Pages

Friday, October 05, 2007

Deporting Iraq GI's Spouses: When No Green Card Trumps a Yellow Ribbon

YADERLIN AND ALEX JIMENEZ
Who would have thunk that among the consequences of the Iraq war are the GIs who in addition to trying to stay alive have to wonder whether their wives or girlfriends will be there when they return home.
This is not a "Dear John" situation, but rather spouses who do not have green cards and face deportation at a time when there may be more support for immigration reform than the war.
Earlier this year, I wrote about the case of Yaderlin Jimenez, who like her husband, Alex, is a native of the Dominican Republic but entered the U.S. illegally prior to marying the Army specialist and naturalized citizen in 2004. She had been slated for deportation because she had not applied for a green card.

The case was additionally wrenching because Yaderlin was due to be deported about the time that Alex and two other soliders went missing after an insurgent ambush in the Triangle of Death south of Baghdad in May that left four soldiers and an Iraqi translator dead. The body of one of the three abducted soldiers was found later.
Jimenez is believed to be dead, but Yaderlin can stay in the country because an immigration lawyer who had the support of the Army intervened in her behalf and she was granted a green card.
With so many emigrees serving in Iraq, the Jimenez case seems to be the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

This brings us to the case of Mildred Gonzalez, the wife of Navy Petty Officer Second Class Eduardo Gonzalez, who is about to be deployed to Iraq for the third time while the missus is faced with being deployed back to Guatemala.

Mildred, who was five years old at the time, and her mother entered the U.S. legally in 1989. Because of their status as war refugees from Guatemala, they were granted political asylum.

This is where things get tricky: Mildred's mother applied to become a legalized citizen and her application included Mildred. But six weeks before her mother was granted legal status in 2004, Mildred married Eduardo, which under labyrinthine immigration laws put her status in jeopardy. Then there is their young son, Eduardo Jr.

Says Eduardo Sr.:

"I like being in uniform and serving my country, but if she goes back I’m going to have to give it all up and just get out and take care of my son and get a job.

"Defending the country that’s trying to kick my family out is a thought that always runs through my mind."
It should be noted that not all cases are as black and white and there are people who try to game the system, including instances where women who are in the country illegal marry GIs to keep from being deported. I heard from several people who pointed out that scenario after began writing about the Jimenez case.

Lieutenant Colonel Margaret Stock, who teaches immigration law at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, says that "because of the dysfunction and complexity of our immigration laws," there should be an overall policy dealing with the potential deportation of family members of active duty military members:

"You got to understand. When you're in a combat zone, you need to be focusing all of your energies on fighting the enemy. You can't be worried that your loved ones back home could be shipped off to a foreign country where you're never going to see them again."
But don't expect any sympathy from anti-immigrant hard asses like Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which doesn't so much "study" the issue as lobby for tougher laws.

Says Krikorian:

"What we're talking about here is letting lawbreakers get away with their actions just because they have a relative in the military."
Even in cases like Mildred Gonzalez, Krikorian ain't giving any ground:
"What you're talking about is amnesty for illegal immigrants who have a relative in the armed forces, and that's just outrageous."
Well, one man's outrage -- and, it seems to me, thinly veiled racism -- is another man's exception made in the service of patriotism in time of war, even if there are some people whose motives may not be entirely driven by love.

My modest suggestion to Krikorian would be for him to take that American flag on his desk and stick it where the sun don't shine.

Photograph © Suzanne Opton

2 comments:

  1. The arguments of one-issue activists are typically unbalanced. They make very good straw men. I share your concern for the injustice saturating the immigration issue, and I feel sad for the miscarriages of justice you describe. I'm sure in many cases, the government could find grounds to make exceptions, but they don't for reasons of stupidity, inflexibility, intolerance, and/or excessive concern for consistency (the hobgoblin of small-minded men?). Nevertheless, if an argument is supported by reprehensible men, the argument is not thereby rendered invalid.

    It is also true that some despicable individuals choose to wrap themselves in the flag. That by no means tarnishes the ideals that the flag has come to represent in the eyes of most Americans. I am neither supportive nor opposed to those who use it for protest or art or just shock value. It may also be that flag-worship is a form of idolatry. Nevertheless, I choose to fly the flag on holidays and give it a place of honor. I am sad when my neighbors neglect to do the same. I think that they have little understanding of the how lucky we are.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here is a short discussion on the nature of patriotism by Richard Fernandez that is worth reading. Also a longer article by Chistopher Hitchens on a different kind of patriot.

    ReplyDelete