USA Today: ‘I Can’t Go Back. The U.S. is My Only Option’: Why Biden’s Border Policy Isn’t Working

This op-ed was originally published in USA Today on August 15, 2024.

The Biden administration has been touting the success of its latest border policy in reducing the number of asylum seekers crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. This is not just premature but politically unwise.

Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris has an opportunity to chart a different course ‒ one that maintains an orderly border while also dealing fairly and humanely with the reality of increased global displacement.

Recent research by Refugees International near the Darien Gap, the remote roadless crossing between Colombia and Panama, and at the U.S. border makes clear that the drop in border encounters does not reflect decreased migration in search of safety. And that’s unlikely to change any time soon.

Take President Nicolas Maduro’s suspicious claim of victory in Venezuela’s elections last month. If it holds and repression continues, more Venezuelans will likely flee. A nationwide poll found that a fourth of the people are thinking about migrating, according to The Associated Press: “Of those thinking about leaving Venezuela, about 47% said an electoral win by the opposition would make them stay.”

An increase in Venezuelan migration could have a big impact given that the majority of people making the crossing through the Darien Gap already are Venezuelan ‒ and many coming directly from Venezuela. 

What’s really behind the drop in Border Patrol encounters?

To meaningfully address these challenges, the United States should adopt an approach that affirms rather than ignores the fact that people will arrive at the border and need a fair and orderly way to access asylum. 

The most significant impact of the new policy is not a reduction in Border Patrol encounters with unauthorized crossers but a drop in the number of asylum seekers referred for fear screenings by Border Patrol agents after crossing ‒ a drop that doubles the 40% reduction in border encounters that President Joe Biden proclaimed in June.

Our research makes clear that Border Patrol agents are ignoring assertions of fear and simply removing asylum seekers to potential grave harm in violation of U.S. and international refugee law.

Refugees International spoke to one Mexican woman who fled Guerrero with her two children after her neighbor’s children were kidnapped and killed: “I feared for my kids, that is why I came, wanting to seek asylum.”

Rather than refer her to a fear screening, she told us, a Border Patrol agent said she should seek asylum in Mexico. In a grim echo of Trump-era family separation policies, the agent warned her that her children would be taken from her if she tried to cross back into the United States ‒ and then removed her to Mexico without any paperwork or shoes.

Unfortunately, dozens of people have recounted similar experiences to Refugees International and other border groups. 

Drop in Border Patrol encounters doesn’t mean migrants aren’t coming

The decrease in encounters at the U.S. border is also likely to be temporary ‒ and does not mean that more people are not coming.

First, according to Panama’s immigration data, the number of migrants crossing the Darien Gap in the first five months of this year has already increased from the same period last year, from nearly 167,000 to more than 170,000 people.

Weather is also a determining factor for when people migrate, and traditionally, numbers of people decrease during rainy months and tend to start rising in September when the dry season arrives.

Furthermore, Venezuelans are aware of some aspects of U.S. Customs and Border Protection policy, namely that there is a CBP One app that can be used to apply for appointments to present at a U.S. land border port of entry.

Recent crossers of the Darien Gap interviewed by Refugees International all said they intended to wait in central Mexico – not near the U.S. border – for their appointments. However, as the waiting population in Mexico grows, the United States has not increased the number of daily available appointments, which have remained at 1,450 CBP One interviews a day for over a year and is the only way to access U.S. ports of entry so as to be eligible for asylum. 

Migrants also expressed fear of Mexican authorities, who have increased enforcement in recent months. It’s another contributing factor to lower numbers reaching the U.S. border. Indeed, the decline in border crossings began before the latest U.S. policy, when the Mexican government increased its use of checkpoints and southward-bound buses to keep asylum seekers from the U.S. border.

Rather than pursue a shortsighted deterrence approach, the United States should manage increased migration in ways that are orderly and fair. This requires adopting new approaches to adjudicating asylum claims and to reception of asylum seekers at the border and in destination cities.

It also means making pathways from Safe Mobility Offices in Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Guatemala more accessible to people on the move. Instead of diverting U.S. aid to pay for repatriations from Panama those migrants planning on traveling to the United States, that aid should be put toward critical humanitarian support for migrants that is now lacking in Panama ‒ particularly for food, health services and care for survivors of sexual violence. 

Our research strongly suggests that any effect of U.S. policy on border crossings is, at best, temporarily keeping migrants away but not reducing their overall numbers, their need for protection or their intent to reach the United States.

Refugees International interviewed a woman who fled Venezuela after her father was killed by gangs, then again from Colombia after threats from the criminal Gulf Clan. When asked why she wanted to go to the United States, despite the treacherous journey on which she had witnessed a child and her mother raped in the Darien Gap, and after the start of the new border policy, she said, “I can’t go back. The U.S. is my only option.”