30 Time Sept. 2–9, 2019
In July, it was reported that the Trump Ad-
ministration was calling up over 2,000 more
troops to support the approximately 5,000
already on duty there. To put that in perspec-
tive, we have fewer than 1,000 troops in Syria
and only 14,000 in Afghanistan, where there
is a clear-cut need for such combat capability.
The military can help the Border Patrol with
logistical support, intelligence gathering and
construction of physical barriers. But U.S.
law generally prohibits the use of the military
in circumstances that approach actual law en-
forcement. When forces under my command
conducted counternarcotics patrols, for ex-
ample, the law- enforcement functions had to
be conducted by duly authorized personnel—
U.S. Coast Guard or Drug Enforcement Ad-
ministration (DEA) officers, typically.
If the military isn’t the answer, what
should we be doing?
Interagency co-
operation is the
first key to solv-
ing this crisis. This
should include
work not only by
the Department of
Homeland Secu-
rity but also by the
State Department
to craft diplomatic
agreements with
our neighbors;
Treasury, Com-
merce and the U.S.
Trade Representa-
tive to create economic incentives that would
help keep migrants in their own countries;
Health and Human Services to deal humanely
with the migrants crossing the border; and
the DEA to work the counternarcotics and
gang challenges that lead to much of the
migrant- driving violence. Only by harnessing
the power of an integrated government can
we create a holistic solution to the crisis.
We also need better international coopera-
tion. Mexico and the nations of Central Amer-
ica have a substantial role to play in resolving
this situation, and they can be incentivized to
do more, including possibly accepting “safe
third country” agreements—in which mi-
grants wait in other countries while the U.S.
asylum system adjudicates their cases. Mex-
ico continues to reject Trump Administration
pressure to accept such an agreement, under-
standably saying the huge backlog of cases in
U.S. courts would cause migrants to remain
inside its borders for three or more years.
Guatemala, under intense financial pressure
from the U.S., accepted one of these deals in
July, although the newly elected government
there has indicated a desire to renegotiate. All
these countries can also help by sharing intel-
ligence, deploying their police and ensuring
their border-control forces effectively crack
down on human smugglers.
The risks facing Latin American countries
are significant—the financial costs of support-
ing migrant populations are obvious, but there
is also the attendant fear of political instabil-
ity as each nation grapples with an increasing
number of newcomers living for a long time
in uncertain circumstances. The situation
in Venezuela offers a useful example: there
are currently over 4 million Venezuelans in
neighboring countries like Colombia and Bra-
zil. Mexico and Central American countries
see the difficulties
those countries are
having coping. But
it’s essential that
they act as good
partners in getting
this situation under
control.
Finally, public-
private partner-
ships can assist in
not only addressing
the humanitarian
crisis but also tack-
ling the root causes
of migration. These
have to be seeded by the U.S. government
with foreign aid and tax incentives, and the
recent decision to cut $500 million in aid to
the Northern Triangle nations of El Salvador,
Honduras and Guatemala was counterproduc-
tive. U.S. corporations and nongovernmental
organizations can help produce better condi-
tions through job creation, higher labor stan-
dards and stronger free-trade arrangements.
These strategies are far less expensive
than keeping 7,000 troops on the border or
building a huge, unnecessary wall. They will
also ultimately be more effective. The Trump
Administration’s effort to deter migrants by
creating harsh conditions at the border may
ease the flow in the short term, but any long-
term solution will require much broader co-
operation with the world to the south.Admiral Stavridis (ret.) was the 16th Supreme
Allied Commander for NATO and is an
operating executive at the Carlyle GroupSoldiers install brackets and wire along
the border wall in NovemberTheView Opener
SHORT
READS
▶ Highlights
from stories on
time.com/ideasA lack of
urgencyWe know we must
act now to reduce
the effects of climate
change, so why don’t
we? According to Bryan
Walsh, author of End
Times, one reason
has to do with how our
brains react to thoughts
of the future: “If we
view our own selves
in the future as virtual
strangers, how much
less do we care about
the lives of generations
yet to be born?”Knowing right
from wrongPresident Trump’s
remark that Jews who
vote for Democrats are
ignorant or disloyal was
foolish and dangerous,
writes Rabbi David
Wolpe, and even if you
like some of his policies
on Israel, it’s O.K. to
condemn him when he’s
wrong: “We have to be
able to hold principle
above personalities.”Checks and
balancesSupreme Court deci-
sions like Citizens
United have allowed
for unlimited election
spending. Senator
Tom Udall proposed a
constitutional amend-
ment to change that.
“If we want to make
progress on the very
real problems Ameri-
cans face,” he writes,
“we have to create a
democracy that is fair
and open to all.”