Discussion topic: Would a "Root Cause" Approach Make Any Difference?
Reading reference.
1. Policy brief by Peter Meyer on "Central American Migration: Root Causes and U.S. Policy
2. Op-Ed: Mistaken metaphor: the 'root causes' approach to migration is both dishonest and ineffective
Instructions:
1. Similar many administrations before, the Biden Administration has been faced with the challenges posed by irregular migration from the Northern Triangle region of Central America (Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador).
2. To address these challenges, the Administration sought to implement a multipronged approach that included, among other things, policies intended to address the "root causes" of migration from the Northern Triangle (See policy brief by Peter Meyer from the Congressional Research Service https). The Vice President travel to Central America was intended to highlight the Administration's root cause approach.
response to irregular migration, and this has not traditionally been advocated by the US whose response has been mostly a security one.
In line with the above instructions and the links provided, kindly discuss the subject "Would a "Root Cause" Approach Make a Difference" based on the questions below.
Q1. Would a root cause approach make any difference in stemming the flow of irregular migration from the Northern Triangle?
a. Is it too ambitious/misleading?
Q2. How do you assess this approach against the complexities of societal challenges in the Northern Triangle?
Q3. What are some of the specific policies/suggestions you think must be part of a root cause approach?