<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/government-did-not-keep-anyone-in-the-dark-over-the-deaths-of-39-indians-in-mosul-sushma-swaraj-36505">Government</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/government-did-not-keep-anyone-in-the-dark-over-the-deaths-of-39-indians-in-mosul-sushma-swaraj-36505"> did not keep anyone in the dark over the death of 39 Indians in Mosul: Sushma Swaraj</a>

After informing&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/no-information-was-given-to-us-sister-of-indian-killed-in-iraq-36478">Parliament</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/politics-over-deaths-shameful-sushma-swaraj-on-indians-killed-in-mosul-36498">&nbsp;on the deaths of 39 Indians in Mosu</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/no-information-was-given-to-us-sister-of-indian-killed-in-iraq-36478">l, Iraq</a>, external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj told reporters that the bodies of Indians weren&#39;t found in mass graves but in a mound in Badush. &quot;The bodies were buried<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/no-information-was-given-to-us-sister-of-indian-killed-in-iraq-36478">&nbsp;in a mound</a>&nbsp;in Badush,&quot; Sushma Swaraj said at a press conference.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/sexual-harassment-case-jnu-professor-arrested-36512">Sexual harassment case: JNU professor arrested</a>

Delhi Police has arrested Professor Atul Johri of JNU on Tuesday after allegations of sexual harassment were leveled against him by students.&nbsp;Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) students, had been protesting outside the Vasant Kunj police station, demanding JNU professor&#39;s arrest in an alleged sexual harassment case, accused the police of &quot;inaction&quot; in the matter.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/government-spent-36-million-rupees-to-install-air-purifiers-in-pm-offices-36516">Modi government spent over Rs 35 lakh on installing air purifiers in offices: Report</a>

According to unpublished government data, the Modi government spent as much as rupees 35 lakh to buy and install air purifiers for Prime Minister&#39;s offices and other federal departments and government agencies like NITI Aayog between the year 2014 and 2017.&nbsp;

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/building-us-mexico-border-to-keep-the-damn-drugs-out-trump-36495">Building US-Mexico border to &#39;keep the damn drugs out&#39;: Trump</a>

United States President Donald Trump on Monday reiterated that the building of US-Mexico border would help to stem the flow of illegal drugs, such as heroin and narcotics into the country. While speaking in Manchester, New Hampshire, which has been the primary city exposed to opioid deaths Trump came up with the decision to build the wall to &quot;keep the damn drugs out&quot; and has come up with numerous ways to fight the epidemic.&nbsp;

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/beginning-of-gloom-why-facebook-is-in-huge-mess-36501">Beginning of gloom? Why Facebook is in </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/beginning-of-gloom-why-facebook-is-in-huge-mess-36501">huge mess</a>

Mark Zuckerberg- led Facebook has been slammed on various occasions in the past for failing to maintain user privacy, but this time social media giant finds itself amid a scandal of much bigger proportion.

Government did not keep anyone in the dark over the death of 39 Indians in Mosul: Sushma Swaraj After informing Parliament on the deaths of 39 Indians in Mosul, Iraq, external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj told reporters that the bodies of Indians weren't found in mass graves but in a mound in Badush. "The bodies were buried in a mound in Badush," Sushma Swaraj said at a press conference. Sexual harassment case: JNU professor arrested Delhi Police has arrested Professor Atul Johri of JNU on Tuesday after allegations of sexual harassment were leveled against him by students. Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) students, had been protesting outside the Vasant Kunj police station, demanding JNU professor's arrest in an alleged sexual harassment case, accused the police of "inaction" in the matter. Modi government spent over Rs 35 lakh on installing air purifiers in offices: Report According to unpublished government data, the Modi government spent as much as rupees 35 lakh to buy and install air purifiers for Prime Minister's offices and other federal departments and government agencies like NITI Aayog between the year 2014 and 2017. Building US-Mexico border to 'keep the damn drugs out': Trump United States President Donald Trump on Monday reiterated that the building of US-Mexico border would help to stem the flow of illegal drugs, such as heroin and narcotics into the country. While speaking in Manchester, New Hampshire, which has been the primary city exposed to opioid deaths Trump came up with the decision to build the wall to "keep the damn drugs out" and has come up with numerous ways to fight the epidemic. Beginning of gloom? Why Facebook is in huge mess Mark Zuckerberg- led Facebook has been slammed on various occasions in the past for failing to maintain user privacy, but this time social media giant finds itself amid a scandal of much bigger proportion.

WION Evening News Brief, March 20, 2018

By Oscar Gil-Garcia*&nbsp;

 
For more than a decade, I documented one man&rsquo;s deportation, the impact on his family and his eventual return to the U.S.

I did this as part of my work studying the migration of indigenous Mayan refugees from Guatemala to Mexico and the U.S. My telling of the story of this man, who I&rsquo;ll call Alex to protect his identity, is forthcoming in the journal Representations. I believe it can help shed light on the human consequences of deportations and family separations &ndash; and the enormous risks deportees are willing to take, irrespective of walls, fences, and the danger of reuniting with their families.

Here is Alex&rsquo;s story.

An immigration raid

Alex was born in a refugee settlement in Chiapas, Mexico. His family is one of more than 200,000 Guatemalans who fled a protracted war, supported by the U.S. and its allies, that largely targeted the indigenous people in Guatemala. In Mexico, barriers to legal status barred refugees from formal employment. To improve his family&rsquo;s situation, he decided to enter the U.S. through a human smuggler, often referred to as a &ldquo;coyote,&rdquo; in 2000. He worked at a meatpacking plant and sent money to support his parents in Mexico.

Two years later, Alex fell in love with his wife, who we&rsquo;ll refer to as Grace, a Guatemalan national. Grace arrived in the U.S. in 1999, also with the help of a coyote, to join her parents who enrolled her in elementary school. Grace too was smitten, and in 2002 she decided to forgo her high school senior year to be with Alex. One year later, Grace gave birth to their first child.

In December of 2006, Alex was deported, without a hearing &ndash; a violation of international human rights law &ndash; in one of the largest immigration raids in U.S. history. He was separated from his wife and 3-year-old child. Family separation due to deportation is common. It is also a violation of the American Convention on Human Rights. Article 17 of the Convention, signed by the U.S. in 1969, states: &ldquo;The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the state.&rdquo; The statement of this principle underscores how deportation violates one of the fundamental rights protected by the Convention &ndash; the rights of the family.

Back in Mexico, Alex faced a lack of job opportunities, compounded by racial discrimination toward indigenous peoples. Meanwhile, Grace, faced economic instability in the U.S. without Alex&rsquo;s income. Even so, she advised Alex to stay in Mexico, due to her fear of more raids and concern over increased criminalization to punish unauthorized migration. In addition, under enforcement priorities initiated under George W. Bush, unlawful entry and re-entry would initiate a new era in the criminalization of migration that involved the creation of new classes of &ldquo;felonies&rdquo; that apply only to noncitizens.

Six months later, Alex&rsquo;s wife and their son joined him in Chiapas, Mexico &ndash; becoming what are often referred to as &ldquo;de facto&rdquo; deportees. Studies have identified how deportees face stigma and discrimination upon return. National origins, language abilities and presumptions of why one was deported can become significant factors in the reintegration to home countries or the countries of spouses or parents. For example, Grace is a Guatemalan national and could not seek legal employment in Mexico.

Despite their reunification, Alex&rsquo;s family continued to face significant hardships in Mexico. Alex&rsquo;s friend, a coyote, informed him that he could make a livable wage working as a coyote and stay close to his family. Alex decided to explore this alternative.&nbsp;

Clandestine migration

Alex&rsquo;s participation in a human smuggling network came with enormous risks. One day, for example, armed bandits surrounded a group of migrants he was leading across the U.S.-Mexico border and confiscated their belongings. Alex ran into the desert bush and escaped to the U.S. side of the border.

After a night in the desert without food or water, Alex returned to Mexico. He later learned that the bandits had taken the migrants hostage, but that they were released after relatives in the U.S. paid an undisclosed ransom. Alex returned home and informed his wife and parents of the incident. All insisted that he no longer continue to work as a coyote.

A large body of research documents how the militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border has led to a militarization and reorganization of drug trafficking organizations. Drug cartels can interfere with smuggling networks, making migrants even more vulnerable to assault or being forced to transport drugs. Scholar Laura Ortiz argues that the increased participation of imposter coyotes, who recruit migrants only to extort them, has helped reinforce dominant perceptions of smuggling as intertwined with drug trafficking. Despite this dominant perception, scholar Sim&oacute;n Pedro Izcara Palacios argues that human smuggling and drug trafficking are operated by different groups. Drug cartels are not directly involved with human smuggling, but instead extort fees from human smugglers. Indeed, Alex identified how cartels pressured smugglers to pay a user&rsquo;s fee for crossing the Sonora-Arizona border. Failure to pay can result in violence.

The risk of violence in coyote work, along with an absence of viable job opportunities in Chiapas, prompted Alex and his wife, now with four children, to make arrangements to join other family in the U.S. in 2015. Although Grace&rsquo;s father is a U.S. permanent resident, he could not sponsor them through what politicians refer to as &ldquo;chain migration&rdquo; because he failed to meet annual income criteria - no less than 125 percent of the federal poverty level. Without legal options, Alex paid US$3,500 to a fellow coyote to take his wife and children over the border. This coyote successfully led them to a location on the Sonora-Arizona border where U.S. immigration officials at the time captured and later released migrants.

Grace and her children turned themselves in to U.S. Border Patrol. Because of new legal protections for families and children in the U.S., Grace and her children were released following one night in detention. The U.S. government filed removal proceedings; and to provide an opportunity to appear before an immigration judge to adjudicate her case, Grace and her children received deportation relief.

To help finance his family&rsquo;s crossing, Alex decided to make a final clandestine crossing with eight migrants in the Sonora&ndash;Arizona corridor. Hours after beginning their journey, heavily armed men captured and held them hostage in a secluded building. A ransom was requested from U.S. kin of every migrant. Despite Grace&rsquo;s offer to pay the ransom for his release, his captors refused. Instead, Alex remained captive for several weeks and was physically tortured.

Eventually, he escaped his captors, but was stuck in the desert again. Without food or water, he turned himself in to U.S. Border Patrol agents who documented the physical wounds he sustained from his prolonged torture and placed him in detention.&nbsp;

Few options

Alex&rsquo;s previous unauthorized entry prompted what&rsquo;s called a &ldquo;reinstatement of removal,&rdquo; a provision under the 1996 immigration reform that re-established the order of removal from 2006. At the request of his family, I located and covered the cost of an attorney. Because Alex expressed a well-founded fear of persecution or torture upon return to Mexico, his attorney advised him to apply for either a &ldquo;withholding of removal,&rdquo; or protection under the Convention Against Torture. Unlike asylum, neither of these remedies offer a path to permanent resident status.

Additionally, the application would have required that Alex remain in detention &ndash; potentially six months to a year &ndash; during the adjudication of his case. Scholars have noted how prolonged detention can exacerbate post-traumatic stress and other harms that asylum seekers and their families may have suffered in their own countries. Others have identified how prolonged detention compromises due process protections that violate international human rights law and coerce migrants into surrendering to deportation. Several have identified how deportations can be tantamount to a death sentence.

His family feared that he too may be killed following deportation and begged him to permit the attorney to adjudicate his case. Alex weighed his options and declined legal counsel. Following the end of his sentence and deportation, he returned to Chiapas. Within a month he made arrangements with another coyote and paid $7,000 to cross via the Chihuahua-Texas border. Like most who attempt re-entry following an apprehension, he succeeded, and is now reunited with his wife and children in the U.S.&nbsp;

Family reunification

Alex says he never wanted to be a coyote. His story provides an opportunity to understand the complex motivations that fuel unauthorized re-entry of deportee parents with family in the U.S. A 2009 Department of Homeland Security report states that 21 percent of re-entries are those without a U.S.-born child, while more than one-third of re-entries are parents of U.S. citizen children. Scholars have also shown how deportees like Alex, who are separated from families in the U.S., are more likely to migrate again than those without family ties.

As the nation considers reforming immigration policy, it is important to remember that deterrence strategies are ineffective in reducing the intention to migrate, particularly among those with family in the U.S. Walls or even detention cells are no match for those with direct experience with crime and violence who have credible fear claims and those separated from their families in the U.S.

In 2017, two years after Alex&rsquo;s family&rsquo;s reunification in the U.S., Grace appeared in court for her immigration hearing. The immigration judge filed an order of removal. Like other returnees and recent unauthorized arrivals, both now face the threat of deportation. Until international protocols on the protection of migrants and their families are upheld, the U.S. will continue producing unauthorized persons or families who are at risk of deportation for years to come.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

* Oscar Gil-Garcia is an Assistant Professor &nbsp;in Binghamton University, State University of New York

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

While the U.S. considers reforming of immigration policy, it is important to remember that deterrence strategies are ineffective in reducing the intention to migrate, particularly among those with family in the U.S.

By Oscar Gil-Garcia* For more than a decade, I documented one man’s deportation, the impact on his family and his eventual return to the U.S. I did this as part of my work studying the migration of indigenous Mayan refugees from Guatemala to Mexico and the U.S. My telling of the story of this man, who I’ll call Alex to protect his identity, is forthcoming in the journal Representations. I believe it can help shed light on the human consequences of deportations and family separations – and the enormous risks deportees are willing to take, irrespective of walls, fences, and the danger of reuniting with their families. Here is Alex’s story. An immigration raid Alex was born in a refugee settlement in Chiapas, Mexico. His family is one of more than 200,000 Guatemalans who fled a protracted war, supported by the U.S. and its allies, that largely targeted the indigenous people in Guatemala. In Mexico, barriers to legal status barred refugees from formal employment. To improve his family’s situation, he decided to enter the U.S. through a human smuggler, often referred to as a “coyote,” in 2000. He worked at a meatpacking plant and sent money to support his parents in Mexico. Two years later, Alex fell in love with his wife, who we’ll refer to as Grace, a Guatemalan national. Grace arrived in the U.S. in 1999, also with the help of a coyote, to join her parents who enrolled her in elementary school. Grace too was smitten, and in 2002 she decided to forgo her high school senior year to be with Alex. One year later, Grace gave birth to their first child. In December of 2006, Alex was deported, without a hearing – a violation of international human rights law – in one of the largest immigration raids in U.S. history. He was separated from his wife and 3-year-old child. Family separation due to deportation is common. It is also a violation of the American Convention on Human Rights. Article 17 of the Convention, signed by the U.S. in 1969, states: “The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the state.” The statement of this principle underscores how deportation violates one of the fundamental rights protected by the Convention – the rights of the family. Back in Mexico, Alex faced a lack of job opportunities, compounded by racial discrimination toward indigenous peoples. Meanwhile, Grace, faced economic instability in the U.S. without Alex’s income. Even so, she advised Alex to stay in Mexico, due to her fear of more raids and concern over increased criminalization to punish unauthorized migration. In addition, under enforcement priorities initiated under George W. Bush, unlawful entry and re-entry would initiate a new era in the criminalization of migration that involved the creation of new classes of “felonies” that apply only to noncitizens. Six months later, Alex’s wife and their son joined him in Chiapas, Mexico – becoming what are often referred to as “de facto” deportees. Studies have identified how deportees face stigma and discrimination upon return. National origins, language abilities and presumptions of why one was deported can become significant factors in the reintegration to home countries or the countries of spouses or parents. For example, Grace is a Guatemalan national and could not seek legal employment in Mexico. Despite their reunification, Alex’s family continued to face significant hardships in Mexico. Alex’s friend, a coyote, informed him that he could make a livable wage working as a coyote and stay close to his family. Alex decided to explore this alternative. Clandestine migration Alex’s participation in a human smuggling network came with enormous risks. One day, for example, armed bandits surrounded a group of migrants he was leading across the U.S.-Mexico border and confiscated their belongings. Alex ran into the desert bush and escaped to the U.S. side of the border. After a night in the desert without food or water, Alex returned to Mexico. He later learned that the bandits had taken the migrants hostage, but that they were released after relatives in the U.S. paid an undisclosed ransom. Alex returned home and informed his wife and parents of the incident. All insisted that he no longer continue to work as a coyote. A large body of research documents how the militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border has led to a militarization and reorganization of drug trafficking organizations. Drug cartels can interfere with smuggling networks, making migrants even more vulnerable to assault or being forced to transport drugs. Scholar Laura Ortiz argues that the increased participation of imposter coyotes, who recruit migrants only to extort them, has helped reinforce dominant perceptions of smuggling as intertwined with drug trafficking. Despite this dominant perception, scholar Simón Pedro Izcara Palacios argues that human smuggling and drug trafficking are operated by different groups. Drug cartels are not directly involved with human smuggling, but instead extort fees from human smugglers. Indeed, Alex identified how cartels pressured smugglers to pay a user’s fee for crossing the Sonora-Arizona border. Failure to pay can result in violence. The risk of violence in coyote work, along with an absence of viable job opportunities in Chiapas, prompted Alex and his wife, now with four children, to make arrangements to join other family in the U.S. in 2015. Although Grace’s father is a U.S. permanent resident, he could not sponsor them through what politicians refer to as “chain migration” because he failed to meet annual income criteria - no less than 125 percent of the federal poverty level. Without legal options, Alex paid US$3,500 to a fellow coyote to take his wife and children over the border. This coyote successfully led them to a location on the Sonora-Arizona border where U.S. immigration officials at the time captured and later released migrants. Grace and her children turned themselves in to U.S. Border Patrol. Because of new legal protections for families and children in the U.S., Grace and her children were released following one night in detention. The U.S. government filed removal proceedings; and to provide an opportunity to appear before an immigration judge to adjudicate her case, Grace and her children received deportation relief. To help finance his family’s crossing, Alex decided to make a final clandestine crossing with eight migrants in the Sonora–Arizona corridor. Hours after beginning their journey, heavily armed men captured and held them hostage in a secluded building. A ransom was requested from U.S. kin of every migrant. Despite Grace’s offer to pay the ransom for his release, his captors refused. Instead, Alex remained captive for several weeks and was physically tortured. Eventually, he escaped his captors, but was stuck in the desert again. Without food or water, he turned himself in to U.S. Border Patrol agents who documented the physical wounds he sustained from his prolonged torture and placed him in detention. Few options Alex’s previous unauthorized entry prompted what’s called a “reinstatement of removal,” a provision under the 1996 immigration reform that re-established the order of removal from 2006. At the request of his family, I located and covered the cost of an attorney. Because Alex expressed a well-founded fear of persecution or torture upon return to Mexico, his attorney advised him to apply for either a “withholding of removal,” or protection under the Convention Against Torture. Unlike asylum, neither of these remedies offer a path to permanent resident status. Additionally, the application would have required that Alex remain in detention – potentially six months to a year – during the adjudication of his case. Scholars have noted how prolonged detention can exacerbate post-traumatic stress and other harms that asylum seekers and their families may have suffered in their own countries. Others have identified how prolonged detention compromises due process protections that violate international human rights law and coerce migrants into surrendering to deportation. Several have identified how deportations can be tantamount to a death sentence. His family feared that he too may be killed following deportation and begged him to permit the attorney to adjudicate his case. Alex weighed his options and declined legal counsel. Following the end of his sentence and deportation, he returned to Chiapas. Within a month he made arrangements with another coyote and paid $7,000 to cross via the Chihuahua-Texas border. Like most who attempt re-entry following an apprehension, he succeeded, and is now reunited with his wife and children in the U.S. Family reunification Alex says he never wanted to be a coyote. His story provides an opportunity to understand the complex motivations that fuel unauthorized re-entry of deportee parents with family in the U.S. A 2009 Department of Homeland Security report states that 21 percent of re-entries are those without a U.S.-born child, while more than one-third of re-entries are parents of U.S. citizen children. Scholars have also shown how deportees like Alex, who are separated from families in the U.S., are more likely to migrate again than those without family ties. As the nation considers reforming immigration policy, it is important to remember that deterrence strategies are ineffective in reducing the intention to migrate, particularly among those with family in the U.S. Walls or even detention cells are no match for those with direct experience with crime and violence who have credible fear claims and those separated from their families in the U.S. In 2017, two years after Alex’s family’s reunification in the U.S., Grace appeared in court for her immigration hearing. The immigration judge filed an order of removal. Like other returnees and recent unauthorized arrivals, both now face the threat of deportation. Until international protocols on the protection of migrants and their families are upheld, the U.S. will continue producing unauthorized persons or families who are at risk of deportation for years to come. * Oscar Gil-Garcia is an Assistant Professor in Binghamton University, State University of New York (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Man struggles to help his family survive due to US immigration policies

On the baked sands of northern Mexico, barefoot tribeswomen chant and dance in clouds of incense, calling on the eagle to save them from US President Donald Trump&#39;s border wall.

The US-Mexico frontier runs through more than just the deserts of Sonora and Arizona. For the Tohono O&#39;odham with their eagle totem, it divides their people.

These are their ancestral lands, a nation that was here thousands of years before the modern states of America and Mexico were drawn on the map in the 19th century.

&quot;This is our land,&quot; says tribal elder Alicia Chuhuhua, 80, at the ceremony among the looming cactus plants, speaking in the tongue of her tribe through a Spanish-language interpreter.

&quot;We want it without &#39;muros&#39;,&quot; walls, she says, using the Spanish word -- in her indigenous tongue, there is no term for &quot;wall&quot; or &quot;border.&quot;

&nbsp;

Desert life

The 3,000 strong Tohono O&#39;odham population -- the name means &quot;desert people&quot; -- is recognised as an indigenous nation in the United States.

Most of them live on the US side of the border in the town of Sells, Arizona, with a few hundred estimated to live in Mexico.

They are allowed to cross to and fro through the San Miguel Gate, for funerals on the Mexican side, for example, or for medical treatment in Arizona. Chuhuhua remembers living a semi-nomadic life as a girl. In her day, the Tohono harvested dragon fruit and made cactus syrup.

Just a decade ago, there was still a bus that took Tohono children from the Mexican state of Sonora across to Sells for school. But one by one, border crossings have been closed to them. Only San Miguel remains as a free transit point within reasonable distance.

Now they fear that too will be blocked when Trump builds the wall.

He says it will stop illegal migrants and drugs reaching the United States. But Chuhuhua and her fellow Tohono O&#39;odham say it will break apart their ancestral land.

If forced to go via another, more distant border crossing, &quot;we would waste more than seven hours going all the way round,&quot; says Gemma Martin, a Tohono woman living on the Mexican side.

&quot;What do we do if it is a medical emergency? By the time we get there it may be too late.&quot;

&nbsp;

Human rights

Tohono leaders plan to take their claim against the wall to the United Nations along with other Native American tribes, said one of them, Mike Wilson. He served in the US Army and is now a human rights activist.

&quot;The new version of the wall would be even worse,&quot; says Wilson, in cowboy boots and a grey ponytail. &quot;It is a form of human rights violation,&quot; he says, because it would deny freedom of movement to members of a tribe on their own territory.

The Mexican government has also promised to support a case the tribe is planning to file next month at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

&nbsp;

Divided hearts

Even before the wall has been built, however, the Tohono O&#39;odham are divided among themselves. The tribe&#39;s vice-president Verlon Jose told reporters he would see the wall built &quot;over my dead body&quot;. But others have cast doubt on his stance.

David Garcia, a former member of the Tohono Supreme Council, says some in the tribal leadership are reluctant to oppose Washington for fear of losing US subsidies.

Faith Ramon, a Tohono student of 34 from Arizona, says tribal authorities tried to stop her traveling to Sonora for the ceremony. &quot;I feel hurt by my own tribal leaders,&quot; she said. &quot;We need to stop using that green paper,&quot; the dollars of subsidies, she said.

Jose did not respond to AFP&#39;s requests for comment.

The Tohono women finish their dance under the burning desert sun. As the sky turns red at sunset, they head back to their homes -- and an uncertain future -- either side of the border.

&quot;It cuts our heart in half. Half of our heart is in Sonora, the other half in Arizona,&quot; Wilson told AFP. &quot;You can&#39;t be whole if you have your heart cut in two. The heart must be one, closed, and living and surviving together.&quot;

(AFP)

'This is our land' says 80-year-old tribal elder, Alicia Chuhuhua. In her indigenous tongue, there is no term for 'wall' or 'border'

On the baked sands of northern Mexico, barefoot tribeswomen chant and dance in clouds of incense, calling on the eagle to save them from US President Donald Trump's border wall. The US-Mexico frontier runs through more than just the deserts of Sonora and Arizona. For the Tohono O'odham with their eagle totem, it divides their people. These are their ancestral lands, a nation that was here thousands of years before the modern states of America and Mexico were drawn on the map in the 19th century. "This is our land," says tribal elder Alicia Chuhuhua, 80, at the ceremony among the looming cactus plants, speaking in the tongue of her tribe through a Spanish-language interpreter. "We want it without 'muros'," walls, she says, using the Spanish word -- in her indigenous tongue, there is no term for "wall" or "border." Desert life The 3,000 strong Tohono O'odham population -- the name means "desert people" -- is recognised as an indigenous nation in the United States. Most of them live on the US side of the border in the town of Sells, Arizona, with a few hundred estimated to live in Mexico. They are allowed to cross to and fro through the San Miguel Gate, for funerals on the Mexican side, for example, or for medical treatment in Arizona. Chuhuhua remembers living a semi-nomadic life as a girl. In her day, the Tohono harvested dragon fruit and made cactus syrup. Just a decade ago, there was still a bus that took Tohono children from the Mexican state of Sonora across to Sells for school. But one by one, border crossings have been closed to them. Only San Miguel remains as a free transit point within reasonable distance. Now they fear that too will be blocked when Trump builds the wall. He says it will stop illegal migrants and drugs reaching the United States. But Chuhuhua and her fellow Tohono O'odham say it will break apart their ancestral land. If forced to go via another, more distant border crossing, "we would waste more than seven hours going all the way round," says Gemma Martin, a Tohono woman living on the Mexican side. "What do we do if it is a medical emergency? By the time we get there it may be too late." Human rights Tohono leaders plan to take their claim against the wall to the United Nations along with other Native American tribes, said one of them, Mike Wilson. He served in the US Army and is now a human rights activist. "The new version of the wall would be even worse," says Wilson, in cowboy boots and a grey ponytail. "It is a form of human rights violation," he says, because it would deny freedom of movement to members of a tribe on their own territory. The Mexican government has also promised to support a case the tribe is planning to file next month at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Divided hearts Even before the wall has been built, however, the Tohono O'odham are divided among themselves. The tribe's vice-president Verlon Jose told reporters he would see the wall built "over my dead body". But others have cast doubt on his stance. David Garcia, a former member of the Tohono Supreme Council, says some in the tribal leadership are reluctant to oppose Washington for fear of losing US subsidies. Faith Ramon, a Tohono student of 34 from Arizona, says tribal authorities tried to stop her traveling to Sonora for the ceremony. "I feel hurt by my own tribal leaders," she said. "We need to stop using that green paper," the dollars of subsidies, she said. Jose did not respond to AFP's requests for comment. The Tohono women finish their dance under the burning desert sun. As the sky turns red at sunset, they head back to their homes -- and an uncertain future -- either side of the border. "It cuts our heart in half. Half of our heart is in Sonora, the other half in Arizona," Wilson told AFP. "You can't be whole if you have your heart cut in two. The heart must be one, closed, and living and surviving together." (AFP)

Native tribe fear Trump's Mexico wall will divide them

Mexican presidential hopeful Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador filed a complaint with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on Wednesday against US&nbsp;President Donald Trump&#39;s planned border wall and his administration&#39;s treatment of immigrants.

Lopez Obrador, a fiery leftist who has led recent polls for the 2018 election, said he expects the commission to &quot;speak out in accordance with the law to protect immigrants from the harassment they are suffering since Trump took office.&quot;

Trump has ordered a wall built along the nearly 2,000-mile (3,200-km) U.S.-Mexico border, has moved to strip federal funding from &quot;sanctuary&quot; states and cities harboring illegal immigrants, and expanded the force of U.S. immigration agents.

During his election campaign, Trump described Mexican illegal immigrants as rapists and criminals and insisted that Mexico would pay for the wall. That caused simmering diplomatic tension and angered everyday citizens south of the border.

Lopez Obrador, a former Mexico City mayor and two-time runner-up for the presidency, said he hoped the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights would view Trump&#39;s moves as a &quot;violation of human rights and discriminatory.&quot;

The commission, an autonomous organ of the Organization of American States (OAS), is tasked with promoting and protecting human rights in the American hemisphere.

(Reuters)

Lopez Obrador, who has led recent polls for the 2018 election, filed his complaint with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights

Mexican presidential hopeful Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador filed a complaint with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on Wednesday against US President Donald Trump's planned border wall and his administration's treatment of immigrants. Lopez Obrador, a fiery leftist who has led recent polls for the 2018 election, said he expects the commission to "speak out in accordance with the law to protect immigrants from the harassment they are suffering since Trump took office." Trump has ordered a wall built along the nearly 2,000-mile (3,200-km) U.S.-Mexico border, has moved to strip federal funding from "sanctuary" states and cities harboring illegal immigrants, and expanded the force of U.S. immigration agents. During his election campaign, Trump described Mexican illegal immigrants as rapists and criminals and insisted that Mexico would pay for the wall. That caused simmering diplomatic tension and angered everyday citizens south of the border. Lopez Obrador, a former Mexico City mayor and two-time runner-up for the presidency, said he hoped the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights would view Trump's moves as a "violation of human rights and discriminatory." The commission, an autonomous organ of the Organization of American States (OAS), is tasked with promoting and protecting human rights in the American hemisphere. (Reuters)

Mexico presidential hopeful files complaint against Trump wall

President-elect Donald Trump said &nbsp;that certain areas of the border wall with Mexico could be fenced.&nbsp;

In an interview with CBS&#39; &quot;60 Minutes&quot;, the business mogul was asked if&nbsp;he would accept a fence instead of a wall, Trump replied that &quot;for certain areas I would.&quot;

&quot;But certain areas, a wall is more appropriate. I&#39;m very good at this, it&#39;s called construction, there could be some fencing,&quot; Reuters quoted Trump saying.&nbsp;

During the presidential campaign, Trump vowed to make Mexico pay for the border wall, as part of tough immigration rules and securing the border.&nbsp;

Trump won&nbsp;the November 8 election against Democratic nominee and rival Hillary Clinton through electoral college despite losing the popular vote.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

(WION with inputs from Reuters)

&nbsp;

'But certain areas, a wall is more appropriate. I'm very good at this, it's called construction, there could be some fencing,' Trump said

President-elect Donald Trump said that certain areas of the border wall with Mexico could be fenced. In an interview with CBS' "60 Minutes", the business mogul was asked if he would accept a fence instead of a wall, Trump replied that "for certain areas I would." "But certain areas, a wall is more appropriate. I'm very good at this, it's called construction, there could be some fencing," Reuters quoted Trump saying. During the presidential campaign, Trump vowed to make Mexico pay for the border wall, as part of tough immigration rules and securing the border. Trump won the November 8 election against Democratic nominee and rival Hillary Clinton through electoral college despite losing the popular vote. (WION with inputs from Reuters)

Trump: Border wall with Mexico could be part fence

us-mexico-border

Us Mexico Border, News on Us Mexico Border, stories on Us Mexico Border, articles on Us Mexico Border, Us Mexico Border stories at Wion, Us Mexico Border news, Us Mexico Border latest news

us mexico-border

WION Evening News Brief, March 20, 2018

Opinion: Man struggles to help his family survive due to US immigration policies

Native tribe fear Trump's Mexico wall will divide them

Mexico presidential hopeful files complaint against Trump wall

Trump: Border wall with Mexico could be part fence