State Department’s Stance on UN Immigration Plans

Marco Rubio’s State Department has taken a strong position against the United Nations’ initiative to facilitate globalized immigration and assist in resettling immigrants in their home countries.

“The United States opposes the Global Compact on Migration and the UN’s efforts to support alternative migration pathways to the U.S. and its allies,” the department stated in a recent tweet. They further elaborated:

Mass immigration has never been safe for citizens of Western countries. It’s introduced new security risks, created financial strains, and weakened societal unity… Under President Trump, the State Department will advocate for immigration, rather than replacement immigration.

This decisive shift contrasts sharply with the approach taken during President Joe Biden’s administration. Under his leadership, his team cooperated discreetly with the UN to settle an estimated 10 million immigrants from culturally diverse backgrounds across American communities, workplaces, and various public services.

Biden’s approach, which involved forced removals, resulted in numerous fatalities among both immigrants and Americans. This turmoil contributed to a political climate that ultimately led to Trump’s election based on the promise to deport millions of immigrants.

Rubio’s department continued with its critique:

UN agencies have consistently advocated for mass immigration to the U.S. and Europe, even as citizens of these nations have called for tighter immigration controls.

Amid a significant wave of mass immigration affecting Americans, the UN remains active in Central America, directing migrants toward our southern border.

UN workers have been documented meeting migrants along perilous routes, distributing maps to help them navigate their way to the U.S.

Despite endorsing mass immigration, the UN has condemned the deportation of illegal immigrants.

Breitbart News has reported extensively on these developments and highlighted an upcoming 2024 conference aimed at creating a “Working Neighbors” plan, driven by a coalition of progressives and corporate interests. This plan reportedly seeks to place many South American immigrants into low-wage jobs in the U.S. and Europe, impacting American workers negatively.

Additionally, Breitbart has covered the influx of white-collar immigrants from India and China since 1990, which has displaced millions of American graduates from the job market.

Mr. Rubio firmly opposed the UN’s World Plan. Following the convening of the UN’s Second International Migration Review Forum, progressive advocates pushed for increased funding and broader legal authority for managing immigration.

Antonio Guterres, the UN Secretary-General, has articulated that “migration is not a crisis; rather, it’s our collective inability to manage it effectively that poses the real challenge.” In March, he emphasized:

Since the Global Compact’s adoption, various member states have made significant strides in enhancing regular migration channels and other related efforts.

Countries should identify and match migrant skills with labor market needs, which benefit both origin and destination countries.

He also noted that countries could progress by addressing the adverse effects of anti-migration sentiment.

Meanwhile, back in the U.S., a State Department social media update highlighted that the UN’s immigration program was equally problematic for Europe.

As Europe grapples with ongoing migration challenges, UN officials have deployed personnel throughout crucial migration routes in the Mediterranean. They have criticized frontline countries for their refusal to open borders and condemned the deportations facing Britain amid record illegal crossings.

Evidence is accumulating that the UN’s pro-immigration policies are detrimental to the development of poorer countries, leading to the exploitation of their human resources by U.S. investors. These patterns are reminiscent of colonialism and have substantially harmed nations like Haiti and Nicaragua since 1990.

This exploitation has allowed investors to profit from social programs meant for low-wage earnings and assistance for impoverished individuals who utilize these benefits to shop in major U.S. grocery chains.

A recent study indicated that emigration often hinders growth in the immigrants’ home countries, with findings suggesting a significant negative impact on GDP growth across Latin America and the Caribbean.

On average, immigration correlates with a decline in GDP growth in those regions, although remittances provide some offset. An analysis showed that for many nations, any income increase from migration is minimal.

By contrast, Trump’s administration claimed success in saving lives through restrictive immigration measures and attempts to stabilize Venezuela’s governance for its citizens and U.S. investment.

President Trump also sought to reinforce Cuba’s existing regime, which stands in stark opposition to Biden’s policy of allowing more economic freedom for impoverished Cubans working in low-wage jobs.