Flipping the script on Trump’s deportations
During a five-nation tour of Central America this month, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has insisted on well-known and tough solutions to the illegal crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border. At one of his last stops, Guatemala, a wholly different solution was waiting for him, one that may flip the script on migration narratives.
In mid-January, President Bernardo Arévalo – whose career specialty is as a conflict conciliator – announced a plan to invest in all Guatemalans deported by the Trump administration by tapping any work or language skills they acquired in the United States.
The plan, called Return Home, would treat deportees as experts in individual agency and assets for the nation, not as victims of politics or of an economic system. President Arévalo called them “anonymous heroes” worthy of a “dignified reception.”
If they have worked in construction or hospitality in the U.S., they could get skill certification. If they are fluent in English, they could be directed to jobs in ecotourism or other types of work with foreigners. If they have been entrepreneurs, they might be eligible for a loan. Most would be offered land to build a house.
If legal ways to work abroad open up, they would be encouraged to apply. That possibility is critical. The money that migrants send back to Guatemala accounts for about a fifth of the country’s gross domestic product. As deportation from the U.S. picks up, exporting workers to other countries could keep bringing in remittances, or dollars.
The president’s plan is by no means a small venture. During the Biden administration, the U.S. deported more Guatemalans than any other group. An estimated 675,000 unauthorized Guatemalans lived in the country in 2022. Paying for the plan may be difficult without foreign assistance.
On Monday, just before Mr. Rubio’s arrival, Mr. Arévalo told potential deportees in the U.S., “You are not alone, we know that you are going through moments of uncertainty and concern, but we are with you and we will fight for you.”
It was one way to take the fear and panic out of migration – either forced or voluntary – and perhaps change the debate over a very charged issue.
