RomeoLu Getty Images/iStockphoto
The COVID-19 pandemic has forced the United States and countries across the globe to reassess national and local capacity to fight a “horrible, invisible enemy,” as President Donald Trump put it. Like millions of others, I am afraid, and yes, the thought of the end to human existence has occasionally crossed my mind during the last two weeks. While it is clear that no group is immune to coronavirus, it is devastating that all of the eight deaths in Milwaukee County to date are African Americans concentrated on Milwaukee’s northwest side. Governor Tony Evers has called this “a crisis within a crisis.” In the midst of this world crisis, an elder Hmong community member called me to ask if this means that the Trump administration will no longer plan to deport Hmong people. I told him that I did not know the status of this issue.
For most people, this man’s concern will seem periphery to the greater disaster at hand. But for him and many others, it is center, even if it would only impact a small number of people. This issue came to light following a Feb. 3 letter that U.S. Representative Betty McCollum, D-MN, sent to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The letter opposed the Trump administration’s efforts to deport more than 4,700 individuals of Hmong, Laotian, Khmu, Mien or Yao descent residing in the United States to the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Laos). On Feb. 13, Governor Tony Evers also sent a letter outlining similar sentiments. In a Feb. 14 Department of State response to Rep. McCollum’s letter, it explained that the U.S. and Lao governments were discussing their positions on Lao nationals who are subject to final orders of removal. It also reiterated the U.S. government’s position “that every country has an international legal obligation to accept all its nationals that another country seeks to legally remove, expel, or deport.”
What followed in cities and states throughout the country with significant Hmong populations was confusion. Hmong community members and elected officials, in particular those of Hmong descent, held informational sessions and rallies to protest the proposed action. In speaking to the media, many Hmong community members assert that the entire community is fearful of being deported regardless of citizenship status. Hmong and others speaking about the issue frequently point out past persecution and current human rights violations in Laos as reasons for why those with deportation orders should not be sent back. They also narrate Hmong contributions to U.S. military efforts during the Vietnam War that subsequently enabled those who served in the American-sponsored clandestine army in Laos to resettle in the United States as political refugees.
|
|
Stop the Deportation
On Feb. 28, Rep. Mccollum, along with four democratic members of congress from Minnesota and Wisconsin introduced the Hmong and Lao Refugee Deportation Prohibition Act of 2020 that would stop the government from deporting people for 72 months and allow for reopening of immigration cases for those with final orders of removal.
Of the 4,716 non-detained Lao nationals who had final orders of removal from the United States, more than 80 percent have criminal convictions. Several hundred reside in Wisconsin. As legal immigrants, refugees live in the U.S. legally and obtain green cards with a pathway to citizenship. However, criminal convictions prior to becoming a citizen will invalidate their green cards, and thus, prevent such individuals from ever obtaining citizenship.
What has transpired recently that has fueled fear, confusion, and attacks by political rivals must be viewed as part of the history of an increasingly contentious environment with growing insecurities at many levels. The 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act broadly defined deportable offenses that consists of crimes of “moral turpitude” or “aggravated felony.” The consequence is that non-citizens are subject to the laws regardless of the length of time from when their crime was committed and the time that they already served. Many do not have the means or knowledge to challenge their deportation based on family ties or how long they have been in the United States. Since the passage of these legislations, many Cambodian and Vietnamese refugees have been deported to Cambodia and Vietnam. Some of the crimes had been committed as youth. We have seen the enormous impact that deportation has had on these individuals who left their country of birth as children. Many have no support system once deported.
Since 1998, the U.S. has pressured Laos to accept a couple of hundred deportees, but because Laos does not have a similar deportation agreement with the United States, immigration officials cannot indefinitely detain Lao nationals with final orders of removal. The 4,716 non-detained Lao nationals are this population. Without disaggregating the data, it is not possible to know the nature of the crimes committed, but community advocates have identified them as ranging from theft and burglary to violent crimes. The larger issue is that all have served time for their crime.
No Threat to the U.S.
Following the emergence of the issue in mid-February, a wide range of opinions surfaced on social media. They ranged from individuals who would either be directly affected or family members of those potentially impacted expressing frustration about the lack of fairness. Others expressed their support for deporting those who committed crimes. Their message was, “don’t commit crime, then you won’t get deported.” Unfortunately, it is not that easy. The crimes they committed took place a couple of decades ago when many were teenagers. The underlying issue is that these individuals have not been a threat to American security and that is precisely why they were not detained all these years. The Lao government understands that these individuals were likely small children when they left the country, and thus, have little or no personal ties in Laos, which explains why it has refused to sign to a repatriation agreement.
So, the question we should ask is why now? The answer is not that difficult. If we allow ourselves to learn a key lesson from history, we will see that this dilemma has very little to do with these former refugees per se. The U.S. Secret War in Laos and the larger war in Vietnam were not about the people of Laos and Vietnam themselves. Great power political maneuvering dictated how the war was fought and when it ended. Politics resulted in more than 1.4 million refugees from Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam seeking refuge in the United States beginning in 1975. Those who fled Laos included Hmong, Khmu, Laotian and Mien (Yao) people. Today, they number nearly 600,000 in the United States and the vast majority are naturalized citizens or American-born.
Many veterans who fought in the U.S.-sponsored clandestine army in Laos have struggled with rebuilding their lives in exile. It is understandable that these staunch anticommunists have had a hard time letting go of their wartime experiences. The trauma they live with has been passed on to their descendants who did not personally experience it. When some Hmong Americans speak about Laos, it is as though Laos is stuck in time: 1975. The characterization goes like this: We left and we have changed, but the people left behind have not.
In May, it will be 45 years since the war ended. Yes, those of us who left have changed. From distressed refugees with not much more than the clothes on our backs, we have become scientists, politicians, entrepreneurs, scholars, doctors and lawyers. As a group we are one of the most impoverished in U.S. society, but many individuals are living the American dream. But let’s not allow ourselves to be blinded by our prejudiced view of those who stayed behind. From 2009 to 2018, I traveled to Laos six times, of which five were with a dozen college students. I met educators, government officials, students, and ordinary people in villages and cities. Our lives are very different, but each time, I came away with this conclusion. They all just want the same things that I and other Americans want: health and safety for their families, good education for their children and opportunities to participate in the global economy.
I am not alone. For more than two decades, hundreds of Hmong Americans have traveled to Laos to reconnect with loved ones or as tourists. Over the years, some tragic incidents have occurred. I am aware of the suspicion that locals have of returnees and vice versa. Certainly, inequality exists and the State Department’s Laos 2017 Human Rights Report cited a plethora of human rights abuses, many of which exists in all countries, including democratic nations like the United States.
So what should be the solution to this dilemma? It is a fact that the United States has the right to expel noncitizens who break the law. The underlying issue with the group in question is also about the law. When people become refugees according to legal definitions outlined by the United Nations, they become stateless: no longer a member of the country they fled. Members of the international community like the United States have incorporated the definition into domestic law. As stateless people, those recognized by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees are at the mercy of nations to offer them permanent refuge. When the refugees were admitted to the United States, they ceased to be Lao nationals. In fact, some may have been born in refugee camps in Thailand, and thus, they had never set foot in Laos. To me, the answer is simple. As those of us whose lives were changed forever have known for a long time, the war was a tragedy for allies and enemies alike.
Today, hundreds of people in Laos continue to suffer from unexploded ordnance dropped by the United States during the war. The Lao People’s Democratic Republic struggled to rebound from the ravage of war. After more than four decades, it is a nation with dreams and aspirations to be a member of the international community. However, there are unequal power dynamics so the United States can and has pressured Laos to take actions that it deems to be in the interest of U.S. national security. But let’s be honest with ourselves. These people have not been detained for decades because they served their time and their crimes were not severe enough to threaten American security. Let’s learn from history and not let politics once again allow a more powerful nation to succumb a less powerful country to take actions that have no benefit to either.
Chia Youyee Vang is a professor of history at UW-Milwaukee.
