June 17, 2022 12:16 pm
The United Nations Refugee Convention, drawn up in 1951, defines a refugee as “a person who is outside his country of residence or nationality because of a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons related to race, religion, nationality, ‘belonging to a particular social group or to its political opinion ”. The first criterion taken into consideration is therefore the race.
Why does breed occupy such a central place? Probably because much of the text was written by former Jewish refugees who escaped the holocaust and their allies. The authors of the convention have added two very important clauses. The first is Article 3, which prohibits discrimination in the host country on the basis of “race, religion or country of origin”. The second is the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits host countries from returning migrants to their country of origin, exposing them to dangerous conditions.
Other considerations that have determined the final scope of the convention include the fall of multinational empires and the racial barriers that rich countries have erected to protect themselves from migratory flows.
The US loophole
Racism itself negatively affects the lives of Haitians, both at home and abroad. Indeed, today Haitian migrants are rarely entitled to asylum. Brazil-led UN peacekeeping operations and the US government’s outsourcing of border controls to Latin America further complicate the asylum procedure for the island’s citizens.
Much of the racism towards Haitians originates abroad. At the end of the eighteenth century the Haitian revolutionaries drove out the French colonizers and abolished slavery. Shortly thereafter, Haiti became a refuge for victims of slavery and colonialism in other countries. But France and other states demanded compensation for their lost “property”, that is, for the human beings they could no longer dispose of. And so Haiti paid off its debt until well into the twentieth century.
From 1915 to 1934 the United States Army occupied Haiti with lasting political and social consequences. In 1937, the Dominican dictator Rafael Trujillo ordered the massacre of thousands of Haitians living near the border.
From the 1950s to the 1980s, the United States supported the Duvalier dictatorship. Since then, external interference in Haitian politics has been almost constant.
Faced with political and economic instability, many Haitians move abroad to improve their living conditions and those of relatives who have remained at home. For Haitians, the boundaries between diaspora, economic migration and political asylum are often blurred. But legally, these categories make a big difference.
Beginning in 1981, the United States began to intercept migrants fleeing Haiti, processing asylum requests at sea. In this way, Washington created a loophole that allowed the non-refoulement principle to be circumvented by sending Haitians home before they enter US territory.
Building on this precedent, today rich countries are increasingly adopting a mechanism of “remote control” of immigration, in international waters or in third countries. The outsourcing of security and respect for human rights is growing rapidly, with several Latin American countries being tasked with welcoming refugees and managing UN peacekeeping missions.
The role of Brazil
In 2004, democratically elected Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide was deposed for the second time, probably with US help. Canada, France, the United States and other leading players quickly recognized the regime that replaced Aristide. A few months later, Haiti received a peacekeeping mission, the United nations stabilization mission in Haiti, known as Minustah.
Until 2017, Minustah’s multinational military force was run by Brazilian generals, with heavy interference from the United States, Canada and France. To depoliticize the situation, the generals had received orders to use force to solve the problem of “gangs”. The urban neighborhoods where the gangs were presumed to operate were precisely those populated by Aristide’s electoral base.
The word pacification it was used to indicate the colonization of indigenous peoples
In a book on the military commanders of the Minustah we read that the generals have defined the slums of Port-au-Prince with the term “favelas”, suggesting that the problem was related exclusively to security.
Another term used by the generals is pacification. This is not a simple translation of the English term peacekeepingthat is, peacekeeping, because historically the word pacification was the euphemism used to indicate the colonization of indigenous peoples. It is also a reference to the work of the Rio de Janeiro police units called Unidades da policia pacificadora. During that time there was an intense exchange of security personnel, ideas and practices between Port-au-Prince and Rio de Janeiro.
After the devastating earthquake of 2010, which left hundreds of thousands of survivors homeless, Brazilian authorities have begun to worry about the arrival of Haitians in their country. The research I am conducting with professors Martha Balaguera and Luis van Isschot of the University of Toronto analyzes how Haitians are treated in Brazil, Colombia and Mexico.
Brazilian migration policies are determined by the Conselho nacional de imigração (Cnig). In the minutes of the CNIG meetings, government officials cite the “special relationship” between Brazil and Haiti (the Minustah operation) as a reason to welcome Haitian migrants. However, the generals themselves underline that Haitians should not be considered as refugees as they are driven by the earthquake, and in no way do they recognize Brazil’s contribution to Haiti’s political and economic instability.
Brazilian officials also expressed concern that Haitians could “establish a more permanent diaspora” in Brazil. This approach is consistent with Brazil’s long history of racially discriminatory and European-friendly migration policies. Brazilian officials have created a specific humanitarian visa for Haitian migrants. The visa guarantees temporary legal status, but does not offer the same protection from deportation or the same government resources as regards the right of asylum.
The route to the north
As economic conditions in Brazil worsened, many Haitians moved north in hopes of reaching the United States or Canada. They often pass through Colombia and the Darien gap, a dangerous area that connects the country with Central America.
In Colombia, Haitians join other flows of migrants which also include Colombians of African or indigenous origin forced to start by the arrogance of paramilitaries and local elites. Others come from Venezuela, Africa or Asia. Further north, migrants mingle with citizens of Central American countries fleeing the violence of drug traffickers. From there, people travel to Mexico, where the United States has outsourced the handling of asylum applications. At that point, many give up hope and stay in Tijuana.
In southern Mexico, a sort of open-air prison has been created to prevent undocumented refugees from reaching the north. Those who manage to enter United States territory are arrested and subsequently deported.
The 1951 Refugee Convention was designed to protect people fleeing the conditions created by the Nazi genocide of Jews. But the refugee system fails to avoid the aggressive and often deadly forms of racism that affect Haitians. This transnational racism is clearly fueled by the behavior of the destination countries.
(Translation by Andrea Sparacino)
This article appeared in The Conversation. Internazionale has a newsletter that tells what is happening in Latin America. Sign up here.