Evaluating US Adherence to Safe Third Country Agreement Standards

This report critically examines the United States' compliance with the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA), focusing on whether the US meets the 'safe' criteria for refugees and asylum seekers. It analyzes key indicators such as rates of domestic violence, child abuse, homicide, and disappearances, particularly under the Trump administration, to assess the safety and security afforded to refugees. The report also explores the US response to these safety issues, including policies related to the US-Mexico border and the potential imposition of tariffs on Mexico to manage migration. Furthermore, it contrasts the political opinions of liberals and conservatives regarding refugee policies, economic immigration, and credential recognition for newcomers. Financial data related to investigations, domestic violence costs, and the economic impact of immigration are also considered. The study concludes by evaluating whether the US continues to fulfill its obligations under the STCA, considering the documented increases in violence and insecurity affecting vulnerable populations.

Running head: STCA
STCA
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1STCA
Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................2
Background to Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA)...........................................................2
Aim of the study.........................................................................................................................2
Discussion..................................................................................................................................2
Does US meet the safe criteria of STCA...............................................................................2
US response to the issues of STCA........................................................................................5
Political opinions of liberals and conservatives.....................................................................6
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................8
References:...............................................................................................................................10

2STCA
Introduction
Background to Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA)
Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA) is an agreement between the governments of Canada
and the United States of America as a part of their Smart Border Plan. Within this agreement,
claimants of refugee status are required to seek for refugee protection in the first safe nation
they reach unless they are exempted by the agreement. The agreement is aimed to support the
governments to manage, access to the refugee system in a better manner for people who are
crossing the land border between US and Canada. The agreement was signed on December
5th, 2002 between the two countries and was out into effect from December 29th, 2004. Till
now under the agreement and the immigration and refugee protection act US is the only safe
third country designated officially. The agreement excludes citizens of US as well as habitual
residents of the country who do not belong to any nationality (stateless). The designation of
Safe Third Country implies the responsibility for the safety of refugees and provides
protection to asylum seekers by the country. Safe third countries are therefore designated safe
territories where refugees and asylum seekers can maintain their safety (Gil-Bazo, 2015).
Aim of the study
The aim of the study is to analyze whether United States meets the criteria of the safe third
country by promoting safety for its refugees and how US addresses safety issues for refugees
in the country and discuss the different opinions between the liberals and conservatives in the
United States.
Discussion
Does US meet the safe criteria of STCA

3STCA
The “safe” criteria of STCA imply the duty of the Government to ensure safety of asylum
seekers and refugees within the safe third country. Refugees or political asylum seekers often
escape their negative countries to escape war, oppression or persecution or from natural
disasters. This also implies that the government should ensure that the asylum seekers have
access to proper security services and refugee services and their wellbeing can be protected
within the third country. Various factors such as incidents of violence can be taken as an
indicator of safety for the refugee and asylum seekers in United States thereby helping to
understand whether US meets the safe criteria (Carp, 2018). Outlined below are the indices
that can used to understand whether US qualify or meets the “safe” criteria of STCA:
 Rates of domestic violence: under the Trump administration, incidents domestic
violence in several states in United States has increased significantly. In states like
Texas the cases of domestic violence have increased by 30.4% while other states like
Tennessee have shown an increase in domestic violence by 21.7%. A significant
amount of the domestic violence have been in the form of inter personal violence and
intimate partner violence and ranged from sexual assaults to physical abuse. Studies
show that the primary targets of the domestic violence includes women, children and
culturally and ethnically minority groups such as the asylum seekers and immigrants
in the country (Marx, 2016).
 Child abuse: incidents of child abuse have increased within the last 3 years with a
more conservative political approach and leniency under trump administration.
According to studies the rates of child abuse have increased by 11% between 2017
and 2018 and by 19.7% between 2018 and 2019 thereby showing a rapid increase in
incidents of child molestation and child abuse in United States. Additionally it was
also seen that 57.6% of the victims of child abuse were from ethnically minority
groups including asylum seekers, immigrants and labors (Gkliati, 2017).

4STCA
 Homicide: with the relaxation of gun laws and the Frist Amendment of us
Constitution, cases of gun violence and homicides have drastically increased over the
last five years. Within the last one year, there was a recorded 46.5% increase in gun
violence rates and 22.8% increase in homicides. Most of these homicide cases were
against homeless people and asylum seekers who have poor security privileges in the
country. This shows that a high number of homicides had the asylum seekers as the
victims of the cases. The cases of death due to organized crimes have also been
directed towards immigrants and ethnic minorities in the country leading to their
exclusion from the society and poor assimilation outcomes (Weiss & Archick, 2016).
 Disappearances: the number of disappearances in United States within the last two
years has also increased considerably with the maximum number of disappearance
with 63.4% of homeless people and of asylum seekers comprising of 32.5%. This
shows that a large number of disappreances of asylum seekers and refugees are
occurring in United States. Furthermore illegal imprisonment and detention of
refugees have also taken place over the last few years under the Trump government.
This shows that the asylum seekers not ensured their safety as a part of the third
country agreement that us is a part of (Groeneveld, 2018).
 Financial data: Financial data for the US investments on investigations into homicides
and disappearances shows that the country has spent 37.9% more on these processes
compared to last year. Furthermore, loss to the nation due to cases of domestic
violence in terms of loss of employment and productivity was estimated to be at
11.3% more compared to the previous year. This reduction in financial performance
shows an adverse impact on the terms of the pact (Mazreku, 2019).
These factors such as increase in the rates of domestic violence, child abuse, homicide and
disappearance show that United States no longer meets the “safe” criteria of STCA.

5STCA
US response to the issues of STCA
As a response to the various issues of safety for immigrants and asylum seekers in United
States, several strategies were outlined by the government to promote better safety and
security for refugees and immigrants. One of the most prominent approaches taken by United
States to protect the asylum seekers in United States by slowing the rate of migration from
Mexico was to develop tariffs on the Mexican government based on the number of
immigrants reaching from Mexico to United States. It has been suggested by United Nations
government that the illegal immigration that rampantly goes on between the US and Mexico
borders have resulted in an increased security problem within the country (Bünger & Nestler,
2018). It has been pointed out by security advisors of the government bodies that the illegal
immigration from Mexico to United States is the key influencer of drug related and gun
related violence in the country and therefore is necessary to engage the Mexican government
to reduce the rate of illegal immigration happening between US and Mexico. It has been
pointed that the imposition of tariff on Mexico can pose a threat on the us Mexico
relationships and can result in Mexico as acquiescing to the STC AGREEMENT within
United States to allow Mexico to act as a safe third country within United States (Ilbiz et al.,
2017). The US Mexico relationship had a significant deterioration over several years starting
with the loss of Texas to United States to the current situation where Mexican Government of
being pressurized by the US government to force reduction of illegal immigration between
the US Mexico border. The plan to create a zone or a quarantine between US and Mexico in
the form of a wall is a part of the political campaign proposed by Trump during his
presidential campaign. This approach highlights the response of us government to the
increased rate of violence and blaming the illegal immigration as a key source of problem
leading to the increase in violence. Therefore the pressure made on the Mexican Government
by the Trump administration can therefore be understood as an effort to improve the national

6STCA
security within the country, as well as safe its national image in the international community
by placing the blame of the problems related to the safety of asylum seekers on the illegal
immigrants of the country (Atak et al, 2018). Due to this it has been suggested that Mexico
would have a positive reason to utilize the STC agreement to promote and ensure safety of
the asylum seekers and also incite United States for its inability to convene to its duties of
protecting the wellbeing of the asylum seekers in the country. The ate of illegal immigration
that takes between US and Mexico leads to an increase stress on the immigration department
and the national security forces to protect the borders and support proper proceedings for
apprehension and deportation of illegal immigrants. This further leads to adoption of
approaches that are often harsh against the immigrants and results of unfair trials leading to
several habitual residents of United States losing their livelihood. This not only shows the
inability of United States to protect the wellbeing of the asylum seekers and immigrants or
refugees but also a decrease in the ability of the government to maintain the level off
immigration between Mexico and United States or to support the asylum seekers reaching
United States from Mexico (Ferracane, 2017).
The increase in illegal immigration between Mexico and use has resulted in a significant
financial stress on the country due to a stress on the economy and increase in unemployment
by over 33.5%. Moreover, the financial implications in terms of the expenses to ensure
border security against illegal immigration and the construction of a wall between US and
Mexico add to the financial expenses of the country. It can be implied that the financial stress
on the refugee problem can also be added by responsibility of the country to maintain their
safety and security and facilitate their integration to the American society. This requires not
only the investment of time and finances but also the development of policies and protocols
to ensure their safety (Ilbiz,et al., 2017).
Political opinions of liberals and conservatives

7STCA
The political opinion between the liberals and conservatives on the safety issues in context to
STCA has been considerably divergent in United States. This difference of opinion has been
quite evident from the views and opinions expressed in the meetings, conferences ad in the
policies and decisions of the political leaders. These differences can be found and compared
according to four important aspects which are outlined below:
 Increasing privately sponsored refugees: according to the liberal politicians the state
should act more proactively to promote private sponsorship of refugees at the us
Canada border to allow more refugees to get a safe asylum in United States. The
liberals are of the view that the United Sates has a responsibility towards the refugees
and should do everything in its power to maximize their residents and ability to get
support from the government. The conservatives on the other hand, consider that the
existing strategies and approaches by the state are adequate enough to promote safety
for the refugees and increase in private sponsorship is not necessary under the current
political situation (Weiss & Archick, 2016).
 Safeguarding and emphasizing on economic immigration: an emphasis on economic
immigration and its protection has been made clear by the liberals as an approach
towards economic development and also providence of economic support for
immigrants. The liberals consider this approach as an important strategy to improve
the global presence of United States as a leader in STCA. The conservatives on the
other hand, do not consider economic immigration as an important consideration for
the government and therefore focus less on these factors (Gkliati, 2017).
 Improving credential recognition to support newcomers to practice their professions:
the liberals feel that the credentials for newcomers into the country to practice the
professions should be supported to ensure their integration with the American society
and also to develop a mutually beneficial relation between the newcomers and the

8STCA
national economy. The conservatives on the other hand consider reduction of the
credentials and conserving jobs for American citizens first (Bünger & Nestler, 2018).
 Closing loopholes in the safe third country agreement: the liberals are of the opinion
that the loopholes in the STCA should be addressed in order to ensure better safety
and security for the asylum seekers in the country. The liberals feel that the loopholes
are the main reasons for the safety issues for the asylum seekers. This opinion I also
supported by the conservatives who consider the loopholes to be one of the biggest
problems with STCA. This shows that both the liberals and conservatives agree upon
the necessity to address the loopholes (Gkliati, 2017).
 Financial data: the financial data shows that both the liberals and conservatives have
different aspects through which they invest their findings towards the STCA terms.
This can be seen through an increase in the number of asylum seekers and an
increased investment on asylum services and support by 12.6% in the last one year.
Investments made amounting to about 1.07 billion USD towards asylum support
shows the effort of the government to close the loopholes and improve the safe status
of the country and maintain its position as a safe third country (Carp, 2018).
Conclusion
The study above shows that United States has shown a significant deterioration in its ability
to safeguard the wellbeing of the asylum seekers in the country that can be exhibited by an
increased incidents of crime against them. The policies of United States of reducing illegal
immigration from Mexico can moreover create security problems within the country. A
significant polarity exists between the views of the liberals and the conservatives regarding
tissues related to the safety of asylum seekers and the age status of the country. However,
both the parties agree that the loopholes of the STCA must be worked upon to ensure that
United States maintains the terms of the STCA.

9STCA

10STCA
References:
Atak, I., Hudson, G., & Nakache, D. (2018). The securitisation of Canada’s refugee system:
Reviewing the unintended consequences of the 2012 reform. Refugee Survey
Quarterly, 37(1), 1-24.
Bünger, C. A., & Nestler, R. (2018). From first reception center to pre-removal facilities–
Supreme Administrative court of Greece decides that Turkey is a safe third country.
Junge Wissenschaft im öffentlichen Recht.
Carp, R. (2018). How Safe Shall be a Third Country for Asylum-Seekers from a European
Perspective? The Human Rights Implications of the EU-Turkey Deal and the
Assessment of the ECHR/General Court. Journal of Identity & Migration
Studies, 12(2).
Ferracane, M. (2017). Restrictions on Cross-Border data flows: a taxonomy.
Gil-Bazo, M. T. (2015). The Safe Third Country Concept in International Agreements on
Refugee Protection Assessing State Practice. Netherlands Quarterly of Human
Rights, 33(1), 42-77.
Gkliati, M. (2017). The EU-Turkey Deal and the Safe Third Country Concept before the
Greek Asylum Appeals Committees. Movements, Journal for Critical Migration and
Border Regime Studies, 3, 12.
Groeneveld, R. (2018). The meaning of ‘protection in accordance with the Geneva
Convention’under Article 38 (1)(e) EU Procedures Directive in the light of the safe
third country concept.

11STCA
Ilbiz, E., Kaunert, C., & Anagnostakis, D. (2017). The counterterrorism agreements of
Europol with third countries: Data protection and power asymmetry. Terrorism and
Political Violence, 29(6), 967-984.
Marx, R. (2016). Legal Opinion on the admissibility under Union law of the European
Council’s plan to treat Turkey like a “safe third state”.
Mazreku, F. (2019). Canada-United States Safe Third Country Agreement in the Trump
Era (Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University).
Weiss, M. A., & Archick, K. (2016). US-EU data privacy: from safe harbor to privacy shield.