Border strategy just plain wrong.
By Rafael Briones
Al-Jazeerah, May 20, 2005
Since my arrival in the United States of America, I discovered that in our country there exists a big time “taboo” concerning Mexican immigration. In recent years, in particular since Sept. 11, the pressure to militarize the border has been growing. President Bush has been feeling the heat from the American public when it comes to this topic. The militarization of the Mexican border by the U.S. will have catastrophic consequences.
The most important question that comes to my mind is that of the economic aspect. Who will be responsible for the budget of that new operation? Taxpayers? Or the will the money come from revenue saved by cutting socials programs such as education and welfare?
The implementation of that program will affect our economic life and our culture as a whole.
By implementing military operations on the border, such as military bases, check points, introducing unmanned airplanes to patrol the border, the lifestyle change for the people of the southern states will be drastic and annoying. Also, having to deal with the noise of helicopters and vehicles will be like living in a war zone.
Personally, I think sending the army to the border with Mexico is one of the most crazy and outdated ideas in the existence of humankind.
It will divide the two countries more that what they are today; remember already Mexico stands against the U.S. military action against Afghanistan and Iraq.
Before we even talk about the issue, we have to ask ourselves: Who are we as a nation?
Since the creation and evolution of politics as a system by earth’s civilizations, never has a specific group of people or government gained so much democracy in their political system as the U.S.A. We are the land of the free, so why does our nation want to put itself in a cage?
From my perspective, those days were gone a long time ago. The China wall style of protection is outdated for our time. Today it is a necessity for countries to be connected to the rest of the world, and such interconnections can be economical, political, and educational. The Internet is a good example of the connection between every country, and it shows how the interaction is closer that what the borders dictates.
Who will be doing the low paying jobs in our country, if we set as a goal stopping illegal immigration? Undocumented immigration is an indispensable necessity for the United States.
It’s clear the militarization of the border will target specifically that particular group of immigrants.
Are those in the welfare programs ready to take over the hard-working job opening that will be available? Are college students ready to spend 12 hours a day working in the fields of the southern states for summer jobs?
Why the militarization of the Mexican border? Is there a terrorist group in Mexico? Is the American public aware of the quality of Mexican immigration services? Is there a record for funding to terrorism from the Mexican government? Many are the questions, but by far they are outweighed by the ignorance of the American public.
The year 2001 brought a new mind-set to the masses of the U.S.A.
Finally, they woke up to reality, and learned something about the rest of the world. For many years they ignored the revolution carried by globalization. After Sept. 11, the American public had no choice but to search recent history to find the facts and learn from them, and therefore to make a conclusion about the attacks.
It seems like the American public wants to take the easy way out of the problem, by isolating our country even more to the rest of the world.
The auto-segregation of the American public toward the rest of the globe is alarming. It can be compared to the economic auto-segregation experienced by former communist nations before the fall of the Berlin wall and the consequent collapse of the Soviet Union. The only exception is that our auto-segregation takes place in the cultural aspect and not economic.
Before the Sept. 11 attacks, the country was in a first-come first-serve basis. Our borders were open to almost anybody coming into the country, to try to search for the infamous American Dream.
Cubans are the first in the list of privileges; as soon as they put a foot in our land they are protected. Also Canadians enjoy an easy way to arrive in the country, by just walking. In contrast with Canadians, Mexicans, usually come in to our country by walking two or three weeks in the desert, in order to reach their goal.
According to a research document I did a year ago, before Sept. 11 around 75 percent of the working force for the Immigration and Naturalization Service was located in the border between the U.S. and Mexico. What a surprise! Is there a reason why?
Is this because the Mexican citizen looks different from his counterpart from Canada? Is that why the INS paid more attention to the Mexican border?
The religious fanatics of Sept. 11 entered our country by plane and some of them by Canada if I recall. The question that the American public needs to work on it is: What happened on Sept. 11?
Are we trying to blame the wrong people by militarizing the border and perform the second part of Operation Wetback? Because it is in our culture to discriminate if we see the right opportunity to do so?
The Mexican government was clear when they opposed the militarization of the border. Undocumented aliens send money by wire that surpasses oil revenues in Mexico. As of today the number-one source of income for the government is the dollars sent by Mexican nationals to their families. The militarization of the border will have catastrophic consequences in the Mexican economic system.
Personally I do not think this is the right move. Militarization of the border will include a totally new development of immigration policies in our country. From my perspective it will be impossible. The Mexican border is big, and even bigger is the hunger from Mexican citizens toward a better level of life.
The same American public looking for the military in the border will be the same who pays the consequences of their actions.
In order to make a valid argument, facts and data need to be brought to the table. Although the vast majority agrees with the military taking over the southern border, many also disagree, and I’m one of those. It is fair to say those who oppose illegal immigration are the less-educated individuals in the country.
In order to make a valid argument about militarization in the border, we need to have data to back it up. And, if you are not willing to recognize the data, then you’re lost. We have to remember that truth always prevails, and to accept truth is a painful experience.
A resident of Portland, Rafael Briones is a graduate student at Ball State University.
Al-Jazeerah, May 20, 2005
Since my arrival in the United States of America, I discovered that in our country there exists a big time “taboo” concerning Mexican immigration. In recent years, in particular since Sept. 11, the pressure to militarize the border has been growing. President Bush has been feeling the heat from the American public when it comes to this topic. The militarization of the Mexican border by the U.S. will have catastrophic consequences.
The most important question that comes to my mind is that of the economic aspect. Who will be responsible for the budget of that new operation? Taxpayers? Or the will the money come from revenue saved by cutting socials programs such as education and welfare?
The implementation of that program will affect our economic life and our culture as a whole.
By implementing military operations on the border, such as military bases, check points, introducing unmanned airplanes to patrol the border, the lifestyle change for the people of the southern states will be drastic and annoying. Also, having to deal with the noise of helicopters and vehicles will be like living in a war zone.
Personally, I think sending the army to the border with Mexico is one of the most crazy and outdated ideas in the existence of humankind.
It will divide the two countries more that what they are today; remember already Mexico stands against the U.S. military action against Afghanistan and Iraq.
Before we even talk about the issue, we have to ask ourselves: Who are we as a nation?
Since the creation and evolution of politics as a system by earth’s civilizations, never has a specific group of people or government gained so much democracy in their political system as the U.S.A. We are the land of the free, so why does our nation want to put itself in a cage?
From my perspective, those days were gone a long time ago. The China wall style of protection is outdated for our time. Today it is a necessity for countries to be connected to the rest of the world, and such interconnections can be economical, political, and educational. The Internet is a good example of the connection between every country, and it shows how the interaction is closer that what the borders dictates.
Who will be doing the low paying jobs in our country, if we set as a goal stopping illegal immigration? Undocumented immigration is an indispensable necessity for the United States.
It’s clear the militarization of the border will target specifically that particular group of immigrants.
Are those in the welfare programs ready to take over the hard-working job opening that will be available? Are college students ready to spend 12 hours a day working in the fields of the southern states for summer jobs?
Why the militarization of the Mexican border? Is there a terrorist group in Mexico? Is the American public aware of the quality of Mexican immigration services? Is there a record for funding to terrorism from the Mexican government? Many are the questions, but by far they are outweighed by the ignorance of the American public.
The year 2001 brought a new mind-set to the masses of the U.S.A.
Finally, they woke up to reality, and learned something about the rest of the world. For many years they ignored the revolution carried by globalization. After Sept. 11, the American public had no choice but to search recent history to find the facts and learn from them, and therefore to make a conclusion about the attacks.
It seems like the American public wants to take the easy way out of the problem, by isolating our country even more to the rest of the world.
The auto-segregation of the American public toward the rest of the globe is alarming. It can be compared to the economic auto-segregation experienced by former communist nations before the fall of the Berlin wall and the consequent collapse of the Soviet Union. The only exception is that our auto-segregation takes place in the cultural aspect and not economic.
Before the Sept. 11 attacks, the country was in a first-come first-serve basis. Our borders were open to almost anybody coming into the country, to try to search for the infamous American Dream.
Cubans are the first in the list of privileges; as soon as they put a foot in our land they are protected. Also Canadians enjoy an easy way to arrive in the country, by just walking. In contrast with Canadians, Mexicans, usually come in to our country by walking two or three weeks in the desert, in order to reach their goal.
According to a research document I did a year ago, before Sept. 11 around 75 percent of the working force for the Immigration and Naturalization Service was located in the border between the U.S. and Mexico. What a surprise! Is there a reason why?
Is this because the Mexican citizen looks different from his counterpart from Canada? Is that why the INS paid more attention to the Mexican border?
The religious fanatics of Sept. 11 entered our country by plane and some of them by Canada if I recall. The question that the American public needs to work on it is: What happened on Sept. 11?
Are we trying to blame the wrong people by militarizing the border and perform the second part of Operation Wetback? Because it is in our culture to discriminate if we see the right opportunity to do so?
The Mexican government was clear when they opposed the militarization of the border. Undocumented aliens send money by wire that surpasses oil revenues in Mexico. As of today the number-one source of income for the government is the dollars sent by Mexican nationals to their families. The militarization of the border will have catastrophic consequences in the Mexican economic system.
Personally I do not think this is the right move. Militarization of the border will include a totally new development of immigration policies in our country. From my perspective it will be impossible. The Mexican border is big, and even bigger is the hunger from Mexican citizens toward a better level of life.
The same American public looking for the military in the border will be the same who pays the consequences of their actions.
In order to make a valid argument, facts and data need to be brought to the table. Although the vast majority agrees with the military taking over the southern border, many also disagree, and I’m one of those. It is fair to say those who oppose illegal immigration are the less-educated individuals in the country.
In order to make a valid argument about militarization in the border, we need to have data to back it up. And, if you are not willing to recognize the data, then you’re lost. We have to remember that truth always prevails, and to accept truth is a painful experience.
A resident of Portland, Rafael Briones is a graduate student at Ball State University.
posted by Rafael Briones at
4:33 PM
0 Comments
