Other countries – dwkcommentaries

U.S. Admits “Havana Syndrome” Not Caused by Foreign Adversary

In 2016, officials in the U.S. Embassy in Havana, Cuba reported ringing in the ears followed by pressure in the head and nausea, headaches and acute discomfort. Subsequently similar symptoms were reported by “U.S. career diplomats, intelligence officers and others serving in U.S. missions around the world” and the symptoms became known as the “Havana Syndrome.”[1]

Apparently in late February 2023, the CIA and six other U.S.intelligence agencies concluded their joint participation in reviewing approximately 1,000 cases of “anomalous health incidents.” Here are their conclusions:

“Five of those agencies determined it was ‘very unlikely’ that a foreign adversary was responsible for the symptoms, either as the result of purposeful actions — such as a directed energy weapon — or as the byproduct of some other activity, including electronic surveillance that unintentionally could have made people sick, the officials said. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the findings of the assessment, which had not yet been made public.”
“There was no ‘credible evidence’ any adversaries had developed a weapon or an intelligence-collection device cable to cause the injuries that American officials have reported.”
“One [unnamed] agency . . . determined that it was ‘unlikely’ that a foreign actor was at fault, a slightly less emphatic finding that did not appreciably change the consensus. [Another] agency abstained in its conclusion regarding a foreign actor. But when asked, no agency dissented from the conclusion that a foreign actor did not cause the symptoms.”
“The officials said that as analysts examined clusters of reported cases, including at U.S. embassies, they found no pattern or common set of conditions that could link individual cases. They also found no evidence, including forensic information or geolocation data, that would suggest an adversary had used a form of directed energy such as radio waves or ultrasonic beams. In some cases, there was no ‘direct line of sight’ to affected personnel working at U.S. facilities, further casting doubt on the possibility that a hypothetical energy weapon could have been the culprits.”
This “assessment also examined whether an adversary possessed a device capable of using energy to cause the reported symptoms. Of the seven agencies, five determined that it was ‘very unlikely,’ while the other two said it was ‘unlikely.’”

“William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director, said in a statement that the findings reflected more than two years of ‘rigorous, painstaking collection, investigative work and analysis’ by the C.I.A. and [the] other U.S. intelligence agencies.’ [Burns continued,] ‘I and my leadership team stand firmly behind the work conducted and the findings. I want to be absolutely clear: These findings do not call into question the experiences and real health issues that U.S. government personnel and their family members — including C.I.A.’s own officers — have reported while serving our country.’”

In contrast to the above conclusions, last year “an independent panel of experts [investigated and] found that an external energy source plausibly could explain the symptoms” and that “a foreign power could have harnessed ‘pulsed electromagnetic energy’ that made people sick.” These conclusions “were consistent with earlier conclusions by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, which found that ‘directed, pulsed radio frequency energy appears to be the most plausible mechanism in explaining these cases.’”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken reportedly “remains of the view that something happened to those employees who have reported significant ailments, and he is committed to making sure they are cared for.”

============================

[1] Harris & Hudson, ‘Havana syndrome’ not caused by energy weapon or foreign adversary, intelligence review finds, Wash. Post (Mar. 1, 2023); Barnes & Entous, Foreign Adversaries Unlikely to Blame for Havana Syndrome, Intelligence Review Finds, N.Y. Times (Mar. 1, 2023); Strobel, Havana Syndrome Unlikely Caused by Foreign Adversary or Weapon, W.S.J. (Mar. 1, 2023). This blog has discussed the previous occurrences of this medical problem and attempts to determine its causes. (See the following sections “U.S. Diplomats Medical Problems in Cuba, 2017-18” and “U.S. Diplomats Medical Problems in Cuba, 2019” in List of Posts to dwkcommentaries—Topical: Cuba [as of 5/4/20]. )

Biden Administration Announces Proposed Restrictions on Asylum Applications

On February 21, the Biden Administration announced a proposed rule that would require rapid deportation of an immigrant at the U.S. border who had failed to request protection from another country while en route to the U.S. or who had not previously notified the U.S. via a mobile app of their plan to seek asylum in the U.S. or who had applied for the new U.S. humanitarian parole programs for certain countries (Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela). This rule will take effect on May 11, with the expected termination that day of Title 42 that allowed the U.S. to swiftly expel migrants at the U.S. border.[1]

This announcement stated that the new rule would “incentivize the use of new and existing lawful processes and disincentivize dangerous border crossings, by placing a new condition on asylum eligibility for those who fail to do so. These steps are being taken in response to the unprecedented western hemispheric migration challenges – the greatest displacement of people since World War II – and the absence of congressional action to update a very broken, outdated immigration system.”

DHS Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas stated, “We are a nation of immigrants, and we are a nation of laws. We are strengthening the availability of legal, orderly pathways for migrants to come to the United States, at the same time proposing new consequences on those who fail to use processes made available to them by the United States and its regional partners. As we have seen time and time again, individuals who are provided a safe, orderly, and lawful path to the United States are less likely to risk their lives traversing thousands of miles in the hands of ruthless smugglers, only to arrive at our southern border and face the legal consequences of unlawful entry.”

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland added the following: “The Department of Justice is responsible for administering the Nation’s immigration courts and ensuring that claims are adjudicated expeditiously, fairly, and consistent with due process. This proposed rule will establish temporary rules concerning asylum eligibility in those proceedings when the Title 42 order is lifted. We look forward to reviewing the public’s comments on this proposed rule.”

The Administration says that without this new rule, immigration at the U.S. border would “increase significantly, to a level that risks undermining the … continued ability to safely, effectively and humanely enforce and administer U.S. immigration law.”

Reactions to the New Rule[2]

“In a joint statement, Democratic Sens. Bob Menendez (N.J.), Cory Booker (N.J.), Ben Ray Luján (N.M.) and Alex Padilla (Calif.) called on the administration to drop the proposed rule. “We are deeply disappointed that the administration has chosen to move forward with publishing this proposed rule, which only perpetuates the harmful myth that asylum seekers are a threat to this nation. In reality, they are pursuing a legal pathway in the United States.”

A similar reaction came from leading Democratic House members (Rep. Jerrold Nadler and Pramila Jayapal). In their joint statement, they expressed “deep disappointment” with the newly proposed rule and stated, “The ability to seek asylum is a bedrock principle protected by federal law and should never be violated. We should not be restricting legal pathways to enter the United States, we should be expanding them.”

“Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, said they applaud the expanded pathways for those four countries announced in January but question where that leaves migrants from other countries. She says it favors people with resources who can afford the necessary requirements of finding a financial sponsor and buying a plane ticket to the U.S. And some people are so at risk, they simply cannot wait in their country for a humanitarian parole slot. Critics have also highlighted technological problems with the app.”

“The Federation for American Immigration Reform said that the rule isn’t designed to halt migrants as much as make the process more orderly: “In other words, the real objective is not to end large-scale asylum abuse, but rather to get them through the next election cycle.”

Justice Action Center’s counsel, Jane Bentrott, said the proposed rule “would send asylum seekers back to danger, separate families, and cost lives, as human rights advocates have been asserting for weeks. It is in direct contravention of President Biden’s campaign promises to reverse Trump’s racist, xenophobic immigration policies, and give all folks seeking safety a fair shot at asylum.”

Lindsay Toczylowski, the executive director of Immigrant Defenders Law Center in California, criticized the inept operations of the government’s online system for scheduling an asylum application interview. “It’s almost like a lottery. You have to win a ticket to be able to seek protection in the U.S.”

An ACLU attorney, Lee Gelernt, who successfully challenged similar efforts by the Trump Administration, said that Biden’s new proposed rules had the same legal flaws as the Trump rules and that the ACLU would sue to block the latest move.

Although this blogger has been a pro bono attorney for asylum applicants and more generally an advocate for strong U.S. laws and procedures for same and although he is sympathetic to the above criticisms of the new proposed rules, it must be acknowledged that there is nothing in the international treaty or U.S. statutes on asylum that requires the U.S. to provide asylum interviews at the border to undocumented immigrants. Moreover, this and related changes in U.S. asylum laws and procedures are counterbalanced by new procedures in U.S. law for asylum or parole applications in Central American countries for at least some of these immigrants (Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela).

====================

[1] DHS and DOJ Propose Rule to Incentivize Lawful Migration Processes, DHS (Feb. 21, 2023); Jordan, Biden Administration Announces New Border Crackdown, N.Y. Times (Feb. 21, 2023); Parti & Caldwell, Biden Administration Proposes New Limits on Asylum Seekers, W.S.J. (Feb. 21, 2023); Miroff, Asylum seekers who cross U.S. border illegally face new Biden rule, Wash. Post (Feb. 21, 2023); Santana, How Biden asylum rule affects immigration, compares to Trump, Wash. Post (Feb. 22, 2023).

[2] See n.1.

More Details on U.S. and Other Countries’ Worker Shortages

This blog already has discussed the current declining and aging populations of many countries, and their impact on employment in those countries. [1]

Here are some additional articles on these subjects.

Wall Street Journal Analysis [2]

“Employers in healthcare, education, leisure and hospitality and other services such as dry cleaning and automotive repair . . . [accounted] for 63% of all [recent U.S,] private-sector job gains. .. . In January alone, restaurants and bars added a seasonally adjusted 99,000 jobs. The healthcare industry grew by 58,000, and retailers added 30,000 jobs.”

This result is helped by “more workers . . .searching for jobs: bigger paychecks and benefits, diminishing fear of getting sick, and financial worries amid high inflation.” Also “more women are flowing back into the labor force, which could help service-sector employers fill positions that traditionally have been held by women.”

Increased U.S. Immigration [3]

Last year U.S. net immigration increased by about a million people, and the “foreign-born work force grew much more quickly than the U.S.-born work force.” This “helped power the job recoveries in leisure and hospitality and in construction, where immigrants make up a higher share of employment, and where there were bigger increases in wages and job vacancies.”

This employment result happened despite the inadequate staffing of the U.S. immigration agencies, resulting in huge delays in acting on asylum applications as well as those for green cards and work permits. “One of the few industries with unlimited immigrant visas is agriculture, where the number of guest worker visas “has risen by double-digit percentages over each of the last few years, reaching 371,000 in 2022.”

Difficulties in Raising Birth Rates [4]

Echoing the pessimism of Ross Douthat of the New York Times caused, in part, by China’s recent declining birth rate and population, other Time’s authors say, “History suggests that once a country crosses the threshold of negative population growth, there is little its government can do to reverse it. And as a country’s population grows more top-heavy, a smaller, younger generation bears the increasing costs of caring for a larger, older one. . . . That’s because the playbook for boosting national birthrates is a rather thin one. Most initiatives that encourage families to have more children are expensive, and the results are often limited. Options include cash incentives for having babies, generous parental leave policies and free or subsidized child care.”

This more recent Times article claims, “many young Chinese are not interested in having large families. Vastly more young Chinese people are enrolling in higher education, marrying later and having children later. Raised in single-child households, some have come to see small families as normal. But the bigger impediment to having a second or third child is financial, [and] many parents cite the high cost of housing and education as the main obstacle to having more children.”

==============================

[1] See these posts to dwkcommentaries.com: Another Defining Challenge of the 21^st Century (Jan. 28, 2023); Skepticism About Douthat’s Defining Challenge of the 21^st Century (Jan. 30, 2023); Comment: Developments in Africa and Italy Accentuate Douthat’s Concerns (Jan. 31, 2023); Iowa State Government Encouraging Refugee and Migrant Resettlement (Feb. 3, 2023);Comment: National Worker Shortages in U.S. (Feb. 3, 2023); Economists Surprised by January’s New Jobs Data (Feb. 4, 2023); Sub-Saharan Africa Is ‘New Epicenter’ of Extremism, Says UN, (Feb. 8, 2023); Migrant Workers Being Paid Premium Wages in U.S. Tight Labor Market, (Feb. 8, 2023).

[2] Cambon & Smith, Mass Layoffs or Hiring Boom? What’s Actually Happening in the Jobs Market, W.S.J. (Feb. 9, 2023).

[3] DePills, Immigration Rebound Eases Shortage of Workers, Up to a Point, N.Y. Times (Feb. 6, 2023).

[4] Jacobs & Paris, Can China Reverse Its Population Decline? Just Ask Sweden, N.Y. Times (Feb. 9, 2023).

Sub-Saharan Africa Is ‘New Epicenter’ of Extremism, Says UN

On February 7 the U.N. Development Programme reported that searching for better jobs eclipses religious ideology as the main driver of recruitment to violent extremist groups in Sub-Saharan Africa. Moreover, 71% of 2,200 interviewees said the precipitating event for joining such groups was human rights abuse, often conducted by state security forces.[1]

According to an officer of the U.N. Programme, ““Sub-Saharan Africa has become the new global epicenter of violent extremism with 48% of global terrorism deaths in 2021. This surge not only adversely impacts lives, security and peace, but also threatens to reverse hard-won development gains for generations to come. Security-driven counter-terrorism responses are often costly and minimally effective, yet investments in preventive approaches to violent extremism are woefully inadequate. The social contract between states and citizens must be reinvigorated to tackle root causes of violent extremism.”

To counter and prevent violent extremism, “the report recommends greater investment in basic services including child welfare; education; quality livelihoods; and investing in young men and women. It also calls for scaling-up exit opportunities and investment in rehabilitation and community-based reintegration services.”

This U.N. report underscores New York Times columnist Ross Douthat’s contention that a major challenge for the world this century is responding to the growing turbulent population of the African continent.[2]

===============================

[1] Musambi (AP), Sub-Saharan Africa is ‘new epicenter’ of extremism, says UN, StarTribune (Feb. 7, 2023); Hope for better jobs eclipses religious ideology as main driver of recruitment to violent extremist groups in Sub-Saharan Africa, U.N. Dev. Prog. (Feb. 7, 2023); Journey to extremism in Africa: Pathways to recruitment and disengagement, U.N. Dev. Prog. (2020).

[2] Another Defining Challenge of the 21st Century, dwkcommentaries.com (Jan. 28, 2023); Skepticism About Douthat’s Defining Challenge of the 21^st Century, dwkcommentareis.com (Jan. 30, 2023).

Iowa State Government Encouraging Refugee and Migrant Resettlement

As a native Iowan who was born and raised in the State and as a supporter of refugees and immigrants, I was pleasantly surprised to learn from an article in the New York Times that Iowa’s state government has adopted and is implementing various programs to encourage these people’s resettlement in the State. [1] These conclusions were corroborated by that article and the preliminary research cited in this post.

The Iowa State Government has programs encouraging resettlement in the State by refugees and other migrants. The state’s “Republican governor, Kim Reynolds, and the state’s Department of Health and Human Services recently announced a program that supports refugees from around the world with a focus on Afghan people in particular. That includes providing grants to organizations that enhanced ‘community integration, English proficiency, digital literacy, banking and financial planning, transportation, health and wellness, services for older refugees and youth supports.” [2]

This effort is driven, in part, by Iowa’s need for more workers. “Iowa alone has over 75,000 job openings . . .[that] are depleting the state’s ability to meet growing manufacturing and service demands. Businesses are begging for workers at local economic development meetings. Employers are struggling particularly with shortages in key mid-skill industries, like health care, information and technology and tourism and hospitality.”

This article commends the following proposed immigration programs for Iowa:

Federal authorization of states to devise guest-worker programs under the auspices of the federal government (Department of Homeland Security) and state governments along the lines of a bill offered by U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (Rep., WI).
The U.S. and other countries could establish bilateral immigration agreements that “would allow U.S. employers to train workers to obtain valuable skills . . . either in the United States or abroad, and then workers could come to the U.S. states that need them.”
Like the State of Washington, revise Iowa’s licensing laws to create a limited license for foreign medical graduates.

One of the authors of this article is Iowan David Oman, who was chief of staff for Iowa Republican governors Robert D. Ray (1969-83) and Terry Branstad (1983-99 & 2011-17) as well as Chair of the Iowa Republican Party (1995-1993) and the 1998 Republican gubernatorial candidate for Iowa . Other authors are Iowan Robert Leonard, the news director of two Iowa radio stations, and Kristie DePena, the vice president for policy and the director of immigration policy at the Niskanen Center in Washington, D.C. and the holder of a J.D. degree from the University of Iowa College of Law.[3]

Niskanen Center[4]

The Niskanen Center asserts that it believes, “Immigration policy is not just about how we treat others; it has direct implications for Americans. Done well, immigration policy reform can protect family values, strengthen national security, reduce unemployment, spur innovation, stimulate competition, increase public safety, enhance the U.S. economy, reinforce international relations, and help those most in need. Evidence consistently shows that innovation and entrepreneurship are good for America. Supporting legal immigration through refugee resettlement programs like DACA, green cards, and more is fundamental to our success as a nation; and our humanitarian policies are a cornerstone of our nation. But, perhaps most importantly, we believe that with very few exceptions, the immigrants coming to America do so for the right reasons, and we benefit by welcoming them.” More specifically, the Center focuses on the following areas of U.S. immigration policy reform:

“Encouraging the involvement of Americans in refugee sponsorship and resettlement and reforming our asylum system to expand capacity and enhance processing.”
“Creating and enhancing opportunities for innovation and frontier growth in America through legalization, a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, and reformed options to work in the U.S.”
“Enhancing domestic and international security and diplomacy through soft power and national security pathways.”
“Repairing our immigration adjudication system by creating independent courts and reforming the criminalization and prosecution of immigrants in the states.”
“Encouraging the involvement of Americans in refugee sponsorship and resettlement and reforming our asylum system to expand capacity and enhance processing.”
“Creating and enhancing opportunities for innovation and frontier growth in America through legalization, a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, and reformed options to work in the U.S.”
“Enhancing domestic and international security and diplomacy through soft power and national security pathways.”
“Repairing our immigration adjudication system by creating independent courts and reforming the criminalization and prosecution of immigrants in the states.”
“Encouraging the involvement of Americans in refugee sponsorship and resettlement and reforming our asylum system to expand capacity and enhance processing.”
“Creating and enhancing opportunities for innovation and frontier growth in America through legalization, a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, and reformed options to work in the U.S.”

Reactions

Congratulations to the government of the State of Iowa for this strong support for refugees and other immigrants.

However, the authors of this article fail to recognize the powerful resistance to immigration efforts in the U.S. Senate by Iowa’s senior U.S. Senator, Republican Charles Grassley. For example, in the last session of Congress Grassley blocked the passage of the Afghan Adjustment Act, which would have prevented Afghan evacuees in the U.S. from being stranded without legal residency status when their humanitarian paroles expire in August 2023 and would have allowed them to apply for U.S. citizenship. [5]

The citizens of Iowa need to press Grassley to reverse course and immediately press for passage of the Afghan Adjustment Act and to take other steps to encourage resettlement of immigrants in the State.

=====================================

[1] Over 75,000 Job Openings in Iowa Alone. Millions of Refugees Seeking Work. Make the Connection, N.Y. Times (Feb.2, 2023)..

[2] See n.1; Iowa HHS Expands Support for Refugees; Announces RFP to provide wraparound supports, and other key initiatives (Jan. 6, 2023); Iowa Dep’t of Health & Human Resources, Iowa HHS Expands Support for Refugees; (Jan. 6, 2023); Iowa Dep’t of Health & Human Resources; Afghanistan Resources; Iowa Dep’t of Health & Human Resources, Ukraine Resources; Iowa Dep’t of Health & Human Resources, Venezuelan Resources; Iowa Dep’t of Health & Human Resources, History of the Bureau of Refugee Services; Iowa Dep’t of Health & Human Resources, Frequently Asked Questions.

[3] David Oman, Iowa Capital Dispatch.

[4] Niskanen Center, Our Mission; Niskanen Center, Immigration: What We Believe; Niskanen Center Annual Report 2022.

[5] Amiri (AP), Afghan refugees’ status uncertain after U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley blocks residency bill, Des Moines Register (Dec. 30, 2022). See also these posts to dwkcommentaries.com: Need To Prod Congress To Enact the Afghan Adjustment Act (Dec. 17, 2022); Apparent Failure To Enact Bipartisan Immigration Bills (Dec. 18, 2022); Comment: Retired U.S. Military Leaders Support Afghan Adjustment Act (Dec. 19, 2022); Congress Fails To Adopt Important Immigration Legislation (Dec. 28, 2022); Comment: Other Reactions to Failure To Adopt Immigration Legislation (Dec.31, 2022).

Need To Improve U.S. Asylum System

The U.S. asylum and immigration system is broken and needs to be fixed, so says a Washington Post editorial. [1]

It points out that the current system “was being rendered untenable by the sheer number of migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border in recent years, each with a legal right to press an asylum claim. Between those assigned to Justice Department immigration courts and Department of Homeland Security asylum officers, the backlog of cases has reached roughly 1.6 million, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University. It can take years just to get a hearing in immigration court.”

“Instead of the selective, humanitarian adjunct to general immigration flows that the law intended, asylum is evolving into an open-ended parallel system. The backlog encourages people to make a dangerous and expensive trip to the U.S. border, knowing that — even if their asylum cases are weak — they can live and work in the United States for years pending a ruling. Even those whose claims are rejected, as they were in most final rulings over the past decade, seldom face prompt removal. Meanwhile, those with strong claims wait longer than they should.”

Given congressional inability to develop and enact a comprehensive reform statute, the Biden Administration has developed short-term fixes. One announced on January 5^th related to attempted border crossings by Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans, resulting in a 97 percent decrease in attempted border crossings by these people. Another one from 2022 allowed asylum officers from the Department of Homeland Security to determine migrants eligibility for asylum, subject to potential appeals to an immigration judge, but DHS lacks personnel to handle many cases.

Conclusion

As a former pro bono asylum lawyer, this blogger has lamented these many problems with the U.S. immigration and asylum system and the inability and refusal of Congress to take action to address these problems, which now seems exacerbated with the Republicans barely controlling the House of Representatives.[2]

=============================

[1] Editorial, Asylum has become a parallel immigration system. Here’s how to fix that, Wash. Post (Jan. 31, 2023).

[2] See these posts to dwkcommentaries.com: Need To Prod Congress To Enact the Afghan Adjustment Act (Dec. 17, 2022); Apparent Failure To Enact Bipartisan Immigration Bills (Dec. 18, 2022); Congress Fails to Adopt Important Immigration Legislation (Dec. 28, 2022); Department of Homeland Security Announces Important Proposed Rules To Improve Immigration Laws and Border Security (Jan. 5, 2023); President Biden’s Argument for New Asylum/Border Policy (Jan. 7, 2023); U.S. Adopts Confusing New Program for Resettling Certain Foreigners (Jan. 20, 2023). See also List of Posts to dwkcommentaries—TOPICAL: LAW (REFUGEE AND ASYLUM).

Another Defining Challenge of the 21st Century

Ross Douthat, a New York Times columnist, asserts that at least one of the defining challenges of the current century is “the birth dearth, the population bust, the old age of the world.”[1]

This assertion is based, he says, upon “various forces, the Covid crisis especially, [that] have pushed birthrates lower faster, bringing the old-age era forward rapidly.” Additional support for this thesis, he says, is China’s recent announcement that “its population declined for the first time since the Great Leap Forward, over 60 years ago.” And “variations on that shadow lie over most rich and many middle-income nations now—threatening general sclerosis, and a zero-sum struggle between a swollen retired generation, and the over-burdened young.”

Douthat then asserts the following “Rules for an Aging World:”

“The rich world will need redistribution back from old to young.” “[R]eform [of] old-age entitlements will become ever more essential and correct — so long as the savings can be used to make it easier for young people to start a family, open a business, own a home. And countries that find a way to make this transfer successfully will end up far ahead of those that just sink into gerontocracy.”
“The big bottlenecks [of the new A.I. technology] aren’t always in invention itself: they’re in testing, infrastructure, deployment, regulatory hurdles.”
“Ground warfare will run up against population limits [as we see today in the Russia-Ukraine war and the tensions over Taiwan].”
A “little extra youth and vitality will go a long way.” For example, “countries that manage to keep or boost their birthrates close to replacement level will have a long-term edge over countries that plunge toward . . .half-replacement-level fertility.” The same “will be true within societies as well.”
A major challenge in this new age will be the international response to the projections that Africa’s population will “reach 2.5 billion by 2050 and [4.0] billion by 2100. . . .The balance between successful assimilation and destabilization and backlash [of the African diaspora] ….will help decide whether the age of demographic decline ends in revitalization or collapse.”

Reactions

Wow!, This is a new and frightening projection of the next 80 years for all of us on planet Earth today! We certainly have seen these challenges in states in the Middle West like Minnesota, Iowa, the Dakotas and Nebraska, and this blog has advocated for increased immigration in these states to counteract aging and declining populations. Nearly everyone in the U.S. today and in the future should join me in a chorus, “I am a proud descendant of immigrants!!”

At the end of the Douthat column are many comments from readers. Here are a few of those comments:

Geoff Burrell of Western Australia said, “Aged 72 I tend to agree that longevity is currently a problem but hasn’t ‘age at dying’ decreased in western countries due to the pandemic, a trend that may continue for many decades as new Covid variants and climate change induced pandemics come along. The article also characterizes elderly people as a ‘burden’ but doesn’t recognize the substantial portion of any population’s wealth they hold, much of it, ironically, used to support younger family members. Immigration is also able to overcome most of the deficits faced by a population with an ageing society, though that requires a good immigration policy to ensure the country gets what it wants.”
Edwin, an American MD in Africa, thanks Douthat “for his recognition of the importance of Africa. Most of Africa’s low- and middle-income countries have 50% or more of their population under the age of 17 years. The education, health and stability of Africa’s children and adolescents is critically important, and will be a major determinant of global security in the 21st Century…” He adds, “Northern Nigeria, where I spend much of my effort, now has a huge number of people living in extreme poverty. Yet the young people in this area of Africa’s most populous nation have much promise. We in the West must prioritize the health, education and security of places like northern Nigeria.”
Nicholas Mellen of Louisville, KY agrees with Edwin. “An aging population? Allow migrants in. They’re young healthy and ambitious. The most productive and successful Americans are usually within the first 3 generations; these migrants will do the same: from Haiti, Honduras, Iran, Sudan, Venezuela, Russia, China, Afghanistan to name a few. You have to be brave, persistent, hopeful and lucky to survive the journey. So there’s how you rejuvenate an aging nation.”
Patrick Bohlen of Orlando, IL, says, “Allowing for more immigration is an obvious top 3 solution that would solve many of the issues brought about by the demographic shift. It will also be unavoidable with climited migration. . . . We don’t need higher birth rates, but we do need sane immigration policies that help address both the demographic and climate crises.”
Anne F of New York, concludes her comment, “We don’t need to be concerned about population decline as it is part of a long-term picture of sustainable human existence. Climate needs to be the focus.”

Surprising news relating to this subject was the recent release of information about the results of the 2021 Gallup World Poll based on detailed interviews with nearly 127,000 adults in 122 countries. “Globally, people’s desire to move reached its highest point in a decade, but interest in moving to the U.S. plunged. When asked where in the world they would want to migrate, 1 in 5 potential migrants — or about 18% — named the U.S. as their desired future residence. The new numbers marked a historic decline that began in 2017, when just 17% — the lowest rate ever recorded — said they’d want to move to the U.S. In previous years, the U.S. has polled between 20% and 24%.”[2]

The managing editor of this World Poll and one of the report’s authors, Julie Ray, attributed the decline in foreigners desire to relocate to the U.S. to anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim policies of the Trump Administration. A Palestinian man, for example, came to the U.S. for graduate study because he thought the U.S. offered “infinite opportunities, but soon he saw a U.S. “workaholicculture,” a lack of fulfillment and evaluating a person’s value by their job status.

==============================

[1] Douthat, Five Rules for an Aging World, N.Y. Times (Jan. 22, 2023).

[2] Abdeleziz, Fewer People Are Interested in Migrating to The U.S. Than Ever Before. Here’s Why, HuffPost (Jan. 26, 2023); Pugliese & Ray, Nearly 900 Million Worldwide Wanted to Migrate in 2021, gallup.com (Jan. 24, 2023).

U.S. and Cuba Resume Law Enforcement Dialogue

On January 18-19, 2023, the United States and Cuba in Havana resumed their Law Enforcement Dialogue, which last operated, 2015-18 during President Obama’s efforts to re-establish a more peaceful and collaborative relationship between the two countries.[1]

The Departments of State, Homeland Security, and Justice co-chaired the dialogue for the United States. The U.S. delegation included representatives from the Department of State’s Bureaus of Western Hemisphere Affairs and Office of the Legal Adviser; the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Strategy, Policy, and Plans, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and U.S. Coast Guard; and the Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs, and Federal Bureau of Investigation. Officials from the U.S. Embassy in Havana also participated.

According to the State Department, this “type of dialogue enhances the national security of the United States through improved international law enforcement coordination, which enables the United States to better protect U.S. citizens and bring transnational criminals to justice. These dialogues strengthen the United States’ ability to combat criminal actors by increasing cooperation on a range of law enforcement matters, including human trafficking, narcotics, and other criminal cases. Enhanced law enforcement coordination is in the best interests of the United States and the Cuban people. This dialogue does not impact the administration’s continued focus on critical human rights issues in Cuba, which is always central to our engagement.”

The Cuban Foreign Ministry said that the Dialogue was held on January 18 and 19 and that they discussed “cooperation in the fight against scourges that threaten the security of both countries, such as terrorism, smuggling of migrants and immigration fraud, among others.” The Cuban Ministry added that their delegation transferred “information and proposals for cooperation . . . on the activities of persons based in the United States, identified as being linked to terrorism, illegal trafficking of persons and other illicit activities.” Cuba also said the two countries “agreed to continue this dialogue and to hold other technical meetings between the law enforcement agencies of the two countries in order to materialize bilateral cooperation.”[2]

===================================

[1] U.S. State Dep’t, United States and Cuba Resume Law Enforcement Dialogue (Jan. 19, 2023); US Sending Delegation to Cuba to Restart Talks on Law Enforcement, VA (Jan. 12, 2023); See posts listed in the following: sections of List of Posts to dwkcommentaries—Topical: Cuba [as of 5/4/20]: U.S. (Obama) and Cuba Relations (Normalization, 2014; U.S. (Obama) and Cuba Relations (Normalization), 2015;U.S. (Obama) and Cuba Relations (Normalization), 2016; U.S. (Obama) and Cuba Relations (Normalization), 2017.

[2] Cuba Foreign Ministry, Cuba and the United States discuss terrorism and migration, (Jan. 20, 2023).

U.S. Adopts Confusing New Program for Resettling Certain Foreigners

On January 19, the Biden Administration announced an additional program for the resettlement of certain foreigners, i.e., “refugees,” in the U.S. that directly will involve U.S. citizens, acting through the State Department’s U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). This new program seeks to resettle refugees from Latin America and the Caribbean with the assistance of Americans “ranging from members of faith and civic groups, veterans, diaspora communities, businesses, colleges and universities, and more.” [1]

This new program already has its own website—Welcome Corps–which says that more than 200 diverse organizations are signaling their support and that Americans will “work in groups of at least five to welcome newcomers by securing and preparing initial housing, greeting refugee newcomers at the airport, enrolling children in school, and helping adults to find employment.” Most importantly, the individuals in these citizen groups will “offer a sense of welcome, belonging, and inclusion for families.”

The “Welcome Corps” website also describes its training program for “providing core private sponsoring services (e.g., housing, benefits and services access, cultural adjustment, etc.) and an overview of how to help facilitate the long-term integration of refugees, . . . the logistics of forming a Private Sponsor Group, fundraising, developing a Welcome Plan, and resiliency-building.” This training must be completed by at least one member of the Private Sponsor Group.”

Who Will Be Welcomed by the Welcome Corps? [2]

The initial Corps materials repeatedly use the word “refugee” to identify the foreigners it will be seeking to help relocate in the U.S. Those same materials also refer to Latin Americans, Caribbeans, Afghans and Ukrainians as people they want to welcome to the U.S. Those are certainly laudatory goals.

But not all of those groups have been determined to meet the legal requirements for “refugee” status under international and U.S. law as shown by the following:

International Law. On April 22, 1954, the international Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees went into force and became a binding treaty after its ratification or accession by the sixth state. Then after its amendment by the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees that went into effect on October 4, 1967, the international definition of “refugee” was the following: Any person who “owing to well- founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who,not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.”

(Excluded from that international definition of “refugee” was “any person . . . [who] (a) . has committed a crime against peace, a war crime or a crime against humanity . . . ; (b) . . . has committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee; [and] (c) . . . has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the [U.N.].”)

U.S. Law. The U.S. did not ratify the previously mentioned Protocol (and by incorporation the previously mentioned Convention) until November 1, 1968, and 12 years later the U.S. finally adopted the implementing federal legislation (the Refugee Act of 1980), which defines “refugee” as follows: “any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” That federal statute also provided, “The term ‘refugee’ does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.”

It must also be noted that this last Session of Congress failed to enact the Afghan Adjustment Act, which would have provided some temporary legal protection for Afghan evacuees who have not been determined to be “refugees.”[3]

Conclusion

It is utterly dumbfounding that the Departments of State and Homeland Security could erroneously use the important legal concept of “refugee” in this matter of foreign policy.

============================

111 State Dep’t, Launch of the Welcome Corps—Private Sponsorship of Refugees (Jan. 19,2023); State Dep’t, U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, (Jan. 19, 2023); Welcome Corps Website, State Dep’t, U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, (Jan. 19,2023); 200+ Organizations Signal Support for the Welcome Corps, New Service, Opportunities for Private Refugee Sponsorship; The Welcome Corps Essentials Training, Jordan, Biden Administration Invites Ordinary Americans to Help Settle Refugees, N.Y. Times (Jan. 19, 2023); Santana, (AP), Welcome Corps provides a new way for Americans to sponsor refugees, Ch. Sci. Monitor (Jan. 19, 2023).

[2] Refugee and Asylum Law: The Modern Era, dwkcommentaries.com (July 9, 2011); Refugee and Asylum Law: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, dwkcommentaries.com (July 10, 2011); Weissbrodt, Ni Aolain, Fitzpatrick & Newman, International Human Rights: Law, Policy, and Process at 1040-42 (4^th ed. 2009).

[3] Need To Prod Congress to Enact the Afghan Adjustment Act, dwkcommentaries.com (Dec. 17, 2022); Apparent Failure To Enact Bipartisan Immigration Bills, dwkcommentaries.com (Dec. 18, 2022); Congress Fails to Adopt Important Immigration Bills, dwkcommentaries.com (Dec. 28, 2022).

President Biden’s Argument for New Asylum/Border Policy

The Biden Administration’s new asylum/border policy was announced on January 5^th. [1] That same day President Biden made the following lengthy statement about the new policy.[2]

“On my first day in office . . . I sent Congress a comprehensive piece of legislation that would completely overhaul what has been a broken immigration system for a long time: cracking down on illegal immigration; strengthening legal immigration; and protecting DREAMers, those with temporary protected status, and farmworkers, who all are part of the fabric of our nation.’

“But congressional Republicans have refused to consider my comprehensive plan. And they rejected my recent request for an additional $3.5 billion to secure the border and funds for 2,000 new . . . asylum officers and personnel — and 100 new immigration judges so people don’t have to wait years to get their claims adjudicated, which they have a right to make a claim legally.”

“And the failure to pass and fund this comprehensive plan has increased the challenges that we’re seeing at our southwest border. . . .”

“People come to America for a whole lot of different reasons. To seek new opportunity in what is the strongest economy in the world. Can’t blame them wanting to do it. They flee oppression . . . to the . . . freest nation in the world. They chase their own American Dream in the greatest nation in the world.”

“And the story of America is the story of so many of your families — including mine, going back to the mid-1800s from Ireland.”

“Now, there are a number of ways to immigrate to America legally under our existing laws. For example, an American citizen — an American citizen can sponsor an immediate family member from another country. An American company can sponsor an employee from another country. There are visas for students to study in our colleges and other special categories.”

“And regardless of the legal pathway, . . they process them to require everyone be involved in following the law. That’s the notion. There are laws to get here legally. That includes another legal way for someone to come to America by seeking asylum because they’re fleeing persecution, like a lot of our ancestors did as well.”

“And for many people, that’s what’s happening at our southwest border now.”

“Over the past several years, thousands of people have been fleeing from Central and South America and the Caribbean countries ruled by oppressive dictators — including Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela — and escaping gang violence, which has the same impact, in Haiti.”

“Currently, these four countries account for most of the people traveling into Mexico to start a new life by getting . . .to the American border and trying to cross.”

“But instead of safe and orderly process at the border, we have a patchwork system that simply doesn’t work as it should. We don’t have enough asylum officers or personnel to determine whether people qualify for asylum. . . . {W] don’t have enough . . .immigration judges to adjudicate the claims of immigrants.”

In fact, the previous administration used a rule called Title 42 to deal with . . . the pandemic, . . . to rapidly expel people who crossed the border. It was . . . designed to deal with the pandemic, but it’s used as a means to expel people at the border.”

“People turned away under Title 42, and they are . . . not barred from trying to come back. They’ve been turned away. They go back. They try again. They try again.. . . [T]hey can and they do try to re-enter the United States again and again, which makes the problem . . . at the border even worse.”

And under the [upcoming] United States Supreme Court decision . . . on Title 42 later this year, my administration will . . . make a decision, finally, what to do about Title 42. In the meantime, my administration will continue to use that authority as the Supreme Court has required.”

And until Congress passes the funds — a comprehensive immigration plan to fix the system completely — my administration is going to work to make things better at the border using the tools that we have available to us now.”

“Today, my administration is taking several steps to stiffen enforcement for those who try to come without a legal right to stay, and to put in place a faster process — I emphasize a ‘faster process’ — to decide a claim of asylum. . . .”

“Over the summer, we saw a huge spike in the number of Venezuelans traveling through — through Mexico and attempting to enter the United States without going through our legal processes.”

“We] responded by using and ensuring that there are two safe and lawful ways for someone leaving [their] country to come to America.”

“First, if they’re seeking asylum, they can use an app on their cell phone called CBP One. . . . To schedule an appointment at a port of entry and make their asylum claim there without crossing the border unlawfully and have a decision determined by an asylum officer . . . [whether] they qualify.”

“Second, in October, we worked with the Mexican government to launch a new parole program. . . . The way this parole program works: One must have a lawful sponsor here in the United States who agrees to sponsor you to get here.”

“Then, that person has to . . . undergo rigorous background checks and apply from outside the United States and not cross the border illegally in the meantime.”

“If they apply and their application is approved, they can use the same app, the CBP One app, to present at a port of entry and be able to work in the United States legally for two years. That’s the process.”

“But if their application is denied or if they attempt to cross into the United States unlawfully, they will be returned back to Mexico and will not be eligible for this program after that.”

“If they apply and they do it properly, fine. If they . . . don’t apply and they try to come through, they’re not going to have an opportunity to deal with the program.”

“This new process is orderly, it’s safe, and it’s humane. And it works.”

“Since we created the new program, the number of Venezuelans trying to enter America without going through a legal process has dropped dramatically, from about 1,100 per day to less than 250 per day on average. That’s several hundred people on average every single day who are not crossing into America illegally.”

“Today I’m announcing that my administration is going to expand the parole program for people not only from Venezuela but from Cuba, Nicaragua, and Haiti.”

“Again, these four countries — Venezuela, Cuba and — Cuba and Nicaragua and Haiti — these four countries account for most of the people now traveling into Mexico to try to start a new life by crossing the border into the United States of America on the southwest border.”

“We anticipate this action is going to substantially reduce the number of people attempting . . . to cross our southwest border without going through a legal process.”

“In fact, today I’m announcing that Mexico has agreed to allow [the U.S.]up to re- — to return up to 30,000 persons per month who try, get caught, and get sent back from those four countries who are apprehended while attempting to unlawfully cross the . . . the southwest border.”

“My message is this: If you’re trying to leave Cuba, Nicaragua, or Haiti, . . . or have agreed to begin a journey to America, . . . do not just show up at the border. Stay where you are and apply legally from there.”

“Starting today, if you don’t apply through the legal process, you will not be eligible for this new parole program.”

“Let me reiterate: You need a lawful sponsor in the United States of America. . . And you need to undergo a rigorous background check.”

If your application is approved and you show up at . . . when and where directed, you have access.”

“But if your application is denied or you attempt to cross into the United States unlawfully, you will not be allowed to enter.”

[We] should all recognize that as long as America is the land of freedom and opportunity, people are going to try to come here. And that’s what many of our ancestors did, and it’s no surprise that it’s happening again today.”

“We can’t stop people from making the journey, but we can require them to come here . . .in an orderly way under U.S. law.”

“The actions we’re announcing today will make things better — will make things better but will not fix the border problem completely.”

“That work will not be done unless and until the Congress enacts and funds a more comprehensive immigration plan that I proposed on day one.”

“Last year, I brought together 20 leaders . . .from the Western Hemisphere . . . to stabilize the flow of immigration, to expand pathways to immigration, and to manage . . .”the border humanely.”

“The leaders of the hemisphere have built on those efforts that I led when I was Vice President to expand economic assistance to nations in north Central America so people . . .can improve their economic prospects at home, instead of having to leave for the United States.”

“Most people would much rather stay in the country they are if they can feed their families, be safe, send their kids to school, and have opportunity.”

“It’s not like people are sitting around a table . . . somewhere in Central America and saying, ‘I got a great idea. Let’s sell everything we have. Let’s give it to a coyote, a smuggler. They’ll take us on a harrowing journey for thousands of miles to get to the United States, then we’re going to illegally cross the border. They’re going to drop us in a desert. And we’re — in a place where we don’t speak the language. Won’t that be fun?’”

“ [Vice] President Harris . . . led this effort to make things better in the countries from which they are leaving. And thanks to her leadership, she’s been able to generate more than $3.2 billion from the private sector to create jobs and opportunities in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala to help people stay in their own countries . . . where it’ll be safer and they have some opportunities.”

“We’ve also set up joint patrols and law enforcement with Mexico and Guatemala that share real-time information on locations that smugglers are using to convince migrant groups to cross illegally.”

“We embedded our Border Patrol officers with Mexican patrols to detect . . . and raid human smuggling operations. . . . [T]hus far, there have — more than 7,000 arrests of human smugglers in the last six months. . . .”

“That’s not just human smuggling at the border. We’re focused on cracking down on drug smuggling, which is a serious and deadly . . . problem. . . .”

“My administration has allocated record funding that added hundreds of additional Border Patrol agents and installed new cutting-edge technologies to be able to use . . . like a X-ray machine, detailed to be able to look through these large containers to determine what’s in the container and — at the border.”

“For example, since August of last year, Customs and Border Patrol have seized more than 20,000 pounds of deadly fentanyl. That’s enough to kill — kill as many as 1,000 people in this country.”

“And next week, I’m going to travel to Mexico where I’m going to meet with President López Obrador. We have a big agenda that ranges from the climate crisis to economic development and other issues. But one important part of that agenda is strengthening our border between our nations.”

And I will visit the border myself this Sunday, in El Paso, to assess border enforcement operations, meet with the local officials and community leaders and the folks at the border [telling] me what they need that they don’t have, and make it public what they conclude they need they don’t have to try to convince my Republican colleagues they should do something.”

“And I know that migration is putting a real strain on the borders and on border communities.”

“We’re going to get these communities more support. And I want to thank all the nonprofits, the faith groups, the community leaders, and other volunteers who will make sure that vulnerable immigrants have what they need to survive, whether it’s food, warm clothing, shelter, medical care right after their arrival.”

“These religious and civic groups represent . . .our nation’s generosity — the best of our country. . . . And they’re a powerful rebuke to the hostility and even the hate which many people face when they arrive here legally.”

“. . . . Our problems at the border didn’t arise overnight and they’re not going to be solved overnight. It’s a difficult problem.”

“It’s clear that immigration is a political issue that extreme Republicans are always going to run on. But now they have a choice: They can keep using immigration to try to score political points or they can help solve the problem. . . .and come together to fix the broken system.”

“Before Congress adjourned for the holidays, some Democrats and Republicans, a few of them, got together — both sides, in the Senate — and decided they were going to put together a comprehensive plan on immigration.”

“But the Republican leadership . . . rebuked it and rejected it out of hand . . . just like they rejected my plan two years ago, just like they rejected my recent request for an additional $3.5 billion to secure and manage the border with more holding facilities , better transportation, additional funding for 2,000 new asylum officers and personnel, 100 new immigration judges to more rapidly adjudicate for people when they come here, and . . . so much more.”

“I’ll sit down with anyone who, in good faith, wants to fix our broken immigration system. And it’s hard. . . . But if the most extreme Republicans continue to demagogue this issue and reject solutions, I’m left with only one choice: to act on my own, do as much as I can on my own to change the atmosphere.”

=============================

[1] Department of Homeland Security Announces Important Proposed Rules To Improve Immigration Laws and Border Security, dwkcommentaries.com (Jan. 5, 2023)

[2] White House, Remarks by President Biden on Border Security and Enforcement (Jan. 5,2023).