L’Arizona : un Etat policier ?, par François Vergniolle de Chantal
Le débat sur l’immigration est reparti aux Etats-Unis d’une façon spectaculaire : devant l’absence d’initiative nationale et la crainte, qui se renforce dans les Etats du Sud-Ouest, d’une perte de contrôle de la frontière mexicaine, la gouverneure républicaine, Jan Brewer, a signé le 30 avril la version finale de la loi SB1070 qui entre en vigueur cet été. Cette loi a suscité un scandale phénoménal outre-Atlantique. Barack Obama lui-même s’est prononcé en déclarant qu’elle mettait en cause l’héritage des libertés américaines et brisait le lien de confiance entre les citoyens et leur police. Les manifestations se sont multipliées dans le pays, ainsi que les appels aux boycotts économiques. Le Mexique a même officiellement conseillé à ses citoyens de quitter l’Arizona. Que fait cette loi pour mériter, non seulement une rebuffade présidentielle, mais toute cette attention nationale et internationale ?
Une dépêche de l’AFP présentait la loi en disant qu’elle “durcissait” le dispositif légal contre les immigrants clandestins. Mais la généralité de la formule cache une comparaison intéressante. Cette loi permet en effet à n’importe quel policier de l’Etat d’Arizona de demander ses papiers à toute personne qui serait susceptible (le texte évoque une “reasonable suspicion”) d’être un immigrant clandestin – on en estime le nombre en Arizona à 450 000 personnes.
Le choc que cela suscite en Amérique est parfaitement compréhensible. Nation d’immigrants par excellence, les Américains sont particulièrement sensibles à la question. Les premières lois qui créent un cadre global pour gérer les flux migratoires datent du début des années 1920. Avant 1921, le pays était largement ouvert, même si les Etats avaient chacun leurs lois et que l’Etat fédéral intervenait ponctuellement, par exemple contre l’immigration asiatique en 1882. Par ailleurs, le mouvement pour les droits civiques qui a balayé l’Amérique quarante ans plus tard a donné à la question raciale un statut quasiment intouchable. Toute attaque frontale basée sur des préjugés raciaux est assurée de susciter des réactions extrêmement fortes, mobilisant sans hésiter le passé discriminatoire de l’Amérique. Le constat est d’autant plus significatif dans une Amérique qui a choisi un président métis dont l’un des engagements forts, quand il était un élu local de l’Illinois, était de lutter contre les discriminations.
Dans ce contexte, une loi comme celle adoptée par l’Arizona est explosive. Le scandale porte non seulement sur le résultat mais aussi sur le critère de contrôle. Les groupes hispaniques soulignent à juste titre que ce texte permet de pratiquer le “profilage ethnique” (ethnic profiling) de sorte que des citoyens américains – et pas uniquement des clandestins – qui sont d’origine hispanique seraient susceptibles d’être contrôlés par les forces de police. L’Arizona est le seul Etat à avoir pris cette décision. Il remet à l’ordre du jour l’incapacité de l’Etat fédéral d’agir au niveau national alors que les sondages indiquent régulièrement que l’opinion publique est favorable à une réforme de la politique migratoire. En 2007 déjà, et malgré le soutien du président G.W. Bush, un projet avait échoué au Sénat. Ce compromis ne satisfaisait personne. La droite refusait en effet toute forme d’amnistie à des clandestins – les chiffres qui circulent dans les médias vont de 10 millions à 12 millions de personnes – qui n’ont pas respecté les lois. La gauche, quant à elle, refusait les mesures sécuritaires de contrôle à la frontière mexicaine. Le problème reste donc sans réponse.
AMALGAME ENTRE SÉCURITÉ ET IMMIGRATION
Le cadre législatif hérité de 1965 est dorénavant contesté par tous, mais sans qu’un nouveau consensus n’émerge pour le remplacer. Jusqu’à présent, Obama ne semble pas avoir d’incitations fortes pour agir. La réforme de l’assurance-santé en mars, et les négociations en cours sur la réglementation des institutions financières et sur le changement climatique ne laissent pas de place pour un autre débat. Non seulement les élections au Congrès sont maintenant proches mais, en outre, les démocrates, tout comme les républicains, sont extrêmement divisés. Dans ces conditions, l’immigration est appréhendée sous l’angle le plus simple, là où le consensus est le plus facile : la sécurité. En 2006, déjà, le Congrès avait adopté une loi pour construire un mur sur la frontière mexicaine. Et, en 2002, lors de la création du ministère de la sécurité du territoire (Department of Homeland Security), l’administration responsable de la gestion des immigrants, l’INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service), a été intégrée à ce nouveau ministère, quittant ainsi le ministère de la justice. Depuis lors, l’amalgame est officiel entre sécurité et immigration.
Scandaleux ? Aux Etats-Unis, sans conteste. Mais pas en Europe et, notamment, en France où n’importe quel agent de police peut demander ses papiers à quelqu’un dans la rue. Et, traditionnellement, notre ministère de l’intérieur inclut à la fois la gestion de la police et le traitement de l’immigration. Il est d’ailleurs extrêmement révélateur de voir que les médias français ne relaient absolument pas le débat qui fait actuellement rage aux Etats-Unis sur l’immigration. L’actualité américaine, vue de France, se résume à la marée noire en Louisiane – comprendre : une catastrophe de plus dans ce pays de tous les excès – et aux difficultés de la réforme financière – comprendre : les responsables ont du mal à corriger les abus de Wall Street. Comme souvent, il est plus facile de critiquer les Etats-Unis avec le sous-entendu implicite que la situation en Europe est nettement supérieure. En revanche, un débat comme celui autour de la loi d’Arizona, reste étrangement absent. Je ne peux m’empêcher d’y voir un exemple de plus de l’abondance des préjugés transatlantiques. Sur ce point bien précis, les Américains ont un débat extrêmement sain, illustrant la vitalité démocratique de leur pays, en refusant toute extension abusive des pouvoirs de police. Au moins pour cette fois, l’Amérique semble pouvoir nous donner une leçon que nous devrions méditer. Il est assez attristant de voir que les médias français laissent de côté une information qui, en présentant les Etats-Unis sous un jour positif, donne à la France le mauvais rôle.
François Vergniolle de Chantal est maître de conférences à l’Université de Bourgogne et rédacteur en chef (avec Alexandra de Hoop Scheffer) de la revue Politique Américaine. Il est actuellement professeur invité au Miller Center de l’Université de Virginie (Charlottesville).
The following is an email from an Arizonan…You may be surprised at the truth. You’ll never red it in the MSM.
………………………………………..
Hi all,
Well, we Arizonans are certainly in the news these days. Couldn’t get any media’s attention for years, as we struggled with our myriad problems with the drug wars and illegal immigrant issues became increasingly desperate. But now that we’ve passed an enforcement law, all the networks and night talk show hosts and hollywood types are coming out of the woodwork.
Just to set a few things straight–which you will NOT see or hear in the media:
* As I e-mailed earlier, 72 percent of ALL adult Arizonans support this new law. We are not racist, and we are not bigots. We are in crisis.
* Between 60 and 63 percent (depending on the poll) of legal Hispanics in Arizona support this new law (they are equally offended and endangered by illegal immigration–violence and taxes and compromised schools and closed hospitals know no skin color!) One Hispanic gentleman in Phoenix said he waited 11 years to legally enter the U.S., and said in a T.V. interview, “We are being overrun, and our way of life is being threatened.” No shit!!!!!!!
* Do not believe what you see on the national news about this law. It does NOT give law enforcement the right to pull anyone over because they “look Hispanic.” It does NOT give law enforcement the right to just look at someone and ask for papers. There has to be a “lawful reason” for stopping them in the first place, and THEN and only then, if the officer suspects they may be illegal–based on criteria already used by ICE–they can ask for legal status identification. Do not believe this garbage you hear every day on T.V. It is not a “police state” statute.
* On April 26th evening local Tucson news, news teams from Tucson went down to Nogales Mexico–across the border–and decided to randomly interview the first 6 people they ran into on the neighborhood streets. They promised not to edit, pick and choose, or whatever. Local media is pretty neutral, but perhaps more sympathetic with the protesters. I think they fully expected outrage across the border. Five of the first six Mexican citizens they first encountered and interviewed support this bill. They see no problem with it. They said the U.S. has the right to find and deport illegals of any nationality–it is our country. They said that they have to carry identification papers all the time in Mexico! One gentleman teaches half time in a Nogales high school and half time across the border in a U.S. high school. He said he has been carrying and showing his papers every day for years, including being asked by the non-border Mexican police for identification. He sees no big deal and is embarrassed by the hoopla from Mexicans in the U.S. He said it “makes us all look bad.”
* Five other states have already contacted Arizona lawmakers (Utah, Oklahoma, Iowa among them) to help them draft similar legislation. I think many many states have wanted to do this, for the same reasons we Arizonans did, but were scared silly of appearing what Arizona is being called–racist, bigoted, etc. etc.)
If you look at the demonstrators, notice their general age group–high school and college students mainly. Why them??? For one thing, in Arizona and other states, Hispanics, legal or illegal, pay in-state tuition, regardless of where they are from. Also, there are special set-aside funds reserved for Hispanics (primarily from Latino support organizations), and for non whites in general (general funds). They are getting a much better deal than citizen students–many a free ride. So why wouldn’t they demonstrate, if this bill threatens to deport them? The high school students are all friends. Good for them. But they are just kids insulated from the economic and social realities of the situation. One Mexican high school girl in tears was put on national media (of course), and she said, “Half of everyone in my high school is illegal. Now they are threatening to split us up and maybe deport half of us.” Can you believe this?? She believes that this kind of statement should garner sympathy–and perhaps does, nationally. We think it clarifies an alarming fact of life down here. Arizona is over three billion dollars in debt. Objective estimates suggest that nearly 30 percent of that is due to unreimbursed education of illegal kids. It is a lovely intent. Estimates are that approximately 2/3 of our state deficit is linked to costs of the illegal population. We are broke and desperate!! 13 state parks have permanently closed. Most highway rest stops are shuttered. Our state sales tax is probably going to 7.6 percent this summer. Roads are in disrepair. Three Tucson hospitals have completely closed within the past 5 years. Tucson police and Pima country sheriff’s departments are laying off law enforcement officers during a dramatic increase in violence. It is not fair for the rest of the country to not have to help us pay for this outlay when the federal government won’t seriously lift a finger to stop this crisis. It shouldn’t fall so disproportionately on the few. When each of the states have to divvy up tens of millions of dollars each year to help the border states educate and deal with illegals, then we can also be high-minded about doing good for all God’s children.
I know this sounds like a rant. But watching the national media, day after day, one gets such a distorted view of what the law actually says (it is on the net, by the way), and how the population here and elsewhere really feel about it. It makes us crazy. The protesters get all the media time. Just had to try to present “the other side of the story.”
First, we are not a “country of excess”. Most Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, with most of the GDP in the hands of about 10% to 20% of the population. We do not live like kings & queens.
secondly, what most of you in France take for granted is not guaranteed to citizens in the U.S…I, for instance, have no health insurance. I have been denied the ability to buy it, by the only real “death panels” we have in the States, insurance CEO’s. If I become seriously ill or injured, my only two choices are bankruptcy or death, and as I will not leave my wife destitute, death is the only choice remaining…no French citizen has to make a choice like this, and I admire the way you care for your injured on a nationwide basis, while here we are simply on our own, or fractured into groups.
As for the immigration problem in the U.S., you must not believe that you hear from U.S. news sources, as they are all corporate controlled. The Arizona law does not allow for random stops or searches of anyone who may look Hispanic. It allows for a background check of anyone stopped for a violation of the law, and it simply requires proof of legal status, a green card or visa (which you are already required to carry), or proof of citizenship, which can be nothing more than a driver’s license issued in the U.S.
It’s sad that Arizona feels it has to enact such a measure, but the fault ultimately lies with the federal government, as they obstinately refuse to enforce border security, and have refused to increase the fines & penalties for knowingly hiring an illegal invader to the point where the penalties would constitute a serious deterrent.
As for amnesty for illegals, we have done that at least 3 times in my life, and each time with assurances that the border would be secured if the amnesty were passed…the border has never been secured, and in every instance of amnesty, more illegals pour across the border to take the place of the newly-made citizens. It is simply a scam aimed at the voters.
We don’t care if anyone immigrates to the U.S., in fact, we welcome you…but we are a sovereign country, with the right to refuse citizenship to those with criminal backgrounds, and the right to control our population…and I, for one, do not like the idea of becoming a country so populous that individuals become cheapened & easily replaceable…this idea may be enticing to corporations, but not to the citizenry at large.
Well-written article, but it skates over what I feel is the underlying reason for the uproar, which is the peculiar sensitivity average Americans have about their behavior.
You are correct when you call the USA a nation of excess. The previous commenter objects, and pretends that being on the economic decline demonstrates we are not fond of excess, but the slide into poverty is exactly caused by the excesses allowed to financial corporations in the destructively competitive fight for personal wealth by both officers and stockholders, devil take the hindmost, who include the commenter.
The real excess is the glib American exceptionalism, which may not be supportable in the view of non-Americans, but has never wavered, and is still being exploited even by Obama, who is locked into by his very realistic fear that the country will turn on him in their panic at the inevitable prospect of a large drop in their ENERGY AND MATERIALS standard of living.
Americans have been trained by their runaway advertisers to require excess in order to achieve personal satisfaction with their life, and now they must be retrained to be restrained in their use of energy and materials.
We shall see if it is possible, but it’s the real thing to watch, and the Internet, with its endless mind-teasers, will likely be how America learns to enjoy its mind, instead of endless thrills from travel, speed and bulk in their houses, cars and entertainments. The age of Hummers, McMansions and cross-country trips to the Other Disneyworlds and relatives has to stop. How fast we can achieve this will decide the fate of the world.
An interesting little update. The president of Mexico was being interviewed on Wolf Blitzer (a nationally broadcast interview show) and expressed concern over the Arizona law. In the very same interview, he admitted that visitors to Mexico must present their identification & carry papers which must be presented to authorities on demand. If they are found to be in Mexico illegally, they are deported.
Also, under Mexican law, if you are caught working without the proper papers, you can be arrested & jailed.