Shots across the US/MEX border

The Economist ^ | Jan 12th 2006 | The Economist

[VU4G10]

Plans for a border fence spark anger among Mexicans

COUNTRIES that claim to be the best of friends do not normally shoot across their mutual frontier. But on December 30th, an agent of the United States Border Patrol shot dead an 18-year-old Mexican as he tried to cross the border near San Diego. The patrol says the shooting was in self-defence, and that the dead man was a coyote, or people-smuggler. Vicente Fox, Mexico's president, made a diplomatic protest, and called for an investigation into the shooting. At the other end of the border, in Texas, Border Patrol agents were reportedly shot at from inside Mexico.

These incidents could hardly have come at a worse time. On December 16th, the United States House of Representatives passed by 239 to 182 votes a bill sponsored by James Sensenbrenner, a Republican from Wisconsin. This would make illegal immigration a felony, create a crime of employing or aiding undocumented migrants, and order “physical infrastructure enhancements” (ie, a fence) along more than a third of the 3,100 kilometre (2,000 mile) border.

The Sensenbrenner bill stands little chance of passing in the Senate. It is not backed by the Bush administration, which has campaigned for tougher enforcement to be combined with a guest-worker programme. This would help give legal status to some of the 10m or so migrants who are in the United States illegally (perhaps 60% of whom are Mexicans).

Nevertheless, the Sensenbrenner bill has caused outrage south of the border. Mr Fox called it shameful. He said migrants were “heroes”, who will in any event find ways to cross the border. Luis Derbez, his foreign minister, called the bill “stupid” and “underhand”.

On January 9th, seven Central American countries, together with Colombia and the Dominican Republic, agreed to work with Mexico to defend their emigrants to the United States. Most of these countries have free-trade agreements with America. They are its closest allies in Latin America, where many governments are less friendly than they were a decade ago.

All this is a far cry from the warmth between Mr Fox and George Bush when both took office. Mexico had high hopes of negotiating agreements on migration. Then came September 11th 2001, and Mexico's opposition at the UN Security Council to the war in Iraq. Some Mexicans say the hopes were always unrealistic. Others say that Mexico—and Mr Derbez in particular—must shoulder much of the blame for them being dashed. Mr Derbez threw out a plan for immigration reform drawn up by his predecessor, Jorge Castañeda, largely out of personal animosity. He is widely seen as an unimpressive minister.

Perhaps Mr Fox's biggest mistake has been his failure to lobby effectively over migration on Capitol Hill. Andrés Rozental, who heads the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations (and is Mr Castañeda's half-brother), notes that this contrasts with the effort made to secure passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993, when Mexico used its network of over 40 consulates to lobby Congress. Another unused channel of influence is the one-in-12 people born in Mexico who now live in the United States (see chart). Most are there legally and many are eligible to vote.

Despite the public acrimony, Mr Rozental says that day-to-day co-operation between Mexico and the United States on matters such as public health, trade and law enforcement has never been greater. But he believes there is a minimal chance of significant progress on immigration reform under Mr Bush.

There is a broad political consensus that Mexico should push for a guest-worker programme and the regularisation of undocumented migrants in return for beefing up security on its side of the border. None of the candidates in a presidential election due in July is likely to use the issue as justification for anti-American rhetoric of the kind that has become common farther south. Mexico's ties to the United States are too important for that.

But migration will remain a running sore in relations between the two countries. Fences on urban stretches of the border in California and Texas have pushed migrants to the Arizona desert—but have not stopped them. Last year, some 400,000 crossed illegally, of whom over 90% had jobs in Mexico, according to estimates by the Pew Hispanic Centre, a think-tank in Washington, DC. But even unskilled jobs across the border pay much better. NAFTA was supposed to close that gap, but it has not done so yet.

More than 400 Mexicans died in 2005 trying to enter the United States (though in only two cases was the Border Patrol involved). That looms large in Mexican consciousness. Every Mexican knows someone who has crossed the border, if they haven't done so themselves. The harder and more dangerous it gets, the more Mexican public opinion may turn against the United States. The free movement of goods, but not of labour, across the border was always likely to cause problems.

[headstamp]

Exactly! How about the US shining a magnifying class right back on Mexico and their corrupt government. How about demanding that Fox get HIS OWN house in order.

When 10% of your population is leaving or left and risks their lives in the process. That is a national disgrace.

Let's put the heat where it belongs, right back on Mexico and the corrupt fat cats living high on the hog in Mexico City. Instead, it's treated like it's all our fault and we should give up our sovereignty for this crap hole south of the border.

[bordergal]

India is building a 2500 mile long fence along their mutual border with Pakistan to reduce the threat of terrorist attacks.

The fence in SoCal has worked.
The fence in Israel has worked.

Build it now. Add a minefield or two or three.

[SwinneySwitch]

"But on December 30th, an agent of the United States Border Patrol shot dead an 18-year-old Mexican as he tried to cross the border near San Diego."

He was on the US side when he was shot at by the agent. He then crossed back into Mexico, where he died in a Mexican hospital!

[Marine Inspector]

But on December 30th, an agent of the United States Border Patrol shot dead an 18-year-old Mexican as he tried to cross the border near San Diego.

BS.

The Mexican had already crossed the border. The Mexican assaulted the Agent with deadly force and was shoot.

After being shoot, the Mexican escaped back into Mexico where he died.

Stupid is as stupid does.

[dennisw]

"But on December 30th, an agent of the United States Border Patrol shot dead an 18-year-old Mexican as he tried to cross the border near San Diego."

That boy was a coyote, A guide for illegal aliens. He's a known pest who has been deported 10 times and was shot when he threw rocks at our Border Agents. Good riddance!

[dennisw]

Please see my post #45. That kid was deported 10 times. Was a multiple offender who threw rocks at our Border Patrol agents. He was shot and killed.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

The naysayers who tell us fences won't work obviously haven't seen them in action, or maybe they have and know they will work. They can whine all they want, the Senate, despite their huffing and puffing isn't going to stop it and neither will Bush, Fox or the open borders media simply because the American people overwhelmingly are in favor of it.

[pcottraux]

"Cost prohibitive" craziness? All I'm saying is to be practical about things, and not to do something that would be expensive AND ineffective. That doesn't mean I think National Security isn't "worth it."

[bk1000]

"I believe personally that the military would solve the problem. A fence or wall would be too costly and hard to build..."

I agree. Plus, the fence would be a worldwide embarassment. Imagine V. Fox saying: "Mr. Bush, tear down this wall."

[Tarantulas]

The governor of Arizona is pushing the Pentagon for National Guard troops along the south.

The Governor of Arizona is a Democrat and this is an election year for her. She has vetoed about 5 or 6 bills dealing with immigration and thoroughly angered everyone who pays any attention to the subject. So here's what she said in her State of the State speech:

The federal government has promised more border patrol agents for Arizona.

But, until they are here, I have asked Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld to invoke article 32 of the federal code, which allows the federal government to pay for us to station the National Guard at our border. That financial support would allow the Guard to expand its presence and become even more involved in enforcing the rule of law at the border.

At first glance it sounds she wants to have the Guard at the border. But if you read it carefully you can see that if she gets no Federal money she won't be doing a thing with the Guard. Then she said this:

I also propose that we give the Department of Public Safety the manpower it needs to keep up with the overwhelming enforcement challenge.

And I want to make sure that law enforcement in the cities and towns that have been hit hardest by illegal immigration have the tools, training and personnel they need.

DPS doesn't do any border enforcement now, so it's a mystery what the new manpower will be doing. And the second sentence doesn't have anything to do with border enforcement or even arresting illegals. She vetoed the bill last year that would have given police the ability to arrest illegals.

She's a big-time leftie trying to make up for past mistakes by blowing smoke. Don't trust her - most people don't.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Putting up a fence is a good idea, but it won't stop everyone. Does that mean we don't put up a fence? No, it means we couple the fence with increased manpower and effective electronic surveillance.

Couldn't agree more, putting up a fence is only part of the solution. More border patrols, interior enforcement including employer sanctions as well as cutting off all incentives to illegals in combination will be needed to put a stop to the flood.

[usurper]

We now have army technologies called Unattended Ground Sensors and Ground Surveillance Radar (17Kilo is the job) that would be force multipliers.

The Border Patrol has been using ground sensors since the 1950s and I believe they are testing the ground radars as we speak. The problem is they don’t have enough of the stuff leaving large areas with little or no coverage. Ask an agent what kind of technology they need and they will tell you more sensors and better IR cameras. So what does DHS buy, a 14 million dollar Predator UAV designed for a completely different mission.

I think that the Border Patrol may need to become more like the Coast Guard.

Please no. The Border Patrol already has more authority to enforce federal law than USCC including Title 8 & 18 (immigration) Title 19 (customs) and Title 21 (delegated from DEA). Placing them under the UCMJ would not do them any favors either.

The USBP makes more arrests per agent (also with the fewest civil rights allegations) than any other law enforcement agency in the world. There are just not enough of them.

You are absolutely right however, there is no silver bullet to solving this more agents or even the National Guard alone will not be enough. We need the proper mix of agents, technology and tactual infrastructure (fences etc.) to effect real and sustained border security. Additionally interior enforcement closing the jobs magnet that drives this activity will be a critical element.

[pcottraux]

I stand corrected.

[Don Corleone]

"Good fences make good neighbors"...anon

[El Gato]

Did anyone see any WMD's down there???

I see you haven't imbibed any of the water down there, have you? Cleans like a brown tornado ... and in many places you can't flush the TP.

[El Gato]

Well of course he says that. Mexican immigrants sending money back to relatives is the only economy Mexico has. There's no money or industry at all otherwise

Hardly, ever heard the term Maquilladora?

My wife's last two cars were assembled in Mexico. (one Ford, one Mazda, and the quality is better than my Michigan assembled Mazda). Toyota also has plants there. At one time the last plant making real VW Beetles was in Mexico. Texas Instruments has long had a plant in Aguascalientes (Hot Waters. :) ) near Mexico City.

I'd much rather buy stuff made in Mexico, where the jobs might keep more Mexicans in Mexico, than stuff made in Red China.

[hershey]

Mexico has no incentive to build its own economy and reform corruption as long as it feeds off the US to the tune of billions each year...and as long as those who might be part of a revolution, give up and head north.

[El Gato]

The guy who was shot was reported to be on the U.S. side at the time, but don't let mere facts spoil your premise ...

I wondered about that. I can't see a US Border Patrol guy shooting someone, who isn't shooting at him/her, dropping someone on the Mexican side. They have plenty that are on the US side to worry about.

[El Gato]

Exactly. There are not enough. You would have to place them at least within sight of each other to be somewhat effective and then they would have to work shifts

No you wouldn't. They'd use UAV's for surveillance and on call quick reaction teams for interdiction. Or they could just use Apaches and F-16s, but I don't think we're ready to go that far yet.

[yarddog]

I recently saw an old interview of an American sailor right after Pearl Harbor. I think it was on the "History Channel".

He made some comment about they weren't worried about being invaded because Canada was our friend and Mexico was impotent. It struck me that we did not consider Mexico a friend even back then, and now Canada fits that description, not our friend but impotent.