On January 29, US President Donald Trump signed an executive note that teaches his government to expand the detention capacity of the migrant operations center in Guantenamo Bay. In his speech before the signing, Trump claimed that 30,000 proposed beds were necessary to “eliminate the scourge of immigrant crime” and would carry “the worst illegal foreigners who threaten the American people” who did not “trust will not seek to return if they were deported.

This came amid an attack by anti -immigrant executive orders, including the Laken Riley Law, and the Ministry of Internal Security requires the detention of citizens other than the United States, but not necessarily guilty, for robbery, theft, theft or shopping, and thus the denial of many immigrants to reach the procedures Legal.

Although these policies are extreme, and even seem an indication of a current authoritarian moment, they are not unique to Trump or the United States. Nor are they without a historical precedent.

For decades, the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia have been experimenting with detention abroad and increased criminalization of immigrants at home. It follows how these policies have evolved together, which were distributed in all three countries, which enter and outside, reveal how the roots of this current authoritarian moment in global politics have deepened more than any country, party, or political perspective. Instead, their roots lie in a constantly recycled racist violence and amplified through the borders of the nation -state.

The American experience with maritime detention began in the 1980s, with the opening of a detention center in Fort Allen, Puerto Rico, and the introduction of the “intersection” policies that sought to intercept and retreat of high -end high asylum seekers at sea to prevent it from reaching the United States. In the nineties, these policies were expanded with the base of the Naval on the Gulf of Guantenamo, who used to detention 36,000 Haiti and 20,000 Cuban people looking for asylum between 1991 and 1996.

Shortly after, in 2001, the Australian government presented the so -called Pacific Solving, which Noro and Manus Island witnessed in Papua New Guinea in a detailed structure of detention abroad. These centers are marked by reports on human rights violations and extensive evidence of abuse and cruelty, however, the solution of the Pacific Ocean continues to this day, and was seen as a model for simulating British governments.

The former conservative cabinet directly drew from Australia’s foreign policy to design a plan to deport people looking to resort to Rwanda. Although the plan was well -known when the Kiir Starmer’s Labor Party arrived in power in 2024, it also looked at Italy’s introduction in Albania as a possible model for simulating.

In all of these countries, external infrastructure and the logic of relevant deterrence are still even when political fluctuations dictate the shift away from the detention of people abroad. Thus, in Australia, when the first repetition of the Pacific Resolution was ended in 2007, the physical spaces and the legal framework of the external process remained intact, allowing this policy to easily revitalize and harden with Pacific 2.0 solution in 2012.

When the Australian government moved the last person from the Noro detention center in 2023, they never ended their company contracts, allowing the center’s center with people looking for asylum after just months.

One of the main effects of detention abroad is the exclusion of the regional detainees and thus legally from the rights and regular protection, as well as isolating them from supporting the networks of society and advocacy. This is locally reflected by criminalizing increasing immigrants.

By creating new crimes related to immigration, imposing the detention and deportation of non -citizens with criminal condemnation, and removing means of appeal or representation, countries have built increasingly illegitimate residents without rights. At the same time, they migrated and criminalized in the general debate.

This places the scene for politicians to compete with each other by providing deterrence through constantly broad detention as the only possible solution, especially during the election campaigns.

The American example of the 1996 illegal immigration reform law and the responsibility of migrants clearly shows this. It passed through the period leading up to the presidential elections, and Iirira sought the definition of the “strict criminal” and the non -citizen’s scope of deportation (including retroactively). The law has established a close cooperation between the enforcement of migration and the local police, the increase in detention and deportation figures and the border militarization between the United States and Mexico.

Today, Trump’s executive orders and defense allegations against the “invasion” by “illegal foreigners” are intensifying this current system and its racist area of ​​deterrence.

Like Bomerrang, a vibration, the criminalization and existence of people looking for a decent life between its wild and external embodiment within the countries, as well as between countries. This criminalization increases during election sessions, when the borders become glasses of political power, with the parties through political divisions that use difficult immigration accounts to prove their ability to judge the nation and pay attention to failure in health services, housing, luxury, employment and more.

The past 12 months were not exception, as the elections in the United Kingdom and the United States and now were imminent elections in Australia. Each of these elections has achieved the total expansion of policy proposals for detention abroad, deporting large areas of people, and undermining, if not death, to our international protection system.

As immigration politicization continues, the goals of what is considered an acceptable step at the right, leading to policies that provide greater restrictions on rights and promise more damage.

This scene of cruelty distracts his attention from another failure – the failure of these restrictions and the deep absence of the political leadership of immigration. What research shows again and again is how these policies do not prevent people from reaching, but instead they harm people who are already marginalized in our societies.

The harm and abandonment of international detention systems of migration, not the occasional secondary products produced by the lack of individuals or rogue companies. Harm and abandonment “according to design”. They are necessary advantages for forced detention and deportation fed by politics financial The profits based on this damage.

However, the violations and injustice of the detention constantly resist. Throughout the world, protests, strikes, riots and strangers were met by people with solidarity by civil rights activists, popular bases activists, religious groups, community organizers, lawyers, families and friends.

Conditions, violations, rulings and laws have been challenged, raids, published bonds, policies that have been approved, border enforcement agencies, and local networks are resisted to close detention sites and support persons at risk of detention.

This resistance and solidarity were shown in a 23 -day protest led by prison men at the Manus Island detention center, after announcing its closure in 2017, when it was ruled by Papua New Guinea unconstitutional. Despite the intimidation of the security forces that intensify them and reach the food, water and electricity that are cut, the men fought safely for freedom instead of restoring the body in new locations, relying on their relations with local manuscripts and Australian advocates, while communicating their ordeal to an international public.

The documented treatment of those who were held on external sites speaks about tyranny in the governance of immigration, which promises to influence citizens and non -citizens alike. Pharaoz Bouchani, the former poet, journalist and prisoner of the Immigration Recipli Center in Australia in Manus, in his book Freedom, is the only freedom: “Refugees have identified and revealed the face of the dictatorship of the twenty -first century, dictatorship and fascism that will one day crawl to Australian society and in the homes of people like cancer. “

In the United States, as anywhere else, popular coalitions between people with living experience in detention and cancellation organizers for decades have been the basis of resistance under Trump 1.0, and they will do it again. Because those who hold the attacks of the Algerian state-and not to liberalize companies for the prevailing “left” parties-which are the strongest opposition and an alternative to our current authoritarian moment.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the editorial island.