MEXICO CITY — As a large caravan of Central American migrants approached the northern border of Mexico last month, the Trump administration launched a campaign to turn back the group.
Unwelcoming statements were issued by American officials, including Kirstjen Nielsen, the secretary of homeland security, who told migrants who intended to apply for asylum in the United States that they “should” instead seek protection in Mexico.
Mexican officials, however, said the migrants were under no legal obligation to apply in Mexico, and, indeed, more than 200 of them ended up crossing onto American soil and petitioning for sanctuary there.
But under a proposal for a bilateral agreement that the Trump administration has broached with Mexican officials, American border officials would have been able to legally turn back those asylum seekers, forcing them to seek protection in Mexico.
The agreement, or at least the concept of one, was part of a wide-ranging discussion about bilateral and regional immigration matters between Mexican and American officials in Washington on Thursday, officials said. The talks are scheduled to continue on Friday.
Such an asylum arrangement, known as a “safe third country” agreement, would allow American border officials to turn away most asylum seekers who cross Mexico to reach the United States, forcing them to petition in Mexico instead.
It would significantly stem the flow of asylum seekers crossing the southwest border of the United States in search of American sanctuary — and push responsibility for them onto Mexico. The United States has a similar agreement with Canada, and the principle is used elsewhere in the world.
Mexican and American officials declined to comment on whether the two sides made any progress in Thursday’s talks or on the substance of the conversations surrounding a safe third country agreement. But asked about the possibility of a safe third country agreement in a television interview on Thursday morning, Luis Videgaray, Mexico’s foreign secretary, said, “There aren’t conditions to speak about new cooperation mechanisms in this matter.”
The Trump administration has sought to reduce immigration and has been interested in brokering a safe third country agreement with Mexico to relieve some of the pressure on its asylum system, which has seen the number of applications skyrocket in the past several years, contributing to immense backlogs in the immigration courts.
But migrants’ advocates and human rights activists say the Mexican government would be ill prepared to handle the sudden and significant surge in asylum petitions that would result from a safe third country agreement.
Mexico’s asylum system is already overwhelmed by the growing numbers of immigrants that have sought sanctuary in recent years, the advocates contend. Moreover, they say, Mexico remains a very dangerous place, with weak law enforcement and judicial systems incapable of providing adequate protections for migrants who are in transit or are seeking to stay.
“The fact is that Mexico is not a safe option for many people, least of all migrants and asylum-seeking families,” said Michelle Brané, director of the migrant rights and justice program at the Women’s Refugee Commission, an advocacy group. Such a deal, she said, would be “nothing more than another attack by the Trump administration on women, children and families seeking safety at our border.”
In recent years, violence in Central America has driven tens of thousands of people to migrate to the United States to seek protection.
A far smaller but increasing number of Central Americans and migrants from other countries have sought sanctuary in Mexico. In 2016, the last full year for which statistics are available, nearly 8,800 people applied for asylum in Mexico, almost seven times as many as in 2013, according to Mexico’s government. About the same number applied during the first eight months of 2017.
The idea of a safe third country agreement with Mexico has not been the exclusive domain of Republicans. According to Mexican officials, Obama administration officials brought up the idea informally in negotiations with their Mexican counterparts, but the initiative went nowhere.
The Trump administration has championed the notion more forcefully, Mexican officials say. Some Republican legislators in Washington have even pushed a bill that would allow the United States to return Central American asylum seekers unilaterally to Mexico — without the need for a bilateral agreement, according to a summary of the bill from the House Judiciary Committee.
Persuading Mexico to sign a safe third country agreement could be difficult, in part because the governing party of President Enrique Peña Nieto, whose candidate is trailing badly in the race for the presidency, does not want to appear to be making any concessions to the Trump administration.
In addition, the Mexican asylum program is overwhelmed.
While the Mexican government has made improvements to the program in recent years, advocates say, the system remains deeply flawed, with inadequate staffing and funding for the country’s refugee agency, uneven training and supervision of immigration agents and inconsistent adjudication of asylum law.
“The administration has waged a yearlong campaign to undermine the asylum system and vilify those who seek protection at our border,” Eleanor Acer, director of the refugee protection program at Human Rights First, said Thursday. “Today’s negotiations are merely the latest tactic to shut the door on those who are desperate to live in freedom and safety.”