Securing the Borders - Thesis Example

? Securing our borders Quintan A. Brown Kenneth Davis 24 January Securing our borders After 9/11, most Americans would like to thinkthat the United States borders are tighter than ever; some articles stressed that they are wrong. Time International correspondents Barlett et al. (2004) reported: “The U.S.’s borders, rather than becoming more secure since 9/11, have grown even more porous. And the trend has accelerated in the past year.” Deputy Chief Patrol Agent of the Border Patrol’s Rio Grande Valley Sector Reynold Garza (2005) said that criminals continue to cross the U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada. Several sources indicated the need for greater border security through a wide range of technological, legislative, and military interventions (Meyers, 2003; Military Technology, 2010), as well as global agreements (Taylor, 2005). Despite the need of securing the borders, however, there are also calls for the consideration of ethical and human rights dimensions of border security (Arreolo, 2010). The U.S. government is also pressed to consider the rights of poor workers and people searching for an asylum to migrate to the U.S., where they can find shelter, freedom, and livelihood. In addition, some sources argued for the importance of understanding cultural geography, when finding and evaluating solutions to border issues (Arreolo, 2010). The borders are not seen as boundaries by illegal immigrants, but as opportunities for a new and better life (Hemphill, 2009; Huemer, 2010). This paper will explore the literature on the U.S. borders and border security. The research questions are: What are some of the strategies that the U.S. government should pursue to enhance border security? Should the government ensure that these interventions are humane and ethical? This paper will discuss existing border patrol strategies. It will also discuss recommended strategies that aim to enhance border security. Finally, it will ponder on the ethical dimensions of borderland security interventions. Review of literature This section reviews the issues of border security, primarily illegal and legal immigration, crime, and terrorism. It also discusses existing border security measures, which range technological, legislative, and military interventions (Meyers, 2003; Military Technology, 2010). Finally, it examines the ethical implications of border security measures and the need for international efforts for managing borders. The Honey of Illegal and Legal Immigrant Bees One of the primary goals of border security is to control immigration, particularly illegal immigration (Marek, 2007). The U.S. continues to symbolize the land of milk and honey for many people around the world, especially those from the Third World. An estimated 500 million people cross the U.S. borders every year, and this consists of people seeking for employment or business opportunities and refugees, as well as unfavorable border crossers, such as criminals and terrorists (Antal, 2010, p.54). The U.S. prides itself as a democratic front for human rights that include the rights to travel and immigrate to other countries. The U.S., despite immigration controls, accepts more legal immigrants as permanent residents than all other countries combined (Antal, 2010, p.54). In 2008, more than a million immigrants became natural U.S. citizens (Antal, 2010, p.54). In 2009, the U.S. granted legal immigrant status to 1.1 million immigrants (Antal, 2010, p.54). The U.S. however, also controls the number of legal immigrants, which push some people to resort to illegal immigration methods. Illegal immigration remains as significant concern, since the U.S. cannot realistically put enough people to monitor wide borders. The U.S.-Canada border extends 5,525 miles; while the border with Mexico covers 1,989 miles long (Antal, 2010, p.54). Furthermore, the U.S. also envelops more than 95,000 miles of shoreline, thousands of airports, and 360 naval ports of entry (Antal, 2010, p.54). It is projected that almost 22,000 containers cross these naval ports every day, and one of the common routes of illegal immigrants (Antal, 2010, p.54). Through land, air, and waters, illegal immigrants stake their lives, if only to have a new and better life; still, not all immigrants have noble intentions, which is why border security personnel seek to stop criminals and terrorists from entering its borders. Crime and Terrorism, Couples of Violence Borders represent the physical and symbolical ideas of sovereignty and security, and the need to heighten border controls became the first response after 9/11 (Meyers, 2003, p.6). Border accords were made between the U.S. and Canada and the U.S. and Mexico to enhance security against potential terrorists (Taylor, 2005). The Border Patrol was made in 1924 to control illegal immigration and it received additional human and financial support after the 9/11 attacks (Lobreglio, 2004, p.936). The U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (USVISIT) Program, which utilizes biometric matching at the U.S. ports to identify people on the terrorist watch list, may have driven some terrorists to enter the U.S. through the U.S.- Mexico border (Wein, Liu, & Motskin, 2009, p.699). The directors of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided their testimonies to the Senate Intelligence Committee that new intelligence robustly indicated that Al Qaeda has considered the alternative of entering the U.S. illegally through the U.S.-Mexico border (Wein et al., 2009, p.699). The U.S.-Mexico border further seeks to keep Mexican crime at bay. Numerous illegal crossings into the U.S. involved drug smuggling, transportation of illegitimate goods, and human trafficking (Antal, 2010, p.55). Drug exports are some of the gravest concerns of the Border Patrol. In August 2010, CNN stated that the death toll in s of Mexico's drug wars for the past few years was estimated at 28,000, which is equal to almost fifty percent of the number of Americans killed during the Vietnam War (Antal, 2010, p.53). Mexican towns are far from being led by elected officers; it is common for some towns to be ruled by drug gangs and the latter routinely kill government officials (Antal, 2010, p.53). Seven to eight large drug cartels are fighting one another and the Mexican government and one can only imagine the political instability and violence that threaten to spillover to American soil (Antal, 2010, p.53). Terrorism and crime prevention are then fundamental reasons for increasing border security. Border Security Mechanisms The U.S. government continues to expand border security mechanisms. It passed laws, developed border technology, and added military dimensions to border security measures, although sources stressed that they are not enough to address the multifaceted components of border issues (Arreola, 2010; Taylor, 2005). The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been particularly provided the mission to develop the infrastructure necessary to dissuade and thwart illegal entry into the southwest Border of the US, such as through pedestrian and vehicle fencing (Antal, 2010, p.55). Technological and geographic developments. The Department of Homeland Security developed controversial measures to boost border security. The Secure Border Initiative, the name of the DHS program, concentrates on additional border infrastructures, such as walls and roads, military-style equipment, and personnel (Marek, 2007). Critics did not approve of such measures, because they argued that this only militarizes the border, which will only shove illegal immigrants to pay more or do more precarious measures to enter the U.S. (Marek, 2007). Homeland Security officials maintained that the new strategy will help them gain "operational control" (Marek, 2007). They asserted that surveillance meant greater access control and catching those who do successfully enter the borders (Marek, 2007). Different kinds of fences already exist along the borders. Virtual fencing has been increasingly used and put between lengths of physical fencing in distant areas (Antal, 2010, p.58). Unmanned aerial vehicles are also used. On September 2010, the U.S. created flying long-fortitude, high-altitude PREDATOR-B Surveillance Drones along the southern border with Mexico (Antal, 2010, p.59). These drones are controlled by the DHS and swathe the southwest Border - from the El Centro Sector in California up to the Gulf of Mexico in Texas – supplying decisive aerial surveillance support to personnel on the land (Antal, 2010, p.59). The DHS believed that the PREDATOR symbolizes the "critical next step" in fighting drug smuggling and human trafficking in the nearly two thousand long U.S.- Mexican border (Antal, 2010, p.59). Military strategies. The U.S. has deployed the armed forces to the borders before, but a present one-year federal mission was placed on the U.S. Army National Guard to put 1,200 National Guard citizen-soldiers and-airmen to sustain CBP and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas (Antal, 2010, p.61). The preponderance of the Guard soldiers will sustain the Border Patrol with entry identification teams (EIT) and prop up ICE with criminal investigative analysts for twelve months (Antal, 2010, p.61). These soldiers will also serve as additional eyes and ears of the Border Patrol and will make contact with Border Patrol agents to apprehend and arrest illegal people crossing to the borders (Antal, 2010, p.61). The soldiers are authorized to use lethal force in instances of self-defense (Antal, 2010, p.61). Legislative components. The 1924 Act created a visa requirement for people who want to immigrate to the United States; nevertheless, Mexicans mainly unseen this requirement and crossed the border without the required paperwork (Lobreglio, 2004, p.936). In 1986, President Ronald W. Reagan enacted the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 (Hemphill, 2009, p.54). The rationale of the IRCA was to enhance border security and immigrant amnesty in a proposal to solve the problem of illegal immigration; recent evaluation asserted that this law failed in controlling undocumented immigrants (Hemphill, 2009, p.54). From 2001 to 2002, the United States signed Smart Border agreements with Canada and Mexico (Meyers, 2003, p.11). The Smart Border Declaration between the United States and Canada, a plan with thirty point-agenda, was signed on December 2001 by Director of the Office of Homeland Security Tom Ridge and Minister of Foreign Affairs John Manley (Meyers, 2003, p.12). It includes four categories: “The Secure Flow of People, The Secure Flow of Goods, Secure Infrastructure, and Coordination and Information Sharing in the Enforcement of these Objectives” (Meyers, 2003, p.12). Presidents Bush and Fox also signed a 22-point U.S.-Mexico Border Partnership Agreement on 22 March 2002 (Meyers, 2003, p.18). The Ethics of Border Patrol and Other Measures This section explores the ethical concerns of border patrol and other border security measures. Bordering for security. Security is a paramount rationale for erecting greater border controls (Taylor, 2005, p.577). There are security implications of unhampered immigration, which intersects drugs trafficking, human trafficking, and the transportation of other illegal goods (Meyers, 2003, p.11). Health concerns are also part of security measures, such as preventing the spread of human and animal diseases from other countries to the U.S. (Taylor, 2005, p.579). Sources argued, however, that security concerns should not mask racial discrimination and aversion for the promotion of the human rights of people for migration (Hemphill, 2009; Huemer, 2010). Bordering for economic progress. Opponents of migration assert that it depresses wages and steals work from American workers (Hemphill, 2009; Huemer, 2010). In reality, however, companies and businesses benefit from illegal immigration, because it reduces labor costs, and they often lobby for laxer laws or laws with small penalties for using illegal immigrants as part of their work force (Hemphill, 2009; Huemer, 2010). A source also noted the frustrations of the border accords, such as lack of vision or detailed roadmap, slow bureaucracy, inadequate focus on land borders, embedded attitudes, confusing messages, and poor attention to the significance of partnerships that resolve broader and wider issues (Meyers, 2003, p.29). One important challenge is the political will needed to continue a broad range of border efforts (Meyers, 2003, p.29). A second key challenge is preserving a practical acknowledgment that success at the border cannot be ensured, because the borders remain porous for diverse factors (Meyers, 2003, p.29). Bordering for human rights. Sources argued that people have the right to migrate (Hemphill, 2009; Huemer, 2010; Meyers, 2003, p.29). An article asserted that that immigration control is a “prima facie rights violation” (Huemer, 2010, p.431). A prima facie rights violation is an action of that, as a rule, violates someone’s rights (Huemer, 2010, p.431). The state has a duty to its citizens indeed, but the state also has a moral obligation to helping the least advantaged (Huemer, 2010, p.444). Refugees, furthermore, have the right to seek asylum in other countries and states that are party to international refugee policies are expected to accept refugees and help provide basic needs, which may include future resettlement in countries of origin (Huemer, 2010, p.450). Border security measures should consider human rights implications and not neglect international human rights code. Global versus national resolutions. Sources argued that border issues are multilateral concerns and so unilateral and even bilateral efforts may not be enough (Lobreglio, 2994; Taylor, 2005, p.575).The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees stressed that global solutions can provide solutions to the difficulty of asymmetrical population movement so that countries can effectively assist “people in need of international protection find it, people who wish to migrate have appropriate opportunities to do so, and abusive manipulation of entry possibilities is curtailed” (cited in Taylor, 2005, p.575). Still, “there is no global institutional framework within which to address the full spectrum of international migration issues in a comprehensive and systematic manner” (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs cited in Taylor, 2005, p.575). The U.S. government should also consider working with countries where immigrants come from, so that global responses to immigration can be identified and implemented. Conclusion Border security cannot be enhanced by technological, physical, and unilateral responses only. Pumping additional people and funds into the Border Patrol may be immediate and evident measures for enhancing border security, but they are not long-term answers to the complex roots of immigration (Hemphill, 2009; Huemer, 2010; Meyers, 2003, p.29). Poverty, political instability, and other factors underscore the need for global measures, where the U.S. works with countries of origin of immigrants to help find lasting solutions. In addition, the government should also not set aside human rights and ethical implications of their border security tools and approaches, because majority of the immigrants are not criminals or terrorists, but people seeking for better economic, social, and political conditions. References Antal, J. (2010). Border battles: The future of border security technology along the US - Mexican Border. Military Technology, 34 (11), 53-62. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Advanced Placement Source. Arreola, D.D. (2010).The Mexico-US borderlands through two decades. Journal of Cultural Geography, 27 (3), 331-351. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Advanced Placement Source. Barlett, D.L., Steele, J.B., Karmatz, L., & Levinstein, J. (2004, September 20). Who left the door open? Time International, 164 (12), 49-63. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Advanced Placement Source. Garza, R. (2005, November 17). Bilateral law enforcement and the U.S.-Mexico Border. Department Of Homeland Security. FDCH Congressional Testimony. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Advanced Placement Source. Hemphill, C.K. (2009). Am I my brother's keeper?: Immigration law reform and the liberty that is America (a legal, theological and ethical observation on the debate of allowing immigrant amnesty). Texas Hispanic Journal of Law & Policy, 15 (1), 51-70. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Advanced Placement Source. Huemer, M. (2010). Is there a right to immigrate? Social Theory & Practice, 36 (3), 429-461. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Academic Source Premier. Lobreglio, K. (2004). The border security and immigration improvement act: A modern solution to a historic problem? St. John's Law Review, 78 (3), 933-96. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Academic Source Premier. Marek, A.C. (2007, June 25). Border battles. U.S. News & World Report, 142 (23), 46-49. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Advanced Placement Source. Meyers, D.W. (2003). Does “smarter” lead to safer? An assessment of the US Border Accords with Canada and Mexico. International Migration, 41 (4), 5-44. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Advanced Placement Source. Taylor, S. (2005). From border control to migration management: The case for a paradigm change in the western response to transborder population movement. Social Policy & Administration, 39 (6), 563-586. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Advanced Placement Source. Wein, L.M., Liu, Y., & Motskin, A. (2009). Analyzing the homeland security of the U.S.-Mexico Border. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 29 (5), 699-713. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from Advanced Placement Source. Read More