Free Movement or Independent Development-Exploration of New Paths of South-South Cooperation for Human Rights Protection in Latin America

I. Immigration, Development and Human Rights

According to US media reports, 782 migrants had lost their lives while crossing the US-Mexico border from October 1, 2021 to September 20, 2022, a record number of deaths.1Immigrant deaths have often been seen in recent years as US immigration policies have been swinging back and forth between opening and tightening. Therefore, International Organization for Migration recently listed the U.S.-Mexico border as the deadliest land migration route in the world. It is urgent to improve the human rights protection level for Latin American immigrants. Latin America is the main outflow region of immigrants in the world. The movement of immigration from Latin Americans to the United States began in the 1960s. Since then, due to political decline and economic failure, the scale of immigration in Latin America is increasingly becoming large; and the route from Mexico to the United States has become the most important immigration corridor in the world. In the 1960s, about one million people from Latin America entered the United States. By 1990, the number of people traveling to North America from Latin America climbed to 10 million. This number rose to 25 million in 2020. Among them, the country with the largest number of emigrants was Mexico, with about 11 million (accounting for 8.4% of the total population of the country) embarking on a journey north; Venezuela ranking in the second place contributed more than 5 million people (accounting for 17% of the total population of the country); and Colombia ranking in the third place had more than 3 million people (accounting for 6% of the total population of the country). The main motivation of migration is to pursue personal safety and the right to economic development. Moreover, such a huge scale of migration has been formed between Latin America and the United States. To discuss the issue of human rights protection in Latin America, it is required to link immigration and development issues.

Movement of hundreds of millions of people across borders is a product of globalization. The number of international migrants in the world in 2020 reached 281 million, more than three times that of 1970; and two thirds of them were migrant workers. Impinging on traditional national sovereignty and governance boundaries, the cross-border movement of immigrants has become an important issue in world politics. However, although the issue of immigration has increasingly become prominent since the 1990s, and the international community has carried out a series of multilateral dialogues around immigration, but the degree of global governance on immigration issues is still relatively low. Due to the lack of institutional protection, human rights of immigrants are more likely to be violated.

With the continuous deepening of globalization and the turmoil of international political and economic situation, compared with the development speed of global migration, the development level of global migration governance is lagging behind. Over the past 20 years, the number of international migrants worldwide has increased by about 87%. Meanwhile, refugees have increased by about 89% and internally displaced persons have increased by about 160%. The increase rate of the latter two exceeds that of the former, indicating that the human rights dilemmas faced by immigrants are getting deteriorated at an accelerating rate.

Under the background, the immigration issue has become the most acute issue of America in dealing with the relations with Latin American countries, but it has not been properly solved. At the 9th Summit of the Americas held in Los Angeles in June 2022, the most important goal of the participants was to conclude Los Angeles Declaration on Migration. However, although a series of development and cooperation measures had been launched by the United States, such as “Action Plan on Health and Resilience in the Americas”, “Food Security Programme”, and the establishment of a new climate and energy partnership with Caribbean countries, which reflected the willingness of the United States to help Latin American countries carry out social rehabilitation and promote the development. However, since there were no implementation details, and the past behavior of the United States had planted the seeds of distrust among Latin American leaders, the Summit yielded limited results.

Meanwhile, Latin American countries are facing one of most severe humanitarian crises in modern history. On the one hand, environmental change creates more and more climate refugees. Moreover, Latin America's inherent development problems remain unresolved for a longtime. On the other hand, since Latin America is in a marginal position in the global political and economic order, it is more vulnerable to the negative impact of international political and economic turmoil and leads to new waves of immigration. One of the latest examples is a large number of climate refugees in Central America due to climate change in 2021. Another example is that the global energy and food crisis triggered by Russia-Ukraine conflict has spread to Latin America, leading to sharp rise of food prices in these countries and forcing large number of people to emigrate due to lack of food. According to data released by World Food Programme in June 2022, 9.7 million people in 13 Latin American and Caribbean countries were in a state of extreme food insecurity.

II. Latin American Immigration Issues in the Shadow of U.S. Foreign Policy

Historically, Latin America was once a destination for immigrants, attracting immigrants from Europe, Japan and other places to purchase houses and pursue development. Between 1950 and 1978, the average economic growth rate of Latin American continent was 5.5%, outpacing all market economies and other developing regions and presenting a picture of prosperity. However, Latin America has gradually changed from a destination for immigrants to a source of immigrants since the 1960s.

In fact, the formation of the structure of continuous immigration of Latin American residents to the United States is the result of long-term political and economic interactions between the United States and Latin America. Therefore, when discussing the human rights of Latin American immigrants, it is necessary to first analyze how the U.S. foreign policy towards Latin American countries has led to the development dilemma in Latin America.

(1) Foreign policy with geopolitical goals continues to lead to political instability in many Latin American countries

The U.S. policy towards Latin America is subordinate to the overall foreign policy objective of the United States. After the outbreak of the Cold War, the United States took geopolitics as its guiding principle to formulate policies to prevent the spread of “communism” and Soviet forces, ignoring the reasonable demands of Latin America in pursuit of national liberation. To realize the objective, the CIA overtly subverted legitimate governments in Latin America through a series of “paramilitary operations”, and conspired to manipulate the domestic political process of Latin American countries through public opinion propaganda and concealed actions2.The main actions of the CIA were as follows: The CIA planned, supported and successfully overturned the Government of Abans, Guatemala in January 1954, planned and organized an armed invasion against Cuba in 1959 and was thwarted by Cuba, and took a paramilitary military operation against the Government of the Nicaraguan Liberation Front in 1979. The U.S. military invaded Panama in 1989.A series of “paramilitary actions” and conspiratorial activities carried out by the United States against Latin American countries not only violated a large number of human rights in these countries, but also severely destroyed the political ecology of Latin American countries. Most of the governments the United States overthrew were nationalist and populist-oriented governments, and most of the governments it propped up were military dictators, making Latin American politics constantly regressive and giving rise to a large number of political refugees. At this stage, the immigration policy in the United States was also discriminatory. Cuban immigrants were welcomed as “opponents of communism”, while Guatemalan immigrants were rejected as “opponents of governments friendly to the United States.”

After the end of the cold war, the inertia of the United States to intervene in Latin American politics was still in existence. The military coup in Honduras in 2009, the forced resignation of then Bolivian President Evo Morales in 2019, and the political crisis in Venezuela having lasted for many years have been all related to the United States. The political decline led to the lack of protection of the personal and safety rights of a large number of residents, forcing them to embark on the road of immigration.

(2) Coercive implementation of the neoliberal institutionalism led to greater economic difficulties for Latin American countries

Neoliberalism was the economic policy carried out by British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and American President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. The main content of Neoliberalism was to oppose government intervention in the market, advocate privatization and demand the implementation of laissez-faire market economy. In the 1980s, in order to solve the debt crisis, Latin American countries including Argentina had to accept the reform program of “structural adjustment” put forward by the United States government, International Monetary Fund, World Bank and other international financial institutions and implement the neoliberal policies when receiving assistance from them.

After the implementation of neo-liberal policies, Latin American countries not only failed to solve the economic crisis they faced, but instead fell into a bigger dilemma. Latin American economies grew by an average of 2.4% a year in the ten years from 1992 to 2002, which was only 45% of what it was before the 1980s. Economic development was characterized by a slow pace of economic growth, a lack of adequate development opportunities and rising unemployment rate. Moreover, the gap between the rich and the poor was widened after privatization; and the structure of inequality further limited the potential of economic development. Latin America changed from the richest region to the poorest region in the world. In search of livelihoods and development opportunities, migrants in their own countries had to risk their lives to embark on the road of immigration northward.

(3) The duality of the U.S. immigration policy

On the one hand, the U.S. immigration policy for Latin America emphasized the free movement of immigrants under the advocacy of neoliberalism and economic globalization concepts. After the North America Free Trade Area (NAFTA) came into force in 1994, America's demand for cheap Labor from Mexico soared, creating a new small peak in immigration. On the other hand, the attitude of the United States towards immigration followed the characteristics of securitization since the Cold War. The arrival of a large number of Latin American immigrants was regarded as threats to the national security of the United States. In 1994 and 1995, movement of immigrants was listed in U.S. national security policy documents as a primary concern. After the mid-1990s, the willingness of the United States to provide asylums to immigrants declined.

Due to duality of U.S. immigration policy, Latin American immigrants were in a very fragile position. American producers could hire workers at cheaper wages, so that costs were reduced and the profit margins were increased. However, it was the immigrants that who suffered from the stigmatization and fear from the American people who couldn't saw the contribution of immigrants to the American economy, but regarded immigrants as threats. On the other hand, immigrants were de facto members of society but had difficulty obtaining citizenship through immigration policy provisions. The duality made it difficult for the human rights issues of Latin American immigrants to be confronted and systematically resolved.

Long-term political, economic and foreign policies of the United States on Latin America led to the stagnation of economic and social development in Latin America. The development gap between the two regions formed a structural trend  of people in Latin America moving northward to the United States. Over the past few years, the U.S. government has implemented several measures that have made it more difficult for immigrants and asylum seekers to move into the United States. Although the Biden administration has moderately adjusted its immigration policy after he came to power, it is still falls far short of what was promised, and the human rights protection of Latin American immigrants still faces serious challenges.

III. Theoretical Reflection and North-South Debate

The issue of immigration and human rights of immigrants is not only an objective reality, but also shaped by existing immigration policies and the framework of understanding of immigration issues. As immigration is increasingly become the focus of U.S. internal affairs and diplomacy, the United States is gradually reversing its previous security-led policy path and instead emphasizing the economic benefits that immigration brings to country of emigration and to the country of destination.

(1) Northern perspectives on migration and development: trumpeted prosperity and masked inequality:

In the 1990s, Western countries, including the United States, looked at immigration from a security perspective. Among them, the representative figures were Myron Weiner, Jeff Heisman, Barry Buzan and Samuel Huntington, who believed that the arrival of immigrants would destroy the country's identity, and regarded immigrants as a threat to state sovereignty, national identity and social stability.

With the deepening of economic globalization and the efforts of the international community to solve the global immigration issue, Western countries put forward a new exposition on immigration and development around 2006. This exposition focused on the economic perspective and believed that as for the destination country, immigrants flow into the developed countries would fill the gaps in the local labor market. As for the home countries, the movement of overseas remittances from immigrants to the home countries would help their relatives to get rid of poverty and the development of the home countries.

This exposition focused on individual immigrants as the theme, emphasizing the protection of the personal and property safety of immigrants in the process of movement, ensuring that immigrants enjoy the right to free movement, and the right to remit their incomes to their home countries without hindrance. From this perspective, international organizations such as the United Nations mainly urged countries to sign Global Compact on Migration to protect the human rights of migrants.

As mentioned in the above analysis, the underlying cause of movement of migrants is the development gap between developing and developed countries. The Northern perspective of developed countries actually hides the structural problems behind international migration and protection of human rights of migrants. By shaping immigrants as economic contributors to theirhomecountries,theexpositionfromtheNorthperspectivehasreduceddiplomaticfrictions between developed countries and countries of immigrants, and the movement of immigrants can be better controlled to meet their own needs through the concept of “immigrant management”. On the other hand, developed countries have set up various obstacles to restrict immigrants from obtaining citizenship. The restriction has become a means for employers to control labor costs. Developed countries have obtained low-cost labor force, but they do not have to bear the obligation to provide immigrants with a series of social security and labor reproduction. This exposition obscures the North-South inequality at the root of the human rights of immigrants, and reduces the responsibilities that developed countries should bear. Countries of the South have challenged this perspective.

(2) Response of countries of the South: calling for a people-centered alternative immigration and development framework

Raúl Delgado Wise, a scholar at a public university in Zacatecas, Mexico, challenged the Northern perspective of immigration and development, and called for an alternative southern perspective in the international community.He proposed the following viewpoints: 1. In the exposition from the Northern perspective, the destination countries of immigrants are shaped as generous providers of job opportunities, and the contributions of migrants to the economic development of the country of destination are devalued. 2. The role of overseas remittances in improving the economy of the home countries is overestimated. Overseas remittances not only play a limited role in economic development, but even hinder the economic development of the home countries. First of all, overseas remittances are remitted by taking family as a unit, mainly for the livelihood of their local relatives. As their children grow up and continue to embark on the road of immigration northward, the accumulation of immigrant labor is used to build an immigration network. When funds are constantly being strengthened in the immigration network, it is actually a waste of development funds. Funds of overseas remittances help the home countries solve the imbalance in income and expenditure, but the local government lacks motivation to promote institutional innovation to a certain extent. Heavy reliance on overseas remittances will cultivate a culture of attachment in the receiving country, which may reduce the labor force participation rate and slow down economic growth. Moreover, a considerable number of immigrants are industrial workers and technical personnel, whose emigrations will further weaken the industrial advantages of the home countries and widen the development gap between the home countries and the destination countries.

Therefore, the countries of the South shall go beyond the migration and development perspective centered on the free movement of migrants, but instead focus on structural inequality in development, and construct a new global migration governance and human rights protection mechanism centered on people and social justice.

IV. Independent development is the fundamental measure: Cooperation between China and Latin America region promotes the realization of the right to development

The policies of the United States have a huge negative impact on the right to development of Latin American people. In stark contrast, the relations between China and Latin American countries have developed rapidly in recent years. Cooperation between China and Latin America region in the field of development is provided with sufficient impetus and solid guarantee, which has significantly promoted the realization of the right to development of Latin American people.

(1) People of similar natures and emotions have similar understanding: People of similar status

jointly seek the development path

Both China and Latin American countries are developing countries. China is the largest developing country in the world, and Latin America is one of the regions where emerging markets and developing countries are most concentrated. China and Latin American countries are facing similar challenges in promoting sustainable economic and social development, narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor, and coping with the COVID-19. Development is the top priority for both China and Latin American countries and the key to solving all problems. In terms of how to develop, China and Latin America can learn a lot from each other. China achieved a comprehensive victory in poverty alleviation in 2021, which was intensively reported by mainstream media in many Latin American countries. Some Latin American scholars also extracted valuable learning experience from China's practices. For instance, Lucas Llach, a professor of Department of History and Social Studies at the Universidad Torcuato Di Tella, pointed out that Latin America can learn three  inspirations from China's experience: “First, economic growth is crucial. Second, poverty eradication should be the primary goal to be achieved in the implementation of economic policies. Third, governments should realize that bold reforms are always required for poverty alleviation. Moreover, reforms should be carried out in all the policy areas, not just in economic policy.” There is no geopolitical competition, ideological disputes or burden of historical contradictions between China and Latin America. All these have laid a sound political foundation for more pragmatic development cooperation between China and Latin America.

(2) Extensive complementarity boosts common economic development

China and Latin America have extensive complementarity in the economic field. Latin American countries have abundant resources, while China has a huge market. Huge market dividends released by China's 1.4 billion people have also benefited many Latin American companies. The trade volume between China and Latin America has increased by more than 17 times since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001. According to Chinese Customs statistics, the total trade volume between China and Latin America in 2021 reached 451.59 billion US dollars, a year-on-year increase of 41.1%, of which China's exports reached 229.01 billion US dollars, a year-on-year increase of 52%, and China's imports reached 222.58 billion US dollars, a year-on-year increase of 31.4%. Furthermore, most Latin American countries still have weaknesses in the field of infrastructure construction, while China has strong infrastructure capacities. From 2005 to 2020, a total of 138 Chinese infrastructure projects were put into use or were under construction in Latin America and the Caribbean, creating more than 600,000 local job opportunities. By the end of 2021, Chinese companies had signed the contract amount of 237.15 billion US dollars for contracted projects in Latin America and the Caribbean, and completed a turnover of 152.4 billion US dollars. On the other hand, the United States didn't make its due contribution to the realization of the right to development of Latin American people. The Washington Post once published an article commenting that the Biden administration had so far failed to mobilize much-needed infrastructure investment in Latin America, nor had it successfully attracted companies to transfer their supply chains to nearby countries friendly to the United States. Jorge Heine, the former Chilean ambassador to China, once said, “When U.S. authorities visit Latin America, they often talk about China and the reason why Latin American countries should not deal with China. However, when Chinese authorities come to visit, the talks are all about bridges, tunnels, highways, railways and trade.”

(3) Multiple mechanisms ensure the implementation of development cooperation

Multiple mechanisms have also been established between China and Latin America countries to ensure the implementation of development cooperation. Following the summit of the leaders of China, Latin American and Caribbean countries in July 2014, the Joint Statement on China-Latin America and the Caribbean Summit in Brasilia was adopted, announcing the formal establishment of the China-CELAC Forum and the decision to hold the first ministerial meeting of the Forum in Beijing as soon as possible. From January 8 to 9, 2015, the First Ministerial Meeting of the China-CELAC Forum was held in Beijing, marking the official launch of the Forum. The main mechanisms of the China-CELAC Forum include the Ministerial Meetings, the National Coordinators' Meetings, and dialogues with Foreign Ministers of the quartet of the CELAC and sub-forums in specialized fields. Among them, the sub-forums in specialized fields include China-Latin America and the Caribbean Agricultural Ministers' Forum, China-Latin America and the Caribbean Science, Technology and Innovation Forum, China-Latin America Entrepreneurs Summit, China-Latin America and the Caribbean Think Tank Cooperation Forum, China-Latin America and the Caribbean Young Politicians Forum, China-Latin America and the Caribbean Infrastructure Cooperation Forum, China-Latin America and the Caribbean Friendship Association, and China-Latin America and the Caribbean Political Party Forum. 3 sessions of ministerial meetings of the China-CELAC Forum was held by China and Latin America and the Caribbean in 2015, 2018, and 2021 respectively. The adoptions of Beijing Declaration of the First Ministerial Meeting of China-CELAC Forum, the China-Latin American and Caribbean Countries Cooperation Plan (2015-2019), Santiago Declaration, China-CELAC Joint Plan of Action for Cooperation on Priority Areas (2019-2021),

Declaration of the Third Ministerial Meeting of the China-CELAC Forum and the China-CELAC Joint Action Plan for Cooperation in Key Areas (2022-2024) as well as the publication of Special Statements on the Belt and Road Initiative demonstrated the clear willingness of China and CELAC to promote the building of a China-CELAC community with a shared future and jointly meet global challenges.

(Both authors are research assistants at Shanghai Institute of American Studies)