The Guardian (USA)

‘Stabbed in the back’: Biden’s border wall Uturn leaves Indigenous and climate groups reeling

- Maanvi Singh

The Biden administra­tion’s decision to waive environmen­tal, public health and cultural protection­s to speed new border wall constructi­on has enraged environmen­talists, Indigenous leaders and community groups in the Rio Grande valley.

“It was dishearten­ing and unexpected,” said Laiken Jordahl, a borderland­s campaigner with the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), amid concerns of the impact on essential corridors for wild cats and endangered plants in the area. “This is a new low, a horrific step backwards for the borderland­s.”

This is the first time a Democratic administra­tion has issued such waivers for border wall constructi­on, and for Joe Biden, it’s a marked departure from campaign promises and his efforts to be seen as a climate champion.

“I see the Biden administra­tion playing a strategic game for elections,” said Michelle Serrano, co-director of Voces Unidas RGV, an immigrants rights and community advocacy group based in the Rio Grande valley. The many rural, immigrant and Indigenous communitie­s that live in the region have become “the sacrificia­l lamb” for politician­s looking to score points, she added.

As the climate crisis fuels ecological decline, extreme weather and mass migration, the administra­tion’s move is especially upsetting, she added. “Building a border wall is counterpro­ductive,” she said.

“This is an inhumane response to immigratio­n,” said Michele Weindling, the electoral director of the Sunrise Movement, a youth-led climate justice group. “The right thing to do would be to treat immigrants with compassion and address the root cause of what is forcing people to have to leave their countries, which is the climate crisis.”

Following the administra­tion’s decision to approve the Willow drilling project in Alaska and renege on a promise to end new drilling, the border wall constructi­on will likely further alienate young voters, she said: “Biden has already caused distrust among young voters. This is another and horrendous reversal of promises he made on the campaign trail, which is a dangerous move to make ahead of 2024.”

Among the 26 environmen­tal and cultural protection­s the administra­tion is waiving are the National Environmen­tal Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriati­on Act and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act.

The administra­tion’s proposed 20 new miles of a “border barrier system” in Starr county, Texas, cuts near the lower Rio Grande Valley national wildlife refuge. Constructi­on would bisect fields where the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe and other tribes source peyote for sacramenta­l use. It would also cut through or near old village sites and trails.

“By developing this, they are furthering a genocide,” said Juan Mancias, the chair of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe, who has been battling border wall constructi­on though tribal cultural sites and graveyards through multiple US administra­tions. Colonizers “killed our people in the first place, and we had to bury – then you dig them up to build. It’s ongoing genocide”, he said.

The new sections of border wall would cut through “some of the most rural, peaceful sections of the Rio Grande”, said Jordahl, who recently canoed down the stretch of river where the administra­tion plans its constructi­on. “It was one of the most serene experience­s I have ever had on the border. There were orioles flapping their wings in the sky, kingfisher­s, great blue herons.”

CBD believes the constructi­on will set back the recovery of endangered ocelots, and cut off wildlife corridors essential to the spotted wildcats’ longterm survival. Two endangered plants, the Zapata bladderpod and prostrate milkweed, would also be threatened by wall constructi­on, according to the CBD.

The waivers were announced just a month after the Government Accountabi­lity Office, a nonpartisa­n watchdog agency, released a dire report finding that border wall constructi­on during the Trump administra­tion had destroyed towering saguaro cactuses in Arizona, threatened ocelots in Texas and dynamited Indigenous cultural sites and burial grounds. The report urged US Customs and Border Protection and the interior department to develop a plan to ease the damage.

In fueling Donald Trump’s zeal to build a “big, beautiful wall” at the US-Mexico border, his administra­tion issued waivers that suspended 84 federal laws including protection­s pertaining to clean air and water, endangered species, public lands and the rights of Native Americans. The Biden administra­tion rescinded one of the prior administra­tion’s waivers in June.

In July, the federal government agreed in a settlement to pay $1.2bn to repair environmen­tal damages and protect wildlife affected by sections of border wall constructi­on. Several states as well as the Sierra Club and Southern Border Communitie­s Coalition had challenged Trump’s use of military constructi­on and of treasury department forfeiture funds to build parts of the wall.

Now, the president who once vowed that “not another foot of wall would be constructe­d” under his watch has had his administra­tion issue further waivers to speed wall constructi­on. He has argued that his administra­tion is compelled to construct border barriers, because money to fund its constructi­on was already allocated by Congress. “I tried to get them to reappropri­ate, to redirect that money. They didn’t,” Biden told reporters. Asked if he thought the border wall worked, he responded, “No.”

Environmen­tal advocates have disputed the president’s claim that there was no choice but to move ahead with border wall constructi­on. The administra­tion was not obligated to waive environmen­tal and public health protection­s to speed the work, they argue.

“It’s absolutely mystifying as to why they thought it was a good idea to issue these waivers,” Jordhal said. “They could have moved forward with the Endangered Species Act still intact, so endangered wildlife and these areas would have had protection­s.” Keeping environmen­tal, health and cultural protection­s in place would also have allowed local communitie­s to provide input on the proposed constructi­on and its impact, he added.

“I’m angry,” said Nayda Alvarez, who spent years fighting the Trump administra­tion’s efforts to seize land that her family has held for at least five generation­s to build the border wall. “Biden didn’t keep his promises – what happened to his word?”

Even after the lawsuit to take her property along the Rio Grande was dropped, Alvarez said, she remained uncertain and uneasy – and continued to voice her concerns about the ecological damage caused by border barriers. “We thought maybe we’d be OK with a Democrat as president, and now Biden did this. We’re being stabbed in the back.”

 ?? Photograph: Matt York/ AP ?? Border wall constructi­on along the Colorado River toppled saguaro cactuses, put endangered ocelots at risk and disturbed Native American burial grounds.
Photograph: Matt York/ AP Border wall constructi­on along the Colorado River toppled saguaro cactuses, put endangered ocelots at risk and disturbed Native American burial grounds.
 ?? Photograph: John Moore/Getty Images ?? ‘The right thing to do would be to address the root cause of what is forcing people to leave their countries.’
Photograph: John Moore/Getty Images ‘The right thing to do would be to address the root cause of what is forcing people to leave their countries.’

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States