{"id":168690,"date":"2010-01-12T04:58:02","date_gmt":"2010-01-12T09:58:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nw0.eu\/2010\/01\/12\/a-north-american-security-perimeter-on-the-horizon.html"},"modified":"2010-01-12T04:58:02","modified_gmt":"2010-01-12T09:58:02","slug":"a-north-american-security-perimeter-on-the-horizon","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/168690","title":{"rendered":"A North American security perimeter on the horizon"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n

Dana Gabriel
\nOnline Journal<\/a>
\nMonday , January 11th, 2010<\/span><\/p>\n

NAFTA has extended from economic integration into a political and
\nregional security pact which has been achieved through the Security and
\nProsperity Partnership (SPP) of North America, Plan Mexico, as well as
\nother initiatives. Various pieces of legislation and reports, along
\nwith influential individuals have called for closer trilateral
\ncooperation regarding common rules for immigration and security
\nenforcement around the perimeter of the continent. A major part of the
\nU.S. security agenda already includes the defense of North America, but
\na full blown security zone would bring Canada<\/a> and Mexico further under
\nU.S. control. A Fortress North America poses a serious threat to our
\nsovereignty and would mean the loss of more civil liberties.<\/p>\n

Plans for a North America security perimeter might have seemed like
\na pipe dream just a short time ago, but it could become a reality
\nsooner than one thinks. Some believe that a perimeter approach to
\nsecurity would be a more effective way of providing safety while
\nensuring the free flow of trade and investment. For those pushing for
\ndeep continental integration, this move is seen as the next logical
\nstep. A recent article from the Toronto Star, Canada<\/a> warms to idea of a tougher \u2018perimeter\u2019<\/a>,
\nsuggests that Canadians might now be ready to debate the idea of
\nperimeter security. David Biette who specializes in U.S.-Canada<\/a>
\nrelations and is a member of the Woodrow Wilson Center stated that a,
\n\u201cPerimeter is no longer a dirty word. It\u2019s beginning to
\ncome up again, at least in academic circles.\u201d He went on to say,
\n\u201cCanada<\/a> held back when it first came up and I can certainly
\nunderstand why. There was still such bad feeling left over on free
\ntrade and what that might mean for Canadian sovereignty that perimeter
\nsecurity was just not palatable to Canadians.\u201d Biette also added,
\n\u201cYou ask yourself, \u2018What would a mutually improved
\nrelationship look like?\u2019 and really, there is nothing else.
\nPerimeter is the one big thing \u2013 the last truly huge step on the
\nhorizon.\u201d A North American security perimeter would be one of the
\nfinal steps needed in the creation of a North American Union.<\/p>\n

Some of the recommendations from the 2005 report, Building a North American Community <\/a>co-sponsored
\nby the Council on Foreign Relations, included a unified border, a North
\nAmerican border pass, a single economic space, as well as a common
\nsecurity perimeter by 2010. Many of the task force recommendations in
\nareas of trade, transportation, energy, immigration and security became
\npart of the SPP agenda. Despite the demise of the SPP, many of its key
\nobjectives continue to move forward under the North American Leaders
\nSummit, as well as through other initiatives. In February of 2009, it
\nwas reported that former Canadian international trade and foreign
\naffairs minister, David Emerson<\/a>,
\n\u201ccalled on the government<\/a> to aggressively seek stronger
\nCanada<\/a>-U.S. ties, up to and including a customs union. He said at
\nminimum, Canada<\/a> should advocate a North American security perimeter
\narrangement, a labour mobility agreement that modernizes NAFTA
\nprovisions, and greater integration on regulatory matters.\u201d U.S.
\nofficials remain concerned on how risk assessments of people entering
\nCanada<\/a> are conducted as well as the differences in its immigration and
\nvisa policies. A common perimeter approach to border management and
\nsecurity would require harmonization of Canadian-U.S. immigration and
\ncustoms standards.<\/p>\n

It was clear before Obama<\/a> became president that he wished to relax
\nimmigration restrictions with Mexico and supported some sort of amnesty
\nprogram. In mid-December of last year, H.R. 4321<\/a>
\nthe Comprehensive Immigration Reform ASAP Act of 2009 was introduced in
\nthe House of Representatives. The Obama<\/a> administration has been
\ncriticized for its lack of immigration enforcement. Many have warned
\nthat the new legislation would not only grant amnesty to millions of
\nillegal aliens, but also increase legal immigration and create more
\nloopholes in the system. In Sec. 143. Reports on Improving the Exchange
\nof Information on North American Security, there is wording which could
\nfurther promote deep continental integration. This includes yearly
\nstatus reports, \u201cin developing and implementing an immigration
\nsecurity strategy for North America that works toward the development
\nof a common security perimeter.\u201d Previous failed security and
\nimmigration bills also contained similar language referring to a shared
\nsecurity perimeter around the continent.<\/p>\n

The Merida Initiative, also known as Plan Mexico is an extension of
\nNAFTA and has its roots in the SPP. It is based on America\u2019s
\nfailed war on drugs<\/a>, which has been costly and ineffective. The Merida
\nInitiative relies primarily on military and law enforcement solutions
\nand is advancing police state<\/a> measures. In a recent interview, Laura Carlsen<\/a>
\ndirector of the Americas Policy Program in Mexico City described how
\nPlan Mexico, \u201cwas designed in Washington as a way to \u2018push
\nout the borders\u2019 of the US<\/a> security perimeter, that is, that
\nMexico would take on US<\/a> security priorities including policing its
\nsouthern border and allowing US<\/a> companies and agents into
\nMexico\u2019s intelligence and security operations.\u201d She also
\ncommented that, \u201cThe Obama<\/a> administration has supported the plan
\nand even requested, and received from Congress, additional funds beyond
\nwhat the Bush administration requested.\u201d The Plan Mexico strategy
\nis working towards the development of a common security perimeter and
\nis further encouraging the militarization of Mexico. Continued drug
\nviolence in the country could be used as a pretext to set up a North
\nAmerican security perimeter<\/p>\n

The recent foiled terrorist attack on Christmas day is accelerating
\nthe implementation of a high-tech control grid which could restrict,
\ntrack and trace our movements. With the war on terrorism<\/a> back in the
\nforefront, the continued merging of North America might include Canada<\/a>
\nand Mexico playing a bigger role in regards to perimeter security.
\nCanadian officials have announced that within the next several months, body scanners<\/a><\/a>
\nwill be installed in 11 airports across the country. Some proponents of
\na continental security zone believe that it is the best way to secure
\nNorth America, but at the same time falsely claim that this could be
\ndone with respect to each nation\u2019s sovereignty. We are well on
\nthe way towards a North American security perimeter where trade and
\ninvestment will be able to roam freely, while we are all forced to
\nendure new security practices dominated by U.S. interests.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Related Posts:<\/h3>\n