Skip to main content

By Walter Ewing

The U.S. Border Patrol’s newly released strategic plan is a decidedly mixed bag when it comes to border security—just like the Border Patrol’s last strategic plan, released in 2004. On the plus side, both documents advocate an intelligence-driven, risk-based approach to border security which focuses on the greatest security threats. Both plans also call for disruption of the smuggling networks which bring unauthorized immigrants, drugs, and other contraband into the United States. On the down side, each plan embraces the simplistic “prevention through deterrence” mentality in which it is believed—or hoped—that heightened border enforcement will scare off unauthorized immigrants and smugglers alike. More broadly, both documents are a reflection of the federal government’s continued misguided emphasis on securing the territory between ports of entry, even though most smuggling now occurs through ports of entry.

To its credit, the 2012 plan is more precise that its 2004 predecessor in defining the security threat posed by smuggling. Specifically, the 2012 plan identifies transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) as “a significant cross-border threat to homeland security. These organizations control most cross-border trafficking in guns and illegal drugs, as well as an increasing percentage of human smuggling.” The latest Border Patrol plan is also more explicit and detailed than its 2004 counterpart in describing the sort of cross-jurisdictional, multi-agency approach to law enforcement that will be needed to defeat TCOs.

Nevertheless, the latest Border Patrol plan over-states the extent to which it departs from the past. For instance, the “risk-based strategic plan” of 2012 is contrasted with the “resource-based strategy” of 2004. Yet a central tenet of the 2004 plan was the use of “intelligence-driven operations” that would “target areas of greatest risk.” Likewise, the 2012 plan proposes to deal with “illegal entrants” into the United States through “a new Consequence Delivery System (CDS) that guides management and agents through a process designed to uniquely evaluate each subject and identify the ideal consequence to break the smuggling cycle.” Yet this “new” system is simply the old “prevention through deterrence” approach dressed up in new clothes. And it was a fundamental component of the Border Patrol’s 2004 strategic plan as well.

Herein lies the greatest weakness of the Border Patrol’s new plan. As it acknowledges, the U.S. Border Patrol is tasked with “securing our Nation’s borders between Ports of Entry (POEs) against all threats.” During the May 8 Congressional hearing at which the plan was unveiled, Marc R. Rosenblum, a Specialist in Immigration Policy at the Congressional Research Service, pointed out that “many of the most serious transnational criminal and terrorist threats to the United States may be more likely to exploit points of vulnerability at ports of entry (POE) and at northern and coastal borders.” In other words, sinking more resources into Border Patrol enforcement between ports of entry is not necessarily the best way to bring down the transnational criminal organizations which the Border Patrol wants to defeat.

As many border experts have pointed out, “securing” the U.S.-Mexico border will require a comprehensive, integrated, bi-national assault on the TCOs that smuggle immigrants and drugs into the United States, and guns and money out of the United States. TCO leaders must be put behind bars, and their money laundering operations shut down. Moreover, POEs must be modernized and adequately staffed, since this is where most smuggling is taking place. Building fences and chasing unauthorized workers through the desert will not do the job.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site