Back in June 2015, when Trump first rode a Trump Tower escalator into the presidential campaign, among his initial promises was the building
of a “great” and “beautiful” wall on the border. (“And no one builds
walls better than me, believe me. I will do it very inexpensively. I
will have Mexico pay for that wall.”) As he pulled that promise out of a
hat with a magician’s flair, the actual history of the border
disappeared. From then on in Election 2016, there was just empty desert
and Donald Trump.
Suddenly, there hadn’t been a bipartisan government effort over the
last quarter-century to put in place an unprecedented array of walls,
detection systems, and guards for that southern border. In those years,
the number of Border Patrol agents had, in fact, quintupled
from 4,000 to more than 21,000, while Customs and Border Protection
became the largest federal law enforcement agency in the country with
more than 60,000 agents. The annual budget for border and immigration
enforcement ballooned from $1.5 billion to $19.5 billion,
a more than twelvefold increase. By 2016, federal funding of border and
immigration enforcement added up to $5 billion more than funding for
all other federal law enforcement agencies combined.
Operation Streamline, a cornerstone program in the so-called Consequence Delivery System,
part of a broader Border Patrol deterrence strategy for stopping
undocumented immigration, is just one part of a vast
enforcement-incarceration-deportation machine. The program is as
no-nonsense as its name suggests. It’s not The Wall, but it embodies the
logic of the wall: Either you crossed “illegally” or you didn’t. It
doesn’t matter why, or whether you lost your job, or if you’ve had to
skip meals to feed your kids. It doesn’t matter if your house was
flooded or the drought dried up your fields. It doesn’t matter if you’re
running for your life from drug cartel gunmen or the very army and
police forces that are supposed to protect you.
This system was what Ignacio Sarabia faced a few months ago in a Tucson courtroom a mere seven blocks from where I live.
Before I tell you how the judge responded to his plea, it’s important
to understand Sarabia’s journey, and that of so many thousands like him
who end up in this federal courthouse day after day. As he pleads to be
with his newborn son, his voice cracking with emotion, his story
catches the already Trumpian style of border enforcement—both the pain
and suffering it has caused, and the strategy and massive buildup behind
it—in ways that the campaign rhetoric of both parties and the reporting
on it doesn’t. As reporters chase their tails attempting to explain
Trump’s wild and often unfounded claims and declarations, the
on-the-ground border reality goes unreported. Indeed, one of the
greatest “secrets” of the 2016 campaign (though it should be common
knowledge) is that the border wall already exists. It has existed for
years, and the fingerprints all over it aren’t Donald Trump’s but those
of Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Twenty-one years before Trump’s
wall-building promise (and seven years before the 9/11 attacks), the US
Army Corps of Engineers began to replace the chain link fence that
separated Nogales, Sonora (in Mexico) from Nogales, Arizona, with a wall
built of rusty landing mats from the Vietnam and Persian Gulf wars.
Although there had been various half-hearted attempts at building border
walls throughout the 20th century, this was the first true effort to
build a barrier of what might now be called Trumpian magnitude.
That rusty, towering wall snaked through the hills and canyons of
northern Sonora and southern Arizona, forever deranging a world that,
given cross-border familial and community ties, then considered itself
one. At the time, who could have known that the strategy the first wall
embodied would remain the model for today’s massive system of exclusion.
In 1994, the perceived threat wasn’t terrorism. In part, the call for
more hardened, militarized borders came in response, among other
things, to a never-ending drug war. It also came from US officials who anticipated
the displacement of millions of Mexicans after the implementation of
the new North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which, ironically,
was aimed at eliminating barriers to trade and investment across North
America.
The expectations of those officials proved well justified. The ensuing upheavals
in Mexico, as analyst Marco Antonio Velázquez Navarrete explained to
me, were like the aftermath of a war or natural disaster. Small farmers
couldn’t compete against highly subsidized US agribusiness giants like
Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland. Mexican small-business owners were
bankrupted by the likes of Walmart, Sam’s Club, and other corporate
powers. Mining by foreign companies extended across vast swaths of
Mexico, causing territorial conflicts and poisoning the land. The
unprecedented and desperate migration
that followed came up against what might be considered the other side
of the Clinton doctrine of open trade: walls, increased border agents,
increased patrolling, and new surveillance technologies meant to cut off
traditional crossing spots in urban areas like El Paso, San Diego,
Brownsville, and Nogales.
“This administration has taken a strong stand to stiffen the protection of our borders,” President Bill Clinton said in 1996. “We are increasing border controls by 50 percent.”
Over the next 20 years, that border apparatus would expand immensely
in terms of personnel, resources, and geographic reach, but the central
strategy of the 1990s (“Prevention Through Deterrence”)
remained the same. The ever-increasing border policing and
militarization funneled desperate migrants into remote locations like
the Arizona desert, where temperatures can soar to 120 degrees in the
summer.
The first US border strategy memorandum in 1994 predicted
the tragic future we now have: “Illegal entrants crossing through
remote, uninhabited expanses of land and sea along the border can find
themselves in mortal danger.”
Twenty years later, more than 6,000 remains
have been found in the desert borderlands of the United States.
Hundreds of families continue to search for disappeared loved ones. The
Colibri Center for Human Rights has records for more than 2,500 missing people last seen crossing the US-Mexico border. In other words, that border has become a graveyard of bones and sadness.
Despite all the attention given to the wall and the border this
election season, neither the Trump nor Clinton campaigns have mentioned
“Prevention Through Deterrence,” nor the subsequent border deaths. Not
once. The same goes for the establishment media that can’t stop talking
about Trump’s wall. There has been little or no mention of what border
groups have long called a “humanitarian crisis” of deaths that have increased fivefold
over the last decade, thanks, in part, to a wall that already exists.
(If the dead were Canadians or Europeans, attention would, of course, be
paid.)
Although wall construction began during Bill Clinton’s
administration, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) built most of
the approximately 700 miles of fencing after the Secure Fence Act of
2006 was passed. Sen. Hillary Clinton voted
in favor of that Republican-introduced bill, as did 26 other Democrats.
“I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a
barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in,” she commented at one 2015 campaign event, “and I do think you have to control your borders.”
The wall-building project was expected to be so environmentally destructive that then Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff waived
37 environmental and cultural laws in the name of national security. In
this way, he allowed Border Patrol bulldozers to desecrate protected
wilderness and sacred land. “Imagine a bulldozer parking in your family
graveyard, turning up bones,” Chairman Ned Norris, Jr. of the Tohono
O'odham Nation (a tribe whose original land was cut in half by the
border) told Congress in 2008. “This is our reality.”
With a price tag of, on average, $4 million a mile,
these walls, barriers, and fences have proved to be one of the
costliest border infrastructure projects undertaken by the United
States. For private border contractors, on the other hand, it’s the gift
that just keeps on giving. In 2011, for example, the DHS granted
Kellogg, Brown, and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton (one of our “warrior corporations”), a $24 million upkeep contract.
In Tucson in early August, Republican vice presidential candidate
Mike Pence looked out over a sea of red “Make America Great Again” caps
and T-shirts and said, “We will secure our border. Donald Trump will
build that wall.” Pence was met with roaring applause, even though his
statement made no sense at all.
Should Trump actually win, how could he build something that already
exists? For all practical purposes, the “Great Wall” that Trump talks
about may, by January 2017, be as antiquated as the Great Wall of China
given the new high-tech surveillance methods now coming on the market.
These are being developed in a major way and on a regular basis by a booming border techno-surveillance industry.
The 21st-century border is no longer just about walls—it’s about biometrics and drones. It’s about a “layered approach to national security,” given that, as former Border Patrol chief Mike Fisher has put it, “the international boundary is no longer the first or last line of defense, but one of many.” Hillary Clinton’s promise
of “comprehensive immigration reform"—to be introduced within her first
100 days in office—is a much more reliable guide to our grim
immigration future than is Trump’s wall. If her bill follows the pattern
of previous ones, as it surely will,
an increasingly weaponized, privatized, high-tech, layered border
regime, increasingly dangerous to future Ignacio Sarabias, will continue
to be a priority of the federal government….
More than 2.5 million people have been expelled from the country by the Obama administration, an average annual deportation rate of close to 400,000. This was, by the way, only possible thanks to laws signed by Bill Clinton in 1996 and meant to burnish his legacy. They vastly expanded the government’s deportation powers.
In 2013 alone, Immigration and Customs Enforcement carried out 72,000 deportations
of parents who said their children were American-born. And many of them
are likely to try to cross that dangerous southern border again to
reunite with their families….
If the comprehensive immigration reform Hillary Clinton pledges to introduce as president is based on
the existing bipartisan Senate package, then this corporate-enforcement
landscape will be significantly bolstered and reinforced. There will be
19,000 more Border Patrol agents roving around ”border enforcement jurisdictions“ that extend up to 100 miles inland. More F-150 trucks and all-terrain vehicles will rumble through and, at times, tear up
the desert. There will be more Blackhawk helicopters, flying low, their
propellers dusting groups of scattering migrants, many of them already
lost in the vast, parched desert.
If such a package passes the next Congress, up to $46 billion
could be slated to go into more of all of this, including funding for
hundreds of miles of new walls. Corporate vendors are salivating at the
thought of such a future and in a visible state of elation at homeland
security trade shows across the globe….
The Evo A. DeConcini Federal Courthouse in Tucson would have the
capacity to prosecute triple the number of people it deals with at
present.