The ongoing Central American child migrant crisis  gained the national spotlight last week when the president asked Congress for emergency funds  to stem the influx. Many of the children, like other immigrants, are looking for work and education , or are trying to reunite with family . But as Ross Douthat has pointed out , the numbers are spiking in large part because the children are following smuggler-spread rumors of amnesty, possibly inspired by the mixed signals of the DREAM Act. Since smugglers make more profit trafficking children than more logistically challenging adults, the administration’s recent efforts to counter the misinformation have not gone far.
The language surrounding the crisis on the U.S. side of the border can be almost as confused, however. As the crisis made headlines, one false dichotomy dominated the rest: “Please don’t call this an immigration reform issue. This is a humanitarian crisis,” Rep. Kay Granger of Texas recently said . Refugee advocate Jennifer Podkul  was quick to echo the juxtaposition. “This is not a migration issue. This is a humanitarian crisis and a foreign policy issue.”
The rush to call this anything but an immigration story  is usually intended to highlight the root causes of poverty and violence in Central America. Rhetorically, it creates urgency and helps encourage a distinction between short-term solutions for children suffering at the border and long-term solutions to reform the system.
In reality, though, those are not competing frameworks. The child migration situation is both a humanitarian crisis and a migration issue, and it cannot be resolved without taking both aspects into consideration. A prime example of the importance of both priorities can be found in the motivating factor in this child migration influx that most defies easy categorization: the proliferation of gang violence in Central America.
Central American child migrants widely cite  gang violence as a motivation for leaving their countries, and the gangs they flee are fundamentally tied up in the migration issue. The most prominent Central American gangs, Mara Salvatrucha (“MS-13”) and 18th Street Gang (“Calle 18”), began among Latino youth in Los Angeles in the 1960s and the 1980s respectively, but both expanded from the United States to Central America  after mass deportations following the 1996 Immigrant Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. This migration policy decision fomented cross-border crime networks that now have an estimated 70,000-100,000 members  in several countries.
The gang violence plaguing these children does not just illustrate the long-term consequences of immigration policy, but also the reason for considering this in international refugee terms. As many as 48 percent of Central American child migrants  are fleeing violence in their communities, including the violence  gangs perpetrate in their recruitment of adolescents . Central American minors specifically seeking international protection as refugees from persecution in the form of gang violence have won asylum in the U.S. in the past . The gangs’ sheer scope, as transnational criminal organizations and sometimes paramilitaries, has led some advocates to describe the child migrants as akin to defecting child soldiers .
Current migration numbers  indicate a geographically consistent uptick in migration, with children heading not just for the U.S. but for other Latin American countries as well (even Nicaragua, one of the region’s poorest countries, is receiving asylum-seeking minors). But the focus of the immigration on the U.S. border and the clearly distinct economic motivations in other child migrants’ journeys means that it is disingenuous at best to discourage an immigration reform angle to the issue. Indeed, focusing on the immediacy of the crisis only paves the way for more crises to be sustained by poorly thought out policy in the future.
The endless factors complicating both the immediate humanitarian crisis and any possible structural reforms indicate that the roots of child migration will not be an easy fix. Productive solutions will need to begin with an integrated vision of the issue, rather than partaking of an imagined competition between political priorities.
Follow @caddingtn11