A New Crisis of Cuban Migration

A New Crisis of Cuban Migration
By WILLIAM M. LEOGRANDEDEC. 4, 2015

Washington — A standoff in recent weeks that has trapped hundreds of
Cuban migrants at Costa Rica's border with Nicaragua as they try to
reach the United States is a graphic demonstration that Washington's
migration policy toward Cuba is no longer sustainable. Left unchanged it
could produce a crisis on the scale of the 1980 Mariel boatlift or the
1994 balsero (rafters) crisis — if one hasn't begun already.

Current policy, based on migration accords negotiated with Havana in
1994 and 1995, commits the United States to accepting at least 20,000
legal Cuban immigrants annually, and to returning to Cuba migrants
intercepted at sea as they try to enter the United States illegally.

Unilaterally, the United States also adopted a "wet foot/dry foot"
policy, which allows Cubans who arrive in the United States ("dry foot")
to remain in the country under a special status called parole and, a
year later, become eligible under the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966 to
seek permanent residency. No other foreign nationality enjoys such
privileged status.

The Cuban government has long argued that these policies encourage
illegal migration and human trafficking. Still, the problem of Cubans
coming to the United States illegally has been relatively minor until
recently.

In the years since the migration agreements were signed, about 4,000
Cubans annually have eluded the United States Coast Guard, reached
Florida beaches, and claimed "dry foot" status. Some 2,000 to 3,000
others have been intercepted at sea ("wet foot") each year and returned
to Cuba. Because crossing the Florida Strait on rickety rafts or
dilapidated boats is so dangerous, and the chances of being caught by
the Coast Guard are high, the flow of illegal migrants remained manageable.

It is manageable no longer. The number of migrants has surged since last
December, when President Obama and his Cuban counterpart, Raúl Castro,
announced their intention to normalize relations. Would-be immigrants
fear that reconciliation foreshadows repeal of the Cuban Adjustment Act,
prompting Cuban migrants to act now lest they miss their chance.

With that in mind, Cubans have found an air-land route to the United
States on which everyone can be a "dry foot" who can expect entry. In
the past 12 months, more than 45,000 Cubans entered the United States
from Mexico — without having to risk crossing a perilous desert as
Mexicans and Central Americans do.

The new route is possible because in 2013, the Cuban government
abolished its requirement that citizens obtain government permission to
travel abroad. Today, most Cubans can travel to any country that will
grant them a visa. Ecuador even admitted them without one until last
Tuesday, and Guyana still does.

As a result, would-be migrants have been flying to Ecuador to begin a
long, surreptitious trek north, without visas, through Colombia, Central
America and Mexico. At the Texas border, they simply declare their
nationality and are admitted under the "dry foot" policy.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Hiring "coyotes," as smugglers of migrants are called, to guide the trek
is expensive, but many Cubans have family members in the United States
willing to pay. Recently, Cubans armed with cellphones have been
crowdsourcing their own smuggling routes by following advice on social
media from those who have gone before them.

The current crisis in Central America was triggered on Nov. 10 when
Costa Rican authorities broke up a smuggling operation, leaving 1,600
Cubans stranded. When Costa Rica tried to send them north, Nicaragua
closed the border. As more Cubans arrive daily, the number stuck there
has reached 4,000, with no end in sight.

At a recent meeting of diplomats from the region, Costa Rica proposed
creating a "humanitarian corridor" that would allow Cubans free passage
to the United States border. Nicaragua rejected the proposal, but even
the suggestion of such a plan should be a red flag for Washington. Latin
Americans are getting tired of enforcing a United States immigration
policy toward Cubans that isn't working and discriminates against their
own citizens. The contrast between Washington's privileged treatment of
Cuban migrants and its coldness toward Central Americans, including
children fleeing criminal violence, is indefensible.

Nevertheless, the Obama administration has repeatedly declared that it
has no intention of changing current migration policy, for fear that any
hint of change will touch off a stampede. United States diplomats
reaffirmed that position at a meeting with their Cuban counterparts last
Monday. The meeting produced no new thinking about how to resolve the
crisis.

There is a solution to this conundrum. If Cuban migrants trying to enter
the United States by land were treated the same as those intercepted at
sea and returned to Cuba, the incentive to make the long, dangerous
passage north would be drastically reduced.

This would not require amending the Cuban Adjustment Act, which allows
for the adjustment of status only for Cubans who have been admitted or
paroled into the United States. It would require only changing the "dry
foot" policy of admitting on parole anyone who sets foot on United
States territory. That policy is a matter of executive discretion. To
avoid a last-minute exodus from Cuba, it could be rescinded by the
attorney general without prior notice.

An end to the "wet foot/dry foot" distinction should be accompanied by a
significant increase in the number of Cubans admitted legally, so that
those who want to immigrate to the United States have more opportunities
to do so safely.

But to do nothing is to face a slow-motion migration crisis that will be
interminable. Cuba will not reimpose travel limits on its citizens, and
Latin America will not cooperate indefinitely by blocking Cubans'
transit when Washington's policy is to let in all Cubans who arrive —
and keep other Latin Americans out.

For Washington to refuse to change a policy when new circumstances have
rendered it utterly ineffective makes about as much sense as King Canute
trying to hold back the tide.

William M. LeoGrande is a professor of government at American University
in Washington, D.C., and a co-author with Peter Kornbluh of "Back
Channel to Cuba: The Hidden History of Negotiations between Washington
and Havana.

Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/opinion/international/a-new-crisis-of-cuban-migration.html