In deporting Asians to Central America, Trump is strong-arming weaker nations, policy experts say

Dozens of mostly Asian migrants were put on a deportation flight from San Antonio on Tuesday. But instead of landing near their home countries, the migrants eventually arrived in the Costa Rican capital of San José, where they were then shuttled off to the southern part of the country to await their fates. 

The flight is among the latest in a series of U.S. deportations that have made a stopover in Central America, with Panama similarly serving as a bridge in recent weeks. Immigration and legal researchers said the Trump administration has pressured these countries to take in undocumented migrants, particularly those who are from countries like China and India that have been traditionally more reluctant to accept people back. 

Immigration and legal researchers and advocates say political and economic pressures from the Trump administration have strong-armed Panama and Costa Rica into repatriation agreements, making them a stopover for the U.S. in the deportation process. They mention the new method allows the other countries to bear the brunt of processing the migrants, and removes them from protections under U.S. law. 

The practice marks a “new world,” policy advisers and immigration groups say, in which the administration is attempting to make less-powerful nations help in its mass deportation operation, based on threats of tariffs or a potential use of force. “They are coercing nations who are at a much greater socioeconomic disadvantage than the United States, so they feel forced to accept migrants,” said Razeen Zaman, director of immigrant rights at nonprofit Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. “It is extremely disappointing and alarming that other countries are now … acting as Border Patrol agents themselves.”

Researchers and advocates also say that without the possibility of applying for asylum in the U.S., migrants face a range of repercussions in their home countries from potential persecution to death.

The White House did not immediately respond to NBC News’ requests for comment. 

Which countries are involved in third country repatriations — and what’s their take on it?

So far, Panama and Costa Rica have been the two main countries serving as a stopover in the deportation process. Honduras also briefly served as a bridge for a deportation flight of 170 Venezuelans who were coming from Guantanamo Bay on Thursday. 

The 65 migrants who landed in Costa Rica on Tuesday included those from India, China and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The group follows 135 migrants who landed there last week, including people from China, Uzbekistan and Afghanistan, among several other primarily Asian and African countries. None had criminal records. 

They are able to apply for refugee status in Costa Rica, Omer Badilla, the country’s deputy minister of the interior and police, told Noticias Telemundo on Wednesday. In Panama, Frank Ábrego, the country’s security minister, said last week that he wasn’t aware of any migrants requesting asylum there.

“But if they think they have the need, as any human being would, to request asylum, we have to pay attention to it and approve or disapprove it,” he said.

Roughly 300 people from 10 mostly Asian countries have already been sent to Panama. Some have been transferred to a camp in the country’s Darien province, while others remain in a hotel where they are forbidden to leave the premises as international authorities arrange for the return to their home countries, according to The Associated Press. 

Researchers say that economic and political pressures are largely behind the new arrangements between the U.S. and these Central American countries. Since beginning his term, Trump has repeatedly threatened to “take back” the Panama Canal, claiming that China has had control of the waterway. 

Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino has sparred with the administration, saying earlier this month that the U.S. has been spewing “lies and falsehoods.” 

But during a visit from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the country agreed to serve as a bridge for deportees, with the U.S. funding the operation. 

A representative from the Panamanian Embassy did not respond to NBC News’ request for comment. 

In an interview with Noticias Telemundo on Wednesday, Badilla said that an agreement between Costa Rica and the U.S. was struck sometime last week, in which his country would accept a maximum of 200 migrants. The remaining 65 arrived Tuesday. During a news conference that same day, Costa Rican President Rodrigo Chaves said that the country intended to help its “economically powerful brother from the north.” 

“If they impose a tax in our free zones, it’ll screw us,” Chaves said. “I don’t think they’ll do it, thank God … love is repaid with love … 200 will come, we treat them well and they will leave.”

In a follow-up interview Saturday, Badilla said there was “no pressure” to take on the migrants. 

“This was a request from the U.S. government to Costa Rica to carry out the process. Costa Rica raised its hand,” Badilla told Noticias Telemundo. “We know we are strategic partners of the U.S. and as such Costa Rica supports the U.S. government to carry out the process.”

Earlier this month, Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo told NBC News that the country agreed to receive third-country nationals deported by the Trump administration, but did not have a timeline on when it would begin doing so. The agreement differs from a 2019 “Safe Third Country” deal in which the Trump administration and Guatemalan officials allowed third-country nationals to be deported to Guatemala and to apply for asylum there. 

Prior to taking office, Trump also expressed that he wanted another Latin American country, Mexico, to take on third-country nationals, three sources previously told NBC News. But the sources said that getting Mexico to agree could be a challenging process and that Trump had planned to threaten tariffs to get Mexico to comply.

Why less-powerful countries might be complying

Muzaffar Chishti, a senior fellow at nonpartisan think tank the Migration Policy Institute, said that many countries are complying with the U.S. to avoid economically devastating tariffs and other threats. India, Chishti pointed out, recently accepted two military flights from the U.S. for the first time in its history amid tensions over tariffs. 

“If you’re head of a state and head of an agency, tell me what should I do so that I’m not in the crosshairs of this administration?” Chishti said. 

Tanya Golash-Boza, executive director of the University of California Washington Center, a research institute, whose own research focuses on immigration and Latin America, said that it’s quite “reasonable” to believe that the U.S. is likely turning up the pressure on these countries, particularly given the history that it has in Latin America. Just over a decade ago, the U.S. significantly ramped up deportations to Guatemala, for example, increasing the number of repatriations more than threefold from 2005 to 2013. 

“It was causing a big administrative problem for those countries to receive all these deportees at the same time. It was really hard to manage the flow, but they couldn’t stop it,” said Golash-Boza, author of “Deported: Immigrant Policing, Disposable Labor and Global Capitalism.” “They didn’t feel like they were in a position to tell the U.S., ‘Stop deporting our people.’”

There’s also the legal aspect of deportations involving third countries. Chishti said that taking migrants out of U.S. territory and forcing Central American countries to then process them instead is likely the administration’s way of taking advantage of the legal differences between countries. 

“The Constitution doesn’t apply in Panama. U.S. due process and regulations and laws do not apply in Panama,” he said. “It’s just out of our hair legally.” 

Golash-Boza similarly mentioned that this could mean the loss of a system to establish asylum or other forms of immigration relief, even for migrants who face major dangers in their home countries. 

“Since the 1980s, activists have slowly fought to put some semblance of rights into the detention system in the United States, but whatever limited rights they have at this point are gone the moment they leave U.S. soil,” Golash-Boza said. 

Chishti also noted that detention facilities are over capacity, further prompting the U.S. to send migrants elsewhere. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has even released migrants because of the operational issue. Additionally, with migrants being dealt with by other countries, the U.S. does not have to contend with the diplomatic “headaches” associated with historically uncooperative countries, who have been unwilling to accept migrants, he said. 

ICE has previously identified China, Pakistan and India as among several uncooperative countries. However, during a visit to the White House last week, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said he is “fully prepared” to bring back any undocumented immigrants. 

What could happen to the migrants if they are sent back to their home countries

Researchers and advocates who spoke to NBC News all noted that removing the possibility of asylum in the U.S. places many of the migrants in life-threatening situations. 

Zaman said that many of the migrants likely risked their lives coming to the U.S. Now, without a guarantee of due process and asylum, she said that migrants could be in danger. For those who fled China for political reasons, for example, a flight back home could also mean serious consequences for them and their families, potentially including arbitrary arrest, detention or forced disappearances, Zaman said. 

Badilla said those who landed in Costa Rica have not made any formal requests for asylum. 

“That is a guarantee and a certainty that people want to return to their countries,” Badilla said. “Already the different embassies of the countries or nationalities of these citizens are getting in contact with us precisely to be able to interview them.”

Liu Pengyu, spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in the U.S., did not elaborate on potential repercussions for those repatriated to China, but said in a statement sent to NBC News that China’s position on illegal immigration is “consistent and clear.” 

“The Chinese government firmly opposes all forms of illegal immigration. The Chinese government adheres to the principle of ‘verification first, then repatriation’ in repatriating illegal immigrants,” Liu said. “We will accept repatriation of Chinese citizens who have been verified to be from mainland China.”

Others from countries like Afghanistan could meet an even more serious fate. 

“We’re essentially sentencing a lot of people to their death,” Zaman said. “These folks would have been fleeing the Taliban. They would be put exactly right back in a position where now they’re at even greater risk of being persecuted.”