Gosh, I wish it were easier to talk about illegal immigration dispassionately. But it just isn't. There are so many sides to the argument, and many of them make sense, even those that are in direct contradiction to each other.
I have no position on it, though my perspective is based for the most part on national security. Yes, we have to do what we can to promote that paramount interest. On the other hand, we have seen little or no evidence that the Mexican border has been actually used by terrorists. On the other other hand--vbg--I have always maintained that it is the most convenient way to introduce terrorists and WMD surreptitiously into the US.
On the other other other hand--vvbg--an economically healthy Mexico is essential to US national security, perhaps more so than tight borders. After all, who the hell wants a Cuba or a Venezuela on the border? And remittances from the US by illegal immigrants make up a huge percentage of Mexican national income. We simply do not want to put an economic squeeze on Mexico in any substantial way because the ultimate price is political instability.
And, yes, illegal immigrants cost a lot when times are tough. But think of the cost of having a radical leftist government on the border. Cooperation on drug interdiction would come to a halt, terrorism and security cooperation would be non-existent, the maquiladoras would be harassed, expropriation of American assets could take place, restrictions on repatriation of cash might be made, the list is literally endless, etc. We could easily end up with a serious security and terrorism problem next door to us. We would be forced to spend untold billions securing the border, a cost that might dwarf the cost of simply letting illegal immigration act as a safety valve for Mexico's social, economic and political problems.
It's a tough, complex problem in which there are no easy answers. |
