By JAMESC. WIDDECKE
The wheels of justice sometimes turn very slowly
particularly in cases of wrongs perpetrated on a grand scale. One of the most
widely discussed issues of Justice today is illegal immigration. Some consider
it unjust that citizens from the foreign country to the south of us come here and
take our jobs and enjoy the benefits of our political, educational and medical systems.
However, this is a very short-term perspective on the problem of illegal immigration, which fails to take into account the long-term question or justice between the United States and Mexico. To fully appreciate the short-term problems affecting our border today, the long-term history of the border must be appreciated.
The circumstances most directly responsible for the current-borders between the United States and Mexico began in the 1820s, when large numbers of U.S. citizens immigrated into Texas, which was then. a part of Mexico. In l 830, the Mexican government closed the Texas border to further immigration. In 1836 Texas declared itself an independent republic after the new Mexican Constitution failed to provide what the Texas residents considered to be adequate states' rights.
In the ensuing conflict, the famous battle of the Alamo occurred and that war was ended in 1836 with the capture and subsequent release of Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna. Although Mexico made no further efforts to retake Texas, it refused to recognize it as an independent state.
This was the time of the doctrine now known as Manifest Destiny, the basic tenet of which was that it was somehow preordained that the United States should occupy all of North America and perhaps all of Mexico. Toward that end. the United States annexed the Republic of Texas in 1845. The Mexican government promptly broke off diplomatic relations. In that same year, the newly elected U.S. president James K. Polk, tried to purchase California from Mexico and attempted to negotiate a treaty whereby the southern boundary of Texas would be the Rio Grande. Previously, the boundary had always been the Nueces River. The Mexican government refused to negotiate on either point.
Polk ordered U.S. troops into the disputed area between the rivers, no doubt hoping to precipitate a clash between Mexican and U.S. forces. That clash took place in April 1846, and Polk then went to the nation and stated that American blood had been shed on American soil. Congress declared war on Mexico the same month.
A dishonorable land grab
As the U.S. government's actions were patently Rn attempt to grab land through political chicanery and force of arms, there was significant opposition in the country to the war. Congressman Abraham Lincoln was said to be in sympathy with the observation that the principle of waging war against a neighboring people to compel them to sell their country was not only dishonorable, but disgraceful and infamous.
However, this is a very short-term perspective on the problem of illegal immigration, which fails to take into account the long-term question or justice between the United States and Mexico. To fully appreciate the short-term problems affecting our border today, the long-term history of the border must be appreciated.
The circumstances most directly responsible for the current-borders between the United States and Mexico began in the 1820s, when large numbers of U.S. citizens immigrated into Texas, which was then. a part of Mexico. In l 830, the Mexican government closed the Texas border to further immigration. In 1836 Texas declared itself an independent republic after the new Mexican Constitution failed to provide what the Texas residents considered to be adequate states' rights.
In the ensuing conflict, the famous battle of the Alamo occurred and that war was ended in 1836 with the capture and subsequent release of Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna. Although Mexico made no further efforts to retake Texas, it refused to recognize it as an independent state.
This was the time of the doctrine now known as Manifest Destiny, the basic tenet of which was that it was somehow preordained that the United States should occupy all of North America and perhaps all of Mexico. Toward that end. the United States annexed the Republic of Texas in 1845. The Mexican government promptly broke off diplomatic relations. In that same year, the newly elected U.S. president James K. Polk, tried to purchase California from Mexico and attempted to negotiate a treaty whereby the southern boundary of Texas would be the Rio Grande. Previously, the boundary had always been the Nueces River. The Mexican government refused to negotiate on either point.
Polk ordered U.S. troops into the disputed area between the rivers, no doubt hoping to precipitate a clash between Mexican and U.S. forces. That clash took place in April 1846, and Polk then went to the nation and stated that American blood had been shed on American soil. Congress declared war on Mexico the same month.
A dishonorable land grab
As the U.S. government's actions were patently Rn attempt to grab land through political chicanery and force of arms, there was significant opposition in the country to the war. Congressman Abraham Lincoln was said to be in sympathy with the observation that the principle of waging war against a neighboring people to compel them to sell their country was not only dishonorable, but disgraceful and infamous.
Despite the opposition, the war progressed, and Mexico Caty
was captured in September 1847. However, the cost was high. The U.S. government
spent $27 million, and some 27,000 U.S. soldiers were killed. Probably many
more Mexican lives were lost.
After negotiations, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was completed in February 1848 and under its terms Mexico deeded over all of her territory north of the Rio Grande and Gila River across the Colorado to the Pacific. Mexico was paid $15 million, and the U.S. government assumed a little more than $3 million in claims held by U.S. citizens against Mexico.
About five years later, Gen. Santa Anna again had assumed dictatorial power, and he sold the e territory south of the Gila River to the United States for $10 million in the Gadsden Purchase.
It is absolutely clear that the United States of America stole a huge chunk of Mexico through force and violence, employing only the most thinly disguised political machinations. Such actions effected on smaller scale are known as armed robbery rather than war. However we might attempt to dignify the act semantically, it must be acknowledged that, in essence, the action was criminal.
When we consider the criminality of the U.S. seizure of the Southwest and West, today's ''border problems" take on a different aspect. Suddenly, the "surreptitious border crossers" may be seen not only as illegal immigrants, but as citizens wrongfully dispossessed of and excluded from their land.
As the Mexican culture extends its influence into the territory again, we do not see a condition of cultural imbalance being created, but rather a condition of cultural balance being restored. In other words, a gross injustice is being righted slowly over a period of many decades in response to the great injustice originally done nearly 150 years ago.
In a very real sense, it restores one's faith injustice and drives home the lesson that ultimately we as individuals or as a society in the form of future generations cannot escape the penalty of our transgressions. Justice will always track us down.
This lesson is more important than ever now that the North American Free Trade Agreement is a reality. NAFTA will insure closer political, social, cultural and economic ties with Mexico than we have ever experienced the past. Our economic partnership with Mexico is a closer one than we enjoy with any other region or nation on earth.
Partnerships are like a marriage. In order to be successful, a high degree of effective communication is necessary. In order for us to communicate effectively with our partners, we must understand their point of view, which obviously will differ significantly from ours and is probably more heavily influenced by events of the past than ours.
In order to reap the full benefits of such as partnership, we must not close our eyes to the unpleasantness of the past but must honestly and forthrightly face the future together with a full understanding of our partner’s perspective.
After negotiations, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was completed in February 1848 and under its terms Mexico deeded over all of her territory north of the Rio Grande and Gila River across the Colorado to the Pacific. Mexico was paid $15 million, and the U.S. government assumed a little more than $3 million in claims held by U.S. citizens against Mexico.
About five years later, Gen. Santa Anna again had assumed dictatorial power, and he sold the e territory south of the Gila River to the United States for $10 million in the Gadsden Purchase.
It is absolutely clear that the United States of America stole a huge chunk of Mexico through force and violence, employing only the most thinly disguised political machinations. Such actions effected on smaller scale are known as armed robbery rather than war. However we might attempt to dignify the act semantically, it must be acknowledged that, in essence, the action was criminal.
When we consider the criminality of the U.S. seizure of the Southwest and West, today's ''border problems" take on a different aspect. Suddenly, the "surreptitious border crossers" may be seen not only as illegal immigrants, but as citizens wrongfully dispossessed of and excluded from their land.
As the Mexican culture extends its influence into the territory again, we do not see a condition of cultural imbalance being created, but rather a condition of cultural balance being restored. In other words, a gross injustice is being righted slowly over a period of many decades in response to the great injustice originally done nearly 150 years ago.
In a very real sense, it restores one's faith injustice and drives home the lesson that ultimately we as individuals or as a society in the form of future generations cannot escape the penalty of our transgressions. Justice will always track us down.
This lesson is more important than ever now that the North American Free Trade Agreement is a reality. NAFTA will insure closer political, social, cultural and economic ties with Mexico than we have ever experienced the past. Our economic partnership with Mexico is a closer one than we enjoy with any other region or nation on earth.
Partnerships are like a marriage. In order to be successful, a high degree of effective communication is necessary. In order for us to communicate effectively with our partners, we must understand their point of view, which obviously will differ significantly from ours and is probably more heavily influenced by events of the past than ours.
In order to reap the full benefits of such as partnership, we must not close our eyes to the unpleasantness of the past but must honestly and forthrightly face the future together with a full understanding of our partner’s perspective.
No comments:
Post a Comment