A recent story in The Nation recounts the experiences of two climate migrants seeking refuge in the US with one defining difference between the two: legal status. The ease with which one migrant fleeing climate disaster is able to immigrate to the US mainland is juxtaposed to the difficulty of the other, highlighting the time sensitive need for the US to create legal infrastructure for climate migration.
Jose Luis Zelaya migrated from Honduras to the US after facing worsening poverty and gang violence in the wake of Hurricane Mitch in 2000. He was thirteen years old and undocumented when he travelled through Central America and across the US border, only to then be detained by immigration officers. After two months he was released and reunited with his mother, who had immigrated without legal status years earlier.
Sharellee Rosario-Rondón felt a similar push to migrate from Puerto Rico in the wake of Hurricane Maria. But instead of facing a six week trek across Central America when essential goods became scarce in Puerto Rico, Rosario-Rondón simply got on a plane to Buffalo, NY. Upon migrating she was assured all the legal protections of a US citizen, and was able to learn English before getting a job as a Spanish-language teacher.
Geopolitical contexts and borders defined each migrants’ citizenship, and also defined the ease with which they could migrate to escape climate-related weather events and their aftermaths. This is especially ironic considering US policies and interventions in both locations, and that the US is the country with the second highest total CO2 emissions in the world, making it one of the countries most responsible for the climate-related events migrants are fleeing around the world.
It should be emphasized that since the early 2000s, it has become increasingly difficult and dangerous for migrants like Zelaya to cross the US-Mexico border. The compounded effects of poverty, gang-violence, climate change, and state-instability has decreased human security in the region. Resulting forced migration has been met though with violence, family separation, and inhumane living conditions in detention centers at the US-Mexico border.
The numbers of internal displacement and migration are even higher, especially in vulnerable regions, increasing the need for countries to pass stronger disaster laws and policies to protect displaced people, noted in this new guide by the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (IFRC) Disaster Law.
In legislative advocacy tailored toward disaster preparedness and protection policies that lawmakers should take up, the important area of immigration is noted, including laws relating to refugees and asylum-seekers.
With the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, the Trump administration instituted an order that expelled any migrant trying to cross the border. The new Biden administration has kept this order in place, making exceptions only for unaccompanied minors. According to Politico, this has resulted in parents making the difficult decision to send their children across the border without them, where children go alone to face detention centers. Ultimately this looks like the child separation and “children in cages” infamously present under the Trump administration.
The Biden Administration thus far has only made nominal efforts to address the impact of climate change on migration. In early February, President Biden issued an executive order requesting a report by August to better understand the impact of climate change on migration, including options for protection and resettlement of displaced individuals.
In March, Climate Refugees released a report of recommendations that the report should address. The report will come within 180 days of the executive order — time in which people fleeing climate-related events will continue to lack any legal protection under US law.
More politicians are beginning to take notice, making the connection between increased arrivals at the US-Southern border and increased climate risks and climate change effects in migrant countries of origin.
This past Earth Day, Representative Joaquin Castro of Texas sent an open letter to President Biden at the start of the Leaders Summit on Climate. The letter, signed by 19 other Congressional Representatives stated clearly,
“Our ask is simple. Currently, the world does not have an agreed upon definition of ‘climate refugees.’ As a result, climate displaced persons are often stuck in legal limbo because they are not protected under international refugee law. This needs to change, and we believe the 2021 Climate Summit is the perfect occasion to work with world leaders to create international standards and legal pathways to address climate migration.”
Yet, it’s important to acknowledge the complexities of defining “climate refugees,” since there is no official definition of that status. Appropriately, much discussion has been afforded to unpacking to what extent climate change effects are the singular or main driver of forced migration across borders. Yet often, these individuals are asylum-seekers, fleeing compounding crises, where the effects of climate change are but one of the many interconnected drivers behind their need for protection.
This same scenario exists in traditional refugee contexts, where people fleeing conflict are often also facing social disruptions compounded by conflict and climate change. Also this past Earth Day, UNHCR published new data that showed disasters linked to climate change worsen poverty, hunger, and access to natural resources, contributing to instability and violence.
The interconnections between conditions that very clearly fall within grounds protected in asylum and refugee law, and the effects of climate change are so increasingly intertwined that UNHCR notes 90% of refugees now come from countries most vulnerable and least ready to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
In the context of US border arrivals from Central America, Haiti and several other regions, the interconnections are no less. As outlined in our report, we recommended the Biden administration incorporate climate drivers into its existing asylum pathways, recognizing the number of Indigenous smallholder farmers who have fled Central America’s Dry Corridor, and better understand the historic context, marginalization, violence, instability and intersection of climate change on livelihoods and food insecurity in the region.