Misguided gatekeeper controls flow into land of the free

One hundred miles south of UCLA, the desert landscape suddenly
converts into a military zone, marked by permanent high-intensity
lighting, 60 infrared scopes, 1200 underground sensors, a dozen
helicopters and over 40 miles of fencing, which extends across the
land into the Pacific Ocean. This is Operation Gatekeeper, a
multi-million dollar-per-year operation designed to keep
“illegal aliens” out of the Land of the Free.

Launched six years ago, Operation Gatekeeper is one of several
extreme anti-immigration initiatives created by Attorney General
Janet Reno and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Like
similar operations in Texas and Arizona, Operation Gatekeeper gave
the California branch of the INS free reign to increase border
patrol officers and to expand military infrastructure along the San
Diego-Tijuana border in order to “strengthen enforcement of
the nation’s immigration laws” (INS Fact Sheet May 1,
1999). According to INS officials, Operation Gatekeeper has
“proven that deterrence works” and the INS has achieved
“considerable success in restoring integrity and safety to
the Southwest border” (INS Fact Sheet May 1, 1999).

Yet the facts show that such claims are blatant lies, spewed
forth as part of a public relations campaign, which aims to mask
the brutality of America’s border patrol operations and the
human rights violations that are committed daily by government
officials. What’s more, these operations are siphoning money
away from social services like public education; in this manner,
the government is perpetuating problems like underfunding and
overcrowding, which are often unfairly attributed to
immigrants.

Since 1994, INS border operations have resulted in a 600 percent
increase in the death rate of migrating people (www.globalexchange.org). Over
the same period, tens of thousands of immigrants seeking employment
and refuge in the United States have been arrested and imprisoned
by INS authorities.

Prison rights activists and human rights watch groups, including
the Prison Moratorium Project and Amnesty International, have
denounced INS prisons, citing testimonials of horrific conditions
and blatant human rights abuses (“Human Rights Concerns with
the Border Region of Mexico,” May 1998, www.amnesty.org). Rather than
deterring immigration and increasing the apprehension of
undocumented immigrants, Operation Gatekeeper is slowly killing
innocent people who are desperately seeking a better life for
themselves and their families.

Examining the statistics, the crackdown on “illegal”
immigrants seems bizarre; according to the INS, undocumented
immigrants total approximately 300,000 individuals annually, making
up less than a third of America’s annual immigrant population
and 1 percent of America’s total population. However, over
half of these undocumented immigrants arrive in the U.S. legally
and overstay their non-immigrant visas (American Immigration
Lawyers Association, www.aila.org). So why is the INS devoting
the vast majority of its regulating budget to enormous, inhumane
border operations when the bulk of the immigration
“problem” lies elsewhere?

There are many answers, but all have one common theme:
exploitation. Undocumented immigrants are encouraged to enter the
United States because they make up the backbone of America’s
cheap labor market. As long as immigrants are handled by
subcontractors, who bring cheap labor over to the U.S. to work in
Californian produce farms and sweatshops for next-to-nothing wages
and no benefits, the U.S. government and INS are more than happy to
look the other way (“Bordering on Futility: Growers Hire
Illegals the Legal Way ““ With Contractors” by Robert
Collier, San Francisco Chronicle, 10/14/98). It’s only when
undocumented workers try to come to the U.S. on their own that the
INS gets militaristic, and that’s simply because such workers
are perceived to be a threat to agribusiness and other business
interests. After all, it’s no coincidence that undocumented
workers residing in America are immediately deported only after
trying to organize to improve their labor situation.

The xenophobic argument that immigrants steal American jobs is
ridiculous; when was the last time someone you knew willingly woke
up at 4 a.m. to stand on a street corner, hoping to be chosen as a
day laborer paid minimum wage, with no benefits, working 12 or more
hours under the incessant California sun or in a suffocating
sweatshop?

The fact that Operation Gatekeeper and similar initiatives were
launched in 1994 is also no coincidence. Only a few short months
before the INS strategy went into effect, President Clinton signed
the North American Free Trade Agreement into law.

NAFTA, one of the many international free trade agreements
characteristic of the international globalization trend, eliminated
farm subsidies in Mexico and displaced millions of rural Mexicans
by removing tariffs on American corn and milk. As the Mexican
market was flooded with cheap American agricultural products,
Mexican farmers were left with no land and no employment.

The U.S. government, knowing that many desperate families would
seek survival in America, cracked down on the border, exacerbating
the crisis. Meanwhile, American companies and wealthy landowners in
Mexico reaped the profits of unregulated trade (“NAFTA Gives
Mexicans New Reasons to Leave Home” by Robert Collier, San
Francisco Chronicle, 10/15/98).

America is not a melting pot; it is a fiery cauldron in which
many immigrants must suffer from repeated attacks from xenophobic
conservatives while desperately trying to survive. Besides the
attacks made on undocumented immigrants along the border,
government officials target legal immigrants seeking
naturalization.

As an immigrant myself, I know firsthand the tedious and
expensive process of naturalization in this country. All immigrants
over the age of 18 are required to pay the INS $225 to apply for
citizenship, regardless of income, and must wait a year or more
before the process is complete.

Immigrants must take time off of work to travel to government
offices, sit in waiting rooms for long hours, fill out a myriad of
confusing forms, swear that they have never been affiliated with
communism, and endure the endless condescension of most INS
officials before they are finally sworn in. It is a ridiculous
process, which ironically ends with a swearing-in ceremony that
quotes the Statue of Liberty and declares America a welcoming haven
for the world’s “tired, poor, huddled masses yearning
to breathe free.”

Two weeks ago, I attended an immigrants’ rights march in
downtown Los Angeles. Beginning in the garment district amidst
L.A.’s very own sweatshops, thousands of people marched
toward Staples Center, where Al Gore was accepting the presidential
nomination for the Democratic Party.

As we marched, protesters carried white wooden crosses adorned
with the names of some of the 600 immigrants who have been killed
in America’s brutal and unnoticed War on Immigrants. Many of
the crosses were simply marked “no identificado,” in
honor of the memory of the unidentified dead.

As the elections approach, we are faced with a unique and
crucial opportunity to stop this War on Immigrants and to restore
justice to our borders. George W. Bush has come out in support of
INS border operations, while Al Gore has only vaguely stated that
such operations should be managed with more
“compassion” (www.issues2000.org and www.guardianunlimited.co.uk).

The empty political rhetoric is too little too late; hundreds
have already died in California from the brutality of Gatekeeper.
We must educate ourselves about the reality of the INS, agitate to
stop the militarization of the border and fight to prevent any more
innocent people from dying for a better life. After all, as
Americans, we are nearly all immigrants.