海角大神

Does the bloodshed in Central America really count as 鈥済ang violence鈥� anymore?

That question took on renewed urgency this week, after United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced new limits on asylum Monday, ruling that domestic abuse and gang violence can no longer be considered factors.

The decision would restore 鈥渟ound principles of asylum and longstanding principles of immigration law,鈥� he said, as US immigration courts face a backlog of some 700,000 cases 鈥� increasingly from Central America鈥檚 Northern Triangle, made up of Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador.

Immigrants鈥� advocates hunkered down with the ruling this week, formulating arguments against it. But many also say it raises a larger issue about the reality in Central America: Over the past decade, violence has taken on a new shape.

Transnational criminal groups have not only carved out physical territory, but play outsize roles in formal and informal politics and power brokerage, observers say. Violent death rates in El Salvador and Honduras are higher than聽most nations at war, and more people are estimated to be dying today than during the region鈥檚 bloody civil wars of the 1970s and 鈥�80s. The military is deployed on the streets from Mexico to Honduras, and in recent years international organizations that typically limit their work to war zones have started popping up in Central America.

鈥淕ang violence,鈥� most observers agree, is no longer a suitable label. And in light of Mr. Sessions鈥� ruling, finding more accurate language could become more urgent. More than 80,000 unaccompanied minors and family units from the Northern Triangle were apprehended at the US鈥檚 southern border in fiscal year 2018, often fleeing extreme violence back home. Fewer people crossed the border in 2017, but asylum claims for individuals from the 鈥淣orthern Triangle鈥� region went up 25 percent between 2016 and 2017.

鈥淚 would say 80 to 85 percent of my clients are coming from a context of gang violence or unchecked domestic violence,鈥� says Nicole Ramos, an asylum lawyer in Tijuana with the legal-aid organization Al Otro Lado. 鈥淭hey鈥檙e coming from countries, especially domestic violence victims, where there is no system of protection. Lives are seen as not worthy of protection.鈥�

The concepts of war and persecution that shaped today鈥檚 asylum laws, many advocates argue, no longer match reality. 鈥淭he language we use to describe armed conflict is surprisingly imprecise,鈥� says Robert Muggah, co-founder and research director for the Igarap茅 Institute, a Brazil-based think tank focused on security in the Americas. He was part of the team that ran the Humanitarian Action in Situations Other than War project, which studied how changing violence in Latin America has created the need for new approaches to humanitarian response.

鈥淭he language we have goes back to the mid-20th century with the laws of war and the Geneva Convention,鈥� he says, but the nature of conflict around the world has transformed dramatically since then.

鈥淭oday we鈥檙e increasingly seeing organized crime, extremism, terrorism, and [we鈥檙e] grappling with what to call these things. There鈥檚 no international legal class,鈥� he says, which affects not only asylum-seekers鈥� treatment, but how the international community observes and regulates the conflict.

'Never meant to alleviate all problems'

Sessions notes in his ruling that 鈥渢he mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes 鈥� such as domestic violence or gang violence 鈥� or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim.鈥�

"Asylum was never meant to alleviate all problems 鈥� even all serious problems 鈥� that people face every day all over the world," he said Monday. The number of people claiming a 鈥渃redible fear of persecution鈥� in interviews with homeland security shot up to 94,000 in 2016 鈥� nearly 19 times the number in 2009, Sessions said.

The announcement overturned previous decisions that abused women could apply for asylum, if they can prove that their home country is unable or unwilling to protect them. Experts fear the move could push domestic violence back into the shadows, where it has festered as a 鈥減rivate matter鈥� for decades.

And Ms. Ramos says she hopes this doesn鈥檛 translate into judges interpreting any case that happens against the backdrop of violence in Central America as invalid.

鈥淭his will be harmful for people detained right now or having their cases heard right now,鈥� she says.

Nearly all her cases coming from Central America are related to gang activity in some way, even if that鈥檚 not the sole argument for an applicant鈥檚 credible fear. Take, for example, a religious figure in El Salvador who was forced to preside over a gang-member鈥檚 funeral. Later, he was threatened by an opposing gang for his involvement, she says, and told he couldn鈥檛 participate in religious events anymore. Will US authorities see this as interference in the free practice of religion, or more narrowly as 鈥済ang violence?鈥�

鈥淚t鈥檚 time to redefine how we label violence in Central America,鈥� says Ramos. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 think it鈥檚 an apt term at all.鈥�

Other options?

Apt or not, there are few good alternatives, observers say. Referring to what鈥檚 happening in Central America as a 鈥渨ar,鈥� even if it looks and feels like one, comes with consequences.

鈥淭here鈥檚 certainly a political element,鈥� says Steven Dudley, co-director of Insight Crime, a foundation that studies organized crime in Latin America. 鈥淚t creates a de facto recognition of an enemy when you declare something like a war or civil war鈥�. That could embolden and strengthen the gang鈥檚 position, essentially giving them political capital they can use for everything from recruitment to negotiations,鈥� Mr. Dudley says.

鈥淵ou really put them on a different playing field.鈥�

But there are positives, too. The rules of the game become clearer when a country is officially at war. There is more international observation of human rights abuses by players on both sides of the conflict.

鈥淵ou have much less accountability when there鈥檚 no declared war,鈥� Dudley says. 鈥淔or the military in particular.鈥�

The conversation over what to call the violence across Latin America has been heating up since around 2010, Mr. Muggah says. But it鈥檚 not all talk. Groups like the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Doctors Without Borders (MSF) have expanded their work in the region.

鈥淚CRC has quietly been running pilot projects across Latin America and the Caribbean, where they never really worked before outside a war context,鈥� says Muggah, noting small projects in Brazil, El Salvador, Haiti, and Mexico. 鈥淭he idea was to see if they had a role to play in these kinds of situations, and they determined that yes, they do. It was a very radical move for an otherwise conservative organization.鈥�

鈥淓very day along the migration route we treat and counsel patients from Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador, who have survived the types of violence our organization usually sees in war zones,鈥� Jason Cone, executive director of MSF-USA, said in a statement this week.

Sessions鈥� decision Monday is 鈥渋n a way highlighting the limitations of our international legal systems,鈥� says Muggah.

鈥淭he dirty secret of international laws of war is that there is no actual legal definition of what is or is not a war,鈥� he says. 鈥淚t鈥檚 like the judge who had to define pornography: [War] is hard to define, but you know it when you see it.鈥�