http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54514

*Administration Will Cut Border Patrol Deployed on U.S-Mexico Border*
*Thursday, September 24, 2009*
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief


[image: http://media.cnsnews.com/resources/54513.jpg]
*A U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer is seen from Mexico's side of
the San Ysidro port of entry guarding vehicles involved in a shooting in
Tijuana, Mexico, Sept. 22, 2009. Four people were injured in a gun battle
involving an attempt to smuggle illegal immigrants from Mexico at the
busiest border crossing in the U.S., authorities said. (AP Photo/Guillermo
Arias)*

*(CNSNews.com)* - Even though the Border Patrol now reports that almost
1,300 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border is not under effective control, and
the Department of Justice says that vast stretches of the border are “easily
breached,” and the Government Accountability Office has revealed that three
persons “linked to terrorism” and 530 aliens from “special interest
countries” were intercepted at Border Patrol checkpoints last year, the
administration is nonetheless now planning to decrease the number of Border
Patrol agents deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Border Patrol Director of Media Relations Lloyd Easterling confirmed this
week--as I first reported in *my
column*<http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/article/54412>yesterday--that
his agency is planning for a net decrease of 384 agents on
the U.S.-Mexico border in fiscal 2010, which begins on October 1.

A Department of Homeland Security annual performance review updated by the
Obama administration on May 7 said the Border Patrol “plans to move several
hundred Agents from the Southwest Border to the Northern Border to meet the
FY 2010 staffing requirements, with only a small increase in new agents for
the Southwest Border in the same year.”

Easterling said on Tuesday that in fiscal 2009, 17,399 Border Patrol agents
have been deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border. In fiscal year 2010, the
Border Patrol plans to decrease that by 384 agents, leaving 17,015 deployed
along the Mexican frontier. At the same time, the number of Border Patrol
agents deployed on the U.S.-Canada border will be increased by 414, from a
fiscal 2009 total of 1,798 agents to a fiscal 2010 total of 2,212.

The Border Patrol is responsible for securing a total of 8,607 miles of
border, including the U.S.-Mexico border, the U.S.-Canada border from
Washington state to Maine, and sectors of coastline in the Gulf of Mexico,
Florida, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Each year, the Border Patrol sets a goal for “border miles under effective
control (including certain coastal sectors).” “Effective control,” as
defined by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, means that when the Border
Patrol detects an illegal border crosser in a particular area of the border
the agency can be expected to succeed in apprehending that person.

In the May 7 update of its *performance
review*<http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cfo_apr_fy2008.pdf>,
DHS said the Border Patrol’s goal for fiscal 2009 was to have 815 of the
8,607 miles of border for which the agency is responsible under “effective
control.”  The review also said the Border Patrol’s goal for fiscal 2010 was
to again have 815 miles of border under “effective control,” meaning DHS was
not planning to secure a single additional mile of border in the coming
year.

However, Acting Deputy Assistant Customs and Border Protection Commissioner
Todd Owen *told a House
committee*<http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20090708190119.pdf>in
July that the Border Patrol already had 894 miles of border under
effective control as of May 31 of this year.  These 894 miles, Owen said,
included 697 miles on the Mexican border, 32 miles on the Canadian border
and 165 miles in the coastal sectors.

Easterling said this week that as of now the Border Patrol still has the
same 894 miles of border under effective control that it had under effective
control as of May 31. He also said the agency would not relinquish control
of any of these miles in the coming year.  After the beginning of the new
fiscal year, he said, the Border Patrol would reevaluate the situation and
set a new goal for border miles under “effective control” for 2010 that
would at least equal, and might exceed, the 894 miles currently under
effective control.

“The intention is to take back the border incrementally, and make gains that
we can keep,” Easterling said. “We do not intend, nor will we give back,
miles that we have gained control over.”

Easterling said the Border Patrol would be able to maintain the current
number of miles under effective control on the Mexico border with fewer
agents deployed there thanks to “force multipliers,” including new fencing,
roads and other infrastructure that has been built in recent years. He also
cited the assistance the Border Patrol receives from local police and
sheriffs departments and community watch groups.

But even if the Border Patrol is able to maintain or marginally improve on
the current level of security on the U.S.-Mexico border, most of the border
will remain effectively open to smuggling both contraband and persons.

The entire U.S.-Mexico border is 1,954 miles long, according to the
*International
Boundary and Water Commission* <http://www.ibwc.state.gov/>. While 697 of
those miles are now under “effective control,” according to the Border
Patrol, 1,257 miles are not under “effective control.”

Reports from other government agencies paint a vivid picture of the massive
drug and alien smuggling that takes place in these uncontrolled expanses and
the national security problem created by unsecured border lands.

Each year, the Justice Department’s *National Drug Intelligence
Center*<http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/>produces “drug market analyses” for
each of 32 regions of the country that
the NDIC describes as “high intensity drug trafficking areas.” Five of these
areas sit along the U.S.-Mexico border. These include the California border
region, Arizona, New Mexico, West Texas and South Texas. The latest reports,
released in March and April of this year, use candid language in portraying
the U.S.-Mexican frontier as wide open to drug smuggling and even vulnerable
to penetration by potential terrorists.

The *California-Mexico
border*<http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs32/32765/index.htm>,
the NDIC said, was “easily breached” on both foot and in vehicles.

“The vast border area presents innumerable remote crossing points that
traffickers exploit to smuggle illicit drugs, primarily marijuana, into the
country from Mexico,” said NDIC. “These areas are easily breached by
traffickers on foot, in private vehicles, or in all-terrain vehicles (ATVs)
as they smuggle drugs between POEs [ports of entry], particularly the
mountainous areas in eastern San Diego County and the desert and sand dune
areas in Imperial County.”

Arizona’s border was judged to be open not only to drug smugglers but also
aliens with “extensive criminal records” and from “special interest
countries,” which are defined as “countries that could export individuals
who could bring harm to the United States through terrorism.”

“Some criminal organizations smuggle aliens and gang members into the United
States,” said *NDIC’s
report*<http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs32/32762/index.htm>on Arizona.
“These particular individuals typically have extensive criminal
records and pose a threat, not only to the Arizona HIDTA [high intensity
drug trafficking area] region but also to communities throughout the United
States. Alien smuggling organizations reportedly also smuggle aliens from
countries other than Mexico, including special-interest countries.”

“Special-interest countries are those designated by the intelligence
community as countries that could export individuals who could bring harm to
the United States through terrorism,” said the NDIC report.

The NDIC described the Arizona-Mexico border as “largely underprotected” in
the areas between official ports of entry.

“Large amounts of illicit drugs are smuggled into the area from Mexico, and
bulk cash is transported from the area into Mexico,” said NDIC. “These
trafficking activities are facilitated by several factors unique to the
region, including the continuing economic and population growth in Arizona’s
two primary drug markets (Phoenix and Tucson), the highways that connect
major metropolitan areas in Arizona with major illicit drug source areas in
Mexico, and a remote, largely underprotected border area between Arizona’s
ports of entry (POEs).

“Vast stretches of remote, sparsely populated border areas are located
within the HIDTA region; these areas are especially conducive to large-scale
drug smuggling,” said NDIC. “By the end of January 2009, 108 miles of the
262-mile shared border between Arizona and Mexico will have some type of
fencing. However, few physical barriers exist in border areas between POEs,
particularly in the West Desert area of the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) Tucson
Sector, to impede drug traffickers, chiefly Mexican DTOs, from smuggling
illicit drug shipments into the United States from Mexico.”

Part of the *New Mexico
border*<http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs32/32779/index.htm>was described
as “an ideal smuggling corridor.”

“Southwestern New Mexico—specifically Hidalgo, Luna, and Dona Ana
Counties—shares a 180-mile border with Mexico,” said NDIC. “More than half
the length of this border is desolate public land that contains innumerable
footpaths, roads, and trails. Additionally, many ranches are located along
the border. These factors and minimal law enforcement coverage make the area
an ideal smuggling corridor for drugs and other illicit goods and services—
primarily alien smuggling into the United States and weapons and bulk cash
smuggling into Mexico. Mexican DTOs smuggle multihundred-kilogram quantities
of illicit drugs through this portion of the HIDTA region annually.”

Like the California border, the *South Texas
border*<http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs32/32791/index.htm>is also
“easily breached,” according to the NDIC.

“The combination of vast stretches of remote, sparsely populated land and
extensive crossborder economic activity at designated ports of entry (POEs)
creates an environment conducive to large-scale drug smuggling,” said NDIC.
“Few physical barriers exist between POEs to impede drug traffickers,
particularly Mexican DTOs, from smuggling illicit drug shipments into the
United States from Mexico. Along many areas of the U.S.-Mexico border in
South Texas, the Rio Grande River can be easily breached by smugglers on
foot or in vehicles, enabling Mexican DTOs to smuggle multikilogram
quantities of illicit drugs, primarily marijuana and cocaine, into the
United States.”

In the *West Texas sector*<http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs32/32792/index.htm>,
the NDIC again raised the possibility that terrorists could exploit the
border to enter the country.

“Moreover, the region’s location along the U.S.-Mexico border poses national
security and law enforcement issues for the region, such as alien smuggling,
weapons transportation, and terrorist entry into the United States through
and between ports of entry,” said NDIC.

While the U.S. government may be failing to exert effective control over
most of the border, identical language in the NDIC reports for Arizona and
West Texas said that drug trafficking organizations have set up “gatekeeper”
operations that control smuggling into the U.S. and levy taxes on the
smugglers they let through.

“Gatekeepers regulate the drug flow from Mexico across the U.S.-Mexico
border into the United States by controlling drug smugglers’ access to areas
along the border,” said the Arizona and West Texas NDIC reports.
“Gatekeepers collect ‘taxes’ from smugglers on all illicit shipments that
are moved through these areas, including drugs and illegal aliens. The taxes
are generally paid to the DTO that controls the area; the DTO then launders
the tax proceeds. Gatekeepers sometimes resort to extortion, intimidation,
and acts of violence to collect taxes from smugglers. Gatekeepers also
reportedly bribe corrupt Mexican police and military personnel in order to
ensure that smuggling activities occur without interruption.”

“Gatekeepers generally operate at the behest of a Mexican drug trafficking
organization (DTO) and enforce the will of the organization through bribery,
intimidation, extortion, beatings, and murder,” said the reports.

A *Government Accountability Office
report*<http://www.gao.gov/htext/d09824.html>released on August 31
pointed out that the Border Patrol’s top priority is
to stop terrorists and weapons of mass destruction from entering the United
States and revealed that three person’s “linked to terrorism” and hundreds
of aliens from “special interest countries” were intercepted at Border
Patrol checkpoints in fiscal 2008. These checkpoints, which act as a final
line of defense for the U.S. border, are typically set up on highways 25 to
100 miles north of the Mexican border.

“CBP reported that in fiscal year 2008, there were three individuals
encountered by the Border Patrol at southwest border checkpoints who were
identified as persons linked to terrorism,” said GAO.

“In addition, the Border Patrol reported that in fiscal year 2008
checkpoints encountered 530 aliens from special interest countries, which
are countries the Department of State has determined to represent a
potential terrorist threat to the United States,” said GAO. “While people
from these countries may not have any ties to illegal or terrorist
activities, Border Patrol agents detain aliens from special interest
countries if they are in the United States illegally and Border Patrol
agents report these encounters to the local Sector Intelligence Agent, the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Joint Terrorism Task Force, U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Office of Investigations, and the
CBP National Targeting Center.”

The GAO also said one illegal alien detained in West Texas had come from
Iran.

“For example,” said GAO, “according to a Border Patrol official in the El
Paso sector, a checkpoint stopped a vehicle and questioned its three Iranian
occupants, determining that one of those occupants was in the United States
illegally. The individual was detained and turned over to U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement for further questioning.”

There has been much discussion in the past week about whether President
Barack Obama will heed the advice of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the U.S.
commander in Afghanistan, to increase the U.S. troop deployment there.  The
administration, however, has already decided to decrease by 384 the Border
Patrol agents deployed on our own southern frontier

<<image001.jpg>>

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to