|
[ printer-friendly PDF version ] c o m m e n t a r y A New, Improved U.S.-Mexican Border?
U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox recently announced an agreement to create a new, technologically advanced border to assure tighter security while helping speed transit for people and goods. Following their talks March 22 in Monterrey, Mexico, they unveiled what they are calling the "Smart Border" plan. Similar to one signed by the United States and Canada in December, the plan provides for laser-scan identification cards for frequent border crossers, X-ray facilities, shared computer databases, and special express lanes for pre-inspected shipments. As Bush put it, the new agreement is designed to "weed out" terrorists while facilitating legal commerce. "We will build a border that protects our societies against those who would do us harm, [one] that truly serves the human and economic needs of our dynamic relationship," Bush and Fox proclaimed in a joint statement. "We share a vision of a modern border that speeds the legitimate flow of people and commerce, and filters out all that threatens our safety and prosperity." Fostering Trade While Battening Down the HatchesMuch of the plan is an attempt to reduce delays and eliminate bottlenecks along the border, which have increased since post-Sept. 11 security measures dramatically slowed commerce between the United States and Mexico. "Smart Border" takes into account the fact that Mexico is the United States' second-largest trading partner after Canada, while the United States is Mexico's largest. It aims to protect the growth trend in trade between the two countries, which has tripled to $650 million per day since the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993. Some of the plan's specific improvements to the U.S.-Mexico border-crossing infrastructure and management system include:
Bush said $5 billion of the $27 billion emergency funding request he sent Congress this month was to use for security improvements along borders and at airports. More than half of the remaining $22 billion would go to war efforts in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and $5.5 billion would go to projects for New York's recovery from the Sept. 11 attacks. The remaining money requested is slated for aiding other countries in their fight against terrorism and to provide relief for workers displaced by the economic downturn. U.S. Homeland Security Chief Takes Charge of the BorderThe principal architect of the new border security agreement between the United States and Mexico is U.S. Homeland Security Director Thomas J. Ridge. Bush appointed Ridge to direct the new department he created after the Sept. 11 terror attacks. Ridge has since become a key player in recent negotiations on new border policies, holding high-level meetings with Canada and Mexico to reconcile the disparate goals of augmenting border security and increasing efficiency at border crossings. In early March, Ridge traveled to Mexico, accompanied by a high-level delegation that included Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS) Commissioner James Ziglar and U.S. Customs Commissioner Robert Bonner, to hammer out details for an overhaul of border policies in anticipation of the Bush-Fox summit in Monterrey. Meeting with Fox, Mexican Interior Minister Santiago Creel, and Mexican Foreign Minister Jorge Castañeda, the Ridge delegation worked on details for the "Smart Border" accord. One of the most critical issues Ridge raised in those meetings was the need to improve border inspection capacity and facilitate quicker crossings. The delegations were mindful that bottlenecks at border crossings since Sept. 11 have had devastating effects on border economies. Bush has been under pressure from U.S. business interests who've been hurt by lengthy delays and inspections at border checkpoints. Meanwhile, in Mexico, which sends 85% percent of its exports to the United States, the clogged border crossings have seriously hampered trade. But the question of border militarization has been no less sensitive for pressure groups and negotiators. U.S. Defense Buildup on the Border Irks MexicansIn February, even before making his emergency funding request, Bush had proposed a $2.1 billion increase in spending for border security, for a total of $10.9 billion in fiscal year 2003. That proposal, expected to be well-received in Congress, includes funding for additional Border Patrol and Customs agents to speed up inspections and the creation of a new entry-exit system to track U.S.-Mexican border crossers. After the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress approved the hiring of additional personnel to beef up border security. This month roughly 1,600 National Guard troops were deployed to increase security until those new agents and inspectors are hired. About 950 of them were assigned to the Mexico border. Mexicans are wary of the growing militarization of the border. An editorial in the national daily La Jornada newspaper said that the United States might find benefits in a "regional triangle of security" with its neighbors, but that could be "clearly injurious to our country's interests." The editorial points out that the United States has a long list of enemies, while Mexico has few, and that the "very act of making common cause with its neighbor on security matters could unnecessarily put our country in the crosshairs of those who, with or without just cause, and with legitimate or condemnable means like terrorism, struggle to affect Washington's interests outside and inside U.S. territory." [1] For his part, Ridge recently stressed that the use of the troops along the borders is temporary. "Among allies and friends, you don't have militarized borders," he said. [2] Ridge Makes Waves in WashingtonWhile Ridge has met with success in Canada and Mexico, he has encountered some opposition at home, particularly to his proposal for incorporating the various U.S. agencies that deal with border issues into a single body. That idea has touched a raw nerve among the departments that would be affected by such a change, including Treasury, Justice, and Transportation, which aren't anxious to cede their powers. Some agency officials have criticized Ridge for trying to push through his proposal without presidential approval. Ridge has responded by alleging there is no "direct line of accountability" for agencies charged with protecting U.S. borders. He's suggested that turf wars may be preventing the implementation of much-needed reforms to improve the nation's security coordination. [3] Ridge says he wants to bring continuity, consistency, and a coherent agenda to U.S. border policy by integrating the agencies' work. "When you come into the United States," he said, "multiple faces of the federal government meet you. And I think we ought to have one face at the border. Somebody ought to be accountable for what we do or don't do at the border. Right now it's diffused." He added, "I might have to break some china" to get Customs, the INS, the Border Patrol, and the State Department to work together. [4] Ridge soon will be making recommendations to Bush on the issue of consolidation of agencies. Observers say the question now is whether Ridge will recommend full consolidation in spite of strong opposition, or suggest a compromise that can be embraced by agency heads and others on Capitol Hill. He appears to be weighing the decision. "I'm still of the mind that if we were designing a new approach to America's borders, we wouldn't have over a dozen Cabinet departments involved and 30 or 40 agencies involved," Ridge said in a recent interview. "But that's just not the world. We've got people and organizations that have histories and cultural and technological connections" to border issues, he conceded. [5] Migration Policy Reform Takes a Back Seat ...Some Mexican officials who met with Ridge recently, including Creel, reported progress on border issues and were positive about the new developments. But while concurring that security issues are important components of revamped border policy, Mexico's Castañeda implied that the safety of the United States is not the only issue to be addressed. "We have to find a way to co-manage our border. This includes security but is not limited to security," Castañeda said. [6] Presumably Castañeda was referring to the need for immigration reform, a topic that was conspicuously absent from the border accord announced by Bush and Fox. Some immigration experts thought Bush and Fox would announce at least some changes in U.S. immigration policy toward Mexico, such as an expanded guest-worker program allowing more Mexicans to legally cross the border to work in the United States. Although proposals for liberalizing U.S. immigration policy toward Mexico were shelved due to security concerns after Sept. 11, in recent months the topic has re-emerged. In January, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell reaffirmed the Bush administration's determination to "get back to this very important issue of regularizing the movement of Mexicans back and forth ... . We haven't given up," Powell said, and called the terror attacks "a detour, a diversion." [7] Also in January, Ziglar, who later accompanied Ridge on the March trip to Mexico, said that the problem of millions of illegal immigrants can only be resolved through a deal with Mexico. Ridge, along with other administration officials, has acknowledged the importance of addressing the issue of Mexican migration to the United States. His high-level delegation to Mexico was "keen on trying to give both presidents at least a partial answer to the larger problem" in time for consideration during the most recent Bush-Fox meetings. [8] Obviously that didn't happen. What's more, on March 22, while Bush and Fox were meeting in Monterrey, the U.S. Congress postponed a decision on competing border-security bills, one of which calls for allowing immigrants with outdated visas to stay in the United States while their applications for residency are being processed. Sen. Majority Leader Tom Daschle, a proponent of more liberal immigration policies with Mexico, said on March 26 that he will not raise the issue again until after April 8, when Congress' spring recess ends. Before the terror attacks, Mexico had been hoping for an amnesty that would legalize the status of millions of Mexicans living and working in the United States without papers. The Bush administration appeared to be giving serious consideration to that possibility, but the political and economic climate changed dramatically after Sept. 11. The recession, security concerns, and a shift in foreign policy agendas make it unlikely that the U.S. public opinion would support an amnesty program, experts suggest. Indeed, polls indicate that most U.S. respondents favor stricter immigration controls, not more liberal ones--in spite of the fact that none of the alleged perpetrators of the attacks has been accused of entering the United States through either Mexico or Canada. As a result, Mexico has softened its rhetoric on the need for immediate, sweeping immigration reform. Castañeda, who once insisted on "the whole enchilada" in terms of changes in U.S. migration policy--calling for amnesty for more than 3 million Mexicans illegally residing in the United States and an expanded guest worker program based on temporary visas--has signaled a willingness to settle for less, given the circumstances. ... But Bound for an OverhaulAlthough Bush and Fox didn't announce any changes in migration policy during their recent summit, inescapable political, demographic, and economic realities favor a major overhaul of U.S. immigration policy in the long run. Some analysts say that both major U.S. political parties are lobbying for a migration agreement because it could add up to crucial votes in this year's midterm election. "The United States' economy is still tied to Mexican immigration and the work of 3.5 million to 4 million Mexicans of questionable status," said Rafael Fernández de Castro, migration expert at the Autonomous Technical Institute in Mexico City. "Mexico has very wisely taken the initiative to awaken Mexican groups in the United States and Latinos in general. The Democrats see this coming and are pushing hard for an accord, so this in turn should push Bush to renew his efforts." [9] Ziglar has expressed an equally pragmatic view. "If we could find a way to move a substantial portion of the current illegal flow from Mexico into legal channels via some kind of temporary-worker program and combine that with new cooperative law-enforcement arrangements with Mexico, we could benefit the U.S. economy, [and] we could substantially reduce illegal immigration," he said. [10] The economic component is critical. Half of the 500,000 Mexican workers in mostly U.S.-owned manufacturing plants have been fired as a result of the economic downturn, and they are looking for work. The administration believes, as do many immigration advocates, that foreign labor is crucial to the U.S. economy. A Bureau of Labor Statistics projection says the United States is facing a shortage of 6 million workers by 2008, most of them in retail businesses, restaurants, hotels, construction, and manufacturing. Ziglar notes that if illegal workers in the United States suddenly vanish, "we're going to have a bunch of economies that are going to die on us, because [these employees] provide essential labor to our economy. This is an issue we've got to deal with, primarily with our friends in Mexico," he said. [11] The important issue of border security and the related issue of international commerce have eclipsed Mexico's desire for changes in U.S. immigration policy. However, the issue is unlikely to stay in the shadows for long. The new "Smart Border" plan underscores a paradox of NAFTA that eventually must be addressed. It encourages a border wide open to goods and commerce yet fortified against people, not just potential terrorists, but ordinary people who seek jobs, as well. Jonathan Treat, a journalist and independent documentary filmmaker with extensive experience in Mexico and Central America, writes regularly for the IRC's America's Program. Based in Oaxaca, Mexico, Treat also coordinates educational study tours and volunteer opportunities in the region for U.S. students. Notes[1] Tessie Borden, Arizona Republic Mexico City Bureau, March
5, 2002.
Links:"Más
de los mismo?" | Americas Program, March 21, 2002 "Political
Support for Immigration Pact May Have Evaporated, but in Mexico, Migration
Pressures are on the Rise" | Americas Program, February 1, 2001 |
|
Published by the Americas Program at the Interhemispheric Resource Center (IRC). ©2002. All rights reserved. Recommended citation: Web location: |