Search

Begin New Search Topic Violence Political Geography North America

21. Youth Violence Prevention in the United States

Author:
Sarah Bast and Victoria DeSimone
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
This report concludes that international terrorists, domestic terrorists, school shooters, and gang members share some common factors that made them vulnerable to radicalization to violence. By focusing on the areas of commonality, it would be possible to further prevention efforts on all four types of violence rather than isolating initiatives. Efforts should focus on the personal, group, and community-level, aiming to provide early education, intervention, or off-ramping options.
Topic:
Terrorism, Radicalization, Youth, and Violence
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

22. http://catcher.sandiego.edu/items/peacestudies/KrocInsight-ImpactPeace.pdf

Author:
Rachel Locke and Andrew Blum
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Joan B. Kroc Institute for Peace Justice, University of San Diego
Abstract:
Globally, violence is on the rise with trend analysis suggesting that urban violence will continue to push rates up if we do not take action to shift the status quo. Urgent situations merit urgent, yet strategic responses. In the fourth installment of our Kroc Insight series, we present important knowledge on how Impact:Peace and the Peace in Our Cities campaign can help drive change by putting evidence behind city efforts to support integrated approaches to violence reduction.
Topic:
Human Rights, Violence, Urban, and Peace
Political Geography:
United States, California, North America, and San Diego

23. Paradoxes of Protection: Compassionate Repression at the Mexico–Guatemala Border

Author:
Rebecca Galemba, Katie Dingeman, Kaelyn DeVries, and Yvette Servin
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
Anti-immigrant rhetoric and constricting avenues for asylum in the United States, amid continuing high rates of poverty, environmental crisis, and violence in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, have led many migrants from these countries to remain in Mexico. Yet despite opportunities for humanitarian relief in Mexico, since the early 2000s the Mexican government, under growing pressure from the United States, has pursued enforcement-first initiatives to stem northward migration from Central America. In July 2014, Mexico introduced the Southern Border Program (SBP) with support from the United States. The SBP dramatically expanded Mexico’s immigration enforcement efforts, especially in its southern border states, leading to rising deportations. Far from reducing migration or migrant smuggling, these policies have trapped migrants for longer in Mexico, made them increasingly susceptible to crimes by a wide range of state and nonstate actors, and exacerbated risk along the entire migrant trail. In recognition of rising crimes against migrants and heeding calls from civil society to protect migrant rights, Mexico’s 2011 revision to its Migration Law expanded legal avenues for granting humanitarian protection to migrants who are victims of crimes in Mexico, including the provision of a one-year humanitarian visa so that migrants can collaborate with the prosecutor’s office in the investigation of crimes committed against them. The new humanitarian visa laws were a significant achievement and represent a victory by civil society keen on protecting migrants as they travel through Mexico. The wider atmosphere of impunity, however, alongside the Mexican government’s prioritization of detaining and deporting migrants, facilitates abuses, obscures transparent accounting of crimes, and limits access to justice. In practice, the laws are not achieving their intended outcomes. They also fail to recognize how Mexico’s securitized migration policies subject migrants to risk throughout their journeys, including at border checkpoints between Guatemala and Honduras, along critical transit corridors in Guatemala, and on the Guatemalan side of Mexico’s southern border. In this article, we examine a novel set of data from migrant shelters — 16 qualitative interviews with migrants and nine with staff and advocates in the Mexico–Guatemala border region, as well as 118 complaints of abuses committed along migrants’ journeys — informally filed by migrants at a shelter on the Guatemalan side of the border, and an additional eight complaints filed at a shelter on the Mexican side of the border. We document and analyze the nature, location, and perpetrators of these alleged abuses, using a framework of “compassionate repression” (Fassin 2012) to examine the obstacles that migrants encounter in denouncing abuses and seeking protection. We contend that while humanitarian visas can provide necessary protection for abuses committed in Mexico, they are limited by their temporary nature, by being nested within a migration system that prioritizes migrant removal, and because they recognize only crimes that occur in Mexico. The paradox between humanitarian concerns and repressive migration governance in a context of high impunity shapes institutional and practical obstacles to reporting crimes, receiving visas, and accessing justice. In this context, a variety of actors recognize that they can exploit and profit from migrants’ lack of mobility, legal vulnerability, and uncertain access to protection, leading to a commodification of access to humanitarian protection along the route.
Topic:
Migration, Immigration, Border Control, Violence, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
United States, Central America, North America, Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador

24. Terrorism: Agreeing on the Basics

Author:
Ophir Falk
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Today, after years of modern terrorism and counterterrorism, the international community still does not agree on a single definition of terrorism. Despite the daily threats posed to many states, the definition conundrum prevents an agreed classification that could better facilitate the fight against terrorism and thwart the public legitimacy that most terrorist organizations seek. When a problem is accurately and acceptably defined, it should be easier to solve. Terrorism is an overly used term often heard in different discourses and contexts. It is used by the general public and in the course of academic, political, and legal debates, not to mention constantly referenced in the media. It may not be feasible to verse one universal definition for all discourses, but the term’s key criteria can and should be agreed upon.
Topic:
International Law, Politics, Terrorism, Military Affairs, Violence, Hezbollah, and White Supremacy
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

25. Mobilizing Memories

Author:
Carol Graham
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Contemporary Arab Studies (CCAS)
Abstract:
Carol Madison Graham (MAAS ’81) was the first MAAS graduate to enter the United States Foreign Service. She reflects on how the 1984 embassy bombing in Beirut inspired her current work to strengthen the Foreign Service for future generations.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Violence, and Memoir
Political Geography:
Middle East, Lebanon, North America, and United States of America

26. HOW US MILITARY AID CAN BACKFIRE

Author:
Daniel Karell and Sebastian Schutte
Publication Date:
03-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
Can military forces mitigate insurgent activity—“win hearts and minds”—by implementing small, localized aid projects? Evidence from the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq has provided contradictory answers to the question of aid’s ability to mitigate violence. Some research finds that aid projects increase the legitimacy of the state among civilians and, under specific circumstances, dampen violence. Other studies, however, show that aid projects provoke insurgent activity, even when delivered by non-military organizations. Despite this ambiguous understanding of counterinsurgency (COIN) aid projects, the US military and its allies spent billions of dollars in Afghanistan and Iraq on projects meant to “win hearts and minds’’ among the populace. After all, there are good theoretical reasons for doing so. Aid projects might make the option of taking up arms less attractive by offering employment opportunities and stimulating local economies (i.e., the “opportunity cost” model of participation in rebellion). They might also encourage locals to share vital anti-insurgent intelligence with military forces.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Counterinsurgency, Violence, and Military Aid
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iraq, North America, and United States of America

27. Great Expectations and Grim Realities in AMLO’s Mexico

Author:
Mary Speck
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
PRISM
Institution:
Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:
There is no single strategy that can quickly overcome the violence consuming many Mexican communities. Andrés Manuel López Obrador—known simply as AMLO—assumed Mexico’s presidency on Dec. 1, 2018, with a robust mandate. AMLO can no more save Mexico through massive social programs than President Enrique Nieto could by enacting sweeping economic reforms or President Felipe Calderón by deploying tens of thousands of federal forces. Mexico’s criminal groups have proven to be as complex as the country itself, with an uncanny ability to mutate and migrate. Change will come community by community, municipality by municipality, and state by state by initiating effective violence prevention programs, ensuring genuine transparency, strengthening civilian law enforcement, and building a justice system that is both efficient and fair. The United States should instead concentrate on the long-term task of helping Mexico strengthen law enforcement by sharing expertise to create a new generation of professional police, prosecutors, and judges.
Topic:
Crime, International Cooperation, Violence, Local, and Organized Crime
Political Geography:
North America, Mexico, and United States of America

28. Predicting Unauthorized Salvadoran Migrants’ First Migration to the United States between 1965 and 2007

Author:
Karen Pren and Nadia Flores-Yeffal
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
Although Salvadoran emigration to the United States is one of the most important migratory flows emanating from Latin America, there is insufficient information about the predictors of first unauthorized migration from El Salvador to the United States. In this study, we use data from the Latin American Migration Project–El Salvador (LAMP-ELS4) to perform an event history analysis to discern the factors that influenced the likelihood that a Salvadoran household head would take a first unauthorized trip to the United States between 1965 and 2007. We take into account a series of demographic, social capital, human capital, and physical capital characteristics of the Salvadoran household head; demographic and social context variables in the place of origin; as well as economic and border security factors at the place of destination. Our findings suggest that an increase in the Salvadoran civil violence index and a personal economic crisis increased the likelihood of first-time unauthorized migration. Salvadorans who were less likely to take a first unauthorized trip were business owners, those employed in skilled occupations, and persons with more years of experience in the labor force. Contextual variables in the United States, such as a high unemployment rate and an increase in the Border Patrol budget, deterred the decision to take a first unauthorized trip. Finally, social capital had no effect on the decision to migrate; this means that for unauthorized Salvadoran migrants, having contacts in the United States is not the main driver to start a migration journey to the United States. We suggest as policy recommendations that the United States should award Salvadorans more work-related visas or asylum protection. For those Salvadorans whose Temporary Protected Status (TPS) has ended, the United States should allow them to apply for permanent residency. The decision not to continue to extend TPS to Salvadorans will only increase the number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States. The United States needs to revise its current immigration policies, which make it a very difficult and/or extremely lengthy process for Salvadorans and other immigrants to regularize their current immigration status in the United States. Furthermore, because of our research findings, we recommend that the Salvadoran government — to discourage out-migration — invest in high-skilled job training and also offer training and credit opportunities to its population to encourage business ventures.
Topic:
Migration, Immigration, Violence, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
United States, Central America, North America, and El Salvador

29. They Are (Still) Refugees: People Continue to Flee Violence in Latin American Countries

Author:
Silva Mathema
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
The April arrival of the Central American caravan at the southern U.S. border once again placed the nation’s focus on individuals and families who traveled thousands of miles to seek asylum in the United States.1 The Trump administration is mischaracterizing the caravan as evidence of an out-of-control border crisis requiring a multifaceted and aggressive response—even though federal law enforcement apprehensions at the southern border in fiscal year 2017 remain at a near 46-year low since fiscal year 1972.2 The administration is using the caravan to justify several decisions, including sending thousands of National Guard troops to the border and making draconian changes to policies relating to asylum and criminal prosecutions. These changes are designed to expedite the path to deportation by circumscribing an individual’s right to seek asylum.3 In May 2018, the administration announced a “zero-tolerance policy” to prosecute anyone crossing the border, including those who may seek asylum.4 One predictable result of this new policy is that families apprehended at the border are being separated, with parents being referred by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for prosecution and children being sent to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement. Recent testimonies by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials suggest that during a 13-day span in May, DHS may have separated 658 children from parents.5 Many asylum-seekers in the United States are from Latin America, especially the Northern Triangle region of Central America—El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.6 They are fleeing because their home countries continue to be plagued with violence—much of it gang-related—as well as economic and political instability. Among those fleeing, many are women; children who may be unaccompanied or traveling with a parent; and LGBTQ people.7 Turning these individuals and families back or actively deporting them to their home countries—sometimes after first criminally prosecuting them and sentencing them to time in U.S. federal prison—may mean returning them to places where they may face persecution, displacement, and, in some cases, even death.8
Topic:
Migration, Refugees, Violence, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Latin America, North America, and United States of America

30. Where Fools Rush In: Why Armed Intervention Failed to Create Political Reconciliation in Somalia

Author:
Joseph P. Alessi
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Studies of Changing Societies Journal (SCS)
Institution:
Studies of Changing Societies Journal (SCS)
Abstract:
To be successful in today's world, leaders must understand the idea of culture. When the word culture is associated with leadership, many might first think of the culture that leadership creates within the framework of an organization. But for leaders who must operate in a tumultuous world connected by modern media, the word literally refers to the understanding of the people and places where they intend to inject themselves. Where Fools Rush In is a study of the failed U.N. and U.S. interventions to create stability and political reconciliation in Somalia from 1992 to 1995, due to the cultural misunderstanding of U.N. and U.S. leaders that created flawed mission objectives. World leaders must make difficult decisions when intervening in the political and social strife of nations when faced with the reality of human catastrophe and genocide. The questions will always remain as to if, how much, and what kind of intervention must occur. The choices are simple: standby, do nothing and watch, or intervene. What international leaders must understand is that, regardless of the boundaries and governmental systems implanted in former colonial and Cold War territories, the people developed their own systems of social organization and governance that predated European or U.S intrusion. When chaos erupts in these areas and the vestiges of these former systems collapse, the indigenous people more often than not return to their deeply entrenched cultural systems to create stability in these regions. Therefore, it is paramount for intervening parties to fully understand these cultural systems and implications if they hope to achieve any level of success. Ultimately, U.N. and U.S. leaders failed in Somalia because they failed to understand the people and their culture. Rather, they ignored it and viewed the situation from purely an ethnocentric western political perspective.
Topic:
International Law, United Nations, Humanitarian Intervention, Conflict, and Violence
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, North America, Somalia, and United States of America