Mediaboss Marketing

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

We have the experience and the expertise to process 125,000 refugees per yeareasily, Eskinder Negash told me this week. Thats eight times more than the historic low number the Biden administration recently said itd allow into the country,before quickly backtracking in the face of pushback from allies and promising to announce a higher level of refugee admissions by May 15.

Much of the reason, it claimed, was that apparentlyit couldnt walk and chew gum at the same timesince the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which is part of Health and Human Services, handles both the countrys refugee program and sheltering and placing unaccompanied migrant minors. As President Joe Biden explained last week, The problem was that the refugee part was working on the crisis that ended up on the border with young people. We couldnt do two things at once. But now we are going to increase the number.

But, as Negash told me, that argument doesnt really make that much sense. He would know: Now the president and CEO for the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, Negash ran ORR under President Obama, from 2009 to 2015a tenure that saw what became known as the child migrant crisis of 2014, in which the number of unaccompanied minors at the border jumped almost 80 percent from the previous year, with more than 68,000 children and teens in US custody. Negash is also a refugee himself, and was welcomed to the US after fleeing Ethiopia in his 20s.

I spoke with him earlier this week about ORRs division of labor, the differences between the 2014 crisis and what were seeing now, and what changes still need to be made when dealing with unaccompanied migrant children. Our conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.

Could you start by sharing a bit about your own personal story and connection to working with refugees?

I was young when I left home and I went to another country the same way that someone from Guatemala, Honduras, or El Salvador does. It took me weeks to get to another country, I didnt speak the language, I didnt have any family members, and thats how I ended up being a refugee in Sudan. And then from there, because of the US resettlement program, I came here 40 years ago. So for me, I think I continue to do this work because with those kids or any refugees regardless of where they came from, when I see them, what I see is myself. Their suffering and their journey is really personal for me; its not just a job. I came as a refugee as one of the lucky ones because many people dont make it.

The Biden administration said that one of the reasons they couldnt raise the refugee cap from a historically low one of 15,000 left by the previous administration was that they had to first deal with last months influx of unaccompanied minors at the border. But looking at 2014, for example, when there was a huge increase of unaccompanied minors at the border from the previous year, ORR handled that while keeping its refugee resettlement program operating as usualthe refugee caps for 2014 and 2015 didnt change, they remained at 70,000.

So what is your response to the Biden administrations reasoning for not increasing the refugee cap yet? And could you share insight into how ORRs process works when it comes to managing both programs?

I think the difference between this crisis and when I was there is that the overseas refugee processing was fully staffed, fully funded. Whats different now is for the past four years, we have dismantled the refugee program overseas. In addition to that, we have COVID. Im not trying to give excuses to the administration, Im just being candid with you.

For unaccompanied minors, what we have now is different thanwhen I was there, too. We had the influx then, yes, and we were struggling because we didnt have enough capacity for beds. And to open a shelter you need to get a license issued by the state. So it takes a lot of time, sometimes up to six months in some places. That was a challenge for us because we didnt have enough resources at that time. So I talked with the Obama administration so we could use military bases in Texas, Oklahoma, and California.

[Leading up to the increase of kids] this time, as you know, the number for unaccompanied minors was way, way down because of what the [Trump] administration decided, and then the refugee program was systematically dismantledall the processing overseas, everything was really in shambles. So I think this administrations intention is to bring in as many refugees as possible, but they realize also they have to go through a process. So just to focus on the comparison with the influx of unaccompanied children from 2014: We didnt have COVID and we didnt have the problem of losses to the refugee resettlement programs overseas.

To clarify, if someone works for ORR and their job is to work on the refugee resettlement side of things, they most likely stay on that side. And if somebody works for the unaccompanied children program, they do that workits not like they would need to be responding to both things at once.

No, and they have a lot of people working there. You have the refugees section, where they work with each state and have a relationship with the state government. And its not just only about refugeesthere are also asylees, and special visa holders, and the survivors of torture program. All of that is within the refugees section of ORR. So the refugee section is functioning. And then the unaccompanied minor section is doing its job. So no, theyre not doubling. I think we have the experience and the expertise to process 125,000 refugees per year, easily. I expect the Biden administration to increase the number of refugees by May 15 and then I expect them to make a decision by September on the 125,000 cap for 2022. The other thing is, as you know, the administration decided to withdraw from Afghanistan by September, so that means a number of special immigrant visa applicantsfor Afghans who worked with the US governmentwill be coming in and we need to help them.

Having spent time working in the Obama administration during the influx of 2014,you knew what it was like to have to quickly respond to an increase of unaccompanied migrant children at the border. What do you think people need to understand about what is going on today?

I think people dont understand how the system works and the division of labor between Health and Human Services and the Department of Homeland Security.

As you know, [DHS officials] have to transfer unaccompanied children within 72 hours to HHS. So DHS can project a certain number [of incoming unaccompanied children], but when that projection is wrong and it exceeds that number, thats why we have the influx. It takes time to build that infrastructure for HHS to take them over. And then, we also have to do some checking; we cant just simply release children to anybody who says, Yeah, I will pick them up. We have to vet the people. Thats why it takes sometimes between 30 days and 25 days: We have to contact the sponsor, and if necessary make a visit to make sure the kids are being released to a decent environment.

I think all of usnot just government, all of uscould actually help talking about the issue of how the process works. And I think thats part of the challenge because sometimes the media focuses on DHS sites [run by the Border Patrol] and seeing those picturesand that will be the narrative. But HHS is different. There are close to 200 shelters around the country, and they are licensed by the state, the states health department, the fire department. There are ratios for how many case managers and clinicians per child; its really well organized, and I dont think that gets enough credit.

What can this administration do to set up more permanent or long lasting solutions to this problem, so that in the next administration, or even the next couple years, we dont find ourselves in the same place needing emergency influx shelters?

I think overall the government, regardless of which administration is in charge, needs to think about the reception of vulnerable children. We need to expand and maintain the number of licensed bed capacity to a minimum of 20,000 to 25,000 beds [in HHS facilities] at all timesthat would be much better going forward. [Ed. note: HHS lists its bed capacity at 13,000, including in emergency shelters and state licensed facilities.] Unless the number exceeds 25,000, we should avoid the influx or emergency unlicensed shelters. We just have to accept the fact this is not an easy program to manage.

For post-release services, there also needs to be a follow up of, at a minimum, one year post release to make sure that the kids are fine. We also need to make sure that they get legal services. About 75 percent of kids with attorneys get asylum. So if you have an attorney, your chance of winning asylum is much higher. These are major solutions for future influxes.

More specifically, what should the Department of Homeland Security do?

I think we need to fund facilities that are humane for children. Thats really crucial. We can do better than what we are doing now, as a country. The first reception for children should not be in that kind of cage environment; thats not really the way we want to process them. The other thing is, I think we need to engage back in their home countries with employment and education. We have to understand the level of violence and level of poverty are driving forceswe cant deny that. You know we need to help work with the governments of these countries and civil society. Ive been there many, many times and I can tell you theres a lot we can do there. I dont think anybody wants to leave their country. There is a reason people become refugees, there is a reason why they have to abandon everything they know and go to a country where they dont speak the language or know the culture. I dont think we should assume that just everybody wants to come to the US. Thats just not the case.

The number of unaccompanied minors coming to this country is very high, even when I was working at HHS under Obama. I think during my time we processed 135,000 children. So its not a small number. But you have to look at it also globally: Who are becoming refugees? Women and children. Theyre the highest number, when you look at it globally and see who is moving from one area to another area. I know people focus only on the Central America, but there is a global migration of children, and nobody is really paying attention.

Follow this link:
I Asked Obama's Refugee Chief: The US Really Can Handle Both Unaccompanied Kids and More Refugees Mother Jones - Mother Jones

The Week

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) held huge rallies in West Bengal state this spring in a hard-fought race to unseat its chief minister, Mamata Banerjee. Banerjee won handily. After votes were counted Sunday, her All India Trinamool Congress party won 213 of the 292 seats up for grab in the state, according to the Election Commission of India. The BJP won 77 and two went to other parties. Modi congratulated his rival on her victory Sunday night. Modi's BJP won in northeastern Assam state and, in alliance with regional parties, in the federally controlled territory of Puducherry, but lost in two southern states, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. The elections were held through March and April, as India's COVID-19 pandemic started spiraling out of control. India recorded a record 3,689 new deaths Sunday and 392,488 new infections, down from Saturday's pandemic-high 401,993 new infections. Both the death and infection numbers are believed to be much higher than the official tallies. In Kolkata, West Bengal's capital, half of all people tested for COVID-19 now test positive. Indian Medical Association national vice president Navjot Dahiya last week called Modi a "super-spreader" for holding the large election rallies in West Bengal and allowing a Hindu religious festival to take place with no restrictions. The Madras High Court in Tamil Nadu also excoriated the Election Commission last week for allowing packed campaign rallies in the middle of the pandemic. "Your institution is singularly responsible for the second wave of COVID-19," Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee wrote for the court. "Your officers should be booked on murder charges probably." Modi's government is "battling a public backlash on their mishandling of the COVID pandemic," political commentator Arati Jerath told The New York Times, but political analyst Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay cautioned that the loss in West Bengal will have to be studied to determine what role the BJP's coronavirus response played. "The BJP started running out of steam as the pandemic spread," he told The Associated Press. "The verdict in West Bengal state will definitely weaken Modi's position," but nobody's sure just how much. More stories from theweek.com5 brutally funny cartoons about Giuliani's legal woesWhat the Elon Musk backlash is really aboutA blue state-red state vaccine divide is emerging

Read the original:
Rep. Biggs: Migrant influx at southern border is 'beyond a crisis' - Yahoo News

The celebrated German philosopher Jrgen Habermaswill turn 92 next month, yet he remains firmly in the public eye after he accepted, then rejected, a controversial award from the United Arab Emirates(UAE)this week.

Having decided to accept the Sheikh Zayed Book Award whichmade himCultural Personality of the Year 2021and 225,000($271,000) richer Habermas turned it down on Sunday over concerns about human rights in the Gulf nation.

In the end, Habermas could not compromise his core philosophical principles established over more than sevendecades.

Having advocatedfor the right to asylum during the 2015 migrant crisis, and against right-wingpopulismand xenophobiain the 2019 European Parliament elections,Habermas remains activelycommitted to his cosmopolitan ideal ofan openand rigorousdemocracy.

After turning 90 in 2019,he also publisheda 1,700-pagework,This Too a History of Philosophy,a look at the evolution of human rationality and reasonthat the Boston Reviewcalled "a masterpiece of erudition and synthesis."

His acceptanceof an award from a UAE absolute monarchy accused of repressionhas, however, been seen to contradicthis avowed principles of freedom of opinionand open debate in a healthy "public sphere."

In a statement to the Spiegel Online news website, Habermasadmittedthat his initial embrace oftheSheikh Zayed Book Award"was a wrong decision," adding that "I didn't sufficiently make clear to myself the very close connection of the institution, which awards these prizes in Abu Dhabi, with the existing political system there."

The philosopher at his home in 1981

Born in Dusseldorf in 1929,Jrgen Habermas ismost closely associated with the city of Frankfurt more specifically, with a school of social and critical theory known as the Frankfurt School.

After earninga doctorate in philosophy in Bonn, in 1964 he took over the chair of philosophy and sociology atthe University of Frankfurt from Max Horkheimer, a position he held until 1971. His postdoctoral thesis from 1961, Strukturwandel der ffentlichkeit (published in English translation in 1989 as The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere), establishes his concept ofthe "public sphere" as asthe domain through which reasoned"public opinion" can be employed to tame the excesses of capitalism.

His updating of Marxist theoryfor the times influenced the 1968 student insurrection; however, when theprotest movement became more radical, the philosopheropenly criticized it.

In his chief work from 1981, Theory of Communicative Action, he developeda theoretical action guide for modern society, which again lookedat how languageand rational argumentation can evolve so thatevery participant is free to take part in democratic discourse.

Habermas inspired the 1968 protests to call for more democracy

But such democratic discourse is routinely shut down inthe country that awardedHabermas his prize,according to Kenneth Roth, Executive Director at Human Rights Watch. Though the UAEis trying to present itself as "a bastion of liberalism,behind the glistening faade is an uglier reality where critics are jailed, the rights of migrant workers are limited, and the ruler of Dubai locks up his adult daughter for wanting to escape life under his thumb."

Latifais one daughter of the prime minister of the United Arab Emirates and ruler of the Emirate of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed, who saysshe is being held against her will since attempting to leave the country in 2018. Meanwhile, her sister Shamsa has not been seen since 2000 when she was allegedly abducted from Cambridge, England.

A #FreeLatifa campaign gained momentum when video footage of the despairing princess was aired on BBC in February.

This follows a ruling by a UK judge in March 2020, which said the billionaire ruler of Dubai ordered the abduction of his daughters and subjected his estranged wife to a campaign of fear and intimidation.

The day before Habermas declined the UAE award, the #FreeLatifa campaign also fuelled calls to ban Sheikh Mohammed's horsefrom theKentucky Derby.

Habermas' decision to rescind the award comes as the UAE's authoritarian government attempts to contrast human rights concerns in the Gulf nation with a more liberal and tolerant outlook, especially concerningwomen.Dubai is well-known for its celebrity "influencers" who receive tax-free income to promote the UAE'ssun-soaked Persian Gulfcity. As theoil-rich UAE has also become a generous patron of arts and culture in recent times,theSheikh Zayed Book Award itself is typically pitched asembodying "the values of tolerance, knowledge and creativity while building bridges between cultures."

When Habermas initially accepted the award, Spiegel Onlinequestioned why the greatest German thinker of the last 50 years hadn'tsimply turned it down.

"With this world-class thinker who has stood for the Enlightenment project and critical distance from power for more than half a century, it should be possible to answer the question [of whether to accept the award] with a resounding 'no,'" wrote SpiegelOnline on Sunday.

Habermashad first said he hoped the award would provide a "tailwind" for the "dissemination of books" in the region that, like his, similarlypromotefreedom of opinionand democracy. He also statedthat he had sought advice from Jrgen Boos, the managing director of the Frankfurt Book Fair who also sits on the committee that adjudicates the Sheikh Zayed Book Award. He addedthat Boos had "dispelled concerns that are obvious."

Boos said in a statement to DW that he was disappointed that Habermas declined the award.

"Of course, I accept Mr. Habermas' decision,"he said. "However, awarding him this prize would have been an occasion to make his important work and his positions even better known in the Arab cultural area and thus to promote Arab society's engagement with his work. A significant number of the German philosopher and sociologist's works have been translated into Arabic."

Habermas declined a DW request forcomment.

Once Habermasrescinded the award, some on social media said thatthe philosopher had upheld the spirit of the "public sphere."

"It is good to see Jrgen Habermas, whose scholarship defines the concept of the public sphere, has rejected an award from the UAE on #WorldPressFreedomDay," wrote "independent activist" @LyndonPeters01on Twitter. "With no press freedom in the UAE there is no public sphere. So we should reiterate the calls to #FreeAhmedMansoor," he added, referring to thehuman rights activist who wasjailedfor criticizing the UAE government.

Having lived through the Nazi regime, Habermas was inspired to embolden democracy in Europe and the world through his writings.

The question of how a repetition of how the Holocaust could be prevented was fundamental tohis work. He was ultimatelyinspiredto create complex communication models through which members of a society could aim to balance their different interests.

"Consensual" was the name given to those social models, and the term had an exceptional impact on the Federal Republic of Germany's self-image. Citizens were no longer to receive orders from above; rather, they shouldbe encouraged to intervene in public, to formulate their views openly and include them into a large-scale discussion, one in which everyone would be working towards an acceptable compromise.

A philosopher, writer and professor of political theory: Hannah Arendt (1906-1975) became renowned in the US and worldwide for her works examining revolutions and totalitarian systems, as well as the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, in which she radically questioned traditions and ideologies.

The exhibition "Hannah Arendt and the 20th Century" at Berlin's Deutsches Historisches Museum (DHM) also displays some of her personal belongings. Arendt wouldn't go anywhere without this silver cigarette case. "Like a briefcase, it was a work tool for her," explains exhibition curator Monika Boll. "Smoking was part of her process of getting her thoughts organized."

Hannah Arendt was born on October 14, 1906 in Hanover to politically progressive parents and it was clear that she would pursue university studies. She first studied philosophy, Greek and theology at the University of Marburg under philosopher Martin Heidegger. She had a brief affair with her much older professor. She obtained her PhD from the University of Heidelberg in 1929.

After Hitler came to power in 1933, Hannah Arendt had to leave the country as a Jew. Initially, she worked in Paris for an organization that brought Jewish orphans to Palestine. But in 1940, she fled to the United States when Germany invaded France. In New York, the first point of contact for many emigrants from Europe, she quickly found work as a journalist.

Hannah Arendt was 38 years old in this photo from 1944, taken by renowned photographer Fred Stein. A series of photos from the Fred Stein Archive in Stanfordville, New York were loaned to the Berlin museum for the exhibition. At the time, Arendt was leading a research project for the Conference on Jewish Relations.

Arendt lived as a stateless person in the United States for a long time until she was finally naturalized on December 10, 1951. Emigration from Nazi Germany, the insecurity of exile and her lack of rights as a Jewish migrant in the US were very formative experiences for her. All of this shaped her strong political views, which guided her throughout her life.

In 1961, the magazine "The New Yorker" commissioned Arendt to cover the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, held in Jerusalem. Eichmann was one of the main organizers of the deportation and extermination of the Jews during the Holocaust. Arendt's account on "the banality of evil" caused a storm of indignation.

She was a professor at different universities, including at the University of Chicago from 1963 to 1967, and at the New School for Social Research in New York, where she taught until her death in 1975. Universities were her intellectual home; she was even able to develop her political and philosophical theories in an empty cafeteria, as this photo from 1961-62 shows.

The controversial philosopher did not avoid intellectual disputes. As a thinker and reporter, Hannah Arendt's ideas often led to controversy in her adopted country and in Europe. "Taking a stand was very risky at the time, and she was well aware of that," says curator Monika Boll.

As a well-known reporter and university professor, Hannah Arendt was also part of the US establishment. She was reluctant to pursue social obligations, but she did have a mink cape at hand for official events such as gala dinners or receptions. The fur coat comes from the private collection of her great-niece, Edna Brocke, who donated different items from Arendt's estate to the DHM.

In addition to private photos, personal letters, manuscripts and books, her legendary Minox can also be seen in Berlin. She often used the tiny camera for her work as a reporter and to photograph her friends. The exhibition provides insight into the life and work of the German-American philosopher Hannah Arendt, who died in New York 45 years ago.

Author: Heike Mund (eg)

View post:
Jrgen Habermas, the philosopher who rejected a 225,000 prize - DW (English)

Some border county sheriffs say theres no crisis at the border

As politicians from both sides of the aisle claim there's a crisis at the border, sheriffs with two border counties in Arizona say they disagree with that assessment.

PHOENIX - Arizona Governor Doug Ducey, along with several Republican leaders, are calling the situation at the U.S.-Mexico Border a 'crisis.'

On the Democratic side, President Joe Biden has used the word 'crisis' recently, and both U.S. Senators from Arizona have asked for more National Guard along the border.

Related: Arizona Governor deploys National Guard to US-Mexico border

However, sheriffs with two border counties in Arizona have a very different take on current conditions.

"We have no migrant crisis at the border, but theres lots of fuzzy math going around," said Santa Cruz County Sheriff David Hathaway.

Santa Cruz County, a small county south of Tucson and north of Nogales, Mexico, has the biggest ports of entry into Arizona. Immigrant arrests in the county are up from the Trump and Obama years, but the people coming here to find work, and the overall numbers are nothing new.

"1.1 million if that continues at the exact same rate this summer, which is unlikely, but theres nothing out of the ordinary. Its practically every year since the 80s, 90s, and 2000s," said Sheriff Hathaway.

Sheriff Hathaway says it's not an immigration crisis, but an economic one on the American side of the border.

"We have an economic crisis here because the tourist visa holders still can't come in the United States, and that's costing millions of dollars every day in lost revenue," said Sheriff Hathaway.

"Whether it's a crisis in their neighborhoods, I cant speak to it, but its not a crisis right now for Pima County," said Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos.

Sheriff Nanos was born on the border, and has worked along it almost ever since. He says if the governor really wants to help, he should send more money for things like police reform, body cameras, and ankle monitors, rather than more National Guard troops.

"It might help those with mental illness or suffer from drug addiction rather than locking them all up in my jail. So yeah, if the governor really wants to help Pima county, send me some funding for one of those items," said Sheriff Nanos.

Read more from the original source:
Sheriffs with 2 Arizona border counties say there is no crisis at the US-Mexico Border - FOX 10 News Phoenix

Asylum-seeking migrant families disembark from an inflatable boat after crossing the Rio Grande river into the United States from Mexico in Roma, Texas, April 27, 2021.

GO NAKAMURA/Reuters

Its time to recognize that the crisis at the Mexico-United States border is Canadas problem.

Thats because, contrary to the way the U.S. media portrays it, its not really a case of thousands of people trying to enter America through Mexico as refugees, but of hundreds of thousands of people emigrating, most temporarily, out of a number of Latin American countries any way they can, during a difficult historical moment. Most arent primarily interested in being refugees, none really want to be making the trek through Mexico, and few are even aiming for the United States specifically.

Canada can have a key role here, one that also benefits us. Many of those crisis-stricken countries including Venezuela, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Cuba, Honduras and El Salvador have important relationships with Canada.

Story continues below advertisement

Crises of political violence, the economic and civic collapse of Venezuela, severe natural and weather disasters, and disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic have caused people to seek different livelihoods outside their countries borders.

Most just need help finding a place to settle in a nearby, more stable country, such as Colombia, Mexico or Costa Rica and hundreds of thousands already have. These countries could use our help handling these populations. Those who make the dangerous journey by train and foot across the length of Mexico to the U.S. border are doing so because they know of no other option and most would instead prefer a regular, legal pathway into a country that happens to be seeking their employment. Such as Canada after all, were already welcoming a good number of them.

Biden vows action on migrants, defends border policy

For example, Canada attracts five times more Guatemalan labour migrants every year than the United States does. Our 15,000 annual Guatemalans (versus 3,000 who go to the U.S.) are mostly farm workers on seasonal visas who fly back and forth. Theyre part of a labour pool thats vital to Canadas farms (it also includes many Hondurans) and could be considerably larger. And thats aside from our permanent immigration targets of 401,000 new Canadians every year, and our smaller but also significant refugee-resettlement programs.

But the labour migrants are key because theyre often the same people who would otherwise become refugees. By shifting an influential fraction of potential refugees into more secure and beneficial forms of migration, we could play a big role in bringing stability to a volatile region and preventing a deadly asylum emergency.

Canada is really already part of the solution here Canadians just dont know that, says Andrew Selee, head of the Washington-based Migration Policy Institute. The question is, if the three countries of North America wanted to sit down and talk about a coordinated strategy to end the crisis, could Canada play a constructive role by expanding seasonal visas and resettlement? Its basically an expansion of what Canadas already doing with Guatemala and Honduras.

Mr. Selee recently coauthored a detailed proposal, with Ariel G. Ruiz Soto, that proposes a new regional migration system that would bring together the U.S., Mexico and Canada, along with successful regional partners such as Costa Rica and Colombia, to stabilize the situation and stop the deadly asylum journeys. It would involve a set of actions: agreeing on a combination of regional refugee-settlement programs in adjoining countries partly financed by the wealthier nations to the north; expanding work-visa programs and labour-migration agreements with countries such as Canada; bolstering and funding refugee-resettlement programs for Central Americans in the U.S. and Canada temporarily; creating new family-reunification programs designed to settle entire vulnerable families in new countries; and making an investment in on-the-ground programs within Latin America designed to identify people before they migrate and find them a safe destination before they flee (and maybe vaccinate them before they leave).

Many of these programs already exist in Canada theyre just lying dormant.

Story continues below advertisement

Two Toronto migration specialists, Craig Damian Smith of Ryerson University and Dana Wagner of the refugee-assistance agency TalentLift, last week published a policy brief looking at Canadian programs such as the federal Economic Mobility Pathways Project, created after the 2015-16 Mideast migrant crisis to direct potential refugees into more desirable economic-migration routes that take advantage of their skills, educations and entrepreneurial ambitions. The authors suggest that Canada redirect and expand these programs to the new crises in Latin America.

This is a clear-cut case where Canada could play a leading role in ending a major crisis afflicting Mexico and the United States, in bringing stability to a dangerously volatile part of the Americas while providing ourselves with people we happen to need. It may be their border crisis, but it could be our solution.

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.

Read more:
Opinion: Those migrants at the U.S.-Mexican border are a Canadian problem, too - The Globe and Mail