A new network, MIWON, has played a key role in uniting different immigrant groups

One of the most critical social issues sidelined by political fallout from 9/11 has been immigrants’ rights. Prior to that day, immigration had emerged as a key national issue in US politics. The movement seemed poised to win a relatively expansive legalization program from the Bush regime, which was eager to make inroads into the growing Latino electorate and to politically shore up the new Fox government in Mexico.

The “War on Terrorism,” however, has dramatically altered the scene. Immediately following 9/11 the federal government rounded up thousands of Arabs, Arab-Americans, and Muslims, holding them for indefinite periods without formal charges or right to counsel. The Bush regime has also reversed its previous tepid support for immigrant legalization, opting instead for increased repression of immigrant workers, such as the firing and/or detention of hundreds of immigrant airport personnel and the detention of almost 500 Iranians in Los Angeles who responded to an Immigration Service requirement for “registration.” Clearly, a low-intensity war is raging against immigrants, waged by the Bush regime as a component of its overall efforts to repress any possible opposition social movements.

A May Day Miracle

Last May 1st, a “miracle” took place in Los Angeles. On a typically balmy Southern California day, an atypical mass action enveloped the streets of downtown LA. Twelve thousand immigrant workers and their supporters took to the streets to celebrate May Day and demand legalization and other rights for immigrants. “¿Qué queremos?” (“What do we want?”) shouted hoarse march monitors through the megaphones. “¡Legalización y Justicia!” (“Legalization and justice!”) roared the marchers in response. “¿Cuándo lo queremos?” (“When do we want it?”)“¡AHORA!” (“NOW!”) demanded the marchers, shouting their defiance of intimidation with the chant “¡Aquí estamos! ¡Y no nos vamos!” (“Here we are! And we’re not going!”).

While politicians backpedal, immigrant youth are pushing forward

The “miracle” was in the size, composition, and militancy of the march. It occurred in the wake of rampant post-9/11 anti-immigrant (“terrorist”) hysteria and growing systematic harassment, round-ups, detentions, and deportations in immigrant communities. Even march organizers from the Multiethnic Immigrant Workers Organizing Network (MIWON) were surprised by the incredible turnout. The high number of attendees (much larger than the previous year) suggests that immigrant workers will not be intimidated by the new anti-immigrant political atmosphere.

This event was both a political affirmation of their determination as well as a collective psychological victory for communities still suffering enormous “collateral damage” from Bush’s War on Terror. Not that immigrant bashing is confined to the Republicans. Post-9/11, the Democratic Party has dropped legalization efforts as if they came straight from Osama Bin Laden. The Democratic retrenchment on the issue is a significant loss because, before 9/11, they had finally begun to promote the concept of a broad-based legalization platform. This shift was largely because of pressure from Latino communities and the AFL-CIO, which has come to see immigrant workers as the best hope for growth, and hence a reinvigorated and politically relevant labor movement.

Arabs and Muslims at Center of New Anti-Immigrant Hysteria

As usual, race and class are at the core of new anti-immigrant attacks, as it is primarily dark-skinned workers from the Third World suffering the brunt of them. Traditionally, Mexicans and Central Americans have been at the top of the immigrant-bashing list, but since 9/11 Arabs, Arab-Americans, and Muslims have been the principal targets of the new anti-immigrant hysteria. As mentioned above, thousands have been rounded up by federal authorities as potential terrorists or terrorist supporters. Yet, in spite of these highly publicized pogroms, only one person has even been charged with any crime related to terrorist activity. Islamic mosques and charities have also been harassed, raided, or shut down by Attorney General Ashcroft. In a perverse illustration of the link between domestic and world politics, civil rights violations against the US Arab populations have also flared up since Israel has intensified its destruction of the occupied territories in the West Bank and Gaza.

Arabs in the US are not the only victims of inflamed anti-immigrant practices. For instance, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has instituted a draconian new border crackdown to try and prevent crossings at the Mexican border. Thanks to this militarized “Tijuana Wall,” border crossings have dramatically fallen off. Meanwhile, INS raids at factories and job sites have significantly increased, resulting in hundreds of workers being terrorized, driven from their jobs, jailed, and deported. US courts have also joined the anti-immigrant frenzy. The US Supreme Court ruled in April that undocumented immigrant workers who were fired from their jobs for union activity were not entitled to back pay even though it was illegal for the company to fire them for union organizing!

Having labor on board has given a big boost to the immigrants' rights movement.

While the ruling does not eliminate immigrant workers’ rights to organize and join unions, it is clearly meant to weaken such efforts. Meanwhile, right-wing Republicans (the “family values” people) have introduced legislation that would make it even more difficult for immigrants to bring over family members, and would severely limit student visas. Such is the hysteria that Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein has floated the idea that the US should stop issuing any student visas at all for a “temporary period.”

These political attacks have created a pervasive climate of fear in immigrant communities. In response, thousands of immigrant homes and cars have sprouted the US flag in an effort to challenge racist images of brown immigrants transporting bombs across the border. The Democratic Party’s virtual abandonment of the immigration issue has also caused many immigrants’ rights advocates to become more cautious about advancing a broad human rights agenda for immigrants. Their caution was also influenced by the AFL-CIO leadership’s initial uncritical support for Bush’s foreign and domestic war policies.

What Is the Way Forward?

The Los Angeles May Day march highlighted some of the complicated issues facing the movement as it struggles to determine the best way to advance. As great as the march was, there was a glaring absence from among its ranks of immigrant workers and supporters. While the march included supporters of the Palestinian struggle wearing the Arab kaffiyeh in solidarity, there were almost no Arab Americans or Muslim immigrants marching with the large contingents of Latinos, Koreans, and Filipinos. If the decision not to invite Arabs and Muslims to participate in the march was made on the basis that significant Arab participation might alienate potential support from Democrats, or from organized labor, then that decision was wrong.

The failure to include Arabs and Muslims in the May Day March reveals an immigrant rights movement that has not yet recognized potentially important new allies in the Arab and Muslim communities and the need to confront the fear and political opportunism of its allies among the Democratic Party politicos and the trade union leadership. This is just one of a number of important questions that the movement needs to address if it is to beat back the Bush-Ashcroft assault and win any serious expansion of immigrants’ rights. Here are some thoughts on some of those questions, and on how to build and advance the immigrant rights movement in this period.

First, the movement needs to stand up for the rights of Muslims, Arabs, and Arab Americans. The attacks on these communities and the situation in Palestine have impelled them into political motion, challenging repressive policies at home, and US war policies abroad. If the immigrant rights movement should represent anything, it should be a consistent spirit of internationalism and solidarity. What’s more, the repressive policies being used against Arabs and Muslims can easily be turned against other immigrant communities (and non-immigrant communities) who might later be considered a risk to “national security.” To their enormous credit, the Japanese-American community in Los Angeles—drawing on the experience of their own World War II internment by the US government—has been outstanding in showing political support and solidarity with Arabs and Muslims. As past experience suggests, excluding Arabs and Muslims from the immigrant struggle is not likely to move Democratic politicians to champion the cause of legalization anyway.

Second, the demands of the movement should go beyond legalization to include the new issues raised post-9/11. Without seriously challenging the new Bush-Ashcroft attacks on immigrant workers, the struggle for legalization itself will be weakened, as thousands of immigrants lose their jobs, are harassed in the community, are indefinitely jailed without charge. A failure to stand up to this repression will ultimately demoralize the very forces that need to be mobilized to win a legalization program. For these reasons, the movement should demand an end to the roundups, arrests, and detentions of Arabs, Arab Americans, and Muslims; an end to the harassment and firing of airport workers; an end to INS factory and community raids; and opposition to any laws that make immigration and family reunification more difficult.

The movement also needs to address Bush regime efforts to divide the INS into a “service” wing that processes naturalization, and an “enforcement” wing that patrols the border and immigrant communities. This initiative provides an opportunity to demand that the Border Patrol be completely dismantled, with all the resources being directed to helping workers process their documents for legalization, residency, and citizenship. At the very least, the movement should demand that the majority of INS resources be directed to the “service” component, and that the Border Patrol be subject to civilian oversight and control.

Third, the immigrant rights movement should make special and concerted efforts to unite with the African-American community. It’s no secret that fairly serious divisions exist between African Americans on the one hand and Asian and Latino immigrant communities on the other, and that these divisions weaken our struggles. These divisions are largely due to competition for scarce jobs, educational resources, and health care and social services, as well as to the narrow nationalism of many of the mainstream leaders in these communities.

The immigrant rights movement can help to overcome these divisions by supporting issues important to the Black community. The movement should, for example, pressure the trade unions to pay special attention to organizing Black workers even as it steps up efforts to organize immigrant workers. In particular, the movement should challenge the AFL-CIO to finally keep its long-delayed promise to organize the South, especially African-American and Latino workers. Solidarity should also include support for African American demands to end racial profiling and the police brutality that so horribly mirrors the terror that immigrants face from the Border Patrol.

Another important issue facing the movement is its relationship to organized labor and the Democratic Party. It is critically important now to build an independent immigrant workers movement that allies itself only strategically (rather than generally) with the AFL-CIO and the Democrats, being mindful how easily those two forces can co-opt the movement and/or sell it out by compromising with the Bush regime.

One model is the Multiethnic Immigrant Workers Organizing Network (MIWON) in Los Angeles, a coalition led by the Korean Immigrant Workers Advocates, the Garment Workers Center, the Pilipino Workers Center, and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. Each of MIWON’s member organizations is building a base among immigrant workers around workplace issues as well as community ones, such as housing, health care access, and educational rights. It is only through building these kinds of independent worker organizations that the movement can challenge any effort to hand the movement over to the Democratic Party leadership.

The struggle of immigrant workers will be a decisive factor in decades to come.

While safeguarding its independence, the immigrant rights movement should strive to build unity with particular labor unions, such as the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees (HERE), the United Farm Workers Union (UFW), and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). HERE and SEIU have thousands of immigrant members and are focused on organizing many thousands of others in campaigns such as “Justice for Janitors.” It was primarily these unions that forced the AFL-CIO to both abandon its support for employer sanctions (for employing immigrants) and to support the demand for a broad-based legalization program. Just recently, these unions joined a coalition of immigrants’ rights advocates to re-launch a national effort to win legalization, beginning with a campaign to send one million post cards to Congress supporting legalization. It is important for the immigrant rights movement to unite with such efforts.

Obviously a united front with organized labor has many challenges, not the least of which is keeping the AFL-CIO bureaucracy from co-opting the movement to garner its members, resources, and political connections. Nevertheless, the immigrant rights movement should work with these unions, encouraging them to use their influence in the Democratic Party to put the brakes on moves to sell out immigrants’ rights to the Bush-Ashcroft forces--and to mobilize union members in a national campaign aimed at both stopping attacks on immigrants and demanding genuine legalization.

Finally, while the political focus of the movement is correctly on stopping the attacks and winning legalization, it’s important to keep in mind the larger human rights agenda for immigrants. This includes demands for immediate unconditional residency for all immigrants, full language rights, voting rights, and the right to education, health care, and social services.

These are difficult times for the immigrant rights movement. But as the 2002 Los Angeles May Day march showed, immigrant workers themselves are willing to stand up and fight. And their message to Bush, Ashcroft, and la Migra was loud and clear: “¡Aquí estamos! ¡Y no nos vamos!”

Bill Gallegos is Coordinator of the Oppressed Nationalities Commission of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization.