“Only when history has been converted into world history have entire peoples been declared superfluous … The sentences are proclaimed aloud and are systematically put into practice in such as way as nobody remains in doubt of the fate reserved for them:  “Exodus or Immigration. Exile or Genocide”, The Great Migration.  Hans Enzenberger.

The history of Mexican immigration to the United States of America goes back to the year 1880 when two railway companies, South Pacific and Santa Fe, began to “import” cheap labour, for the most part Yaqui, Cora and O’otam indigenous peoples, from the neighbour to the South.  Until 1910 close to 20 000 Mexicans were recruited each year by railway company agents.  During World War I, Mexican workers played a central role in the economic development of the United States [1] , but the usual gratitude of the gringo government was not long in presenting itself in the form of the most ferocious wave of violent xenophobia that the Mexican people have suffered.  While the war veterans attacked the “outsider” workers at their work posts and while they burned their houses and robbed their belongings, the agricultural, railway and automobile industries continued to contract the Mexicans for starvation wages, leaving them in a position of permanent illegality and dangerous vulnerability to the aggressions of the class of poor Americans.

Since then, the ambiguous immigration policy of the American government has not changed.  Being underground and dangerous illegality are the normal conditions that immigrant Mexicans face from the first moment that they set foot in the United States. [2] .

On January 1^st, 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA, or TLCAN in Spanish), came into force, a multilateral agreement that united the Canadian, American and Mexican economies in a neoliberal model.  The inspirational principles are the opening of borders to goods, the writing of laws that favour the generation of large capital benefits and that decrease the political power of “nation states”, which, if in the phase of negotiations acquire a secondary role, will be unable to modify the decisions imposed by the accord in the future.  From this moment, the contradictions seen in the immigration policies of the two richest countries are, each day, more important.  A study by the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) in 2001 noted that, although the cost for security at the border of the United States has increased in the past 7 years, the flow of immigrants has not decreased, the only consequence has been an increase in deaths at the border, owing to the change in the habitual routes that are now more insecure.  Regarding this, the University of Houston’s Center for Immigration Research in Texas estimates that between the years 1995 and 1998 the number of deaths due to hypothermia and exposure have tripled compared to the levels in the 1980s [3] .   According to the Federal Mexican Republic’s Senate Human Rights Commission, it is calculated that in 2003, 400 people were found dead at the northern border.   [4]

If then, on one hand, we aid the toughening of American policy with respect to people who attempt to cross the border, on the other hand we find a large presence of Mexican workers, both underground and not underground, that play a fundamental role in the prosperity of the U.S. economy.   [5] The same neoliberal theory tells us that accelerating and guaranteeing the mobility of capital and facilitating the participation of foreign capital, encourages labour mobility: “when the political system and the economic system interconnect, the work force tends to flow toward the country where there is less social stratification and where living standards are highest.”   [6]   Nonetheless, this theory does not tell of the terrible conditions that push Mexican men and women to abandon their homes, their belongings and their communities to face the journey toward an economic prosperity that they will probably not find, being obliged due to their “clandestine” condition, to accept poorly paid and insecure work.  Research by the Associated Press of the U.S. confirms that one Mexican worker dies each day.  Although workplace safety has increased, the number of dead Mexicans has continued to grow:  30% in the mid-90s and 80% in the year 2003.  Public Security officials explain the phenomena, affirming that it is the same condition of illegality that obliges Mexicans to accept whatever type of job offers, these generally being of low remuneration and a high degree of risk. 

What surprises us is the reaction of federal authorities in the event of accidental death:  the OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) fines the contractor for failure to comply with safety standards.  The sum is up to $50 475 (U.S.).  [7] .

This is the price that the gringo government considers appropriate as punishment for the death of a non-citizen.

It is calculated that there are presently 8.5 million Mexicans in American territory, of which 5.5 million meet the legal requirements for their stay and the remaining 3 million are considered “indocumentados” (people without identification papers), with the consequent risk of deportation or imprisonment.  Moreover, it is estimated that each year close to 610 000 Mexicans emigrate temporarily, the majority of which do not have the documentation necessary to face the journey.   [8]  Added to this data, is the growing importance of the money sent to Mexico by workers residing in the U.S. to the interior of the Mexican economy.  In the year 2002, this money reached 6.75 billion dollars, constituting the sixth greatest source of income in the country.  Already in January 2004, it figures as the second largest source of income (between 9.4 and 14 billion dollars  [9] ) being surpassed only by petroleum sales. 

Ten years after the entrance of Mexico into the global market, the national minimum wage has lost 20% of its purchasing power, the Mexican political class has not known how, nor has it wanted, to face and resolve the problem of growing unemployment and the constant demand for workers in the agricultural and industrial sectors of the United States.  Considering, in a like manner, the wage difference that exists between the two economies, that the phenomena of Mexican migration toward the richest neighbour is constantly increasing and that 1.3 million families depend directly on money sent from the U.S., is no surprise.  [10]  What is really astonishing is the lack of intention on behalf of both of the interested governments to regulate this phenomenon, allowing bands of “polleros”  [11] to organize into the transnational business known as the “Gringo Coyote Company”, moving around $8 billion annually.   [12]  If one considers that in 1995 a Mexican who put his life in the hands of a pollero to cross the border paid between $20 and $30, and that today, with considerably more risk he pays between $1 500 and $ 2 500, it is easy to get an idea of the volume of money that moves daily from one side to the other encouraging the clandestine trafficking of workers and the corruption of customs agents.  [13]

One of the states where the Gringo Coyote Company has the most connections is Chiapas.  In the municipality of Comalapa, for example, on March 24^th, 2004, six hundred men began the journey of hope contracted by one of many “travel agencies” that had recently rose up in the municipality. 

“Here in Comalapa there is no more work, there is a cantina [Mexican bar] on every corner, the prices of corn and coffee are decreasing and the bloody government doesn’t do anything but promotion, it doesn’t develop the industry and it doesn’t notice that every month 2 400 people leave here to go the U.S., it doesn’t notice that we depend economically on the money that they send us from there.”  That is how Joaquin Lopez Lopez puts it, a man who, with his family, has tried more than once to cross the border.

Meanwhile 30 foreign exchange offices, 2 banks and post offices have opened up in Comalapa (a municipality that has 7 500 inhabitants in its urban zone and a total with all of its communities and ejidos – communal lands/villages – of 52 111 inhabitants [14] ) which gives a clear idea of the importance of the economic bridge with the U.S. for this municipality. [15]  And this is not an isolated example in the state; in the municipality of Siltepec, situated in the Sierra zone, it is calculated that 200 people between the ages of 20 and 45 years leave each month and that the amount of money coming in monthly from the United States surpasses one million dollars.  In the community of Las Delicias, belonging to the same municipality one no longer sees men.  Only the women and the old have stayed, surviving solely on the money that their husbands and children manage to send home.  [16]

Finally, the number of people from Chiapas annually that make the difficult decision to leave their home and family in search of fortune across the border is around fifty-thousand.  And it is estimated that the fruit of the money sent home by workers is $380 million, which, in terms of the Gross Internal Product (GIP) represents 45% of said product. [17]

For a better understanding of the reasons for this imposed exodus and its close relationship with NAFTA one can look at the consequences that were the product of the corn market after 1994. 

Historically, Chiapas has survived thanks to its fields, with agricultural production representing 45% of the state’s GIP.  Likewise, 95% of corn producers, to which 65% of lands are devoted, cultivate an area of land that is less than 5 hectares.   [18] . With the entrance into NAFTA the borders to this product have also been opened, something which means strong competition between the small Mexican production and the large American agricultural industry.  In fact, the average corn production yield in the U.S. is from eight to ten tonnes per hectare, while in Mexico it oscillates between two and five, and in Chiapas, between one and three.   [19]  Moreover, thanks to a law proclaimed in 2001, the American state grants each farmer a sum equal to $52.30 daily by way of subsidy; while Mexico grants only $1.80 per day.  [20]  Hence, Mexican corn production costs $181.90 per tonne but the international market price for corn remains at $129.18.

Consequently, the Mexican government and transnational corporations can buy corn coming from the U.S. at a lower price, including transportation costs.

And that is exactly what they do.

Mexican campesinos (small-scale farmers) and those from Chiapas, finding themselves in a position where it is impossible to sell their own harvests see themselves obliged to abandon the field and look for luck in other places.  With the stroke of a pen, the work that for millennia has provided food to this region has been obviated and it remains today the cause of flight and death for thousands of people. 

Chiapas is one of the states in Mexico where the ferocity of the neoliberal policy is most present; where natural and cultural resources, abundant in the territory, are easy prey for the large transnational companies, but where the daily resistance of indigenous peoples is the only and true check against the official recognition [(politically for example] of Coca Cola.  In this struggle and resistance scenario the immigration phenomena occurs as the fruit of this neoliberal system which imposes exile and the criminalization of the exiled.

After September 11^th, 2001, the U.S. policy regarding foreigners worsened, transforming them into potential terrorists.  The fear induced in people permits and justifies this kind of behaviour by the government and large corporations that, in the name of national security -- which is more talked about than defined – maintains the immigrant in a condition of illegality.  In this way the ability of the immigrant to acquire and enjoy the rights that workers have fought for for centuries (a fair wage, social security, fair working days, the right to education and union organization, etc.), has been impeded, and she/he accepts, under the threat of deportation, the most risky jobs facilitating the big businesses of the American agriculture firms. 

The vicious circle that is the fruit of the globalizing scheme – the opening of markets, the illegality of immigrants and the maintenance of low wages – feeds this framework in which large agricultural companies always come out winning, along with the resource transmission channels, such as Western Union, Elektra, Telegrafos Nacionales (National Telegraph), Panamerican Services and Cometra, banks, etc..  Parallel to this we find another model rising up from the same land in Chiapas:  the Zapatista movement.  From the solidarity and indigenous tradition it builds its foundations, and responds to the neoliberal death threat with a community autonomy project which ends up being a possible alternative to the aggressive international market that makes the lack of rules its only rule.  In a historical epoch in which unfair cultural homogeneity is easily transformed into the genocide of the different forms of knowledge, the horizon designed by the indigenous peoples of Chiapas appears to be the most effective response for the survival and rescue of these peoples that, due to intensification of the immigration phenomena, continue to suffer from the colonial policy of big world powers.  Hence, the importance of the Zapatista movement as it persists in the construction of alternatives to the neoliberal model, starting from its 11 basic demands:  health, education, land, shelter, work, food, peace, justice, independence and democracy with dignity for all Mexicans.

[1] Tom Barry, et al. 1994 “Crossing the Line”, Resource Center Press, Albuquerque, New Mexico

[2] In reality, the first violations of the human rights of immigrants begin long before their crossing the border.  See, among others, the document presented by the United Nation’s Human Rights Commission Special Raporteur, Ms. Gabriela Rodriguez Pizarro, E/CN.4/2002/94, 15. Feb. 2002.

[3] Bulletin of Atomic Scientist, Michael Flynn, 8-7-2002, see www.thebulletin.org

[4] The Euro-Mexican Parliamentary Forum on Immigration, a presidential declaration from the Federal Mexican Republic’s Senate Commission on Human Rights, Miguel Sabot Sanchez Carreño, published by the “La Jornada” newspaper, page 14, 30-03-2004

[5] Consult the research of Jeffrey S. Possel, published by the Urban Institute on 12-01-2004, www.urban.org

[6] Saskia Sassen, in: “Indigenous Mexican Immigrants in the United States:  New Rights Against Old Abuses”, Cuadernos Agrarios, México, 2000.

[7] “The Arizona Republic” article from 14-03-2004

[8] “La Jornada” 30-03-2004, page 14.

[9] These sums were put out by the Central Bank of Mexico and by the Euro-Mexican Forum on Immigration, published in the “Cuarto Poder” newspaper on  25-03-2004

[10] Data put out by the CONAPO Institute (the People’s National Council) found at  www.conapo.gob.mx, 30-03-2004

[11] Traffickers of immigrant labour

[12] A study presented by the Mexican Republic’s Chamber of Representatives published in the “Cuarto Poder” newspaper on l 1-03-2004, page A4

[13] Data presented by the Inter-American Human Rights Commission in its year 2003 report, www.cidh.oas.org

[14] Chiapas Statistics Book 2000.

[15] News found in the “Cuarto Poder” newspaper on 24-03-2004, page B15

[16] Data obtained thanks to an interview carried out with Mr. Jesus Barrios Escobar who had the courtesy to authorize the author’s use of the information

[17] “Cuarto Poder” 24-12-2003

[18] Information from: “ El Maíz en el Estado de Chiapas”(Corn in the State of Chiapas). The National Statistics Institute, Geography and Data Processing. 1997. page 31

[19] ”Where Everything is Merchandise”, a study presented at the “First Biodiversity Forum” in June 2001, San Cristobal de Las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico

[20] See CIEPAC, “Chiapas al día” bulletin # 328, www.ciepac.org

Note: If you wish to be placed on a list to receive this English version of the Bulletin, or the Spanish, or both, please direct a request to: ciepac@laneta.apc.org and indicate whether you wish to receive the bulletin in plain text or as a Word 7 for Windows 95 attachment.

Note: If you use this information, cite the source and our email address. We are grateful to the persons and institutions who have given us their comments on these Bulletins. CIEPAC, A.C. is a non-government and non-profit organization, and your support is necessary for us to be able to continue offering you this news and analysis service. If you would like to contribute, in any amount, we would infinitely appreciate your remittance to the bank account in the name of:

CIEPAC, A.C.
Bank: Banamex
Account number: 7049672 Sucursal 386
San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas, México.
You will also need to use an ABA number:
BNMXMXMM

Thank you! CIEPAC

Telephone:
in México: 01 967 674 5168
from outside Mexico:: +52 967 674 5168