Mexico Institute Mexico Institute

Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20004-3027 www.wilsoncenter.org THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO: Towards a Strategic Partnership

!"#$%&#'"&("(&)#"*&#+,-.".#&)%/"&-")0/012$3,4&"#$5!',&-/

The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, established by Congress in 1968 and headquar- tered in Washington, D.C., is a living national memorial to President Wilson. !e Center’s mission is to commemorate the ideals and concerns of Woodrow Wilson by providing a link between the worlds of ideas and policy, while fostering research, study, discussion, and collaboration among a broad spectrum of individuals concerned with policy and scholar- ship in national and international affairs. Supported by public and private funds, the Center is a nonpartisan institu- tion engaged in the study of national and world affairs. It establishes and maintains a neutral forum for free, open, and informed dialogue. Conclusions or opinions expressed in Center publications and programs are those of the authors and speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Center staff, fellows, trustees, advisory groups, or any individuals or organizations that provide financial support to the Center. !e Center is the publisher of !e Wilson Quarterly and home of Woodrow Wilson Center Press, dialogue radio and television, and the monthly newsletter “Centerpoint.” For more information about the Center’s activities and publications, please visit us on the web at www.wilsoncenter.org.

Lee H. Hamilton, President and Director Board of Trustees Joseph B. Gildenhorn, Chair Sander R. Gerber, Vice Chair Public Members: James H. Billington, Librarian of Congress; G. Wayne Clough, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution; Bruce Cole, Chair, National Endowment for the Humanities; Mark R. Dybul, designated appointee within the federal government; Michael O. Leavitt, Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Condoleezza Rice, Secretary, U.S. Department of State; Margaret Spellings, Secretary, U.S. Department of Education; Allen Weinstein, Archivist of the United States !"#$%&'($)&'*'("#&+,%*$-".//0&%1$*/' Private Citizen Members: Charles Cobb, Jr., Robin B. Cook, Charles L. Glazer, Carlos M. Gutierrez, !"213*'("4+/'/5*+"6'$&(%1$*/'"" " Susan Hutchison, Barry S. Jackson, Ignacio E. Sanchez 7/%3"8/%"9::

!"4')1'+*'(";<#<=2&>*+/".//0&%1$*/'"" /'"2*(%1$*/'

!"?)&";<#<=2&>*+/"@/%A&%B"#0&+*1:"" .)1::&'(&CD"#0&+*1:"E00/%$,'*$*&C Mexico Institute

The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership

!"#$%&#'"&("(&)#"*&#+,-.".#&)%/"&-")0/012$3,4&"#$5!',&-/

Woodrow Wilson Center Mexico Institute

January 2009

www.wilsoncenter.org [email protected]

Table of Contents

6 !"#$%&#'%()'*&+(,-.#)/#0#(12 79 67#"&,05(/'3005/"%15,('!,.5&@'' ?%5.4"#'%()'C(;%(&5(/'FG:GH=#>5&,'' 7 3(1",)4&15,('%()'67#"75#-8'' A,,<#"%15,(',('=5/"%15,( 9,-%")2'%':1"%1#/5&'!%"1(#"2;5<'' #$ (,.)#$"?="Estimated Proportion of Mexico- -51;'=#>5&, Born Persons to Total Population, 2007

66 9;"#%1#(#)',('*..'?",(128'' #& (,.)#$"6@="Mexicans Naturalized as :1"#(/1;#(5(/':#&4"51@'A,,<#"%15,('' U.S. Citizens, 1998–2007 1,'A,($",(1'6"/%(5B#)'A"50# (# (,.)#$"66="Remittances to Mexico, !" (,.)#$"6="Per Capita Cocaine 1996–2007 Consumption, 1999–2008 ($ (,.)#$"68="Growth in Unauthorized !# (,.)#$"8="Federal Drug Control Immigrant Population in the United Spending, by Function, States, 2000–2008 FY 2002–FY 2009 :; 9;#'FG:GH=#>5&,'I,")#"8'' !$ (,.)#$"7="2008 Drug-Related Killings :<#&5%.'A;%..#(/#2J'' in Mexico by State' :<#&5%.'6<<,"14(515#2 !% (,.)#$":="Mexican Police Forces, 2007 (& (,.)#$"67="Population of the Border States and Border Counties or Municipalities, 89 =%+5(/'C&,(,05&'3(1#/"%15,('' United States and Mexico, 2000 D,"+'?,"'*..8'*('*/#()%'$,"'' 9"%)#'%()'E#7#.,<0#(1 )! (,.)#$"6:="Income per Capita in U.S. Border Communities "& (,.)#$"9="U.S. Trade with Mexico, 1993–2007 9; *<<#()5>'6(#8'' "' (,.)#$"<="U.S. State Exports K521',$'D,"+5(/'L",4<'=#0M#"2 to Mexico *<<#()5>'9-,8'' "% (,.)#$";="U.S. GDP per capita vs. <6 *))515,(%.'A,00#(12'$",0'' Mexico GDP per capita, D,"+5(/'L",4<'=#0M#"2 1990–2005

#! (,.)#$">="Official Mexican <7 *<<#()5>'9;"##8'' Poverty Rate, 1992–2006 I"5#$'I5,/"%<;5#2',$'*41;,"2

Preface and Acknowledgements 6 !ere are few relationships that matter more to the own, but rather a set of options that may help

United States—if any—than that with Mexico. them as they think through crucial policy decisions The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership !e two countries share more than a border—they in the future. !is report is the first of several that are bound together by shared challenges for the will come out throughout 2009 that will address prosperity, security, and well-being of their citizens. key issues in the U.S.-Mexico relationship and At a time when the United States is undergoing ideas for managing bilateral issues more effectively. a change in administration, the Woodrow !is report is based on the assumption that Wilson Center felt it was important to conduct a the United States and Mexico could benefit from thorough review of the relationship between the thinking more strategically about their relationship two countries and address possible strategies for with each other. !ere is no lack of attention cooperation between them in the future. on either side of the border towards the other To this end, the Wilson Center’s Mexico country. In fact, an endless number of federal, Institute convened a series of working groups in state, and local agencies in each country have the fall of 2008 to assess four critical issues in policies that deal with the other either directly the relationship: security cooperation, economic or indirectly, and politicians in both countries integration, immigration, and border management. regularly address issues on the bilateral agenda. Each working group was made up of experts What are frequently lacking are the synergies drawn from the overlapping worlds of academia, among different approaches taken by government policy, business, journalism, and civil society agencies to deal with the same issue. !is report, and was asked to develop a set of policy options therefore, suggests that a little bit of coordination for improving cooperation between the two and consultation between policymakers in the two countries on the issue. !e working groups did countries and among different agencies can go a not try to reach consensus on the policy options; long way towards improving the ways we manage however, each of the groups managed to come up joint challenges—from dealing with organized with sets of ideas that enjoyed a fair amount of crime to resolving trade disputes to developing agreement. We have reflected these ideas in this orderly systems for migration to managing natural report, with the caveat that neither working group resources at the border. members nor their organizations endorse all the !e first part of this report provides an overview options explored here nor the report as a whole. of the reasons why cooperation with Mexico is Moreover, this report does not attempt to present in the national security interest of the United a set of recommendations that we would suggest States and summarizes some of the major policy policymakers in either country to assume as their options from the working groups, including an analysis of those ideas that may be possible in the first came up with the idea for this study and early months of the Obama administration. !e the board’s Strategy Committee, chaired by rest of this publication presents the reports from Guillermo Jasson, helped design the process. We the four working groups that deal with security are grateful to all the members of the board for cooperation, economic integration, migration, and their input at various stages during the process border management. !e primary authors of this and, in particular, to the following members of publication are Andrew Selee (Overview/Editor), the Strategy Committee: Brian Dyson, Guillermo Eric Olson (Security Cooperation), Dolia Estevez Jasson (chair), Carlos Heredia, Diana Negroponte, (Economic Integration), David Ayon (Migration), Andrés Rozental, Peter Smith, and Javier Treviño, and Robert Donnelly (Border Management). who offered ongoing guidance in this effort. !e authors bear full responsibility for the ideas Susan Kaufman Purcell and Carlos Heredia represented, although we have tried to include helped design and chair the economic integration those ideas that appeared to have the most weight working group. We also benefited immensely from 8 within the groups we convened. detailed remarks on the introduction from Roderic We are grateful for the opportunity to work Camp, Peter Smith, and Abe Lowenthal, and from with El Colegio de la Frontera Norte (Colef), detailed discussions with Arturo Sarukhan, Lazaro and especially with Tonatiuh Guillén, Carlos de Cárdenas, Roberta Jacobson, Leslie Bassett, Charles la Parra, and Rene Zenteno, in convening the Barclay, Antonio Ortiz Mena, and Octavio Tripp. working group on Border Issues. !is working !is project would not have been possible group will continue to meet throughout 2009 without the assiduous efforts of Robert Donnelly as part of a joint project in conjunction with the and Katie Putnam of the Wilson Center who Border Governors Conference. For the financial helped organize the working groups, and Travis support, we are grateful to our ongoing donors High and Jane Zamarripa who provided research and to special support received from the Secretaría assistance. We are grateful to Michelle Furman for de Relaciones Exteriores, through the Mexican her work in creating the final design for the report. Embassy in Washington; from USAID, through !e editor and authors of the report bear full Preface and Acknowledgements its Mission in the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City responsibility for the findings that are reflected for work on border issues; and from the Heinrich here and, of course, for any omissions or Boell Foundation for work on migration. shortcomings. However, our deepest gratitude goes !e Advisory Board of the Wilson Center’s out to all those who took time to participate in the Mexico Institute, chaired by José Antonio four working groups that produced the ideas for Fernández Carbajal and Roger W. Wallace, this report. Introduction and Overview: A Strategic Approach to U.S.-Mexico Relations 7 It is time to strengthen the U.S. relationship with the trade run deep throughout cities and towns in

Mexico. !ere are few countries—if any—which both countries. Policymakers in the two countries The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership are as important to the United States as Mexico. We have a shared interest in working together to share more than just a two-thousand mile border. develop a comprehensive and bilateral approach Our economies and societies are deeply interwoven that limits the reach of organized crime. and what happens on one side of our shared border Mexico also remains vital for the U.S. economy, inevitably affects the other side. As the United although the current economic slowdown States seeks to redefine its role in the world, it is presents special challenges that will have to be vital to start at home, with our neighbors. addressed with great care. Mexico is the second Today is a time of great opportunity in our destination for U.S. exports, and the first or relationship with Mexico, but also a time of severe second destination of exports for at least twenty- challenges. While the two governments have taken two U.S. states. Over six million Americans live important steps to limit the risk that terrorists in cities and counties on the border and over will use the shared border as a launching pad 60 million in border states, whose economies for attacks, drug trafficking organizations have are particularly tied with Mexico’s. !is degree developed a lucrative and deadly cross-border trade of integration creates opportunities for more that creates significant vulnerabilities for both focused economic cooperation, but also generates countries. Mexican drug trafficking organizations risks for spillover effects in times of economic have become increasingly violent in recent years, crisis. An economic slowdown in either country with over five thousand deaths tied to narcotics will inevitably affect the other and a full-scale trafficking in 2008 alone, and they have gradually crisis could send shockwaves across the border. penetrated the institutional framework of the Moreover, the persistent wage gap between the Mexican state, especially local law enforcement two countries presents a long-term challenge that authorities. !ese organizations are fueled by has been insufficiently addressed in past efforts at persistent demand in the United States: over deepening cross-border economic ties. !e United twenty million Americans use illegal drugs each States and Mexico have the opportunity to develop month and roughly 15 to 25 billion dollars in a framework for economic integration that helps profits from U.S. drug sales are pumped back into to contain the effect of economic shocks, takes to the Mexican economy each year in cash and advantage of complementarities to increase the weapons. !e violence and corruption wrought by competitive position of both countries, and, above drug trafficking organizations are felt particularly all, places an emphasis on improving the well-being strongly in border communities, but the effects of of average citizens in both countries. : IntroductionIntroduction andand Overview:Overview: TowardsTowards aa StrategicStrategic PartnershipPartnership withwith MexicoMexico : a majority of unauthorized immigrants. Over Over immigrants. unauthorized of majority a including Mexico, from United come States the to immigrants all border. of the third of a Roughly sides both on policymakers to challenges present the U.S.-Mexico border, as do a range of state state of border, range U.S.-Mexico a the do as or Mexico with dealings some has government U.S. the of agency every almost and department every aspects, policy foreign as well as domestic have always almost Mexico with relationship the in issues the Since government. U.S. the in cooperation. binational require that problems to solutions unilateral pursued has government U.S. the past, the in interest. national shared of issues around cooperation and consultation on based partnership a pursue to and Mexico to given attention of level the raise to opportunity the have Congress ! !"/'#!'$.,4"!%%#&!4A"'&"2$3,4& whole. a as country the benefit and needs their serve better that policies local o and state to listen to and priority a region border the make to opportunity the has administration attention. policy of lack chronic a of result the as disadvantages and hubs economic binational as advantages comparative both enjoy they and Mexico, to ties strong particularly have states border and border.communities border U.S. U.S.-Mexico the to closest communities those on e greater even have they that question no is there United but States, the throughout citizens economic integration,andmigration—a migration. to alternatives long-term provide to and flows immigration manage to how about Mexico in counterparts their with speak to policymakers U.S. require inevitably will it discussion, policy domestic a of part be will reform immigration U.S. Mexico. Although in born was population U.S. the of percent three Unitedand States, Mexico’s of tenth a the in lives now population e Obama administration and the incoming incoming the and administration Obama e Finally, immigration from Mexico continues to Finally,to continues Mexico from immigration ! cooperation, challenges—security these of All ere is no lack of policies towards Mexico towards policies of lack no is ere ffi cials from the border region in crafting crafting in region border the from cials ! Too often e new new e ff ect ect strategic ff ects ects existing structures for consultation but also to to also but consultation for structures existing strengthen to important be It will decisions. policy key in involved level local and state, federal, the and e in Washington attention City Mexico policy and foreign high-level both require will countries countries. both of interests security national the in are that objectives defined clearly around Mexico with collaboration for agenda often competinge and disjointed, multiple, these among synergies building of ways strategic find to therefore, is, agencies. government local and fuels crime in neighborhoods throughout the the throughout neighborhoods in crime fuels trade drug the Meanwhile, agencies. government federal even and state, local, some of politics the into penetrated gradually has it and endemic, tra drug from States. Violence tra drug by used arms the of 90% over while Mexico, in activities illicit into year every billion $25 to $15 roughly United pump States the in sales drug from profits turn, In marijuana. and heroin, methamphetamines, of supplier foreign largest the is United and States, the to route en cocaine for point transshipment largest the is border. the of sides Mexico both on communities tra crime. organized transnational of rise the with concern joint a share committing actsoflarge-scaleviolence. upon intent organizations terrorist by used not is border the that sure making in interests security national vital United share States the and Mexico /'#$-.'A$-,-."/$4)#,'B"4&&%$#!',&- management. border and immigration, integration, economic cooperation, security engagement: and dialogue sustained require will and relationship the in attention priority e sustain and promote can that ones new develop ff ective dialogue and problem-solving. problem-solving. and dialogue ective ffi A strategic partnership between the two two the between partnership strategic A Criminal activity associated with drug drug with associated activity Criminal ! cking poses an increasing threat to to threat increasing an poses cking ff ere are at least four areas that call out for for out call that areas four least at are ere orts to engage all government actors at at actors government all engage to orts ffi ckers are imported from the United the from imported are ckers ff orts that tie into a broad broad a into tie that orts ffi ! cking has become become has cking e challenge challenge e ! ey also also ey !,.5&@'6<15,(2'$,"':1"#(/1;#(5(/':#&4"51@'A,,<#"%15,('

UÊÊ-ÌÀi˜}Ì i˜ˆ˜}ʏ>ÜÊi˜vœÀVi“i˜ÌÊ UÊÊ
ÃÈÃ̈˜}ÊivvœÀÌÃÊ̜ÊÃÌÀi˜}Ì i˜Ê i݈Vœ½ÃÊ cooperation by: judicial and law enforcement institutions by: U Increasing funding for financial intelligence U Providing training and information sharing on operations to identify and intercept bulk cash, judicial reform (both federal-federal and state- wire transfers, and financial transactions used to state efforts). send narcotics proceeds to Mexico. U Providing training and information sharing on U Committing to reasonable steps to reduce arms police reform, especially models that ensure trafficking to Mexico, including increasing the internal controls and public accountability of law number of ATF agents and inspectors assigned enforcement and judicial institutions. to the U.S.-Mexico border region to monitor U Providing inspection equipment to facilitate straw purchases and illegal exports. detection of narcotics, arms, and cash. U Continuing ongoing collaboration under the 9 Merida Initiative. UÊÊ,i˜i܈˜}ÊivvœÀÌÃÊ̜ÊÀi`ÕViÊ`i“>˜`ÊvœÀÊ

narcotics by: The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership U Gradually increasing mechanisms for U Significantly increasing federal funding for drug intelligence sharing, rapid-response treatment programs in the United States. communication, and joint law enforcement operations at the border. U Sharing best practices on prevention and treatment with Mexican authorities.

United States and grows particularly threatening 2!-!.,-."$4&-&2,4",-'$.#!',&- in the border area. Although there is no evidence to date of terrorists using the Mexican border for !e United States and Mexico have undergone an attacks on the United States, clearly the existence accelerated process of economic integration over of an extensive infrastructure linked to organized the past two decades. Trade has tripled between crime raises concerns about possible future threats. 1990 and 2008, due in large part to the North Recent efforts between the two countries American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Mexico to strengthen intelligence sharing, technology is now the United States’ third largest trading transfer and training, including the bipartisan partner and the second destination of exports, passage of the Mérida Initiative, have built a accounting for roughly one-eighth of all U.S. strong framework for future efforts at cooperation. exports. Border states are particularly dependent on Much more can be done to deepen these efforts, trade with Mexico, but so are states that are distant however, and a new administration should from the border such as Nebraska, Indiana, and look for ways to forge a comprehensive approach Iowa. !e United States also depends on Mexico against organized crime that combines (1) law for more than one-tenth of its petroleum imports. enforcement cooperation, especially targeted Even the labor markets of the two countries have efforts at disrupting money and arms supplies become increasingly intertwined, with immigrant (2) strengthening police and judicial institutions workers from Mexico accounting for a significant in Mexico, and (3) reducing the demand for part of U.S. labor market growth and contributing narcotics in the United States. !is would mark a to the solvency of U.S. entitlement programs by major departure in U.S. drug control policy in the providing new tax revenues. past but one that would have significantly more Despite these trends, not enough attention has chances of success than previous efforts. been given to deepening economic integration Introduction and Overview: Towards a Strategic Partnership with Mexico < forward-looking agenda should now address address now should agenda forward-looking A distribution. income equitable more a and creation job promote to needed development economic of type the stimulate to attempt not beyond tradeandinvestment. NAFTA did !,.5&@'6<15,(2'$,"'=%(%/5(/'C&,(,05&'3(1#/"%15,( help particular, NAFTA in would two its partners, and Mexico between gap income Narrowingthe disparities. income reduce and standards living raise to seek should First, it concerns. basic three U U U UÊ U U UÊ

food andproductsafety. stronger coordinationonhealthstandardsand immigration inspectorsatexistingcheckpoints. communities. ensure thebestpossibleoutcomesforborder local authoritiesonborderinvestmentsto andstate with theMexicangovernment checkpoints. Theadministrationshouldconsult expanding immigrationandcustoms investments inborderinfrastructure,including economic crisis. openforMexicoduringthecurrent Reserve ontheother.have sharpeffects can andfiscalpolicyinonecountry monetary to stabilizetheU.S.economysinceshiftsin when pursuing measures Mexican government Harmonizing regulationsandlabeling,including Harmonizing IncreasingthenumberofU.S.customsand Includinginanymajorstimuluspackage MaintainingalineofcreditfromtheFederal Engaginginongoingconsultationswiththe security through: people acrosstheborderwhileensuring by: economic downturn Ê“«ÀœÛˆ˜}ÊÌ iʓœÛi“i˜ÌʜvÊ}œœ`ÃÊ>˜`Ê Ê ˜ÃÕÀˆ˜}ÊiVœ˜œ“ˆVÊÃÌ>LˆˆÌÞÊ`ÕÀˆ˜}ÊÌ iÊ in the United States and in global markets and and markets global in United and States the in Mexico’sturmoil economic to vulnerability special business. border cross- in involved become to businesses medium di particularly it made have complex di and infrastructures border poor as (such trade non-tari reduce should it Second, United States. the to migration Mexican curb Exploring waystolinktradeanddevelopment U U U environment, potentiallyincluding: and Mexicoonoptionsforimprovingthe Promoting dialoguewithbothCanada U U U U in thefutureby: technology. development scientificgroupon cleancoal limit carbonemissions. system orregionalcoordinatedcarbontaxto fuels. treatment inMexicanhospitals. small butstrategicinvestmentsovertime. inexpensive modelsthatcouldbescaledupwith relatively and TIES(USAID)programsoffer technology. Boththeexisting Comexus(Fulbright) especially intheareasofscienceand educational exchangebythetwogovernments, standards. compliance withlaborandenvironmental three countriestoassesswaysofimproving cooperation overtimefortargetedpurposes. at creativewaystoaugmentdevelopment Forming a North Americanresearchand aNorth Forming Americanemissiontrading CreatingaNorth Cooperatinginthedevelopmentofalternative ExploringpossibilitiesforMedicaretocover Increasinggraduallytheexpenditureson Namingspecialrepresentativesfromall Creatingabinationaltaskforcetolook ff erences in national standards) that that standards) national in erences ! ird, it should acknowledge acknowledge should it ird, ffi cult for small and and small for cult ff barriers to to barriers seek to prevent an economic slowdown from rights. And while Mexican migrants send roughly turning into a full-blown crisis, with significant $23 billion back home in remittances, there is no spillover effects for the U.S. economy. question that the loss of so many of the country’s most entrepreneurial citizens represents a net loss !CC#$//,-.",22,.#!',&- for Mexico’s competitiveness. Most of the efforts needed to provide Migration is transforming the social fabric alternatives to migration and manage future and economies of both the United States and flows will have to be taken unilaterally in one Mexico. Today over 12 million Mexicans live in country or the other; however, the effects of the United States, roughly half of them without measures taken in one country will have profound legal documents. Roughly one-third of all U.S. effects on the other. Strategic thinking between immigrants come from Mexico, with about the two countries could provide incentives and 300,000 new unauthorized immigrants arriving opportunities to pursue the best policy options each year. While immigration produces net available. A permanent dialogue between the ; benefits to the U.S. economy as a whole, the rapid two countries on migration can help produce the pace of immigration and the unauthorized status best policies available, even though each country The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership of so many immigrants pose specific challenges will need to pursue its own efforts to deal with for integration, wage competition, and labor particular policy reforms.

!,.5&@'6<15,(2'$,"'*))"#225(/'3005/"%15,(

UÊÊ-ÌÀi˜}Ì i˜ˆ˜}ÊÀi>Êˆ““ˆ}À>̈œ˜Êi˜vœÀVi“i˜ÌÊ immigrants currently in the United States; and (3) efforts by: enforcement measures with an emphasis on strict U Limiting sporadic workplace raids in favor of employer sanctions and a verifiable national developing an effective e-verify system that can database of eligible workers. determine eligibility for employment. U In the short-term, exploring measures to reduce U Redirecting funds from construction of the border visa backlogs and provide some pathways fence into an increased number of border to citizenship for unauthorized workers (both inspectors at key checkpoints and renewed the DREAM Act and AgJobs provide possible efforts to develop virtual detection equipment to approaches though are not substitutes for ensure that the border is not used by terrorists or comprehensive reform). drug trafficking organizations. UÊÊ Ý«œÀˆ˜}ʜ«Ìˆœ˜ÃÊvœÀÊÌ iÊ1°-°Ê}œÛiÀ˜“i˜ÌÊÌœÊ complement Mexican government efforts to UÊÊ1«`>̈˜}Ê1°-°Êˆ““ˆ}À>̈œ˜Ê>ÜÃÊ̜ʫÕÌÊÌ i“Ê invest in migrant-sending communities. ˆ˜Êˆ˜iÊÜˆÌ Ê
“iÀˆV>½Ãʘii`ÃÊvœÀʈ““ˆ}À>˜ÌÊ labor and security priorities by: UÊÊÊ ˜}>}ˆ˜}ÊÌ iÊ i݈V>˜Ê}œÛiÀ˜“i˜ÌÊ systematically in discussions on how the two U Ensuring a comprehensive overhaul of governments can better coordinate issues America’s outdated immigration laws with involving migration, including visa policies for an approach that includes (1) modernization third-party nationals, capacity development and simplification of the visa system with vœÀÊ i݈Vœ½Ãʈ““ˆ}À>̈œ˜ÊÃiÀۈVi]Ê>˜`Ê«œˆVÞÊ new work-based visas sufficient to provide an changes needed in both countries in the event alternative to illegal immigration; (2) measures to of a change in U.S. immigration law. provide earned regularization for unauthorized Introduction and Overview: Towards a Strategic Partnership with Mexico > to dealwitheachothere challenges thatthetwocountriesfaceintrying ! ,-D$/',-.",-"E&#C$#"4&22)-,',$/ UÊ U U U UÊ“«ÀœÛˆ˜}ÊLœÀ`iÀʈ˜vÀ>ÃÌÀÕVÌÕÀiÊÌ ÀœÕ} \ !,.5&@'6<15,(2'$,"'3(7#215(/'5('I,")#"'A,004(515#2 developed binationalmechanismstomanage e become laboratoriesofexperimentationincreative international gateways. advantages thatborder communitiesshouldhave as and infrastructure, despitethecomparative country, andsignificantdeficitsinemployment average incomesathird lessthanintherest ofthe among thepoorest intheUnited States, with responsibility. U.S.border communitiesremain know nopoliticalboundariesandrequire joint su enforcement; andthechallengesofcleanair the needforcross-border cooperation inlaw unilateral strategiesforsecurityplayoutagainst raise thecostoftradeandlimitcross-border ties; bottlenecks causedby deficientinfrastructure ff

sector investments. private for guarantees loan including projects, employment-generating and infrastructure fund to (NADBank) Bank Development American infrastructure. border for times approval reduce to government U.S. the in agencies local and state, federal, security. ensuring while crossings border speed to inspectors border additional of assignment short-term, Strengthening the mandate of the North North the of mandate the Strengthening relevant all involve that mechanisms Developing the in and, points crossing new Constructing ffi border communitiesby: Ê-̈“Տ>̈˜}ÊÌ iÊVœ“«>À>̈ÛiÊ>`Û>˜Ì>}iʜvÊ orts atinternationalcooperation.Mostorts have e border hasbecomeamicrocosm ofallthe At thesametime,border communitieshave cient waterremind peoplethatnaturalresources ff ectively. At theborder UÊ U U UÊ“«ÀœÛˆ˜}ÊÃiVÕÀˆÌÞÊLÞ\ U U objectives have oftenreplaced unilateralthinking border, where jointe border resemble thatoftheU.S.-Canadian made tomakegovernance oftheU.S.-Mexican bilateral cooperation.Over time,e andparalyzedhas wastedpotentialopportunities too often,rigidinsistenceonnationalsovereignty border communitiescanbesafeandprosperous. All e and statelocalgovernments toensure thatthese coordination isneededbetween federalagencies margins offederalpolicy. However, muchbetter security, andpromote development, generallyatthe resources, respond tonaturaldisasters,ensure public communities. bottlenecks andstimulatedevelopment inborder infrastructure thatcanhelpovercome existing provides toincludefundsforborder anopportunity infrastructure development initiatives in2009 and Mexican governments maypursuemajor development oftheborder region. with significantbenefitsforbothsecurityand

ff virtual fencing. virtual border. the cross who criminals apprehend and track to together work to governments state and local for border. the of sides both on workforce knowledgeable and highly-skilled more a develop to partnerships hubs. transportation modern of development the and technologies new in clusters economic cross-border of development Redirecting funds for a physical fence into into fence physical a for funds Redirecting framework legal and capacity the Strengthening educational cross-border for funding Providing the encourage to funds federal Providing air quality. air and water on cooperation environmental Ê iÛiœ«ˆ˜}ʘiÜʓiV >˜ˆÃ“ÃÊvœÀÊ orts canbeconsolidatedandexpandedsothat orts In thepossibilitythatU.S. theshort-term, ff orts tosecureorts common ff orts shouldbe orts

/'#)4')#,-."4&-/)5'!',&-"!-C"4&&%$#!',&- Partnership, a trilateral effort to get agencies in the three governments to work together on Strengthening the U.S. partnership with Mexico economic and security issues. A North American will require new channels for communication and Business Council, made up of CEOs of large ongoing consultation that allow strategic thinking companies, was invited to participate in this to take place. From the early 1980s through 2006, process. !e North American Leaders’ Summits the primary formal structure for dialogue between and SPP have been useful in addressing common the two countries was the Binational Commission standards and border policies. However, they have (BNC), which brought together cabinet officials left out other stakeholders in North America, from both governments for an annual meeting that including labor, environmental organizations, focused on a range of bilateral topics. As contacts and small and medium businesses, and provided among cabinet officials of the two governments insufficient opportunities to address major issues accelerated in recent years, however, the BNC of integration among the three countries, such as increasingly became an unfocused bureaucratic education, technology transfer, and environmental ? exercise, and it has not met since 2006 by mutual cooperation. agreement of the two governments. In 2005 A new administration will need to create The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership the U.S., Mexican, and Canadian governments both bilateral (U.S.-Mexico) and trilateral (U.S.- started a series of annual North American Leaders’ Mexico-Canada) channels for consultation and Summits, tied in with the Security and Prosperity cooperation. While most consultation across the border takes place among cabinet agencies routinely in the process of their operations, !,.5&@'6<15,(2'$,"':1"4&14"5(/' structuring an annual leadership meeting each A,(24.1%15,('%()'A,,<#"%15,(' year with the leaders of the three North American countries, which can include a separate bilateral UÊÊ >ˆ˜Ì>ˆ˜ˆ˜}Ê>˜Ê>˜˜Õ>Ê œÀÌ Ê
“iÀˆV>˜Ê leadership meeting, would help focus attention Leaders Summit with the heads of state on major issues that need to be resolved and to of the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. This develop strategic thinking. summit could include a separate meeting between the Presidents of the United States 'A$"*!B"(&#*!#C="(,#/'"/'$%/"!-C"" and Mexico. It might also provide a venue 2&#$"!2E,',&)/".&!5/ for creating a set of working groups on key cross-border issues (some of them !e new administration and Congress are taking bilateral and some trilateral) that address office in the middle of the country’s worst key challenges for the future (e.g. border economic crisis in decades and will inherit two security and facilitation, technology and wars in the Middle East. While we believe that innovation, educational cooperation). Any the administration and Congress should give working groups should include relevant significantly greater attention to Mexico from the stakeholders from business, academia, and start of the administration, we also recognize that civil society, as well as government. not all measures—especially those that require significant new expenditures—will be possible UÊÊ Ài>̈˜}Ê>Ê œÀ`iÀÊ7œÀŽˆ˜}ÊÀœÕ«Ê within the U.S. government that engages over the first few months. It will be important to relevant federal, state, and local agencies separate out what is feasible in the short-term from to review and expedite infrastructure longer-term goals. Nonetheless, several issues lend projects and harmonize them with local themselves to immediate action from the start of development plans. the 2009. 6@ Introduction and Overview: Towards a Strategic Partnership with Mexico to create goodwill between the two countries countries two the between goodwill create to serve would issue single no that noting Itworth is governments. Canadian and U.S. the from support with but government Mexican the by started fund development a and energy; alternative and biofuels on cooperation hospitals; Mexican certified in treatment Medicare for allowance cooperation; ! administration. the in early cooperation bilateral for possibilities ambitious more the of some on discussions begin to immediately,worthwhile is it !,.5&@'6<15,(2'$,"'C%".@'*&15,(' UÊ UÊ UÊ UÊ ese could include increased educational educational increased include could ese Even though not all issues can be addressed addressed be can issues all not Eventhough greater emphasisonfinancialintelligence, any majorstimuluspackage. credit totheMexicangovernment. and thecontinuedextensionofaline consultations withtheMexicangovernment economy throughongoingeconomic stakeholders involved. range ofissueswithabroadergroup American LeadersSummittoaddressawider on bilateralissuesandrevisingtheNorth atthehighestlevel Mexican government Ê,iœÀˆi˜Ìˆ˜}ÊVœÕ˜ÌiÀ˜>ÀVœÌˆVÃÊ«œˆVÞÊ̜ʈ˜VÕ`iÊ Ê*ÀˆœÀˆÌÞʈ˜VÕȜ˜ÊœvÊLœÀ`iÀʈ˜vÀ>ÃÌÀÕVÌÕÀiʈ˜Ê Ê*Àœ“œÌˆ˜}ʓi>ÃÕÀiÃÊ̜ÊÃÌ>LˆˆâiÊÌ iÊ i݈V>˜Ê Ê-ÌÀÕVÌÕÀˆ˜}ÊÀi}Տ>ÀÊVœ˜ÃՏÌ>̈œ˜ÃÊÜˆÌ ÊÌ iÊ

UÊ citizens in both countries. both in citizens to benefits greater even bring could that agenda bilateral ambitious more a for groundwork the prepare to options future about dialogue ongoing maintaining worth is it crisis, economic of time a cooperation. security of forms enhanced o currently are that issues of range a on discussions in engage to governments two the for allow would Unitedwhich States, the in reform immigration comprehensive a than verification system; substituting efforts to verification system;substitutingefforts todevelopaneffectiveemployer efforts byreplacingworkplace raidswith reform Initiative. inMexico,asvisualizedtheMerida reform tostrengthenpoliceandjudicial and efforts include targetedlawenforcementcooperation A comprehensiveapproachshouldalso increased investmentindemand-reduction. trafficking,and to stem arms efforts DREAM Act. backlog reduction;andapprovingthe to bordermanagement;promotingvisa technology andcooperativeapproaches todevelopvirtual with Mexicoefforts build aphysicalbarrierontheborder Ê/>Žˆ˜}ÊÃÌi«ÃÊ̜Ü>À`ÊiÛi˜ÌÕ>Êˆ““ˆ}À>̈œ˜Ê While someoftheseoptionsmaybedi ff the table including including table the ffi cult in in cult

Threatened on All Fronts: Strengthening Security Cooperation to Confront Organized Crime 66 !e United States and Mexico are facing serious aged 15 to 64 to 0.8 percent, an increase of about common security challenges that threaten the 400,000 users. !e Mexican government’s 2008 The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership safety of their citizens far beyond their mutual survey of national illegal drug use found a 30% border. One particularly troubling aspect of these increase in consumption in six years, and a 51% challenges is the threat posed by organized crime increase in addictions over the same period.2 groups operating on both sides of the border. To satisfy this vast consumer market and in !ese illegal groups have developed sophisticated response to U.S. efforts to shut down trafficking trafficking networks to satisfy the demand for routes throughout the Caribbean in the 1980s and illegal drugs amongst millions of consumers, and 1990s, traffickers have increasingly treated Mexico launder the money and obtain the weapons needed as the preferred transshipment route for illegal to defend and protect their criminal enterprise. drugs flowing into the United States. An estimated !e extent of the consumer market is 90 percent of the cocaine entering the United staggering. In 2007, for example, 2.8 percent of States each year passes through Mexico and its United States residents over the age of 12 were territorial waters and, according to a report by the considered to be dependent on or having abused National Drug Intelligence Center, Mexico became an illicit drug. Nearly 20 million reported using the primary source of methamphetamines entering an illicit drug in the previous month, according the United States in 2007.3 !ough precise figures to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, are difficult to obtain, the U.S.-Mexico drug 2007.1 Mexico also appears to have a growing drug trade is estimated to generate between US$15 consumption problem. According to the United and 25 billion in profits for Mexico’s cartels, Nation’s Office of Drugs and Crime, consumption representing roughly two percent of the country’s of cocaine in Mexico roughly doubled between GDP.4 As narcotics flow north, the profits from 2002 and 2007 from 0.4 percent of the population drug sales in the United States return to Mexico

1. http://oas.samhsa.gov/nsduh/2k7nsduh/2k7Results.cfm#Fig2-1 In 2007, an estimated 19.9 million Americans aged 12 or older were current (past month) illicit drug users, meaning they had used an illicit drug during the month prior to the survey interview. !is estimate represents 8.0 percent of the population aged 12 years old or older. Illicit drugs include marijuana/hashish, cocaine (including crack), heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, or prescription-type psychotherapeutics used non-medically. 2. National Drug !reat Assessment 2008: http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs25/25921/25921p.pdf 3. Encuesta Nacional de Drogas, 2008 4. It should be noted that estimates on the value of illegal drugs consumed in the United States vary widely. !e most recent comprehensive source of US government data is from 2001, rendering current estimates even more unreliable. See “What America’s Users Spend on Illegal Drugs, 1988–2000, December 2001 http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/drugfact/ american_users_spend2002/index.html 68 1. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0 8 6 4 2 0 Threatened on All Fronts: Strengthening Security Cooperation against Organized Crime General’s o violence. In October 2008, Mexico’s Attorney authorities andinstitutionsthrough payo has ledtra forgrowing andprocessing illegaldrugs territory ! safety, oflaw, therule anddemocraticgovernance. increasingly powerfulposingathreat topublic within licitandilliciteconomies. ofbusinesses humans, andtheprotection/extortion as tra their operationsintoothercriminalactivitiessuch established, organized crimegroups oftendiversify weapons. tra With north-south countries, bulkcashtransfers,andthepurchase of through complextransactionsthatinvolve third 5. War inMexico Double in’08,” December 9,2008. See Washington Post, “In Mexico, AssassinsofIncreasing Skill,” December 12,2008;andNew York Times, “KillingsinDrug e battleforcontrol over tra As aresult, organized crimehasbecome ffi 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 cking inpiratedgoods,automobiles,and http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/WDR.html Source: United Nations O (,.)#$"6=" 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 ffi ffi ckers toseekinfluenceover civilian ce announcedthatithaddetained 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 Per Capita CocaineConsumption,1999–2008 ffi ce for Drug Controlce forDrug Policy andPrevention World andGlobal Reports Illicit Drug Trends, 1999–2008. ffi ffi cking routes and cking routes well ff s and law enforcement personnelaswell. Worse stillis gangs beingtargeted,butgovernment o 5,376 deathsasofDecember 2. 117 percent increase) compared to2007,atotalof related killingsin2008hadmore than doubled(a General Eduardo Medina Mora statedthatdrug- According topress Mexico’s reports, Attorney public institutionsandahorrifyingbodycount. candidate-selections andelectoralcampaigns. process by contributingmoneytoinfluence have even triedtoinfluenceMexico’s electoral aswell. collaboration withthecartels Tra underinvestigation forpossible is reportedly tra (SIEDO) forallegedconnectionstodrug- senior o ffi Sadly, thecosthasbeenalossofconfidencein ckers, andano ffi cials initsanti-organized crimeunit ffi cial withintheU.S.Embassy United States Global Mexico 5 Not onlyare rival ffi ffi

cials and ckers

(,.)#$"8="Federal Drug Control Spending, by Function, FY 2002–FY 2009

$15,000.0015000 Total Spending

1.2 $12,000.00

1.0 12000

0.8

$9,000.009000 Supply- Supression

$6,000.00 6000 Demand -Reduction 67 The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership Budget Authority in Millions Authority Budget $3,000.003000

$0.00 0 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Enacted Request Fiscal Year

Source: John Carnevale & Associates LLC. Policy Brief, “Federal Drug Budget Trend.” February 2008.

the terror that much of the public feels as a result that have both a short-term impact on the horrific of the seemingly random violence. A senseless violence, public insecurity, and the coercive effects grenade attack on a public gathering in Morelia, of organized crime on governments and society Michoacán during Mexico’s Independence Day in both countries, as well as a long-term strategy festivities on September 15, resulted in eight dead to strengthen public institutions, prevent drug and scores wounded. Responsibility for the attack abuse, and generate long-lasting benefits for both has been attributed to a drug cartel, but no rival countries. cartel members were present at the attack. !is paper proposes to articulate a !e United States and Mexico have comprehensive and multi-dimensional approach substantially increased cooperation to deal to tackling the challenges of organized crime by with organized crime in recent years, and the offering a set of policy options for authorities of establishment of the Mérida Initiative has served both countries. While each country must undertake to reinforce a spirit of collaboration between the difficult and sometimes painful policy reforms two countries.6 Yet much more needs to be done. of their own, these reforms are best undertaken Strategies and policy reforms must be adopted in the context of binational collaboration and

6. In October 2007 President Bush announced a major new initiative to “… combat the threats of drug trafficking, transnational crime, and terrorism in the Western Hemisphere.” Known as the Mérida Initiative (MI), the plan called for the United States to provide $1.4 billion in equipment, training, and technical cooperation to Mexico and the countries of Central America over three years. 6: Threatened on All Fronts: Strengthening Security Cooperation against Organized Crime for asuccessfuljointstrategy. on successfulcollaborationisanessentialingredient cross-border fingerpointing.Building based trust too great forcollaborationtobesubsumedby cooperation. operations. Many of these e these of Many operations. crime organized dismantle to prosecutions in policing e and intelligence-sharing both including level, cooperation ! e these in role supporting critical a play can responsibility, Mexican government U.S. the a primarily is this While 2008. in achieved were that initiatives legislative existing on build that reforms structural major these on depends long-term the in crime organized undermine to Mexico’s operations. their dismantling ability government’s the increase and e institutions enforcement law and judicial strengthening for United States. the from coming chains supply interrupting and e priority towards them orient to strategies control drug U.S. ! activities. their fuel that cash and weapons of flow the disrupting and market consumer U.S. the reducing on focusing than cartels’operations e more be would that do could government U.S. the that important operations. arms and money of flow illicit the to Mexico with fashion coordinated a in domestic its up step significantly United to States the for collaboration. binational by times, at and, dialogue bilateral by strengthened be can but responsibilities, unilateral primarily involve for bothcountries. situation security the improving to contribute can e 7. See Susan S.Everingham andC.Peter Rydell, “Modeling Demand,” Drug Policy Drug Research Center, RANDCorp., 1994 ff orts by each country, individually and jointly, and country, each by individually orts is requires a major rethinking of current current of rethinking major a requires is e third area involves greater greater involves area third e We have identified three priority areas where where areas Wepriority three identified have institution-building in Mexico, especially especially Mexico, in institution-building demand reduction e reduction demand ff

orts, as well as e as well as orts, to reduce the influence of cartels cartels of influence the reduce to between both countries both between ! ! ere is probably nothing more more nothing probably is ere ! e stakesare toohighandtherisks e second area involves support support involves area second e ff orts for demand reduction reduction demand for orts ! ff e first and second areas areas second and first e ective in undermining the the undermining in ective ff ff ff ective cooperation cooperation ective orts will require both both require will orts orts orts law enforcement enforcement law ff that fuel cartel cartel fuel that ectiveness in in ectiveness and to work work to and

and at every every at and ! ff e first is is first e orts. orts. curtail curtail

illegal tra consumptionintheUniteddrug States, andthe by competitionfortheprofits generatedby illegal crime, theviolenceisbeingfueledinlargepart violence andinsecurityunleashedby organized While Mexico ofthe isexperiencingthebrunt &("*$!%&-/"!-C"2&-$B #$C)4,-."C$2!-C"!-C"'A$"(5&*" globally. operate syndicates crime organized and Americas, the in countries several spans often trade simultaneously,drug the approaches since regional and bilateral as well as action unilateral and prevention programs). demand-reduction strategies(includingtreatment less e production andtra programs targetingcultivation, source-country strategies. Numerous studies have shown that towardcontrol isheavilyskewed supplydisruption lie inthefactthatfederalbudgetfordrug explanation forthisapparent contradictionmay control budget. ever expandingnational drug United States over thepastfive years, despitean adults hasremained largelyunchangedinthe amongyouths and consumption ofillegaldrugs Recent government suggestthatthe reports -%.)/#$-"0$%")*#,&#-01 !"#$%&"'$%(%&)*#$+$%"(,%) security strategy. pointasitdefinesitsown binational a starting U.S. administrationshouldcarefully consideras as pragmaticpolicyoptionsthattheincoming end, thefollowing recommendations are intended and increase securityinbothcountries. To this long termstrategytoundermineorganized crime they are alsoessentialelementsofasuccessful proven themostdi on theUnited States andtheseproblems have money laundering,andillegalweapons fallsheavily Mexico. Addressing theproblems ofconsumption, ff ective in reducing drug consumptionthan ective inreducing drug ffi cking ofhigh-powered weapons backto ffi ffi cult toconfront. Nevertheless, cking are more expensive and 7

) " ! e Reducing demand for illegal drugs in the are also important. As such, it will be important United States and Mexico is critical to weakening for both countries to communicate and collaborate the grip of organized crime, and treatment and on best practices for treatment and prevention prevention programs are essential to reducing programs. Options for addressing these challenges demand. Yet according to one analysis, there has include: been a 57-percent rise in the U.S. national drug control budget for “supply suppression” programs t

.BJOUBJOJOH
BO
POHPJOH
EJBMPHVF
CFUXFFO
CPUI
between 2002 and 2008, and these now account countries on best practices in prevention and for two-thirds of the national drug control budget. treatment of drug abuse. Conversely, demand reduction programs grew by only 2.7 percent in the same period.8 Given this t

4USFOHUIFOJOH
UIF
/FUXPSL
GPS
UIF
5SFBUNFOU
disparity in budget priorities, the United States of Addictions and the new efforts to construct should consider the following policy options when public centers for treatment in cities throughout rethinking its national drug program: Mexico. 69

t


'VMMZ
GVOEJOH
BOE
SFTUPSJOH
USBOTQBSFODZ
JO
UIF
Since demand reduction is closely linked to The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership U.S. government’s data collection and reporting educational and health programs that target at on illicit drug use, consumption trends, and risk youth providing them with alternatives to performance measurements for government joining the illegal economy or youth gangs where supported and community-based programs. consumption and violence are often intertwined, the Mexican government might consider: t


*NQSPWJOH
USBDLJOH
BOE
SFQPSUJOH
PG
TUBUF
and local investments in drug prevention and t

&YQBOEJOH
NFOUPSJOH
QSPHSBNT
GPS
DIJMESFO
treatment programs, including social and at risk, and operating extended school hours educational programs targeting at-risk youth. (Escuela Siempre Abierta) in evenings and on weekends with organized sports and educational t

'PSNVMBUJOH
B
/BUJPOBM
%SVH
$POUSPM
4USBUFHZ
activities; and expanding and strengthening and accompanying budget that reflect the vocational training programs and technical findings of empirical research and gathered schools for youth. data. Funding should prioritize treatment and prevention programs including local initiatives t

*ODSFBTJOH
GVOEJOH
GPS
DPNNVOJUZ
BOE
with a proven track record of successful municipal based and run youth outreach intervention and prevention. centers and violence prevention programs. Such programs should also include support for t

*ODSFBTJOH
GFEFSBM
GVOEJOH
GPS
USFBUNFOU
BOE
parents and very young children (pre-K), since support programs for addicts. Twenty percent of addressing domestic violence, and expanding cocaine users consume approximately 70 percent access to education and health care programs of the cocaine in the United States. Programs for young children is an important factor designed to reduce consumption amongst heavy in preventing gang involvement and drug users is smart policy. consumption later in life.

While efforts at demand-reduction are most t

4VQQPSU
GPS
SFJODPSQPSBUJPO
QSPHSBNT
GPS
SFDFOU
important in the United States, efforts to reduce deportees with criminal records to provide demand and better treat drug addicts in Mexico better education and/or work alternatives for

8. See Carnevale Associates LLC, Policy Brief, Februray 2008, “FY 02-09 Budget Emphasizes Least Effective Ingredients of Drug Policy.” 6< Threatened on All Fronts: Strengthening Security Cooperation against Organized Crime

Sinaloa; 653 599 Baja California;

357 State of Mexico; Mexico; of State Mexico by State, Jan. 1–Dec. 19,2008 (,.)#$"7= confiscated from organized crimeinMexico approximately 90percent oftheweapons Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), According totheU.S.Bureau ofAlcohol, !"#$%&'"()*+,-&.(#*/$-0123"() t
San Diego, from datacollectedby 2008 Source: killingssurpass5,000mark” “Cartel-related in youth violence. designed toreduce thepublichealthimpactof socialpolicies existing orimplementingnew Use thisresearch asthebasisformodifying decriminalization andregulation onthesecosts. aswell asestimateson the impactof drugs, health risks,andsocialharmcausedby illegal estimated economiccostoftheviolence,public
$PNNJTTJPOJOH
B
TUVEZ
BOE
SFQPSU
PO
UIF
deportation. deportation. toyouthand employmentupon opportunities U.S. custodycanleadtoimproved educational high schoolcurriculumtoMexican youth in these disa . Justice inMexico Project, Trans-Border Institute, University of U U U " Cartel-Related in Killings ff ected youth. Programs thato Reforma Reforma 1,806 All otherstates; 1,642 Chihuahua; newspaper. News December Report ff

er a t
Policy optionsinclude: willneedtobeapriorityinthefuture.cartels weapons andidentifypurchases destinedforthe Barrett rifles.Additional cooperationtotrack 66-millimeter anti-tankweapons, and.50-caliber weapons, aswell as.30-calibermachineguns, sophisticated armssuchasM16andAK-type originate intheUnited States, includinghighly t
t
t
t
t
federally licensedfirearms dealers(known as ATF agentsmonitoringthemore than6,600 arms toMexico. devoted topreventing theillegaltra that expired in2004. weapons thatstrengthens themodestrestrictions US market andfindingtheirwayintoMexico. magazinerifles”capacity military floodingthe “non-sporting” firearms includingall“large interpretation of prohibiting theimportation assault riflesby restoring thepre-2000 and rule identification ofconfiscatedweapons inMexico. Spanish-language e-Trace systemforrapid are “straw purchasers” disclose informationonindividualstheysuspect owners andprivate citizens toanonymously purchases atgunshows. andregulationsby tighteningrules governing standardizing background checksatgunshows devoted touncovering “straw purchases” and to Mexico. firearminvestigating, andthwarting tra and specialagentsdedicatedtomonitoring, Operations Investigatorsnumber ofIndustry 55,000 nationwide,aswell asincreasing the FFLs) alongtheborder, andapproximately
*ODSFBTJOH
64
MBX
FOGPSDFNFOU
QFSTPOOFM

*NQMFNFOUJOH
BO
FĊFDUJWF
CBO
PO
BMM
BTTBVMU

4USJDUMZ
FOGPSDJOH
UIF
FYJTUJOH
CBO
PO
JNQPSUFE

&YQBOEJOH
BDDFTT
JO
.FYJDP
UP
UIF
"5'T

1SPWJEJOH
B
NFDIBOJTN
GPS
64
HVO
TIPQ

*ODSFBTJOH
UIF
OVNCFS
PG
64
JOWFTUJHBUPST
! is shouldincludeadditional ffi cking of ffi cking t

3FHVMBUJOH
DBMJCFS
TOJQFS
SJnFT
VOEFS
UIF
financial transfers receive the same level of National Firearms Act which requires registration scrutiny in each country. with the Department of Justice, an expanded background check, payment of a transfer tax, and t

$PPSEJOBUFE
SFHVMBUJPO
PG
DVSSFODZ
FYDIBOHF
the sign-off of a local law enforcement official houses on both sides of the border. before the firearm may be transferred. t

$PPQFSBUJPO
JO
JODPNFUBY
BENJOJTUSBUJPO
UP
t

3FQMBDJOH
UIF
DVSSFOU
JOFĊFDUJWF
CBO
PO
TPNF
minimize tax evasion and reduce opportunities types of armor-piercing handgun ammunition to avoid scrutiny by public ministries such as with one that incorporates a performance-based Hacienda and Treasury. standard to ensure it applies to all handgun ammunition capable of piercing body armor. t

*NQSPWJOH
DPMMBCPSBUJPO
PO
KPJOU
FĊPSUT
UIBU
aim to freeze assets or accounts of transnational t

3FQFBMJOH
UIF
$POHSFTTJPOBM
QSPIJCJUJPO
PO
criminals. 6; the release of data from ATF’s crime gun trace

database. !e current restriction amounts t

-PXFSJOH
UIF
UISFTIPME
GPS
UIF
NBOEBUPSZ
The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership to a special exemption from the Freedom reporting of single-transaction currency transfers of Information Act (FOIA) which prevents and cash importation into Mexico, from the policymakers and academics from analyzing the current level of US$5,000, and establishing data to identify effective policies to prevent gun automatic triggers for reporting repetitive trafficking. !e restrictions also severely hamper transfers in a single day. the ability of law enforcement agencies to analyze firearms trafficking patterns or identify corrupt /'#$-.'A$-,-."4,D,5,!-",-/',')',&-/ gun dealers. Defeating organized crime and restoring a sense of *#$+$%"(%&)2,%$3)4-5%.$#(%&)-%.)"'$) security in Mexico will be a complex and difficult /$-(#0,$*.0*4%53*6-#7 task. Nevertheless, President Calderon has already made this the top priority for his government Interrupting the flow of money from drug sales and has mobilized massive federal resources and in the United States to Mexican cartel operations personnel to confront the problem. !e United may be the most effective and most difficult way States has joined in supporting these initiatives by to undermine the power of the cartels. With approving $400 million in cooperation as part of estimates of US$15 to 25 billion from illegal drug the Merida Initiative. sales entering Mexico each year from the United A key element of this strategy includes restoring States, the cartels have tremendous resources to public confidence in Mexico’s civilian institutions ply their trade and corrupt government officials to ensure greater collaboration between Mexican and private citizens. Broadly speaking there are society and its government, and between Mexico two ways money from drug sales and other illegal and the United States. Lack of public confidence activities are brought back to Mexico: through a in judicial, law enforcement and other civilian series of electronic transfers that mask the illegal institutions undermines their ability to effectively origins of the money and in bulk cash transfers fight organized crime. Training and equipment over the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border. Options are important and necessary for increasing for additional cooperation include: the technical capacity of public institutions, but measures that increase transparency and t

(SFBUFS
TZNNFUSZ
CFUXFFO
MFHBM
BOE
SFHVMBUPSZ
accountability in government and strengthen the frameworks in each country to ensure that rule of law are equally important. Failure to restore 6> Threatened on All Fronts: Strengthening Security Cooperation against Organized Crime 8$.9.'"()*:%;"2"-5*<,0.$9 undermine Mexican andU.S.e public confidenceinitsinstitutionscanonly t
t
t
might include: Mexico’s for framework institutional sector justice the strengthen Policy to crime. options organized against strategy long-term sustainable a ensuring to vital are level, local and state the at reforms undertaking and reforms, judicial Mexico´s of United E States. the and Mexico in violence and crime organized combat to strategy comprehensive a in element central a be must and governance democratic for ingredient essential an is law of rule the Establishing contribute to despair and greater drug use, and contribute todespair andgreater drug overcrowding andpoorliving conditionsthat detention suchaspleabargaining, by easing achieved by o management systemare essentialandcanbe the authoritiesImprovements intheprison undermining publicconfidencein further and “arraigo” increase thechancesofabuse, organized crime,andlengthy pre-trial detention Prisons centersfor have becomerecruiting the useofdetentionswithoutcharges(arraigo) 40 percent oftheprison population,andlimit pretrial detentioncurrently estimated tobe
2VJDLMZ
SFEVDJOH
UIF
OVNCFS
PG
QFPQMF
JO
important as federal judicial reform. judicial federal as important policing e with hand-in-hand go must liberties civil and rights human for respect on based E institutions. government in confidence public erode further and law of rule the undermine will strengthening and reform sector justice of expense the at e modernization police by overshadowed not and priority a be should which reforms, judicial
+VTUJDF
TFDUPS
SFGPSN
BU
UIF
TUBUF
MFWFM
XIJDI
JT
BT

&ĊFDUJWF
JNQMFNFOUBUJPO
PG
.FYJDP}T

ff orts. A narrow focus on aggressive policing policing aggressive on focus narrow A orts. ff orts. orts. ff ering alternatives topretrial ff ective implementation implementation ective ff ective prosecutions prosecutions ective ff orts. orts.

t
t
t
ways: following the in attempted be can and critical is institutions public’s the these in Restoring result. confidence a as diminished likewise is agencies enforcement law among and between coordination and di extremely citizens and police between collaboration make and police the in confidence public undermines crime organized by agencies enforcement law and police of infiltration and Corruption =.;,$(">"()*'7,*8.5"2, t
t
t
certain non-violentcriminalo certain by encouragingalternative sentencingoptionsfor organized crime in each country. each in crime organized of prosecutions and litigation for procedures and standards on focuses that education legal investigations. state capacitiestoconducte and federal Mexican increase help could cooperation boosting forensics; and science in techniques sharing in particularly investigations, control (accountability) of federal police forces. forces. police federal of (accountability) control and (transparency) review external and internal rulings. and decisions judicial to regard with including transparent, more system justice the make to technologies mechanisms resolution dispute alternative “presumed of innocence.”concept the on based system justice a implementing of points fine the and techniques argument oral on defenders, public especially practitioners, legal Mexican educate to curriculum school law
'VOEJOH
B
DSPTTCPSEFS
.BTUFST
QSPHSBN
JO

&ODPVSBHJOH
CJOBUJPOBM
DPMMBCPSBUJPO
PO

&TUBCMJTIJOH
BOE
GVOEJOH
NFDIBOJTNT
GPS

&ODPVSBHJOH
UIF
VTF
PG
EJHJUBM
BOE
OFX

&ODPVSBHJOH
BOE
FYQBOEJOH
UIF
VTF
PG

'VOEJOH
QSPHSBNT
BOE
DMJOJDT
BOE
SFWBNQJOH
ffi cult. Collaboration Collaboration cult. ff ective forensic forensic ective ff enses. !is would include ensuring the full operation and priorities, especially regarding increases in of the National Registry of all law enforcement the numbers of police officers as an effective agents at federal, state and local levels. crime-deterrent. t

&YUFOEJOH
QPMJDF
SFGPSN
BOE
QSPGFTTJPOBMJ[BUJPO
t

*EFOUJGZJOH
DPNNVOJUZ
QPMJDJOH
TVDDFTT
TUPSJFT
programs, as well as internal and external review at the municipal level in Mexico that can be mechanisms, to state and local forces; and replicated in other localities. creating mechanisms for greater information sharing between federal, state and local forces. (,.)#$":="Mexican Police Forces, 2007 t

4USFOHUIFOJOH
DPVOUFSJOUFMMJHFODF
QSPDFEVSFT
including use of polygraph and background checks (exámenes de control de confianza), as well as the expanded use of financial disclosure State Preventive 6? procedures and audits for law enforcement Police**: 156,993

officials in highly sensitive positions. The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership

State Investigative t

4USFOHUIFOJOH
QPMJDF
QSPGFTTJPOBMJ[BUJPO
QSPHSBNT
Police**: 31,590 U Federal District by establishing a career track within federal and Preventive Police: state police forces; establishing elevated standards 77,862 for entrance exams and education levels for new Municipal Federal District recruits; setting standards for promotion based on Preventive Police*: Investigative Police: 4,315 independent professional review and competence; 139,901 U requiring continuing education and training U U Federal Preventive for all personnel regardless of rank and years of Police (PFP): service; increasing training in technical areas 12,907 such as investigations, crime scene protection, Federal Investigation maintaining chain of custody for evidence, and Agency (AFI): 8,127 international standards in deadly use of force; and *All municipalities **Excluding Federal District establishing better pay and benefits. Source: Sergio Aguayo, El Almanaque Mexicano 2008, Mexico City: Aguilar, 2007–2008, 153–154. t

'PDVTJOH
PO
FĊPSUT
UP
FTUBCMJTI
MBX
BOE
PSEFS
JO
all sectors of society as an important complement to establishing specialized counter-narcotics 2,.$#%(6(%&)"'$)2(7("-#3) forces. Effective state presence and public security is needed throughout the country to Recognizing that the armed forces are playing ensure that organized crime cannot simply shift a role in efforts to fight organized crime, it is to areas of weak state presence. important to ensure that the armed forces both have the equipment and training necessary to t

&ODPVSBHJOH
SFTFBSDI
BOE
QPMJDZ
UIBU
SFDPHOJ[FT
carry out their functions and are subject to the benefits of restorative justice principles, i.e. transparency and accountability criteria similar to the application of alternative dispute resolution other government agencies engaged in combating mechanisms as effective crime deterrents organized crime. In this way, Mexico can bolster efforts to ensure that the armed forces do not fall t

&ODPVSBHJOH
TDJFOUJmD
SFTFBSDI
PO
UIF
prey to the coercive effects of corruption. Options effectiveness of current law enforcement policies for achieving this goal include: 8@ Threatened on All Fronts: Strengthening Security Cooperation against Organized Crime t
t
asked by: U.S. government role when canplayasupporting and implementedby the Mexican government, the be debatedby Mexican societyandpolicymakers, While e 0.$*?(#'"'%'".(-5*<,0.$9 *#,+(.(%&)8(7-"$#-7)!599,#") t
t
t
t
t
process by incorporating input and expertise of process by incorporatinginputandexpertise enforcement activities. (exit strategy)forMexico’s armedforces from law institutions. capacity ofthearmedforces tostrengthen civilian crime. role forthearmedforces incombatingorganized society oncriteriaforalimitedandtemporary consensus withinthenationalCongress andcivil congressional committees. and capacityamongstcivilianadvisersto by theMexican congress, andincreased expertise authoritiesincludinggreater oversight military accountability mechanismsbetween civilianand among others. countries suchasChile,Brazil andSouth Africa, strengthening e and determiningbestpractices injudicial domestic lawenforcement operations. cases ofhumanrightsabuseswhileinvolved in personnelallegedlyinvolved in trials formilitary crime. CISEN already engagedincombatingorganized civilian institutionssuchasthePGR,SSPand
*ODSFBTJOH
BOE
FYQBOEJOH
USBOTQBSFODZ
BOE

1SPWJEJOH
GVOET
GPS
DPNQBSBUJWF
BOBMZTJT

3FGPSNJOH
UIF
NJMJUBSZ
DPEF
UP
HVBSBOUFF
DJWJMJBO

%FNPDSBUJ[JOH
UIF
NJMJUBSZT
EFDJTJPO
NBLJOH

%FmOJOH
DSJUFSJB
BOE
B
UJNFUBCMF
GPS
XJUIESBXBM

6UJMJ[JOH
PQFSBUJPOBM
BOE
JOUFMMJHFODF
HBUIFSJOH

&ODPVSBHJOH
B
QVCMJD
EFCBUF
UIBU
TFFLT
UP
CVJME
ff orts atinstitutional strengthening must orts ff orts andpolicereform in other orts ) t
each area include: cooperation inprosecutions. Policy optionsfor expanded intelligencesharing, andstronger U.S. andMexican lawenforcement agencies, include greater useofjointoperationsbetween strengthened andbroadened to must befurther Nevertheless, lawenforcement cooperation representing inthistrend. amajorleapforward in recent years, withtheMérida Initiative and theUnited States hasincreased significantly crime. Security cooperationbetween Mexico combat thetransnationalthreat oforganized elementofasuccessfulstrategyto also acrucial reforms onitsown, binationalcooperationis important mustundertake While eachcountry 4&&%$#!',&- /'#$-.'A$-,-."5!*"$-($2$-'" t
t
based prosecutions againstindividualsresponsible outevidence- criminal groups, whilecarrying e ability todirect itsresources more e investigative capacitywouldimprove Mexico’s trade.Enhancing at thebottomofdrug are small-scaledealers( crimes of thosedetainedfordrug-related publication ofcrimestatistics. in criminology, suchascollectionand in internationalbestpracticesandstandards the chainofcustody, evidencehandling,and which couldincludetraininginareas suchas public reporting ofcrimestatistics. public reporting withstandard categoriesandmethodsfor surveys judicial andlawenforcement agencies. transparency andaccountabilitymechanismsin forMexico’ssupport e for commoncrime.
4VQQPSUJOH
.FYJDPT
JOWFTUJHBUJWF
DBQBDJUZ

4VQQPSUJOH
UIF
TUBOEBSEJ[BUJPO
PG
WJDUJNJ[BUJPO

1SPWJEJOH
UFDIOJDBM
BTTJTUBODF
BOE
mOBODJBM
ffi ciently atthehigherechelonsoforganized ff narcomenudistas orts tocreate greaterorts ! e majority ff ectively and

) or

@'$,()'7,("()*:."('*8.5"2,*A2'".(# @7-$"()*?(',55"),(2,*

With multiple law enforcement agencies operating Effective law enforcement operations, on both sides of the border, sometimes with investigations, and prosecutions depend in a overlapping or conflicting jurisdictions and significant way on the authorities’ capacity to duties, it is essential that communications and gather intelligence effectively, and utilize it in collaboration be streamlined and consolidated as a timely manner. Sharing intelligence between much as possible. In addition, competition for Mexican and U.S. police and prosecutors has resources and lack of trust in other agencies within been hampered by several factors, but especially a government or across the border are very real by mistrust and fear of corruption. Failure to and serve to undermine the effectiveness of law effectively share intelligence has meant that enforcement efforts. As such, policy options may important opportunities to strike a blow at include: organized crime have been missed. Options for improving intelligence sharing include: 86 t

$POEVDUJOH
B
GVMM
SFWJFX
PG
CFTU
QSBDUJDFT
BOE

lessons learned from other instances of cross- t

+PJOU
DPOTVMUBUJPOT
PO
JOUFMMJHFODF
EBUBTZTUFN
The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership border inter-agency cooperation that lead to construction, e.g., Plataforma México and effective law enforcement efforts. Important the DEA’s Narcotic and Dangerous Drug lessons could be taken from efforts to combat Information System. child abduction and human trafficking, for instance. t

+PJOU
DPOTVMUBUJPOT
PO
EFWFMPQNFOUT
JO
information-sharing among national-level t

#BTFE
PO
UIJT
BOBMZTJT
FTUBCMJTIJOH
KPJOU
PS
agencies and between these and state-local-tribal combined bi-national law enforcement units levels. capable of quick response to cartel activity. !ese units should be fully vetted, well trained, and t

&YQBOEJOH
UIF
4PVUIXFTU
CPSEFS
i)JHI
*OUFOTJUZ
continually monitored, internally and externally, Drug Trafficking Area” program to include for potential infiltration by organized crime. collaboration with Mexican law enforcement !ey should be fully integrated with operational agencies. capacity in law enforcement, intelligence gathering, and prosecution. t


6OEFSUBLJOH
B
SFWJFX
PG
UIF
RVBMJUZ
BOE
efficiency with which actionable intelligence is t

*ODSFBTJOH
PQFSBUJPOBM
JOUFHSBUJPO
CFUXFFO
developed and shared among law enforcement local, state, and federal police forces engaged in services, and making recommendations for combating organized crime activities in both improving systems for sharing actionable countries. In the case of Mexico, constitutional information. reforms will first need to be enacted to enable closer collaboration between federal, state, and t

$POTVMUBUJPOT
PO
CFTU
QSBDUJDFT
GPS
USBJOJOH
PG
local law enforcement to combat organized intelligence analysts and operatives. crime. t

4USFOHUIFOJOH
DPVOUFSJOUFMMJHFODF
QSPDFEVSFT
t

*ODSFBTJOH
DSPTTCPSEFS
SBQJE
SFTQPOTF
IPUMJOFT
including use of polygraph and background like those in use in El Paso/Ciudad Juárez for checks (exámenes de control de confianza), as quick response to cartel activity in border cities. well as the expanded use of financial disclosure procedures and audits for Mexican military intelligence services and the high command 88 Threatened on All Fronts: Strengthening Security Cooperation against Organized Crime t
t
mechanisms shouldinclude: options forbroadening andstrengthening these and multilaterale collectively are essentialfrom the outset.Regional inthehemisphere,elsewhere soe Mexico willinevitablyshifttra organized crimebetween theUnited States and a channels forcooperationamongstallcountries treatment andprevention strategiesneedtobuild across nationalboundaries andlawenforcement, are intheregion. organized cartels Drug partners coordination and communicationwithother tra challenge offightingorganized crimeandnarcotics U.S. andMexican e venture shouldberegional aswell asbilateral. ! =%5'"5-',$-5*A&&$.-27 B(#%$"()*-*<,)".(-5*-(;* t
ff crime. authorities have beeninfiltratedby organized exists suggestingthatfederal,stateandlocal “narco-politics” given thatsignificantinformation intelligence onorganized crimegroups and and National Security’s (CISEN)togather Police (PFP). Secretariat (SSP)andtheFederal Preventive the intelligenceunitswithinPublic Security and theAFI(Federal Investigation Agency);and, Investigations intoOrganized Crime (SIEDO), the Deputy Attorney General’s O federal Attorney General’s O information andintelligenceo Central American Integration System (SICA). intheSecurity Commissionofthe participation
4USFOHUIFOJOH
UIF
DBQBDJUZ
BOE
PWFSTJHIU
PG

&YQBOEJOH
64
BOE
.FYJDBO
JOWPMWFNFOU
BOE

*ODSFBTJOH
UIF
DBQBDJUZ
PG
UIF
$FOUFS
GPS
3FTFBSDI
forces; armed the of branches all of Mayor) (Estado ected. Moreover, successfulstrategiestocontrol ffi e overarching architecture ofthiscooperative cking cannottakeplacewithoutextensive ff orts are alreadyorts underway, but ff orts toaddress thesharedorts ) ffi ffi ffi ce (PGR),suchas cking routes ff ces withinthe orts towork orts ffi ce forSpecial requires enablingabetterinformedcitizenry Building ingovernment citizen trust agencies and collaborationbetween citizens andtheState. and socialprograms dependonbuildingtrust E 8$.9.'"()*8-$'(,$#7"&*C"'7*6"D"5*@.2",'E t
threats posedby organized crimeintheUnited ! 4&-45)/,&- policy andpractice. and recommendations forimprovements in would betoissueanannualprogress report organizations. academia, journalism,andnon-governmental legislatures, drawnfrom aswell askeyexperts and federalo the goals. policy reformsand further needtoaccomplish recommendations forenhancedcooperation progress inmeetingpre-defined goals,andmake panel wouldmeettwiceannuallytoreport on and lawenforcement cooperation. organized crimeviolence,strengthening judicial inbothcountries,reducingfor illegaldrugs inareas ofreducingof eachcountry demand progress inmeetingthegoalsandobjectives organized crime,bothcountriesshouldconsider: authorities. In caseofcombating theparticular is given legitimacyby themediaandgovernment provide innovative iftheirvoice prevention services on government power, and warn ofcorruption, Civil societycanprovide check animportant to listencitizens andorganized civilsociety. government, andthewillingnessofgovernments through greater transparency andaccountabilityin ff drugs. drugs. illicit on (UNGASS) Session Special Assembly United NationsGeneral the of Review 2008 1998– the of centerpiece prevention—the and e
.FYJDP
BOE
UIF
6OJUFE
4UBUFT
TIPVME
TVQQPSU
ff ere isnomagicbullet fordealingwiththe ective lawenforcement, democraticgovernance, Establishing abinationalreview paneltoassess orts to make demand reduction—treatment reduction—treatment demand make to orts ! e panelwouldbemadeupofstate ffi

! cials, representatives ofnational e panel’s function primary ! e review

States and Mexico. Effectively addressing these agenda of cooperation can pave the way toward problems will require a sustained multidimensional the formulation of joint strategies to confront approach for dealing with the security and law organized crime and drug abuse in both enforcement challenges, institutional weaknesses, countries. !e task is urgent and citizens in and social policy aspects of the problem. both countries are anxiously awaiting action by Successful collaboration through a broader their governments.

87 The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership

Making Economic Integration Work for All: An Agenda for Trade and Development 89 !e United States and Mexico have undergone an production facilities in the U.S. market. Even the

accelerated process of economic integration over labor markets of the two countries have become The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership the past two decades. Trade has tripled between increasingly intertwined, with immigrant workers 1990 and 2008, influenced by the North American from Mexico accounting for a significant part of Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Mexico is now labor market growth in the United States and even the United States’ third largest trading partner contributing to the solvency of U.S. entitlement and the second destination of exports, accounting programs. for roughly an eighth of all U.S. exports. Twenty- While NAFTA succeeded in its central goal two U.S. states depend on Mexico as their first of facilitating the flow of goods and increasing or second destination for exports, and this is investment, since 2001 the growth in trade has especially important for Texas, Arizona, Nebraska, been less than one third of what it was in the California, and Iowa. !e United States accounts previous seven years, only 3 percent since 2001 for roughly two-thirds of Mexican trade and is the versus 9.8 percent before then, with China and destination of 82% of its exports. Most of Mexico’s other Asian countries dramatically increasing oil exports go to the United States which, in turn, their share of the U.S. market. Insufficient depends on Mexican oil for more than a tenth infrastructure at the border, long and often of its imports. U.S. foreign direct investment in unpredictable crossing times, differences in Mexico has increased dramatically.9 Since 1994, regulatory frameworks, and trade disputes all the U.S. has accounted for 62 percent of all foreign have helped undermine the potential for greater direct investment (FDI) in Mexico. In 2007, FDI commercial ties. !e inability of trucks to deliver into Mexico reached record levels of $27 billion, cargo across the border imposes an added drag a rise of 37.8 percent over the previous year.10 on the economies of both countries, especially Mexico’s own FDI has also risen noticeably in in those states that depend heavily on bilateral cement, bakery goods, glass and other activities in trade.11 !ese implicit barriers to trade have a which major Mexican multinationals have set up disproportionate effect on small and medium

9. See data in Andrew Selee, "e United States and Mexico: More "an Neighbors, Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center, 2007. 10. Secretaria de Economia, Direccion General de Inversion Extranjera, Comportamiento de la Inversion Extranjera Directa en Mexico (www.economia.gob.mex) 11. See Sidney Weintraub, “Trade, Investment, and Economic Growth,” in Weintraub, ed., NAFTA’s Impact on North America, Washington, DC: CSIS, 2004; Gary Hufbauer and Jeffrey Schott, NAFTA Revisited: Achievements and Challenges, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 2005; and “Building a North American Community,” Council on Foreign Relations, Independent Task Force Report No. 53, 2005. 8< Making Economic Integration Work For All: An Agenda for Trade and Development about theircompetitive positionintheglobal have donelittletothinkstrategicallytogether states. Moreover, thethree countriesofNAFTA trade andontheeconomiesofborder citiesand inbinational businesses thatwouldliketotakepart 18. 17. 16. 15. 14. 13. 12. economy aswell asthe humancapitalthatwould tolinke infrastructure and centralstatesoftenlackthenecessary Moreover, Mexico’s highlypopulatedsouthern productivity andlimitMexico’s competitiveness. deficiencies. Monopolies inkeyindustriesundercut policy from broad macroeconomic andstructural Mexico’s lacklustergrowth stems,inlargepart, States, similartolevels intheearly1990s. remains roughly asixthofthattheUnited raise livingstandards agenda shouldbetoreduce incomedisparitiesand two tradingpartners. close theincomegapbetween Mexico andits development neededtoaddress jobcreation and agenda forstimulatingthetypeofeconomic investment. NAFTA hasnotestablishedabroader economic integrationbeyond tradeand enough attentionhasbeengiven todeepening inbinationaltrade.medium businessestoparticipate in border forsmalland states,andopenopportunities stimulate theeconomiesofbothcountries,especially about positioningintheglobaleconomy, couldhelp and theUnited States, andthinkingstrategically Addressing implicitbarrierstotrade between Mexico economy vis-à-visChinaorothertradingblocs. the U.S.recession turnsouttobe. for 2009. In November, themultilateralfinancialorganizations lowered Mexico’s GDPgrowth from anestimated 1.9%in2008to0.9 Regional Economic Outlook, Western Hemisphere with datafrom the2004Current Population Survey Je of Tufts University and WOLA, 2008. and Perils ofAgricultural Trade Liberalization intheAmericas, Polaski, “ Enrique Dussell Peters, International Economics, 2001.See alsoLederman,Maloney, andServén, A.Pastor, Robert Integration, Economic Convergence under NAFTA,” inIsabel Studer and Wise, eds., ! Despite growth intradeandinvestment, not ff ere is,however, asnotedby Carol someevidenceofconvergence onmacroeconomic performance, Wise, “Unfulfilled Promise: rey Passel, “Unauthorized Migrants: Numbers andCharacteristics,” Washington, D.C.,Pew Hispanic Center, June 14,2005 ! ! Washington, DC:Brookings, 2007. e Employment ConsequencesofNAFTA.” See Perez, alsoMamerto Sergio Schlessinger, and Tim Wise, e Banco deMexico’s growth forecast for2009isbetween 0.5%and1.5%,dependingonhow deepand long lasting Towards aNorth American Community:Lessonsfrom theOld World fortheNew, . Mexico’s GDP A keygoalofapost-NAFTA Polarizing Mexico: ff ectively totheglobal per capita " e Impact ofaLiberalization Strategy, , International Monetary Fund, Page 20, October 2008. 12

Washington, DC:Global Environment andDevelopment Institute economic futures ofboth. economic integration inawaythatcouldliftthe towork togethertomanage have anopportunity between 1990and2006. million Mexicans moving totheUnited States an alternative todevelopment, withalmost7.5 poverty intheseregions. in thesouthofMexico, accentuated hasfurther sustains asignificantpercentage ofthepopulation industries. SMEs are onlyweakly linkedwithlargerexport the country’s entrepreneurial potential,andmost small, mediumbusinessesstilllagsfarbehind allow themtobecompetitive. to record levels, despitetheBanco deMexico caused thevalue ofthe Mexican pesotodrop economy. In addition,thefinancialcrisishas they have littlehopeoffindingjobsintheformal Mexican migrantstogobackMexico where number ofdocumentedandundocumented industries, are expectedtoforce unprecedented and aslowdown andservice intheconstruction Increased unemployment intheU.S.labormarket dramatic e which isexpectedtodeepenin2009,willhave a demand fortourism. remittances from theUnited States andreduced declining especially from afallinU.S.imports, global financialturmoil.Mexico willbea countries inLatinAmericaduringthepresent makes Mexico oneofthemostvulnerable ! Requiem orRevival: thePromise ofNorth American e interdependence ofthetwoeconomies Lessons from NAFTA. 14 ff Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2000.

ect onMexico’s prospects forgrowth. ! e drop inthepriceofcorn,which 17

!

Washington, DC:Institute for 15 16 e U.S.recession, Migration hasbecome

" e twogovernments 13 Credit for micro, " ff e Promise ected 18

(,.)#$"9="U.S. Trade with Mexico, 1993–2007 (in billions of dollars)

250250

200200

150150

8; 100100 The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership

U.S. imports from Mexico 50 50 U.S. exports to Mexico

0 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Source: U.S. Census, Foreign Trade Statistics deployment of billions of dollars of reserves to aftermath of the assassination of the ruling party’s try to maintain its value during October 2008. presidential candidate in 1994 which provoked !e Bolsa, Mexico’s stock market, paralleled the massive capital flight, the Federal Reserve’s extreme volatility of its U.S., European and Asian Open Market Committee established the North counterparts. Although Mexico was virtually free American Framework Agreement (NAFA), and the of the toxic mortgage-backed securities at the associated bilateral reciprocal currency (“swap”) heart of the crisis, and the Mexican government arrangements with the Banco de Mexico and the has followed conservative and responsible fiscal Bank of Canada. !e Fed’s swap arrangements, policies, the country’s economy has been hit which are renewed yearly, are in the amount of $3 by declining oil prices and the turmoil of the billion to Mexico and $2 billion to Canada. !e highly speculative derivatives market in which Department of Treasury, through its Exchange Mexican corporations were involved.19 !e move Stabilization Fund, which was used to lend funds by the U.S. Federal Reserve to extend emergency to Mexico in 1995, is also a NAFA participant. currency swap lines to Mexico and other emerging During the 1982 debt crisis and the 1994–95 peso economies helped restore confidence in the crisis, the Fed played a pivotal role in assisting Mexican currency.20 !e Fed’s concern about Mexico to renegotiate with its foreign creditors Mexico’s financial well-being is not new. In the and meet its dollars liquidity needs.21 "is close

19. !e Mexican government’s fiscal finances were largely protected against the drop in federal oil revenues, at least for 2009, by the timely sale of oil futures while the price of oil was still high. 20. Banco de Mexico, Press release, October 29, 2008; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, Press Release, October 29, 2008. 21. Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee, May 9, 2007. 8> Making Economic Integration Work For All: An Agenda for Trade and Development 22. its partner’s successandeachisdiminishedby benefitsfrom showsHistory usthateachcountry that takeplaceoneithersideof theborder. economies ofbothcountriesby developments mechanisms toavoid sudden shockstothe crisismanagement consultation andshort-term past, theneedforbettermacroeconomic policy highlights, perhapsmore thanothertimesinthe for longtermstrategies. coordinated actionsincrisismanagement. authorities underscores oftimelyand theimportance collaboration between Mexican andU.S.financial Miami, August 11,2008. Joydeep Mukherjee, “Mexico’s Challenge:Moving from Stability toDynamism,” CenterforHemispheric Policy, University of Crises o 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 (as apercentage oftotalexports) (,.)#$"<= 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 5 Source: U.S.CensusBureau, Foreign Trade Statistics. 0 5 ff er challenges and opportunities er challengesandopportunities " Texas U.S. State toMexico, Exports 2006 Arizona !

e current downturn Nebraska California Iowa South Dakota Mississippi Colorado Oklahoma education, energyandmonopolies have limitedthe andsecondary tax collection,laborlaws,primary of law,reforms, including rule competition policy, 1990s, Mexico’s economytogrow graduallysincethelate good macroeconomic management hasallowed had adirect impactinMexico. And although insu on migration.Financial mismanagement and that Mexico’s and economyhasonU.S.exports stability andlong-termhealth,given theimpact vested interest inMexico’s economicandsocial the other’s problems. Arkansas ffi cient regulation intheUnited States have 22 Michigan the lack of attention to crucial structural structural thelackofattentiontocrucial Kansas Wisconsin Indiana !

e United States hasa Kentucky Tennessee Missouri Louisiana New Mexico North Carolina (,.)#$";="U.S. GDP per capita vs. Mexico GDP per capita, 1990–2005

50,00010 10 50000 ! United States ! Mexico

1.2 1.0 Ratio 400000.8 10000 40,0008 8 2000030000

30,0006 6

Ratio 8? The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership

U.S. Dollars 20,0004 4

10,0002 2

0 0 1990 1995 2000 2005

Source: Development Data Group, World Development Indicators, World Bank, 2006.

potential for growth and highlighted weaknesses governments could do far more to maintain high- in Mexico’s economy.23 Insufficient investment in level attention on the best ways of managing this infrastructure and human capital create long-term relationship. !e principal institutional framework drags on the Mexican economy and, in turn, limit for economic dialogue in recent years has been the potential for economic growth, with secondary the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP); effects on the U.S. economy. While these are however, the issues related to security have almost essentially matters of domestic policy in each always trumped those related to prosperity, and country, both governments have a vested interest in the design of the process has largely excluded improving communication, pursuing a more viable most important stakeholders in the economic process of engagement on macroeconomic policy and relationship between the two countries. Similarly, maintaining a critical dialogue about the need for the labor and environmental commissions, which sound economic policies in both countries. were designed parallel to NAFTA, have been left Given the importance that bilateral to languish with insufficient funding and unclear economic integration has for economic growth mandates. !e North American Development and development in both countries, the two Bank (NADBank), created as a parallel tool for

23. Gerardo Esquivel and Fausto Hernández Trillo, “How Can Reforms Help Deliver Growth in Mexico?” unpublished manuscript. See also Daniel Lederman, William F. Maloney, and Luis Servén, Lessons from NAFTA for Latin America and the Caribbean, Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press and the World Bank, 2005. 7@ Making Economic Integration Work For All: An Agenda for Trade and Development deepen theprocess ofconsultationanddialogue to U.S. administrationbringstheopportunity the largerchallengestwocountriesface.Anew has onlyalimitedmandateandisfarfrom meeting development forMexico andtheUnited States, 24. t
t
t
include: could helpencouragecooperation.Policy options government, butongoingdialoguebetween them both economiesrequires unilateralactionby each be doneoneachsideoftheborder toinvigorate economic shocks.Much ofthework thatneedsto including closerconsultationindealingwith from anenhanceddialogueoneconomicpolicy, Mexico andtheUnited States wouldbenefit C$!5,-."*,'A"4B45,4!5"$4&-&2,4"4#,/$/" challenges thateconomicintegration produces. economic issuesandallow themtoaddress major high-level communicationandproblem-solving on design newinstitutionalarrangements thatensure to withCanada, have anopportunity partnership institutions. and toassessthee having Mexico represented inthesemeetingwith two governments canconsidertheoptionof Committee, whichmeetseight timesayear. by theFederal Board’s Reserve Open Market isregularly reviewed economic performance meetings canbecalledforinmomentsofcrisis. Extraordinary with theirCanadiancounterpart. Finance Minister through regular yearly meetings ofthe the Secretary Treasury andMexico’s e mitigate secondary e canhave sharp and fiscalpolicyinonecountry during acrisis.Because majorshiftsinmonetary pursuing measures tostabilize theeconomy
.FYJDP
JT
POF
PG
B
IBOEGVM
PG
DPVOUSJFT
XIPTF

*OTUJUVUJPOBMJ[JOH
QFSJPEJD
DPOTVMUBUJPOT
CFUXFFO

,FFQJOH
UIF
CJMBUFSBM
SFMBUJPOTIJQ
JO
NJOE
XIFO
ff John Burstein, ects ontheother, priorconsultationcan " U.S.-Mexico Agricultural Trade andRural Poverty inMexico, e twocountries,togetherandin ff ectiveness ofexistingbilateral ff ects across theborder.

! e t
t
t
t
Policy optionsinclude: third partner, Canada,toaddress existingbarriers. e trade. andoftennon-transparent barriersto unnecessary Both countriescanbenefitfrom removing #$C)4,-."'#!C$"E!##,$#/ t
ff both countries,including: Banco deMéxico. for U.S.representation insimilarinstancesofthe voice butnovote, withareciprocal arrangement reaction againstMexican agriculture products food andproduct safety. stronger coordination onhealthstandards and of additionalborder crossings. immigration inspectors,andpriorityconstruction include anincrease inU.S.customsand e to facilitatethemovement ofpeopleandgoods transition intoothercashcrops. allow Mexico’s smallproducers additionaltimeto toMexicorestraints forwhitecornexported to
4UJNVMBUJOH
HSPXUI
UISPVHI
TUSVDUVSBM
SFGPSNT
JO

%FWFMPQJOH
DMPTF
DPOTVMUBUJPOT
UP
BWPJE
PWFS
)BSNPOJ[JOH
SFHVMBUJPOT
BOE
MBCFMJOH
JODMVEJOH

*OWFTUJOH
JO
CPSEFS
JOGSBTUSVDUVSF
BOE
QFSTPOOFM

(JWJOH
DPOTJEFSBUJPO
UP
64
WPMVOUBSZ
FYQPSU
orts between thetwocountriesandwiththeir orts ffi t t

reforms, implementinge the successfulimplementationofjudicial Mexican government commitmenttoensuring markets andreducing publicdeficits. andfinancial adequate regulation ofmortgage U.S.government commitmenttopromoting thinking onenergypolicy. policies, anddeveloping long-termstrategic ciently across theshared border. Priorities ! Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center, 2007. is canonlybeachieved through ongoing ff ective competition 24 (,.)#$">="Official Mexican Poverty Rate, 1992–2006

8080 Poverty Moderate Poverty 70 70 Extreme Poverty

60 60 50 50 40

Percent 40 76 30 The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership 3020

2010

0 10 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Source: CONEVAL, www.coneval.gob.mx

like the recent salmonella scare that affected bilateral (and trilateral) initiatives are likely to have Mexican producers and U.S. consumers. a more significant impact and benefit all countries by ensuring a growing market in North America t

4PMWJOH
UIF
MPOH
MBTUJOH
/"'5"
USVDLJOH
EJTQVUF
and a long-term reduction in migration pressures. to allow Mexican trucks to deliver cargo to Policy options include: destinations in the United States, and vice versa. !is would benefit consumers in both countries t

/BNJOH
TQFDJBM
SFQSFTFOUBUJWFT
GSPN
BMM
UISFF
by cutting down transportation costs. countries to conduct an assessment of NAFTA’s effects and ways of ensuring that trade can $-/)#,-."'A!'"'#!C$"5$!C/"'&"C$D$5&%2$-' lead to better developmental outcomes in all three countries. !is should involve a review of !e United States and Mexico have opportunities measures to ensure the adequate enforcement of to work together to promote investments in environmental and labor standards in all three infrastructure, human capital, technology, and countries. credit that could help ensure that all citizens can benefit from economic integration and that t

$SFBUJPO
PG
B
CJMBUFSBM
PS
USJMBUFSBM
GVOE
GPS
this leads to a more robust convergence between development that targets credit for micro, small, the two countries. !e impetus for these efforts and medium businesses, infrastructure, and/ in Mexico will have to come from the Mexican or human capital. !ere are several ways to government and will almost certainly have to wait approach this: until the current economic downturn passes, but 78 Making Economic Integration Work For All: An Agenda for Trade and Development t

U.S. legislation. the Unites States, thiswouldrequire achangein Since Medicare canbeprovided onlyin services benefits forthelabormarket ofthisoption. government aboutthefeasibilityandpotential could thenconsultwiththeMexican to retirees wholive there. having Medicare provided inMexico services assess thebenefitstoU.S.healthsystemof examined. in Mexican border towns couldalso be American citizens innursing homesestablished Medicaid for payingforthecostofservices away currently do.farther hospitals, ascountries(India and andrecuperation infirst-rateMexicansurgery proximity totheUnited States toprovide Mexico couldtakeagreater advantage ofits between thetwocountries. creative partnership
*NQSPWJOH
BDDFTT
UP
IFBMUIDBSF
UISPVHI
t t t

USAID. increasing development assistancethrough governments coulddiscussoptionsfor theU.S.andMexican In theshort-term, human capital. and public fundstoinvest ininfrastructure a North AmericanDevelopment Fund using ! the future. SWF orFundación Chile,ifoilpricesrisein funding mechanisms,similartotheChilean (SWF) tiedtorevenue from oil,orother to create aMexican Sovereign Wealth Fund One optionisfortheMexican government as theprivate sector, tojoininthee the U.S.andCanadiangovernments, aswell small, andmediumbusinessesinvite a targetedpurpose,suchascredit formicro, standards andpublic/private board tomeet autonomous agencywithhightransparency ! e three NAFTA governments couldcreate e Mexican government couldcreate an ! e U.S.government couldalso ! ! e U.S.government e optionof ! ailand) ff orts. orts.

t
t
t
t
Policy optionsforthefuture include: bodieswithlimitedmandates. as underfunded and environmental commissions have languished security componentsofSPP. Meanwhile, thelabor relationship, andhasbeenovershadowed by the address othercriticalconcernsintheeconomic all three countriesinvolved, hasnomechanismto conducted withoutmonitoringby thepublicin helped address somebarrierstotrade,ithasbeen Security andProsperity Partnership (SPP)has foreconomicdialogue. structure While the would dowell torethink thecurrent institutional To achieve theseobjectives, thegovernments !-C"4&&%$#!',&- #$C$/,.-,-.",-/',')',&-/"(&#"4&-/)5'!',&-" environmental concernswithsomefundingof Development Bank (NADBank) beyond for alternative energy. incentives forstrategicprivate sectorpartnerships group oncleancoaltechnologyandcreate American research anddevelopment scientific NAFTA governments couldalsoformaNorth carbon taxtolimitemissions. emission tradingsystemorregional coordinated governments couldcreate aNorth American technology andstandards. of current orpotentialcooperation suchas Heads ofStates meetingsandincludeareas ! of stakeholdersineacharea underdiscussion. three countriesthat takesintoaccounttheviews government, business,andcivilsocietyfrom all from Mexico, theUnited States, andCanada. summit meetingsattendedby theheadsofState projects. be usedforsocialandeconomicdevelopment private sectorprojects togenerateinterest can
&YQBOEJOH
UIF
NBOEBUF
PG
UIF
/PSUI
"NFSJDBO

%FWFMPQJOH
B
QBSUOFSTIJQ
BSPVOE
FOWJSPONFOUBM

$SFBUJOH
USJMBUFSBM
XPSLJOH
HSPVQT
UIBU
JODMVEFT

*OTUJUVUJPOBMJ[JOH
BOOVBM
/PSUI
"NFSJDBO
is canbetiedintotheannualNorth American ! e three NAFTA ! e three health standards, technology transfer, education t

%FWFMPQJOH
NFDIBOJTNT
UIBU
FOTVSF
DPNQMJBODF
cooperation, environmental cooperation, and with labor and environmental standards. labor standards. t

"HSFFJOH
PO
B
CSPBE
BHFOEB
UIBU
DBO
CF
SFOFXFE
on a yearly basis.

77 The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership Making Economic Integration Work For All: An Agenda for Trade and Development Overcoming Immigration Policy Failure and Enhancing U.S.-Mexico Cooperation 79 Failure has been the hallmark both of U.S. Obama Administration, the new U.S. Congress,

immigration policy and of attempts to reform and bilateral relations generally. The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership it in recent years. In 2006 and 2007, bipartisan Several basic considerations must guide any efforts at comprehensive immigration reform attempt to resolve the challenges posed by the (CIR) legislation failed in Washington. Separate undocumented status of millions of immigrants bills of more limited scope, focused on the status and of continuing unauthorized flows: (1) neither of undocumented students (the Dream Act) and mass deportation nor a legalization program of agricultural workers (AgJOBS), have also been perceived to encourage future unauthorized introduced but have failed to come to a vote. At migration represent viable options, (2) the same time, workplace raids, an increasingly enforcement measures alone will neither end fortified border, and state and local policies undocumented flows nor induce self-repatriation targeting immigrants have advanced. According on a significant scale, (3) even in recession and to the Department of Homeland Security, certainly beyond it, the U.S. economy will however, since 2000 the unauthorized immigrant continue to rely on immigrant labor, and (4) population has grown on average by 470,000 per greater bilateral cooperation with Mexico is needed year, reaching 11.8 million in January 2007.25 to help reduce migratory pressures, to achieve !e main piece of federal legislation to become control of the border, and to bring about a lawful law in this period was the Secure Fence Act of labor migration regime. Mexico currently accounts 2006—a measure that has served more to impede for almost a third of all immigration to the United rather than to advance cooperation with Mexico States and well over half of all unauthorized in establishing control of immigration and the immigration.26 border. !e Calderón administration, with four !e dominant view, therefore, that is generally years remaining in power, still has not had the shared by policy experts in both the incoming and opportunity to substantively engage the United outgoing administrations and which is backed by States on migration. !is fact contrasts with the public opinion, is that a combination of measures is breakthrough achieved in bilateral cooperation required in order to fix our “broken immigration in fighting drug trafficking, in the form of the system” in general, and to address unauthorized Mérida Initiative. Immigration thus remains a Mexican migration in particular. !ese will need to complex of unresolved issues on the agenda for the include:

25. Michael Hoefer, Nancy Rytina, and Bryan C. Baker, Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2007, Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, September 2008, p. 1. 26. Immigration and Americas Future, Report of a Task Force chaired by Spencer Abraham and Lee H. Hamilton, Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2005. 12.01-16.00 8.01-12.00 5.01-8.00 2.01-5.00 0.00-2.00 7< Overcoming Immigration Policy Failure and Enhancing U.S.-Mexico Cooperation on Migration t
t
t
(,.)#$"?=" Source: 2005–2007AmericanCommunity Survey 3-Year Estimates.U.S.CensusBureau. www.census.gov. Nationwide, theestimatedpercentage ofMexico-born personstototalpopulationis3.82percent. States. unauthorized immigrantsalready inthe United and exploitationofunauthorized migrants border
"
QSPHSBN
PG
iFBSOFE
MFHBMJ[BUJPOw
GPS

"
SFMJBCMF
TZTUFN
GPS
QSFWFOUJOH
UIF
FNQMPZNFOU

"O
FĊFDUJWF
QMBO
GPS
BDIJFWJOH
DPOUSPM
PG
UIF
Estimated Proportion ofMexico-Born Persons to Total Population, 2007 has acquired in greater urgency andsupport the fullintegrationofimmigrants inU.S.society Furthermore, the needforenhancede t
t
countries andregions andespeciallyinMexico. those whocurrently comewithoutdocuments. labor andtoprovide areasonable alternative to adequate legalchannelsforneededimmigrant
&DPOPNJD
BMUFSOBUJWFT
UP
NJHSBUJPO
JO
TFOEJOH

"
SFXPSLJOH
PG
DVSSFOU
WJTB
MBXT
UP
DSFBUF
! ! ! ! ! ! !! 12.01–16.00 8.01–12.00 5.01–8.00 2.01–5.00 0.00–2.00 Data Classes Data unavailable ff LEGEND orts at orts Percent (,.)#$"6@="Mexicans Naturalized as U.S. Citizens, 1998–2007

250000250,000

207,072

200000200,000 189,051

150000150,000

122,258 7; 111,995

102,736 The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership 100000100,000 83,979 76,310 77,089

Number of persons naturalized Number 63,480 55,946 5000050,000

00 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Source: Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, Persons Naturalized by Region and Country of Birth.

recent years. In addition, U.S. visa policy and comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) should the sluggish immigration bureaucracy remain be abandoned in favor of some smaller components widespread sources of dissatisfaction and a barrier pursued separately. !is paper argues for a series of to implementing sensible immigration policy. policy steps that can be taken individually, while !e current visa system largely dates from the recognizing that the broken migration relationship 1960s and makes little sense in the light of today’s between Mexico and the United States will not be economic and social needs. Recent bipartisan fixed until a critical combination of enforcement and reform efforts identified critical difficulties in legalization measures is in place, together with efforts balancing different immigration criteria with to provide an alternative to migration. Furthermore, existing visa categories and quotas, yet these efforts some combined measures are needed not only to failed to effectively resolve these challenges. effectively meet the challenge of migration, but !e major obstacle to immigration reform on also to assemble the minimum political support the domestic front has been political. Furthermore, needed to pass legislation. the weight of recent failures—now combined with On the bilateral front, cooperative efforts and the effects of the financial crisis and recession—has dialogue on this issue have yet to recover from raised the question of whether the objective of the breakdown of talks on migration between 7> Overcoming Immigration Policy Failure and Enhancing U.S.-Mexico Cooperation on Migration reengagement not only possible but also necessary. also but possible only not reengagement of form some making then, since border the of sides both on elected been have governments Iraq WarHowever, 2003. March in new the of start the and 2001 11, September costs. However, itshouldbe understood clearly policies, practices,procedures, capabilities, and examined, includingapprehension anddetention internal andattheborder shouldbethoroughly All aspectsofimmigrationlaw enforcement, both punitive stateandlocalpoliciestargetingmigrants. government, aswell asanalyze theproliferation of enforcement measures implementedby thefederal andassessthee review of enforcement. improving thequality, e debate andhelpprepare forfuture reforms while that wouldcontributetoreframing thepolicy legislation. But there are stepsthatcanbetaken conducive tosmoothing thewayforfuture reform administrationnormayitbe option forthenew enforcement maynotbeanattractive early collapse ofreform e has beenonenforcement, especiallysincethe ! B(0.$2"()*?99")$-'".(*F-C# C&2$/',4"%&5,4B"&%',&-/ approaches totheseissues. should organize itselftodevelop andpursue new and how theincomingU.S.administration do tohelpreframe thebinationalpolicydebate, children. Finally, we consider whatMexico might number ofwaysonundocumentedyouth and national challenge,aswell asby focusingin a highlighting and refocusing immigrationpolicye agendas. regional and bilateral the on migration of management the to approaches cooperative fashioning of goal the place to opportunities key present process, summit American North annual the of renewal the for as well as Calderón, and Obama Presidents between meeting first the for Preparations e main thrust ofrecent immigrationpolicy e mainthrust ! ere forreframing are alsoopportunities immigrant integration ! e new administrationcan e new ff orts. Howeverorts. scalingback ff ectiveness oftheenhanced ffi cacy, andhumanity asamajor ff orts by orts

get separatedfrom theirundocumentedparents unaccompanied minors,andthechildren who migrants intheworkplace; (2)themigrationof as: (1)theexploitationofunauthorized enforcement challenges,such several particular tobearon issue by bringinggreater scrutiny can helptoputmore ofahumanfaceonthe without documents. of thosealready intheUnited States working revision ofvisapolicies,includingaregularization States unlesstheyare combinedwithathorough significant impactonimmigrationtotheUnited that nosetofenforcement measures willhave a t
t
verification systems. of thefederalgovernment’s identificationand develop thereliability that canbetakentofurther immigration custody. at theborder; and (4)thedeathsofdetaineesin greater detailbelow); (3)theproblem ofdeaths in theUnited States (thisissueisaddressed in measures thesepoliciesindetail and to toreview conference onstate andlocalenforcement an inter-agencytaskforce and/ora White House policies. greater coherence between local andnational unauthorized workers andtheirfamilies. significant hardship tobothauthorized and nopurposeasadeterrent andhasbrought serves workplace raidsthatfocus exclusively onworkers Labor andOSHAinspections. multiple-o ofastrategythattargets conditions abusesaspart combined withinspectionofwageandworking Workplace shouldbe enforcement inparticular enforcement e within thecontextofacommitmenttopursue objectives andguidelinesonthatbasis, of new andassessmentthedevelopmentreview immigration enforcement thusfarcallsforcareful policies.
.POJUPSJOH
PG
TUBUF
BOE
MPDBM
NFBTVSFT
UP
FOTVSF

0SEFSJOH
BO
JOUFSBHFODZ
SFWJFX
PG
FOGPSDFNFOU
Furthermore, administration thenew Some specificpolicyoptionsinclude: ! ! ff e new administration mightconvene e new e experienceoftheDHSwith ender worksites inconjunction with ff ectively andintelligently. ! ere are alsomeasures ! e recent risein

highlight the need for national policy in place of the Ninth Circuit Court—should be shelved a patchwork of responses.27 altogether until such time as a fully reliable E-Verify system is in place. t

3FQPSUJOH
BOOVBMMZ
PO
EFBUIT
BU
UIF
CPSEFS
ɨJT
provision of the 2007 compromise bill can be t

*NQSPWJOH
UIF
64
1BTTQPSU
DBSE
4FWFSBM
implemented without legislation, by instructing problems and limitations of this new card-size the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border version of the U.S. passport should be addressed, Protection in DHS “to collect statistics relating including the lack of encryption of its embedded to deaths occurring at the border between the RFID chip and its inadequacy for air travel to the United States and Mexico, including the cause same countries it can be used to travel to by land and total number of deaths,” and to publicly and sea (Mexico, the Caribbean, Canada, and issue these data annually. Bermuda) t

3FQPSUJOH
PO
EFBUIT
PG
EFUBJOFFT
*OGPSNBUJPO
*#,0,"(%&):00(&#-%"):%"$&#-"(,% 7? regarding the treatment and fate of immigration

detainees should be made more available, !e proliferation of state and local policies either The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership beginning with systematic collection and annual explicitly targeted at immigrants or that have a reporting by DHS on deaths of migrants in direct and disproportionate bearing on the lives federal detention, in privately run prisons, and in of immigrants in U.S. communities presents county jails.28 opportunities for reframing the objectives of immigration policy reform. Punitive policies along t

5FTUJOH
BOE
JNQSPWJOH
UIF
&7FSJGZ
TZTUFN
ɨJT
these lines in some states and localities have drawn pilot online system for verifying the employment media attention, but what is less well known is eligibility of new hires, operated jointly by DHS the significant number of such policies that aim and the Social Security Administration, should instead at enhancing immigrant integration.29 be reauthorized, but only if subjected to rigorous Principal among these are the provision of in-state and regular testing and updating, well before any tuition for undocumented immigrant children at further consideration of expanding or requiring public colleges and universities, “New Americans” its use beyond what has been the case thus far. policies that provide English-language instruction and that encourage naturalization of legal t

4IFMWJOH
i/P.BUDIw
MFUUFS
FOGPSDFNFOU
immigrants, and enhanced enforcement of wage, Department of Homeland Security rules safety, and workers compensation laws. Somewhat requiring employers to correct discrepancies differing groups of nine to ten states have adopted or fire employees identified in Social Security policies in each of these areas, and numerous local Administration “no-match” letters—which jurisdictions have adopted specific integration are currently blocked pending a ruling from policies as well aimed at providing health,

27. !e Migration Policy Institute hosts a comprehensive database of state-level immigration legislation, compiled and analyzed in collaboration with the NYU School of Law at http://www.migrationinformation.org/datahub/statelaws_home.cfm. !e National Conference of State Legislatures has an Executive Committee Task Force on Immigration and the States, which offers its own overview of legislation, analysis of issues and policy recommendations at http://www.ncsl.org/programs/immig/immigtf.htm and http://www.ncsl.org/programs/press/2006/immpolicy.htm. 28. "e New York Times reported on 5 May 2008 that it had acquired a list of 66 deaths that occurred in immigration custody from 2004–2007, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. Nina Bernstein, “Few Details on Immigrants Who Died in Custody”: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/05/nyregion/05detain.html?pagewanted=all 29. See "e Anti Immigrant Movement that Failed: Positive Integration Policies by State Governments Still Far Outweigh Punitive Policies Aimed at New Immigrants. A Report by the Progressive States Network (September 2008): http://www.progressivestates.org/files/ reports/immigrationSept08.pdf. See also the sources cited in footnote 1. :@ Overcoming Immigration Policy Failure and Enhancing U.S.-Mexico Cooperation on Migration 31. 30. a recent from theAmericasSociety report and can alsobefoundinthecorporatesector. As e more education, andEnglish-language instruction t
t
organizations: the private sector, andmajornon-profit to buildone immigration reform. help reframe andrefocus themeaningof debate ofrecent years shouldbeleveraged to profits, inthemidstofbitternationalpolicy and thosepursuedby corporationsandnon- establishment ofthesestateandlocalinitiatives, of outreachcommunities. tonewcomer asameans increasingly providing theseservices Major nationalnon-profit organizationsare also care, andcampaignsforcivicparticipation.” education, informationaboutaccesstohealth English languagecourses,scholarshipsforhigher for skillsdevelopment, financialliteracyprograms, immigrant integration. sponsor ordirectly o number ofmajorU.S.corporationseither Council oftheAmericashasdetailed,alarge ff Hatch (R-UT), wouldmakecollege education Hatch (R-UT), by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL)andOrrin Dream Act. integration shouldbeidentifiedanddeveloped. ofimmigrant corporate programs in support the country. Incentives toexpandtherole of ofimmigrantintegrationacross supporters identify bestpracticesandtofosterlinksbetween initiatives ontheother, couldbeconvened to policies ononehand,andprivate-sector subjects ofstateandlocalimmigrantintegration policies. A White House conference onthe
*NQSPWJOH
SFJOUSPEVDJOH
BOE
TVQQPSUJOH
UIF

)JHIMJHIUJOH
JOUFHSBUJWF
BOE
i/FX
"NFSJDBOTw
ectively to newcomer communities. ectively tonewcomer Council oftheAmericas(23July 2008):http://as.americas-society.org/article.php?id=1145 U.S.Business andHispanic Integration: Expanding theEconomic Contributions ofImmigrants. 2008. See, forexample, Significant support forimmigrantintegration Significant support ! e following policyoptionsmightbepursued ff ! orts by localandstategovernments,orts is bill,introduced inseveral forms Strengthening Inclusion: Engaging Newcomer andImmigrant Communities, ff er programs in support of er programs insupport 30

! ese include“training 31

! e

t
the worldwere substantiallydi States andtheimmigration flows from therest of 1960s, whentheworkplace needsoftheUnited Current visapolicieslargelyoriginatedinthe one—is revisingimportant thevisasystemitself. e Perhaps themostcomplicatedelementofany ;+$#'-57(%&)"'$)<(1-)!31"$0 t
ff developing aplantowork withnon-profit application backlogandprocessing timesand include thecontinuingreduction ofthe application feehikeofJuly 2007. sincethe of modernizationplansunderway placing ahighpriorityonthecompletion financial aid. tuition andinsomeversions allowing accessto legal status,encouragingtheiraccesstoin-state 60,000 peryear), by providing themprovisional graduates ofU.S.highschools(estimatedatover more feasibleforqualifyingundocumented cooperation withstatelaboro increased penaltiesforviolations,andgreater with additionalresources forinspection, comprehensive strategyofimmigrantintegration, be strengthened across theboard ofa aspart above), theenforcement oflaborstandards could wage, hourandwork standards (asrecommended at theworkplace withinspectionforviolationsof addition tocombiningimmigrationenforcement naturalization applications. collaborative e to theDirector ofUSCISontheiroutreach and annually (USCIS)to report Immigration Services require alldistrictdirectors ofCitizenship and levels ofnaturalizationapplications. E organizations andthemediatoencouragehigh
.PEFSOJ[JOH
UIF
/BUVSBMJ[BUJPO
4ZTUFN
CZ

&OGPSDJOH
8BHF

8PSLJOH
$POEJUJPOT
*O
ort atimmigration reform—butort alsothemost ff orts geared towardorts generating Chicago, IL: YMCA oftheUSA, A Product oftheAmericasSociety and ff ffi erent thanthey ces. ! is should ff orts might orts are today. Political realities will dictate when and and help improve the capacity of the immigration how the U.S. Congress and Obama administration system to handle future visa policy changes. address visa policy; however, a sensible approach will have to include at least two elements: A;9"("#'$-'"D,*G$)-(">-'".( t

*ODSFBTJOH
UIF
OVNCFS
PG
XPSLCBTFE
WJTBT
7JTB
In spite of the separate and delinked quality of policy could be simplified by creating a single the foregoing recommendations, most of them “provisional” category for visas, with a flexible probably cannot gain significant consideration number, that would allow immigrants to come without the formation of a dedicated, to the United States on a temporary basis to overall coordinating body within the new fill jobs but with the possibility of applying for administration—an interagency working group permanent residence and eventually citizenship charged with formulating a new strategic approach if they lay down roots in the United States and to the immigration issue and shepherding its meet a set of conditions of good citizenship. implementation. !e incoming administration :6 Levels for provisional immigration would be set should consider taking immediate steps to form

substantially higher than current work-based such a strategic working group with representation The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership immigration but lower than current unauthorized from the White House, DHS, the State flows. An independent immigration board Department, the Department of Justice, and the could adjust visa levels to respond to changing Department of Labor, in order to lay out plans circumstances in the economy.32 of action along multiple avenues from the start of the new presidential term. !e administration t

"MMPXJOH
VOBVUIPSJ[FE
JNNJHSBOUT
DVSSFOUMZ
JO
might also create an undersecretary position for the United States to accede to provisional, and immigration and border control, which would help eventually permanent, residency if they meet coordinate policies among the various agencies that stringent requirements of good citizenship. address immigration issues.

In the short-term, a major overhaul of the U.S. $-A!-4,-."E,5!'$#!5"4&&%$#!',&- immigration system may not be politically possible. While a comprehensive overhaul is far superior to a Although both the United States and Mexico view piecemeal approach, if that is politically impossible, policies on migration as wholly domestic issues, short-term policy options include: clearly the sheer number of Mexicans who leave their home country to settle in the United States t

"QQSPWJOH
UIF
FYJTUJOH Agricultural Job means that this is also a binational issue that Opportunities, Benefits and Security Act requires ongoing dialogue and consultation, even (AgJobs), which is a compromise between if many of the specific policy decisions are taken farmworker advocates and agricultural employers through domestic channels. !e growing presence and would provide earned legalization for of Mexican immigrants as civic and political leaders undocumented farmworkers and H-2A in both their U.S. home communities and their guestworkers. Mexican communities of origin further highlights the need for creative dialogue between the two t

"QQSPWJOH
MFHJTMBUJPO
UP
FOTVSF
B
NBKPS
SFEVDUJPO
countries. in the visa backlog, which would have the effect Issues that might be on a U.S.-Mexico of legalizing a large number of unauthorized migration agenda include the possibility of immigrants who have pending visa applications enlisting Mexican cooperation in the development

32. Immigration and America’s Future. :8 Overcoming Immigration Policy Failure and Enhancing U.S.-Mexico Cooperation on Migration 35. 34. 33. attention tothemigrationofunaccompanied addressing migrants;drawingnew third-country greater bilateraldialogueandcoordination in instead ofthemore controversial “border wall”; of ahigh-tech“virtual fence” areas, incertain Mexico Plan Country Agency forInternational Development (USAID) examine thecausesofthismigration.AsU.S. to never have beendirected toaddress oreven to U.S. internationaldevelopment policyappears migration primarilyfrom developing countries, States withsustainedhighlevels ofunauthorized Despite great publicconcernintheUnited A;;$,##"()*'7,*6-%#,#*.0*=")$-'".( issue ofcauseswillbeaddressed insomedetail. dimension, andtoward thisendinpaperthe calls forseparatetreatment ofthedevelopmental from policyreviews andproposals. dimension, whichisoftendropped altogether to lastplacehasledchronic neglectofthis the considerationofcausesmigration term undocumentedresidents. But relegating legal migrationpolicy, andthestatusoflong- last, afteraddressing enforcement, laborneeds, place theproblem ofthe migration policyintheUnited States typically States, meritsspecialattention.Approaches to spur andsustainongoingmigrationtotheUnited the development needsofmigrant-sendingareas. minors andhow theyare handled, andaddressing judicial strengthening. programs inMexico through theMerida Initiative willincrease thesefunds significantlyin2008-2010,especiallyforprograms on see http://www.usaid.gov/locations/latin_america_caribbean/ For Mexico seehttp://www.usaid.gov/locations/latin_america_caribbean/country/mexico/ HIV/AIDS. from environmental andresource degradationandlossofbiodiversity; andContainingthespread ofinfectiousdiseases,especially reducing poverty, investing inpeople andcollaboratingoncross-border enforcement needs;Stemming globalandregional threats and employment thatwillreduce poverty andleadtoprosperity; Reducing illegalimmigrationandnarcotics tra Central America;Promoting amore open,transparent andcompetitive market economy abletogeneratediversified investment systems across theregion; Facilitating regional integrationand“two-way” tradeandinvestment between theUnited States and listsU.S.interests intheregion as:Sustaining anddeepeningmore opendemocratic pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PDABZ054.pdf), USAID, 2003), p. 1:http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PDABZ674.pdf USAID, ! e lastofthese,regarding theconditionsthat Regional forCentral Strategy America andMexico: FY2003-2008. Volume 1Core Strategy Regional forCentral Strategy America andMexico: FY2003-2008. Volume 2,Annex Plan CMexico Country for2003–2008statesinits causes of migration ! is tendency . It shouldbenotedthatsupplementalfunding forUSAID cooperation programs inMexico iscurrently listed America. a U.S.foreign policy interest andgoalinCentral 2003–2008 Strategy forCentral America andMexico: FY the “Core Strategy” volume ofUSAID’s on thissubject. States, itcontainsnosectionoreven aparagraph passing references tomigration totheUnited migration directly...” “USAID/Mexico’s programs willnotaddress recipient country.” Later, thisreport notesthat first sentence,Mexico “isnotatraditionalUSAID t
options include: interest tothe United States. In thisregard, policy mass out-migrationasadevelopment challengeof U.S. development ofthephenomenon experts obstacles neednotpreclude anexaminationby addressing development issuesinMexico. But these to expandingtherole ofU.S.foreign aidin million. America andtheCaribbeanofapproximately $963 at $28.9million,outofanFY08budgetforLatin this, includingasystematicreview of: with Mexico inthefuture one migration toassessthepossibilitiesofcooperation
ɨF
CFHJOOJOH
PG
B
SFWJFX
PG
64
QPMJDZ
PO
PVU Although theMexico Plan makes Country t !

migration, with particular attentiontothe migration, withparticular ! ere are seriousobstaclesinbothcountries e conditionsanddynamicsofout- 35 34

! listsreducing illegalimmigrationas e USAIDbudgetfordevelopment ! is inspiteofthefactthat , forLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean 33 (1August 2003),p. 4(http:// ff orts todealwith orts ffi cking by (5September Regional (,.)#$"66="Remittances to Mexico, 1996–2007

2500025,000

0.20 0.64 1.0.08

2000020,000

1500015,000 :7 The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership 10,000 10000 of Dollars Millions

50005,000

00 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Source: Banxico

ongoing phenomenon of school abandonment t Processes and problems of the reintegration and first-time migration by youth. of return migrants, with a focus on younger migrants with less experience in the United t Potential options for checking first-time States. migration, and the development of alternatives to cross-border migration. t !e optimal application of community development projects such as (but not limited t !e dynamics of the geographic proliferation to) those co-funded by migrant organizations and spread of migration sending areas, and the and the Mexican government’s “!ree for identification of options for containing and One” matching funds program, for the avoiding both. purpose of mitigating migration pressures.

t !e challenge of developing alternatives in Any movement toward a role for U.S. foreign southern Mexico to internal migration to the aid as part of a bilateral approach to addressing northern border region. the causes of migration poses significant challenges for development specialists, leaders and constituencies in both countries. !ere is :: Overcoming Immigration Policy Failure and Enhancing U.S.-Mexico Cooperation on Migration Peace Corps,bothofwhichfollowed decades Private Investment Corporation(OPIC) andthe intoMexicoof theentry oftheU.S.Overseas meeting similarchallenges,suchasinthecases recent experienceonbothsides,however, in 36. criticized by Mexico. Meanwhile fence thevirtual border jurisdictionsandlandowners, aswell as wall” hasbeenbadlyreceived by arangeofU.S. equipment. surveillance mounted motiondetectors,camerasandother a “virtual fence” inotherareas made upoftower- hundreds ofmilesdouble-layered fencingand ! 4.$;,$*6.('$.5 8$.9.'"()*-*6..&,$-'"D,*A&&$.-27*'.* and localauthoritiesinthisarea. challenges, andengagingwithkeyMexican federal of Mexican regional development policiesand acquiringandsharingknowledgeprocess offurther OPIC, thePeace CorpsandNADBtobegina include, amongothers,representatives ofUSAID, the formationofaworking group thatwould stepwouldbe interests andobjectives. Afurther definition ofU.S.internationaldevelopment of thecausesmassmigrationbroadly intothe that wouldbeneededtoincorporatethemitigation of U.S.foreign aidpolicytodeterminethechanges Another essentialstepwouldbeamandatedreview dimension ofthemigrationpolicydilemma. step indrawinggreater bilateralattentiontothis to theUnited States isonlyafirst,butcritical conditions, causesanddynamicsofmassmigration ofUSAIDthe understanding onthepart be fullyworked out. relations, theoptimaltermsofwhichhave yet to Agreement altered thecourseofU.S.-Mexico ! North AmericanDevelopment Bank (NADB). of exclusion, aswell asthecreation ofthe e Secure Fence Act proposes acombinationof e advent oftheNorth American Free Trade and%20Without%20Papers.pdf United States See ! e development ofadeeperinstitutional A ChildAlone and Without Papers: andRepatriation ontheReturn AReport ofUnaccompanied Undocumented Children by the . CenterforPublic Policy Priorities, September 2008:http://www.cppp.org/repatriation/A%20Child%20Alone%20 ! e fencingor“border points whileensuringgreater security. greatly enhancethee and Border Inspectors, whosepresence would used more e Some fundsfrom theborder fencemightalsobe fence. development ofrevised plansforthevirtual be usedtoengageMexican authoritiesinthe the progress ofbothtypesborder control should fence. the high-techvirtual Mexico inacooperative approach todeveloping real possibilityofengaging exploring thevery A more discriminatingapproach wouldinclude intoserioustechnical di project hasrun unaccompanied minors who are repatriated repatriated are who minors unaccompanied of thousands of tens the of subject the on repeatedly legislator, spoken has federal former and lawyer a lady, first herself Zavala, Margarita minors. unaccompanied by migration unauthorized of phenomenon the concerns issue enforcement the of reframing a and cooperation bilateral for avenue potential promising One I%9-(">"()*?99")$-'".(*6.('$.5 when theymeet. issues these ignoring or downplaying by will they than together and openly flows migratory and borders their over control humane achieving of challenges multiple the and area this in failings their address and acknowledge, face, better can governments two Our administrations. Mexican and U.S. new the between encounters first the in item agenda principal a be should countries third from migrants toward policy and action border. intelligence, common Coordinated their over control greater achieve to Guatemala with United and States, the reach to Mexico using migrants unauthorized of return the facilitate to Cuba with In October, agreements Mexico reached A;;$,##"()*/7"$;H6.%('$E*=")$-('# ff ectively tofundadditionalCustom ff ectiveness ofcurrent check- ! e current delayin 36 ffi Mexico’s culties.

annually to Mexico by U.S. authorities. cooperation on this issue, until such a position Two possibilities to be explored in this area gains wider currency in Mexican society. However, are the formation of a binational working group Mexican opinion leaders can create the conditions or commission focused specifically on the for such a step by their own government. It would challenge of unauthorized migrant children be healthy for Mexican leaders from a variety who arrive unaccompanied or become separated of sectors—including legislators, party leaders, from their parents in the United States. !e intellectuals and others—to seriously consider how related possibility is the direct involvement of the they can start to reframe the migration issue and Mexican first lady, and perhaps the U.S. first lady thereby the conditions for bilateral cooperation, by as well, in some manner in this approach. !e working to establish Mexico’s interest in helping initiative for this could come from the Mexican to finally bring an end to the long era of mass side, and specifically from the office of Margarita unauthorized migration to the United States. Zavala, but would require coordination with U.S. authorities. B(7-(2"()*<,)".(-5*6..&,$-'".( :9

67-()"()*'7,*!,J-',*"(*=,K"2. Two aspects of regional cooperation are due for The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership review and reform in relation to migration: the Mexican officials have repeatedly stated that North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), migration to the United States should be “safe, and the annual North American summit process orderly and legal,” and that migration should be that brings the three countries’ chief executives a voluntary choice rather than necessitated by together outside of the NAFTA framework. economic desperation. !is position is tantamount Perhaps the weakest facet of both of these parallel to saying that unauthorized flows should end, institutionalized relationships is their treatment— but Mexico has been reluctant to explicitly state or rather their non-treatment—of labor migration as much in so many words. In the United States, within the region. !is omission is even more the accusation that Mexico benefits from and glaring than the neglect of mass migration in U.S. encourages illegal immigration raises the political international development policy. costs of pursuing bilateral cooperation and Labor issues are not addressed in the NAFTA dialogue. A more forthright expression of Mexican accord itself but rather by a “side agreement” interest in ending unauthorized migration would formally known as the North American Agreement empower advocates of bilateral approaches and on Labor Cooperation (NAALC). NAALC reform. !is interest should be based on both the includes provisions regarding the protection of hope that the United States will create a more migrant workers, but there are no common laws or welcoming immigration regime, but that the standards, no program for or oversight of migrant Mexican government will also take steps to create labor, and only weak mechanisms for advancing the conditions for potential migrants to stay in Mexico enforcement of those protections that in principle (and current migrants to return). exist in each country’s domestic laws.37 NAALC It is politically impossible for the Mexican created a trinational Commission on Labor government to explicitly endorse the objective of Cooperation that issued a study in 2003 titled ending unauthorized migration, for the sake of North American Labor Markets: Main Changes enhancing the prospect of bilateral dialogue and Since NAFTA.38 !is study, however, makes no

37. See Protection of Migrant Agricultural Workers in Canada, Mexico and the United States, Commission on Labor Cooperation (2002): http://new.naalc.org/english/pdf/study4.pdf 38. See the Commission’s web page at http://new.naalc.org and the report at http://new.naalc.org/english/pdf/labor_markets_en_1. pdf. !e Commission’s Secretariat is located in Washington. :< Overcoming Immigration Policy Failure and Enhancing U.S.-Mexico Cooperation on Migration under the rubric ofthe“Security andProsperityunder therubric institutionalized by theBush administration American headsofgovernment, thesewere laborflows. mention whatsoever ofmigratory t
the wayforregional cooperationonmigration: excluded from theSPPagenda. regulation, however, have beendeliberately Partnership” (SPP).Migration andlabormarket reviewing NAALC, instructing theSecretariat NAALC,reviewing instructing labor sideagreement. governments couldtakestepstorevise NAFTA’s
3FUIJOLJOH
UIF
-BCPS
$PNNJTTJPO
ɨF
UISFF
As fortheannualmeetingsofNorth ! e following stepsmightbetakentoprepare United States, 2000–2008 (,.)#$"68= Source: Je Millions of People 12 15 12 15 0 3 6 9 0 3 6 9 ff rey Passel andD’Vera Cohn,“Trends inUnauthorized Immigration,” Washington, DC:Pew Hispanic Center, October 2,2008. 2000 " Growth inUnauthorized Immigrant Population inthe 2001 Mexicans asPercent of Total Unauthorized Population ! ! ! EstimateofUnauthorized Persons from Mexico Estimate ofUnauthorized Persons ese wouldinclude 2002 2003 2004 t
reconceived andrenewed,itcouldincludea process. workers. labor rightsofmigratory North Americaandthefullprotection ofthe laborflows in the legalregulation ofmigratory among itsultimatestrategicobjectives achieving NAALCthe agreement. Anew shouldinclude Council ofMinisters onaprocess ofrevision of and openingconsultationsintheNAALC labor,markets takingfullaccountofmigratory prepare onNorth report anew Americanlabor of theCommissiononLaborCooperationto special taskforce onlabormarket regulation.
3FEFTJHOJOH
UIF
/PSUI
"NFSJDBO
4VNNJU
2005 ! 2006 e annualsummitprocess couldbe 2007 2008

50 52 54 56 58 60 Percent 60 50 The U.S.–Mexico Border: Special Challenges, Special Opportunities :; !e U.S.-Mexico border region both joins and commitment. !e transnational quality of

divides Mexico and the United States. Frequently organized crime syndicates, whose violence is The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership thought of as a unitary region, it nonetheless defies felt in Mexican border cities but threatens one-size-fits-all development applications and is to spill over onto the U.S. side, makes long- characterized by high sub-regional differentiation term partnerships between cross-border law in culture, language, political-economy, and enforcement agencies necessary for effective topography. At its most nebulous, the border refers engagement and prosecution. to an amorphous terrain of uncertain geographic contours, a boundary of separation shaped by (,.)#$"67="Population of the Border States inequality, yet also a point of unification and and Border Counties or Municipalities, hybridization. At its most promising, the border United States and Mexico, 2000 refers to a transnational community with a shared Counties/ history, a terrain for the exploration of common State Municipalities binational interests in support of the greater United States (44 counties) U.S.-Mexico agenda, and a resources-abundant region historically shaped by commercial and Arizona 5,130,632 1,159,908 political entrepreneurship, yet whose comparative California 33,871,648 2,956,194 advantages in a globalized economy remain New Mexico 1,819,046 312,200 unrealized. Texas 20,851,820 2,125,464 !e binational border region faces challenges Total 61,673,146 6,553,766 that often ignore the political concerns of Mexico (80 Municipalities) Baja national governments and that materialize 2,487,367 2,487,367 California regardless of sovereign borders or the barriers that are built at them. In the areas of natural Chihuahua 3,052,907 1,363,959 resource management, water conservation, and Coahuila 2,298,070 387,922 natural disaster preparedness, unilateral efforts Nuevo León 3,834,141 116,556 generate limited returns, if divorced from a Sonora 2,216,969 607,508 strategy of bilateral collaboration and joint Tamaulipas 2,753,222 1,387,549 management. Likewise, actions that would Total 16,642,676 6,350,861 capitalize on the border region’s particular Total 78,315,822 12,904,627 synergies, especially its comparative economic 4PVSDF
6OJUFE
4UBUFT
$FOTVT
#VSFBV
4UBUF
BOE
$PVOUZ
2VJDL'BDUT
advantages built on the symbiosis of its many Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía y Informática (INEGI). XII Censo “twin cities,” also require a sustained bilateral General de Población y Vivienda 2000. :> The U.S.-Mexico Border: Special Challenges, Special Opportunities 39. to thinkthatwe cancontrol theborder by limiting border between thetwocountries.It istempting integration, andmigration—cometogetheratthe addressed inthisreport—security, economic strategies. e designing in border the across relationships their manage authorities state and local how of experiences the from learn could authorities federal cases, Inmany countries. both of economies broader the on drag a places as well as economies, fragile their and communities border on costs impose often can trade on impact the to su without requirements security new Implementing countries. both of economies the for essential are and communities border sustain that people and goods of flow the facilitate to needs real equally with security for needs real the balance to way a find to need governments more likelytoyieldreal results. by thelatesttechnologiesavailable, are supported and carefully designedriskmanagementstrategies, moving across theborder, cross-border intelligence is impossibletoinspectallpeopleandvehicles a more strategicandtargetedapproach. Since it the border with binationalstrategiesthatfollow own sovereignty instoppingillegaltra their need tobalancethelegitimaterightassert in bothdirections. form ofbinationalcooperationtoreduce flows controlling theseflows thatdoesnotbuildonsome is impossibletodevelop ane andcasharmstothesouth.Itto thenorth movethe subjectofbilateralflows: illegaldrugs border interactions.Even narcotics tra work andtheybelietheactualbilateralnature of However,of drugs. unilateralapproaches rarely U.S. sidetocontrol immigrationandtheflow best exemplified by thebuildingofafenceon transit andcommerce across it—themodelperhaps Diego andBerkeley, 5. RegionCalifornia Morris, Kenn, Nathan Owens,Walshok. andMary To alargeextent,alloftheotherissues ! is report also argues that the two federal federal two the that argues also report is . December 2005. (San Diego Dialogue, San Diego, Calif.) Regents oftheUniversity System ofCalifornia.San ! e twofederalgovernments ff ective strategyfor ff ffi ective cooperative cooperative ective cient attention attention cient ffi ffi c across cking is Borderless Innovation: Catalyzing theCompetitiveness oftheSan Diego-Baja the process ofcrossing theborder legally. South- complicated have further ofentry at landports the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) immigration andtheimplementationin2008of controls amidpublicoutcriesagainstunauthorized E following the2001terrorist attacks. ofentry ports the applicationofstrictersecuritymeasures atU.S. along theborder. Wait timeshave increased since merchants, consumers,workers, andstudents times are creating significantchallengesfor Lengthy andunpredictable cross-border wait )%.#!C,-."E&#C$#",-(#!/'#)4')#$ potential threats and move somecommercial security forborder crossing, whichwouldtarget to improved security. Anemphasison“smarter” the source ofthelong waittimes,hasactuallyled vigilance ofalltra time scantevidenceexiststoprove thatincreased frequent andrapidborder crossings.” assuring asecure ande cross-border innovation between theCalifornias)is “ concludedinarecent publication, consortium countries. AsaSan Diego-Tijuana border research communities andonthelargereconomiesofboth places adragonboththelocaleconomiesofborder are impossibleeven toconsider.partnerships many cross-border collaborative ventures and especially forcommercial anddailytravelers, predictable, andsafeborder-crossing mechanism, border communities. trade, underminingthecomparative advantages of communities andraisethepriceofcross-border daily hardships fortheresidents ofcross-border mere irritationforinfrequent travelers, theypose investment. While lengthywaittimesmaybea cost asmuch$9billionayear inlostsalesand exceed anhouroreven twoandare calculatedto North waittimesformotorized tra ! ff orts by theU.S.Congress tostrengthenorts border Without apolicythatfacilitatesane e mostsignificant(challengefacingenhanced ffi c crossing theborder, whichis ffi cient border thatenables ffi c often 39

At thesame ffi cient, !

is inspections farther from the border itself, could inter-agency Border Task Force to review these both enhance security and encourage efficiency request and look for ways to reduce wait times. It in border crossings. Policy options to reverse this is particularly important to support border state trend include: requests for presidential permits for international crossings that utilize alternative financing t

*ODMVEJOH
NBKPS
TQFOEJOH
GPS
CPSEFS
mechanisms, such as toll roads, to minimize infrastructure investment programs in the cross-border wait times. stimulus plans proposed by the governments of the United States and Mexico. Spending t

"TTFTTJOH
UIF
FĊFDUJWFOFTT
BOE
QSPmUBCJMJUZ
PG
could focus on improvements in cross-border current cabotage procedures at land ports of entry. transportation facilities, ports, rail linkages, bridges, and the roads that connect these to t

$SFBUJOH
B
TFMGGVOEFE
CPSEFS
TUBUF
JOWFTUNFOU
larger cities, with the end aim of improving fund to finance shared infrastructure projects. cross-border commerce and the lives of border- Enable a profit-sharing mechanism for certain :? region residents. If a National Infrastructure infrastructure projects, such as for toll roads and

Reinvestment Bank is developed by the Obama multimodal ports, to “share the wealth” of such The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership administration, this might include provisions for projects, inhibit intra-regional competition for border infrastructure, which generally requires such public works projects, and even out the costs binational financing. and benefits of such projects. t

*ODSFBTJOH
UIF
OVNCFS
PG
$VTUPNT
BOE
#PSEFS
t

4VQQPSUJOH
UIF
10354
"DU
BOE
PUIFS
MFHJTMBUJPO
inspectors as a short-term measure to reduce that would create long-term multiyear funding border crossing times. Expand the hours of options for port of entry projects since these operation of border crossing stations as needed, currently end up competing against each other on and use two to three inspectors per line at peak a yearly basis. hours. Consider double- or triple-stacking inspection booths, as needed, to shorten cross- t

$SFBUJOH
B
TJOHMF
CJOBUJPOBM
NFDIBOJTN
UP
border wait times. Funds from construction of coordinate hours of operation at each port- the border fence could be redirected into paying of-entry, including an assessment of the best for the costs of an increased number of border utilization for staffing and hours of operation. inspectors, which would enhance both security Frequently there is a lull in the early hours of and commerce. operation until Mexican trucks are released and then are able to proceed to U.S. inspection. !is t

$SFBUJOH
DBSQPPMPOMZ
IJHI
PDDVQBODZ
WFIJDMF
could mean that the hours of operation are not and bicycle lanes, as needed, at those crossing identical but staggered. stations that would be able to accommodate these additions. t

$POTJEFSJOH
UIF
FTUBCMJTINFOU
PG
QSFDMFBSBODF
zones in Mexico to allows for commercial truck t

&TUBCMJTIJOH
B
QSPDFTT
UP
JOTUJUVUJPOBMJ[F
EJBMPHVF
safety inspections to take place prior to the truck among local, state, and federal stakeholders in arriving at the border. the United States and Mexico to identify and prioritize future ports of entry and connecting t

&YQBOEJOH
4&/53*
MBOFT
JO
LFZ
QPSUTPG transportation projects. entry. !ere need to be more efforts to facilitate the flow of larger numbers of crossers. !ese t

4USFBNMJOJOH
UIF
QSPDFTT
GPS
BQQSPWJOH
QFSNJUT
efforts should include the application of WHTI for border crossing infrastructure by creating an technology for not just SENTRI or U.S. passport 9@ The U.S.-Mexico Border: Special Challenges, Special Opportunities 40. world’s third-largest economy—theborder region economic clout—collectively theyrepresent the advantages. Given thetenborder states’ significant natural businesssynergiesand human capital of individualsectors,andbuildontheregion’s be multidisciplinary, transcendthenarrow goals development oftheregion. Such avisionshould comprehensive, strategic,andsustainableeconomic and thatproposes along-term visionforthe region’s comparative economicadvantages exploitstheborderneeded thatconstructively major worldmanufacturer, paradigmis anew since NAFTA andtheemergenceof China asa technological changeintheglobaleconomy Given thephenomenonofcontinuousandrapid %#&2&',-."$4&-&2,4"C$D$5&%2$-' t
t
t
mega-port project nearEnsenada, especially mega-port United States onthePunta Colonetmultimodal residents. holdersandlegalpermanent for U.S.passport near theborder justinsideofMexico especially stations; 2)conductingpre-clearance inspections tra procedures forsomecommercial andpassenger tra capacities through: 1)e to encouragethismodeoftransportation. border crossers. citizens represent onlyaboutone-third ofall given thatU.S. and regimes ishighlyimportant travelers inthese“smart” technologyprocesses other visaholders. holders butalsoforlegalpermanentresidents and Arizona-California border. network nearthesouthern U.S. transportation on how suchaproject couldlinkwiththe
1SPNPUJOH
B
EJTDVTTJPO
BOE
EFCBUF
JO
UIF

"OBMZ[JOH
XBZT
UP
FYQBOE
DSPTTCPSEFS
QSPDFTTJOH

$SFBUJOH
NPSF
EFEJDBUFE
MBOFT
GPS
CVTPOMZ
USBċD
Ibid. ffi ffi c awayfrom centralized border crossing c by conductingscreening andinspection

! e incorporationofforeign ffi ciently separating t
in theborder region: policy optionstoenhanceeconomicdevelopment be relegated toaperipheralissue. economic development strategy, not andcertainly should playacentralrole inanynationalorstate t
t
determine theviabilityoftheseprojects inother It toconductresearch to willbenecessary clusters andcorridorsinsouthernCalifornia. California, tocapitalize onrelated industrial inBaja and biomedicaldevices,particularly clinical research, marinebiotechnology, software, of aerospace anddefense,pharmaceuticals population of Tijuana, according toone sector. In fact,only10to20percent ofthe border region lacksarobust financialservices technologies. transportation of cutting-edgeenvironmental-friendly should beupdatedtoincludetheincorporation predominant definitionofabusiness“cluster” and burdensome forfrequent travelers. wait timesremain lengthy, unpredictable, sharing. feed o technology clustersare knowledge clustersthat of cross-border “twin cities.” Recognize that the border. capable oftreating patientsoneithersideof of bilingualandculturallycompetentnurses retirees. forU.S.-basedpensionersandexpatriate services especially asregards medicaltourismandhealth to enhancetheborder region’s sectors, service Consistent andsolide value, suchasbiotechnologyandsoftware. and toward industriesthato andmanufacturingsectors assembly-for-export economic future needstolookbeyond the twin cities.
"OBMZ[JOH
DSPTTCPSEFS
QPUFOUJBM
JO
UIF
mFMET

%FWFMPQJOH
B
mOBODJBM
TFSWJDFT
JOEVTUSZ
ɨF

#VJME
PO
UIF
OBUVSBM
TZOFSHJFT
BOE
TZNCJPTFT
ff humaninteractionandknowledge- ! ! is shouldcombinewiththetraining is dynamicimpossibleifborder ! e future oftheborder region’s ff orts couldalsobemade orts ff er greater added ! e following are !

e

40

(,.)#$"6:="Income per Capita in U.S. Border Communities

3500035,000

U.S. Average Income U.S. Border Communities Average Income

3000030,000

2500025,000

96 U.S. Dollars The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership 2000020,000

1500015,000 1970 1980 1990 2000

Source: Joan B. Anderson and James Gerber, Fifty Years of Change on the US-Mexico Border: Growth, Development, and Quality of Life, University of Texas Press, 2007, data set available online at http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~latamweb/BorderData.html.

estimate, has a bank account. Invigorating time, efforts should be made to study the extent the border-region financial sector by to which the portability of U.S. Medicare and transforming it into a worthwhile broker other forms of U.S. health insurance may have a and liaison between the U.S. and Mexican positive effect on the region. financial-services sectors will enable the creation of a pool of local investment financing for t

'VOEJOH
DSPTTCPSEFS
FEVDBUJPOBM
QBSUOFSTIJQT
entrepreneurial projects and the like. to nurture resourceful, adaptable, and highly skilled workforces on both sides of the border. t

%FWFMPQJOH
B
NPSF
SPCVTU
BOE
JOUFHSBUFE
NFEJDBM
!e border region is home to exceptional human services industry. An aging U.S. population, high capital, yet because of educational limitations insurance costs, and an overtaxed U.S. healthcare the potential of this resource remains unrealized. system are all reasons why cross-border healthcare Major investment in university and vocational and gerontology services should be pursued education could transform the border region’s as potential drivers for post-manufacturing workforce into one that is highly attractive economic growth in the region. Tijuana, to employers in high value-added industries, especially, should capitalize on its proximity to such as those related to biotechnology, “green” the southern California healthcare infrastructure technology, and high-technology manufacturing to better develop this sector as a formal cluster, and research. organized around its universities, hospitals, and other medical service providers. At the same 98 The U.S.-Mexico Border: Special Challenges, Special Opportunities t
t
t
t
t
local corporationsandgovernments. projects benefitfrom significantbuy-infrom border collaboration. Emphasize thatsuch thatexistfrom sustainedcross- opportunities and administratorstorecognize therich states. Encourage U.S.andMexican academics projects amonguniversities inthetenborder and of collaborative ventures, partnerships, more distantregions. than, inmanycases,similarrelationships with more valuable andbeneficialtotheborder region administrators thatcross-border are partnerships research collaboration. ConvinceU.S.university advantages insustainedandrobust cross-border Encourage U.S.universities totakestockofthe economic development intheborder region. together onprojects toimprove sustainable from U.S.andMexico universities topartner station withinthe terminalofthe Tijuana airport. It mightbefeasibleto installaborder-crossing less than2kilometersseparate thetwoairports. in international airport Tijuana. Asthe crow flies, station linkingwiththeAbelardo L.Rodríguez or neartheexistingOtay Mesa border-crossing terminal nearBrown Field Municipal Airport Forairports. example inSan Diego Countya sistercity cross-border terminalsthatservice impact normallyassociatedwithsuchprojects. by mitigatingtheheavyenvironmental partly benefits anddirectly helpborder communities, multiplier Ensenada inBaja California,cancarry Punta southof Colonetmultimodalport projects, suchastheproposed infrastructure private-sector investments. projects, includingproviding loanguaranteesfor andemployment-generatinginfrastructure American Development Bank tofund
$SFBUJOH
TVTUBJOFE
BOE
DPNNJUUFE
CVZJO

"OBMZ[JOH
UIF
GFBTJCJMJUZ
PG
DPOTUSVDUJOH

&YBNJOJOH
UIF
XBZT
JO
XIJDI
NBKPS

4USFOHUIFOJOH
UIF
NBOEBUF
PG
UIF
/PSUI

$SFBUF
B
TUSVDUVSF
GPS
SFTFBSDI
BOE
QSPNPUJPO
both the supply and demand components of of components demand and supply the both address usually can strategies collaborative while e enforcement unilateral defies often ! $-/)#,-."%)E5,4"/$4)#,'B t
t
creative responses from lawenforcement and robbery, and domesticviolence,alsorequire tra tied todrug points forthisillicittrade. transit as bear communities border that burdens particular the account into takes that one and approach binational thoroughly a without crime organized of threat the address to impossible border. the of sides It is both on operate tra drug tra drug the of operations the supply to border the at South to North from crosses cash bulk and trade, drug the fuel cities border U.S. in purchased arms addition, In countries. both in police between intelligence-sharing and collaboration e for need the emphasizes 2006, since acutely experienced has Mexico which of likes the slayings, gangland for sites become themselves towns border U.S. before time of cartels. the of victims the among numbered have citizens U.S. and Mexico, in perpetrated violence the by and families,theU.S.sideisalsodeeplya residents border-region of lives intertwined the tra drug sophisticated exceptionally from faces region border the that threat Juárez the and underscored Tijuana,have Ciudad of cities border Mexican the in particularly killings, cartel-related of numbers high consistently tra drug San Diego-Tijuana region. consequences ofborder crossing processes. inform ontheeconomicandcommercial
1SPNPUJOH
B
CJOBUJPOBM
0MZNQJDT
GPS
UIF

"VUIPSJ[F
UIF
SFMFBTF
PG
PċDJBM
SFQPSUT
UIBU
e transnational character of organized crime crime organized of character transnational e Other formsofcrimethatare notnecessarily ffi ffi cking organizations often live and and live often organizations cking e more cking ! e fear that it may be only a matter matter a only be may it that fear e ffi ffi cking operations. Leaders of of Leaders operations. cking cking, includingautotheft, ffi ff cking organizations. Given Given organizations. cking ectively. 2006 Since ff ective operational operational ective ff orts, orts, ff

ected ected

judicial authorities who frequently have to work t

0SHBOJ[JOH
B
SFHVMBS
CJOBUJPOBM
TVNNJU
BNPOH
across international lines to pursue and prosecute judges, prosecutors, court clerks, defense suspects. Authorities on both sides of the border attorneys, and court interpreters, among have developed mechanisms for rapid response others, to discuss issues of common interest, to in these cases, but they often require greater participate in clinics, and to pursue mechanisms coordination with federal authorities. of collaboration, particularly in the area of cross- !e following are policy options to enhance border family law. collaborative efforts on regional public security: t

*EFOUJGZJOH
iBU
SJTLw
ZPVUI
JO
.FYJDBO
CPSEFS
t

4USFOHUIFOJOH
UIF
DBQBDJUZ
BOE
MFHBM
GSBNFXPSL
communities and investing in educational for local and state governments to work together curricula and after-school programs for children to track and apprehend criminals who cross the and adolescents that help to inoculate them border. against the lure of crime or social deviance. In combination with investments in the vocational 97 t

&ODPVSBHJOH
SBQJE
SFTQPOTF
DPNNVOJDBUJPO
sector, help to create higher life expectations

systems among law enforcement agencies on for these youth and their families. Study The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership both sides of the border. the effectiveness of similar crime-prevention measures. t

#VJMEJOH
PO
BOE
SFQMJDBUJOH
UIF
TVDDFTTFT
of Border Enforcement Security Taskforces t

&NQIBTJ[JOH
BEEJDUJPO
USFBUNFOU
BOE
(B.E.S.T.s), which enable a framework for drug rehabilitation programs as part of a collaboration among U.S. and Mexican agencies comprehensive strategy to fight drug trafficking and to improve the psychological, economic, t

*OWFTUJOH
JO
UIF
QSPGFTTJPOBMJ[BUJPO
BOE
MPOH and physical integrity of border-region families. term continued training of Mexican police Make addiction treatment programs “portable” forces, an essential step in reducing the over- with suitable resources for addicts available in reliance on the Mexican military to fight both countries. Given that large percentages organized crime. Encouraging citizens to of incarcerated persons in both countries monitor and collaborate with law enforcement, may suffer from drug addiction, ensure that including through community policing efforts, successful programs exist in penitentiaries, jails, may provide models to encourage police and prisons to treat this frequently overlooked professionalization. It may be possible for border subpopulation. communities to share successful efforts to abate police and official corruption. t

%FWFMPQJOH
DPOUSPMT
UP
QSFWFOU
UIF
JMMFHBM
FYQPSU
of weapons from the United States to Mexico, t

%FWFMPQJOH
KPJOU
PQFSBUJPOT
UP
EFBM
XJUI
including the creation of North-South security common crime, such as automobile theft. It is checkpoints at the border, increased numbers vital to recognize that sustained buy-in from of ATF inspectors in U.S. border communities, local actors is essential for the success of any joint and stepped-up prosecution of surrogate arms binational law enforcement effort. For example, purchasers. joint operations to crack down on car thieves who steal vehicles from U.S. motorists would t

1SPNPUJOH
JOUFSOBUJPOBM
DPMMBCPSBUJWF
FĊPSUT
UIBU
be impossible without the support of local degrade the logistics and supply chains of drug police in Mexico. trafficking organizations, particularly through aggressive efforts to stop money laundering. 9: The U.S.-Mexico Border: Special Challenges, Special Opportunities t
t
region: management ofnaturalresources intheborder challenges involving the environment andthe both sidesoftheborder. help ensure abetterqualityoflifeforcitizens on management ofborder naturalresources willalso of childhoodasthmainNorth America.Sensible border region someofthehighestrates andreports records someoftheworstairqualityforentire average. in theborder region thanfortheU.S.national asthma, diabetes,andtuberculosis are muchhigher disease attheborder. Such diseasesashepatitis, many cases,forthehigherincidenceofpreventable maintenance ofitsbiodiversity. border region’s animalandplantspeciesthe ofthe is appropriate forthecontinuedsurvival joint managementofshared naturalresources environmental stewardship oftheregion. E and whichmayrepresent anobstacleforthe e minimal consultationthatcouldcomplicate unilateral actionsthatare carriedoutwith management. It todiscourage isimportant and oftenjointdecision-makingfore resources thatrequire frequent consultation areRivers, watersheds,forests, shared anddeserts directly impactscommunitiesontheotherside. Air andwaterqualityononesideoftheborder ! !-C"-!')#!5"#$/&)#4$/ 2!-!.,-."'A$"$-D,#&-2$-'" ff report suspectedillicitorcriminalactivity.report allow unauthorized migrantstoconfidentially to anonymous communicationsinfrastructure migrants canbeanintelligenceasset.Create an environment inbothcountries. su management oftheColorado River toensure
3FDPHOJ[JOH
UIBU
BVUIPSJ[FE
BOE
VOBVUIPSJ[FE

&OIBODJOH
CJOBUJPOBM
DPMMBCPSBUJPO
JO
UIF
ective jointborder managementoperations e environment knows nonationalboundaries. ! Environmental factorsare alsoresponsible, in ffi cient waterforbothpeopleand the e following are policyoptionstoaddress ! e Imperial/Mexicali Valley consistently " ff ective ffi cient t
t
t
t
t
2VBMJUZ
5BTL
'PSDF
approaches, suchasthePaso delNorte Air institutions andmodeledafterlocalized conjunction withorseparatefrom existing mechanisms mightbeimplementedin cooperation onwaterandairquality. New properly determined. long-term e of ColoradoRiver waterintoMexico, untilthe lining operationsthatwouldprevent seepage water managementandinfrastructure issues. with providing indepthpolicyanalysisontimely established “study boards” or other bodies charged andlandowner interestsconservation through analysis from academiaaswell asinputfrom include more robust informationanddata Recommendations forimprovement might and InternationalWater Boundary Commission. to improve upon,update,orreorganize the the contextofU.S.-Mexico border forways States andCanada,mightbeexaminedwithin WatersBoundary treaty between the United disputes andissuesundertheframework ofthe responsible formediatingwatermanagement example, theInternational Joint Commission, natural resources shouldbestrengthened. For power forthejoint-managementofborder-area that holdpolicymakinganddecision-making renewable energypolicies. e the stateofCalifornia’s pioneering e pipeline through theCalifornias,especiallygiven corridors, i.e.analternative-fuels supplychain/ technology through cross-border clustersand
%FWFMPQJOH
OFX
NFDIBOJTNT
GPS
FOWJSPONFOUBM

*NQPTJOH
B
NPSBUPSJVN
PO
BEEJUJPOBM
DBOBM
*OTUJUVUJPOBMJ[JOH
CJOBUJPOBM
DPNNJTTJPOT

1SPNPUJOH
UIF
EFWFMPQNFOU
PG
iHSFFOw
investment fundingamongtheB.E.I.F., the financial innovations toenablejointloansand Environment Infrastructure Fund andcreate
"HHSFTTJWFMZ
SFDBQJUBMJ[JOH
UIF
#PSEFS
ffi ciency standards anditsimplementationof ff ects ofsuchliningoperationscanbe ff orts onfuel orts North American Development Bank, and a t

1SPNPUJOH
UIF
EFWFMPQNFOU
PG
iSFTUPSBUJPO
potential future U.S. infrastructure investment economies” at the border through medium- to program, to create beneficial economies of scale large-scale restoration projects on both public and optimally harness these different resources. and private land that involve a variety of partners. Building a restoration economy has the potential t

"VUIPSJ[JOH
UIF
VTF
PG
HPWFSONFOU
GVOET
GPS
to benefit a range of stakeholders. Proponents cross-border projects that would directly improve say they beautify the border region, encourage the environment of a neighboring country. Even sustainable and responsible ecotourism and if local and state governments are able to find local recreational options, and create jobs. !ey workarounds to existing federal rules that block may also improve the health, sense of pride, such funding, such as by authorizing a grant and environments of border-region residents. to a non-governmental group, these operations Such projects can be carried out in a way that are time-consuming and cumbersome. It is will address security concerns effectively while counterproductive to prohibit funding for a minimizing the negative consequences of security 99 project that would improve the water quality infrastructure on wildlife through disruption of

of a river that originates in Mexico and flows migratory patterns and habitat degradation. The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership into the United States. t

&YBNJOJOH
UIF
DPTUT
BOE
CFOFmUT
PG
EFTBMJOBUJPO
t

4VQQPSUJOH
UIF
64
'PSFTU
4FSWJDFT
.FYJDP
as a means to mitigate demand on Colorado Program and especially its Fire Management River water. division to enable rapid joint response to natural disaster preparedness, especially to fight t

"TTFTTJOH
XBZT
UP
MJNJU
DBSCPO
FNJTTJPOT
BU
seasonal wildfires in southern California and border ports of entry to mitigate health risks. Baja California.

Appendix One List of Working Group Members 9; "e policy options in this report were developed by four working groups convened by the Mexico Institute which met

at the Center in the period October to December 2008. While the discussions in each working group helped develop The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership the ideas in this report, working group members do not individually or institutionally endorse all these positions and we did not seek to build a consensus that all could agree with. A few additional comments from working group members can be found in the next appendix of this report. + Report Writer # Invited to offer remarks * Participated via written comments *&#+,-.".#&)%"&-")0/0F2$3,4&"/$4)#,'B"4&&%$#!',&- &4'&E$#"6<16;G"8@@> Mariclaire Acosta, ICTJ :!CA3*K'LFC:9: Sergio Aguayo, El Colegio de México* Sigrid Arzt, Presidency of Mexico# Luis Astorga, UNAM Lázaro Cárdenas, Woodrow Wilson Center# Bruce Bagley, University of Miami* John Carnavale, Carnavale & Associates# John Bailey, Georgetown University Alfredo Corchado, Dallas Morning News Raúl Benítez, UNAM Rodrigo Iván Cortés Jiménez, Mexican Senate# Jorge Chabat, CIDE Tom Diaz, Violence Policy Center# Jay Cope, National Defense University Mauricio Ibarra, Embassy of Mexico Guadalupe González, CIDE* Roberta Jacobson, U.S. Department of State# Ernesto López-Portillo Vargas, INSYDE Eric Jacobstein, House Western Hemisphere Maureen Meyer, WOLA Subcommittee# Diana Negroponte, Brookings Institution Joe Kalinowski, National Drug Policy Center# Eric Olson, Mexico Institute+ Edward (Alex) Lee, U.S. Department of State José María Ramos, COLEF* Arturo Sarukhan, Embassy of Mexico# Abelardo Rodríguez, Universidad Clare Seelke, Congressional Research Service de Guadalajara John Walsh, WOLA# Miguel Sarre, ITAM David Shirk, University of San Diego Miguel Treviño, Grupo Reforma 9> Appendix One: List of Working Group Members -&D$2E$#"6;16>G"8@@> *&#+,-.".#&)%"&-")0/0F2$3,4&"2,.#!',&- Gerardo Esquivel,ElColegiodeMéxico Enrique DusselPeters,UNAM Anne Alonzo,KraftFoods "" &4'&E$#"8718:G"8@@> *&#+,-.".#&)%"&-")0/0F2$3,4&"$4&-&2,4",-'$.#!',&- Leni Gonzalez, LULAC-Virginia deZacatecas Rodolfo GarcíaZamora,Univ. Autón. SantaCruz* Jonathan Fox,UniversityofCalifornia, Oscar Chacón,NAALAC Lázaro Cárdenas,Woodrow Wilson Center GroupInc. Héctor Cárdenas-Suárez,TheErgo Frontera Norte Jorge Bustamante,ElColegiodela Xóchitl Bada,UniversityofIllinoisatChicago University David R.Ayón, LoyolaMarymount Cresencio Arcos,K&LGates Edward Alden,CouncilonForeignRelations Christopher Sabatini,CounciloftheAmericas Luis Rubio,CIDAC* Manuel PérezRocha,InstituteforPolicyStudies Pastor,Robert AmericanUniversity Juan Pardinas,IMCO Gray Newman,MorganStanley Diana Negroponte,TheBrookingsInstitution œÞ`ii«Ê Վ iÀˆ]Ê-Ì>˜`>À`Ê>˜`Ê*œœÀ½Ã Nora Lustig,GeorgeWashington University Chappell Lawson,MIT Susan KaufmanPurcell,UniversityofMiami Hufbauer,Gary PetersonInstitute Carlos Heredia,ITAM MonterreyTec* González-Aréchiga, Bernardo SAIS Francisco González,JohnsHopkinsUniversity- Jeff Faux,EconomicPolicyInstitute "

# +

Lázaro CárdenasBatel,Woodrow Wilson Center ofCommerce Peter Bowman,Department Juan CarlosBaker, SecretaríadeEconomía :!CA3*K'LFC:9: Tim Wise, Tufts University Carol Wise, California* UniversityofSouthern Sidney Weintraub, CSIS Elio Villaseñor, IniciativaCiudadana Isabel Studer, MonterreyTec* Elio Villasenor, IniciativaCiudadan Marc Rosenblum,MigrationPolicy Institute OrganizacionesBinacionales (FIOB) Gaspar RiveraSalgado,Frente Indígenade - >˜˜œ˜Ê"½ iˆ]Ê œÕ˜VˆÊœ˜ÊœÀiˆ}˜Ê,i>̈œ˜Ã Fred Niehaus,Western Union Doris Meissner, MigrationPolicyInstitute* Eliseo Medina,SEIU StateLegislator Saldaña,former Jesús Martínez LaRaza NationalCouncil of Clarissa Martínez, Berkeley Andrés Jiménez,UniversityofCalifornia, Tamar Jacoby, ImmigrationWorks USA Elizabeth Wolfson, ofState Department Service Angeles Villarreal, CongressionalResearch Mena,EmbassyofMexico Antonio Ortiz TheBrookingsInstitution Leonardo Martinez-Díaz, Dolia Estévez,Woodrow Wilson Center a

+

:!CA3*K'LFC:9: Javier Díaz de León, Embassy of Mexico Demetri Papademetriou, Migration Policy Institute# Daniel Hernández Joseph, Foreign Arturo Sarukhan, Embassy of Mexico# Relations Ministry Karla Mendoza, Mexican Senate

*&#+,-.".#&)%"&-"'A$")0/0F2$3,4&"E&#C$# C$4$2E$#":19G"8@@>" H4&F/%&-/&#$C"*,'A"4&5$(I César Cantú Ayala, Universidad Autónoma :!CA3*K'LFC:9: de Nuevo León Juana Alavez, Public Security Secretariat Francisco Javier Cantú, Nuevo León of Baja California State Legislator Francisco Javier Alejo, Government of Nuevo León 9? Karen Chapman, Environmental Defense Fund Lisa Almodovar, Environmental Protection Agency The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership Ana Córdova, COLEF Lázaro Cárdenas, Woodrow Wilson Center Carlos de la Parra, COLEF Rodger Garner, USAID Gustavo Del Castillo, COLEF Natividad González, Border Governors Denise Moreno Ducheny, California State Senator Conference# Jim Gerber, San Diego State University Hector Márquez, Secretaría de Economía Tonatiuh Guillén, COLEF David Olsen, U.S. Department of Commerce Mary Kelly, Environmental Defense Fund* Alejandro Posadas, SEMARNAT Jim Kolbe, McLarty Associates* Rachel Poynter, U.S. Department of State Chappell Lawson, MIT Karen Senhadji, U.S. Department of the Interior Erik Lee, Arizona State University - NACTS Arturo Sarukhan, Embassy of Mexico# David Mares, UCSD and Baker Institute Alejandra Sifuentes, Office of Rep. Silvestre Reyes Diana Villiers Negroponte, Brookings Institution José Octavio Tripp Villanueva, Embassy of Mexico Fred Niehaus, Western Union Tony Payán, University of Texas at El Paso Luis E. Ramírez Thomas, Ramírez Advisors Raúl Rodríguez, Arizona State University - NACTS David Shirk, Trans-Border Institute, USD Lucinda Vargas, Plan Estratégico de Juárez, A.C. René Zenteno, COLEF

Appendix Two Additional Comments from Working Group Members <6 "is report does not represent a consensus document and working group members and their organizations do not

necessarily endorse all findings. However, we asked members to submit additional comments on the report if they The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership wished, and the responses received are included below.

$4&-&2,4",-'$.#!',&-

'JKLMNO"*JPQ" 4NWXXQYY"5WZPLT 'RSMP")TJUQVPJMO 2WPPW[NRPQMMP",TPMJMRMQ"LS"'Q[NTLYL\O One of the most disappointing features of the I applaud the report’s attention to issues of Mexican economy under NAFTA has been broad-based economic development, as weak job creation, and this has important well as its recognition of the fact that trade implications for the US as well as Mexico. liberalization alone will not promote such This problem will only get worse with the development. I also agree that Mexico needs recession, as the report already notes. This investment in roads, energy generation and makes it particularly important that the three transmission systems, water treatment facilities, NAFTA governments coordinate on economic and the like in order to grow. However, policy and take steps that help ensure the several decades of experience with large- livelihoods and food security of the continent’s scale infrastructure spending programs have most vulnerable populations. Most reside in revealed the perils of relying on such programs Mexico. Measures that strengthen employment to generate growth. Foremost among these and livelihoods are the most important for dangers are the waste and corruption that governments to undertake. Measures that follow from the inability of governments to threaten employment and livelihoods are the properly administer projects and to monitor the most important to avoid. In that context, and way funds are spent. Other potential perils of in the context of Mexico’s weak employment poorly crafted infrastructure spending programs growth under NAFTA, further trade opening is include habitat destruction on a massive scale, not a priority if it comes in areas that threaten the disruption of local communities that were livelihoods. Further development assistance is not allowed to participate in the design of very much in order. Investments in smallholder the projects, and the strengthening of political agriculture could be particularly cost-effective machines where the governments involved toward the goals of ensuring food security, are already shot-through with clientelism. Only addressing poverty, and securing livelihoods for an infrastructure fund that explicitly addresses the poor. Protection of those sectors from import all of these issues will bring about the sort of competition may be warranted. development that this report rightly advocates. <8 Appendix Two: Additional Comments from Working Group Members be toreduceinequalityandraiseliving of apost-NAFTA economicagendamust correctlystatesthatthegoal The report $[LTLKJ["%LYJ[O",TPMJMRMQ ]QSS"(WR^ with “developmental” goals,suchascreating must notbeforgotten thatNAFTA was“sold” on thepopulationandenvironment. It renegotiation toredressitsnegative impacts evaluationand for aseriousparticipatory As such,NAFTA shouldbeopened up should beastakeholderintrinational relations. As thedocumentrecognizes,civilsociety ,TPMJMRMQ"SLV"%LYJ[O"/MRaJQP 2WTRQY"%_VQ`"#L[NW more democraticprocesses. social developmentpolicieslegitimatizedby economy withcoordinatedtrade,industrialand structurefortheregional a newgovernance thethreenationsmust committo go forward, It cannotgobacktothepre-NAFTA world.To Americaisataneconomiccrossroads. North reduce itstradedeficit.Giventhisnewreality, must consumeless,savemoreandsubstantially deliver moregrowthinanerawhichtheUS consumer boomintheUS,itisunlikelyto for Mexicoduring15yearsofanextraordinary the NAFTA modelcouldnotcreateenoughjobs competitiveness ofbothnations.Putbluntly:if issue comparedwiththedeterioratingglobal US-Mexican trade,whichtodayisamarginal focused onthequestionoffacilitatingmore the workforce.Moreover, istoo thereport of thoseinthebottomroughly75percent policies thatundercutthebargainingpower expense ofinadequatesocialinvestmentand model thatsubsidizesprivateinterestsatthe afunctionofaneconomic example, isinpart that suggestedinthisdocument.Inequality, for Americanintegrationthan re-thinking ofNorth dependent growth)requiresamoreambitious deregulation, subsidizedprofitsandexport- NAFTA developmentmodel,(i.e.,financial in factthegoalofNAFTA. Thefailureofthe standards. Butraisinglivingstandardswas rather than merely “considering U.S. voluntary rather thanmerely“consideringU.S.voluntary trade).Likewise, ininternational participate of Originthatwouldhelplocalproducers Requirements andtheeliminationofRules clauses suchastheProhibitionofPerformance establish linkagesbetweenthem(including was designedtoeliminaterequirements becausetheagreement with largerexporters small andmediumcompaniesarebarelylinked private sectors.AsaresultofNAFTA provisions, andinthepublic jobs inthecountryside has acceleratedbecauseofthedestruction home, yetsinceNAFTA migrationtotheU.S. more andbetteremploymentforMexicansat bi-national relations hasbeensacrificedto exchange ofgoods andpeopleimproved the eventsofSeptember11, 2001.Promoting of has beenseriouslyalteredin theaftermath facilitating commerceonthe Mexicanborder The balancebetweenensuring securityand 2[5WVMO"!PPL[JWMQP ]JK"+LYbQ 'A$"E&#C$# to thehighestdenominatorsinregion. environmental standardsdesignedtoconverge trade.” Thiswillonlybedonewithlaborand and wealthhelpspreadthe“benefitsof tackle theincreasedconcentrationofpower arethosethat The mosturgentstructuralreforms the NACC,excludingcongressesandsociety. branches andthe30corporationsthatintegrate oftheexecutive under thesoleparticipation deregulatetheNAFTAdealings tofurther area should behaltedbecauseofitsundemocratic Mexican economy. InthecaseofSPP, it of capitalcontrolsunderNAFTA impactsthe toevaluatehowtheelimination also necessary crops.” To dealwiththeeconomiccrisis,itis instead ofbeingobliged“totransittoother Mexican peasantstoretaintheirlivelihoods, agricultural chapterofNAFTA inordertoallow latter mustbeaddressedbyrenegotiatingthe Mexico” theincreasedfooddependencyof to exported restraintsforwhitecorn export the dubious goal of border security—dubious it does not directly address the problems because there is little evidence that the affecting a regional border population that is measures instituted since 9/11 have been increasingly transnational. If this population effective in enhancing security. The report of is going to see improvements in its quality of the Binational Working Group makes important living, and if the border is going to prosper, recommendations on how this balance might their needs must be taken into consideration. be righted. The new administration would do In part this can be facilitated if universities and well to heed these recommendations. schools, nonprofits, and families are assisted so that they might contribute. Universities need ]JK".QVbQV mechanisms for crossing the border to attend /WT"CJQ\L"/MWMQ")TJUQVPJMO classes including on a part-time basis, as one The Mexico Institute of the Woodrow Wilson component of a full time schedule in the home International Center for Scholars and the country plus easier mechanisms for internships Colegio de la Frontera Norte have contributed “on the other side,” and improvements in <7 a thoughtful list of needs for the US-Mexico health and travel insurance so US students region. It is impossible to comment on each are not forced to act as if they are going to The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership and every one, so I will make a few general a faraway country when they work in their comments. To begin, it is notable that while cross-border twin city. Nonprofits and border cross-border trade in goods and services families need to be able to cross more easily continues, albeit with unnecessary and in order to collaborate, to visit each other, and expensive obstacles, and that while large, but to develop the social capital of the border, not small, capital flows also move relatively while workers on both sides need to be able easily across the line, the residents on both to get to work reliably on time. The border is sides feel the presence of the border in ways about commerce, but it is also about building that remain mostly outside the considerations communities that know each other and that of the report. The report addresses bi-national can work together to press their needs on their issues for which it is to be commended, but respective capitals.

Appendix Three Brief Biographies of Report Authors <9 C!D,C"#0"!Bc- (Migration) is a political analyst and writer, who serves as a Senior Research Associate at the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University and as the The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership U.S. Director of the Focus Mexico/Enfoque México Project.

#&E$#'"C&--$55B'­ œÀ`iÀ®ÊˆÃÊ*Àœ}À>“Ê
ÃÜVˆ>ÌiʜvÊÌ iÊ7œœ`ÀœÜÊ7ˆÃœ˜Ê i˜ÌiÀ½ÃÊ i݈VœÊ Institute and was previously the Coordinator of the Justice in Mexico Project at the University of ->˜Ê ˆi}œ½ÃÊ/À>˜ÃLœÀ`iÀʘÃ̈ÌÕÌi°

C&5,!"$/'dD$e (Economic Integration) is a career journalist who currently writes for Poder magazine and El Semanario and serves as the consulting coordinator of the U.S.-Mexico Journalism Initiative at the Woodrow Wilson Center.

$#,4"&5/&-"(Security Cooperation) is Senior Advisor to the Security Initiative of the Woodrow 7ˆÃœ˜Ê i˜ÌiÀ½ÃÊ i݈VœÊ˜Ã̈ÌÕÌiÊ>˜`Ê >ÃÊ i`ÊÃi˜ˆœÀÊ«œÃˆÌˆœ˜ÃÊ>ÌÊÌ iÊ"À}>˜ˆâ>̈œ˜ÊœvÊ
“iÀˆV>˜Ê States, Amnesty International, and the Washington Office on Latin America.

!-C#$*"/$5$$ (Introduction and Overview/General Editor) is Director of the Woodrow Wilson i˜ÌiÀ½ÃÊ i݈VœÊ˜Ã̈ÌÕÌiÊ>˜`Ê>˜Ê
`Õ˜VÌÊ*ÀœviÃÜÀÊ>ÌÊœ ˜ÃÊœ«Žˆ˜ÃÊ1˜ˆÛiÀÈÌÞ°Ê Mexico Institute Advisory Board

4&748!,#/ Mr. José Antonio Fernández Carbajal Chairman and CEO, FEMSA Mr. Roger W. Wallace Vice President, Pioneer Natural Resources

2$26$#/ Dr. Sergio Aguayo, Professor, El Colegio de México Mr. Carlos Heredia, Former Congressman and Mr. Herb Allen, Chairman and CEO, Allen Professor, ITAM and Co., LLC Mr. Hunter Hunt, Senior Vice President, Hunt Ms. Anne Alonzo, Vice President for Global Public Oil Company Policy, Kraft Foods Mr. Guillermo Jasson, Latin American Regional Head, Mr. Alberto Baillères, Chairman, Grupo BAL Investment Banking, Morgan Stanley and ITAM Amb. James Jones, Chairman, Manatt Jones Mr. Malin Burnham, Chairman, Cushman & Wake Global Strategies Dr. Enrique Cabrero Mendoza, General Director, Mr. Alejandro Junco, President and Publisher, Reforma CIDE and El Norte Dr. Luis de la Calle, Founding Partner and Managing Dr. Susan Kaufman Purcell, Director, Center for Director, De la Calle, Madrazo, & Mancera Hemispheric Policy, University of Miami Dr. Roderic Ai. Camp, Professor, Claremont Hon. Jim Kolbe, Senior Advisor, McLarty Associates McKenna College Dr. Enrique Krauze, President and Director, Letras Libres Ms. Magdalena Carral, Partner, Carral, Sierra y Mr. Robert Lovelace, Chairman, Capital Research Asociados S.C. Company Mr. Eduardo Cepeda, Managing Director, J.P. Morgan Dr. Lorenzo Meyer, Professor, El Colegio de México Chase-Mexico Dr. Diana Negroponte, Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Mr. Brian Dyson, Retired President, Coca-Cola & Brookings Institution President, Chatham International Mr. Fred Niehaus, Senior Vice President, Western Union Ms. Maria Echaveste, Co-founder, Nueva Vista Group *Amb. Jesús Reyes Heroles, Director, PEMEX Mr. Jaime El Koury, Partner, Cleary Gottlieb, Amb. Andrés Rozental, President, Rozental & Asociados, New York, NY Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution Dr. Rafael Fernández de Castro, Director of Mr. Luis Rubio, President, CIDAC International Relations, ITAM University Amb. Arturo Sarukhan, Mexican Ambassador to the Dr. Rossana Fuentes-Berain, Journalist and Professor, United States ITAM Dr. Peter H. Smith, Simón Bolívar Professor, University Mr. Donald E. Garcia, President, Pinnacle of California, San Diego Financial Group Mr. James Taylor, Partner, ViaNovo Amb. Antonio O. Garza, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico *Dr. Luis Téllez, Secretary of Communications and Mr. Armando Garza Sada, CEO, Grupo Industrial ALFA Transportation, Government of Mexico Dr. Neal R. Goins, President, ExxonMobil Dr. Javier Treviño, Vice President, CEMEX Ventures-Mexico Dr. Mónica Verea, Professor, National Autonomous Dr. Bernardo González-Aréchiga, Director, School of University of Mexico Public Administration, Monterrey Tec Dr. Peter Ward, Professor and former Director, Mexico Amb. Lawrence Harrington, Deputy Attorney General, Center, University of Texas, Austin State of Tennessee Attorney General Mr. Lorenzo Zambrano, President and CEO, CEMEX

* on leave as of December 2006 due to official responsibilities. Mexico Institute Mexico Institute

Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20004-3027 www.wilsoncenter.org THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO: Towards a Strategic Partnership

!"#$%&#'"&("(&)#"*&#+,-.".#&)%/"&-")0/012$3,4&"#$5!',&-/

The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, established by Congress in 1968 and headquar- tered in Washington, D.C., is a living national memorial to President Wilson. !e Center’s mission is to commemorate the ideals and concerns of Woodrow Wilson by providing a link between the worlds of ideas and policy, while fostering research, study, discussion, and collaboration among a broad spectrum of individuals concerned with policy and scholar- ship in national and international affairs. Supported by public and private funds, the Center is a nonpartisan institu- tion engaged in the study of national and world affairs. It establishes and maintains a neutral forum for free, open, and informed dialogue. Conclusions or opinions expressed in Center publications and programs are those of the authors and speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Center staff, fellows, trustees, advisory groups, or any individuals or organizations that provide financial support to the Center. !e Center is the publisher of !e Wilson Quarterly and home of Woodrow Wilson Center Press, dialogue radio and television, and the monthly newsletter “Centerpoint.” For more information about the Center’s activities and publications, please visit us on the web at www.wilsoncenter.org.

Lee H. Hamilton, President and Director Board of Trustees Joseph B. Gildenhorn, Chair Sander R. Gerber, Vice Chair Public Members: James H. Billington, Librarian of Congress; G. Wayne Clough, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution; Bruce Cole, Chair, National Endowment for the Humanities; Mark R. Dybul, designated appointee within the federal government; Michael O. Leavitt, Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Condoleezza Rice, Secretary, U.S. Department of State; Margaret Spellings, Secretary, U.S. Department of Education; Allen Weinstein, Archivist of the United States !"#$%&'($)&'*'("#&+,%*$-".//0&%1$*/' Private Citizen Members: Charles Cobb, Jr., Robin B. Cook, Charles L. Glazer, Carlos M. Gutierrez, !"213*'("4+/'/5*+"6'$&(%1$*/'"" " Susan Hutchison, Barry S. Jackson, Ignacio E. Sanchez 7/%3"8/%"9::

!"4')1'+*'(";<#<=2&>*+/".//0&%1$*/'"" /'"2*(%1$*/'

!"?)&";<#<=2&>*+/"@/%A&%B"#0&+*1:"" .)1::&'(&CD"#0&+*1:"E00/%$,'*$*&C