Excerpts from SIPA capstone workshop produced for Doctors Without Borders (MSF). All text excerpts in this post and all data visualizations in the report were produced by Liz Olson. The full report can be downloaded here.
Migration Trends & Policy Landscape
Over the last 10 years, the U.S. and Mexican governments have enacted increasingly restrictive policies attempting to reduce migration and limit asylum access. Despite militarization of the borders and expanded immigration enforcement, a growing number of migrants from northern countries of Central America have continued to travel towards the United States. Although Mexico passed promising migration reforms in 2011, the administration of Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto (2012-2018) changed course with the 2014 Southern Border Plan leading to a spike in Mexican deportations to Central America. After U.S. President Donald Trump (2017-2021) took office, both U.S. deportations and apprehensions at the Southwest border began to rise, likely reflecting an increase in both enforcement policy as well as the spike in migrants arriving from Central America in 2019. During the COVID-19 pandemic, detention and apprehension figures for both Mexico and the U.S. declined significantly from previous years. However, these figures are already on the rise again in the early months of the Biden Administration.
In March of 2018, when the first migrant caravan left Honduras en route to the U.S., the Trump Administration launched a battery of harmful policies aimed at deterring migration. Increasing numbers of migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. coincided with a jump in apprehensions at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2019,5 reaching rates of over 850,000 — although these were still far below the historic record of 1.6 million apprehensions in 2000.6 The Trump Administration responded with sweeping changes to asylum procedures aimed at restricting access to the asylum system.7
Violence
“The route through Mexico is the cemetery of Central America and it is increasing. We have had cases of violence by state agents and organized crime.”
– Shelter Provider, U.S.-Mexico Border region
Violence along migratory routes
After fleeing violence in northern Central America, migrants continue to face violence along the migration route at the hands of organized crime, state agents, local communities, other migrants, and even the institutions that have theoretically been put in place to protect them. As Martinez et. al. wrote in 2019, “Crossing from southern to northern Mexico is considered one of the most dangerous routes in the world for undocumented migrants.”12
Violence along the route is so pervasive that it has become normalized for many migrants. As one direct service provider explained:
One thing that was shocking to me when I spoke to clients was how normalized violence is – particularly gender-based violence. Oftentimes, it won’t even come out in initial interviews, because clients don’t perceive it as noteworthy or worthy of disclosing because it’s so pervasive. It’s really been normalized for a lot of people.
– Direct Service Provider, United States
Violent Locations
SIPA survey findings indicate that service providers throughout Mexico perceived the three Northern routes to be the most dangerous for migrants – 70% indicated that the Northeast route along the Gulf of Mexico was among the most dangerous, followed by 40% selecting the Northwest and Northern routes as among the most dangerous (see figure “Most Dangerous Routes” and map “Most Dangerous Routes & States”). The presence of organized crime along much of the U.S. border creates much of this risk: as one service provider described, “The northern border four years ago, turned into a nightmare because the crossings were controlled by organized crime”. Interviewees noted that along the U.S. border, Tamaulipas was particularly dangerous, in addition to Piedras Negras, Ciudad Juárez, and Tijuana. In Central and Southern Mexico, the route between Mexico City through Hidalgo as well as the states of Veracruz, Chiapas, and Tabasco were highlighted by interviewees as notably dangerous for migrants.
Guatemala is also perceived as particularly unsafe. According to a survey of migrants conducted by the Mixed Migration Center (n = 323), 22% of respondents indicated that Guatemala was the most dangerous country for transit and 14% mentioned Mexico.13 While only a small share of respondents in the SIPA survey indicated that the Guatemalan routes were the most dangerous, these results were likely biased towards Mexican routes as the majority of SIPA survey respondents were based in Mexico. Certain areas along Guatemala’s northern border, particularly between Flores and El Ceibo in Petén, as well as Parque Nacional Laguna Del Tigre, are viewed as extremely dangerous and almost outside of state control given the power and prevalence of criminal groups.14
Sources of Violence
Cartels are a key source of violence along the migration route. 65% of respondents to the Mixed Migration Centre Survey considered criminal gangs to be the main perpetrators of violent incidents.13 It is not only migrants themselves that are targeted by organized crime – service providers also reported being targeted directly. Government agents are another notable source of violence against migrants, and reports of corruption and collaboration with organized crime are concerning. Approximately 25% of respondents in the Mixed Migration Centre Survey indicated that government officials are a primary perpetrator of violence.13
The massacre of 19 migrants in Tamaulipas in January 2021, for which a dozen Mexican police officers have been charged, is a gruesome example of the threat migrants face from law enforcement. As Michael Lettieri from the Center for United States-Mexican Studies told the New York Times, “Migrants experience violence not just because organized crime is involved in human smuggling but because the state is involved in organized crime.”15 Interviewees confirmed this “double burden” of violence, saying that migrants “encounter violence from criminal organizations and from state authorities.” If migrants make it to the U.S., they may suffer mistreatment at the hands of U.S. authorities and in U.S. detention centers, and they risk deportation back to dangerous conditions across the border in Mexico.
Types of Violence
Violence is directed at migrants in many forms: financial exploitation, physical brutalization, intimidation, humiliation, and institutional violence. The vast majority of respondents to the SIPA survey – about 75% – ranked financially motivated violence such as extortion and theft as the most common types of violence that migrants experience (see “Types of Violence”). Migrant bodies are exploited as a source of revenue, with several interview respondents highlighting that migrants have become “a commodity for organized crime.” Kidnapping, although perceived to be less common than extortion or theft, was nonetheless cited by 30% respondents as a common manifestation of violence. Cartels abduct migrants for both ransom and labor. As one shelter provider from the U.S.-Mexico border region explained, “the narco wants them as merchandise, they kidnap them to ask for money from the family,” as well as for “labor exploitation.”
It is important to note that SIPA survey results reflect the perceptions of service providers, rather than the experiences of migrants. Service providers may be unaware of all the types of violence that migrants face, as migrants are often fearful of reporting violence due to possible repercussions. According to one interviewee:
Women often don’t report being the victims of crime. They’re worried the very people who will be investigating the case might be somehow involved or somehow colluding with whoever hurt them. I think the main problem is people are too afraid to report crimes and when they do report crimes they’re not adjudicated and they probably don’t even reach the judicial level at all.
– Direct Service Provider, Central Mexico region
Interviewees also highlighted that women migrants, in general, may be less likely to discuss incidents of sexual abuse due in part to their processes of assimilation, the sensitive and traumatic nature of their experiences, and concern about how their abuse will be perceived. One interviewee asserted that this does not mean this violence is not happening and emphasized that the scale and frequency of sexual assault is much greater than official data reflects. This reporting gap is likely also reflected in the SIPA survey results.