Homeland Security Watch

News and analysis of critical issues in homeland security

November 2, 2006

Op-ed looks at the border security system

Filed under: Border Security — by Christian Beckner on November 2, 2006

Daniel Goure and J. Michael Barrett have an interesting op-ed published this week by the Federal Times, focused on the topic of border security. In the piece, they argue for a systemic approach to addressing border security challenges, rather than looking piecemeal at technologies – which is essentially the strategic intent of the Secure Border Initiative:

A plan for border security that focuses on building fences, buying widgets and hiring personnel will likely cost a lot of money and provide relatively little in the way of additional security. It also will overwhelm the capabilities of the local authorities, who continue to struggle with these challenges every day.

That is where the Homeland Security plan comes in, with the resources and the big-picture view to create an overarching approach that integrates multiple, disparate activities. Each one in isolation creates some value, but together they effectively and efficiently hinder illegal activity.

The primary focus of the SBI program should be on defining the overall task and developing the appropriate information technology system-of-systems architecture and the manpower base to support it.

I agree unreservedly with the authors that there needs to be this type of strategic, system-level approach to addressing border security challenges, and I think that DHS has moved toward this perspective. But I don’t think that this viewpoint is incompatible with the viewpoint that they dismiss: an overemphasis on investment in fencing, technologies, and/or manpower. In fact, I think that appropriately rigorous analyses of the overall situation at the border will naturally lead one naturally to realize the need for these types of investments. I’ve strongly advocated additional investments in border fencing on this blog, but this advocacy has always been within the context of an overall strategic framework, thinking about fencing not as a barrier in an of itself, but as a tool to change flows and the operational parameters of interdiction at borders. So while I agree with the authors’ main point, I think that their attack on “fences, widgets and personnel” is something of a straw man.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Print
  • LinkedIn

1 Comment »

Comment by zak822

November 3, 2006 @ 3:43 pm

The economic incentives for illegal immigration across the Mexican border must be addressed. Those incentives support a huge network of people smugglers who don’t care who they smuggle, as long as they get paid.

Drying up the money will dry up large segments of those networks and make it harder for terrorists to use those established paths into the country. This includes those in this country who profit from hiring illegal immigrants, they are the major piece of economic incentives.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>