“Violence and poverty are more important issues than immigration.” While reporting on the 2024 presidential election, I visited Yuma, a border town in Arizona. A 34-year-old woman working in health care said this. Politically independent, she said she would choose a candidate without considering immigration policy.
Because Yuma is a town that has become an entrance for illegal immigrants heading to the U.S., I had thought there would be growing dissatisfaction about illegal immigration, but there were more voices than I had guessed that did not have such a view.
A woman in her 60s who worked for Uber said, “public safety is not bad because of the immigration issue.” She herself says that she works until late at night.
Of course, there are also some people who are strongly unhappy about illegal immigration. A 71-year-old man who said he leaned Republican angrily declared that President Joe Biden's administration “has no strategy for the border,” and his tone emphasized that he would be voting for former President Donald Trump. Even in border towns, opinions are diverse.
In the meantime, at a restaurant during lunch, the words of a working 27-year-old man rang in my ears. He said, “There are many people who secretly hire illegal immigrants to do business. I don't think everyone is saying what they really think about illegal immigration.” There is also concern that in Arizona, a state dealing with the border issue, simply saying one's true feelings could lead to criticism. Silence is golden. I was keenly aware of how difficult it is to gauge public opinion on the immigration issue.
Venezuela is likely to become another wasted crisis, resembling events that followed when the U.S. forced regime changes in Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq.
We are faced with a "scenario" in which Washington's exclusive and absolute dominance over the entire hemisphere, from Greenland and Canada in the north to the southern reaches of Argentina and Chile.
The message is unmistakable: there are no absolute guarantees and state sovereignty is conditional when it clashes with the interests of powerful states.