Border Security Policy Analysis

The U.S.-Mexico border’s management and security have long been contentious topics in American politics. With a complex interplay of concerns ranging from national security to humanitarian issues, the debate often centers on the effectiveness of physical barriers like fences and walls. This essay explores the impact of border fencing, drawing on historical examples and expert testimony to argue that while border fences have proven effective in reducing illegal activities, the financial and social costs cannot be overlooked. The discussion also addresses the overarching theme of how these barriers fit into a broader strategy for national security.

The Role of Border Fences in Crime Reduction

Veterans of border enforcement have consistently highlighted the critical role that fencing has played in reducing violence, drug smuggling, and illegal entry along the U.S.-Mexico border. Ronald Colburn, a former Border Patrol deputy chief and head of the Yuma Border Patrol Sector, was instrumental in implementing a border fence between southwestern Arizona and southeastern California in 2006. This initiative was followed by another fence installation in 2015. Both structures were pivotal in reducing crime rates, as demonstrated by the significant drop in illegal crossings and violent activities perpetrated by bandits and traffickers.

Prior to the construction of these fences, the border was alarmingly porous. Approximately 2,706 drive-throughs occurred where illegal immigrants crossed with contraband, including drugs and human trafficking. Out of these, only thirteen individuals were apprehended, leaving a staggering number of illegal entrants unaccounted for. Colburn lamented that the rest "all got away, with no idea what, or who, they brought in." Yuma, at that point, had gained notoriety as one of the most perilous sections of the border, plagued by over 200 attacks from "border bandits" who preyed on their own. These criminals engaged in robbery, sexual assault, and even murder of Mexican migrants. The completion of the fence in 2006 led to a dramatic reduction in these violent incidents, effectively bringing violent bandit attacks down from 200 to zero. The drive-throughs decreased from 2,706 to merely six, illustrating the fence's efficacy in curbing crime.

By 2008, the Yuma Sector witnessed a remarkable decline in arrests of illicit border crossers and traffickers, dropping from over 138,000 to 8,363. The fence, therefore, serves as a tangible line in the sand, reinforcing the United States' commitment to reducing cross-border crime. In 2015, the Department of Homeland Security installed approximately 350 miles of primary pedestrian fencing and an additional 300 miles of vehicle fencing along the border. This development, according to David Aguilar, former acting official of Customs and Border Protection, "improved detection and surveillance capabilities," leading to a decrease in migrant apprehensions from 1.7 million in fiscal 2000 to 408,870 in fiscal 2016.

The Financial and Ethical Considerations

While the reduction in crime statistics supports the case for border fencing, it is crucial to acknowledge the financial implications and ethical considerations surrounding such measures. The wall promised by President Trump, for instance, was projected to cost nearly $70 billion—a financial burden that would ultimately fall on American taxpayers. This raises questions about whether the funds could be better utilized in alternative methods for border security or other pressing societal needs.

Moreover, the ethics of erecting physical barriers must be considered. Critics argue that walls and fences can perpetuate division and xenophobia, potentially straining diplomatic relations with neighboring countries. There are also humanitarian concerns about the treatment of migrants who are often fleeing dire situations in their home countries. The challenge lies in balancing the need for national security with empathy and respect for human rights.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while border fences have indisputably played a significant role in reducing crime and illegal border crossings, they are not a panacea. The financial cost and ethical implications of constructing such barriers necessitate a comprehensive approach to border security—one that includes advanced technology, international cooperation, and policies that address the root causes of migration. A well-rounded strategy should aim to ensure national safety without compromising humanitarian values. The debate over border fences should not only focus on their effectiveness but also consider how they fit into the broader landscape of immigration policy and national security.

Did you like this example?

317

13