3/16/17 (too late to still be typing….and believing in ideas like the one below)
Another book review – I enjoy doing these, they serve a two-fold purpose and seem to be getting strong reception from readers.
I purchased this book in 2006 and still review it from time to time. As opposed to being a “traditional” commercial release this was an actual formal report released in book form by an independent task force commissioned by the Council on Foreign Relations.
The basic concept is pretty well stated in the title – the panel was tasked to make recommendations on how The USA, Mexico and Canada could work together to create a shared / united border – AND enhance security …. while promoting economic prosperity within what would now be called a “region”
(or as I call it…..Mexiamada)
The book is written in a very clear and direct manner and that’s one of the things I like about it. Each copy includes 3 versions of the report – one in English, French & Spanish.
The panel made very clear recommendations from start to finish.
So even though the desired implementation date (2010) was VERY aggressive – the proposed work to be done and supporting measures were concrete and described clearly.
Also, with the recent inundation of debate about President Trump’s Executive Orders to review US bound immigrants from 7 nations — it’s interesting to step back and listen to smart people who OPENLY promote the idea of eliminating our traditional borders and see how their opinions and methods compare with our media and other public figures.
Quick context – I am fully opposed to eliminating our borders and attempting to create a European Union type of super-bureaucracy that attempting to maintain shared borders (and resources). I believe an arrangement like this inherently undermines the accountability of government officials to the governed.
I also believe that corruption within government is inevitable to varying degrees. It makes no sense to create ever larger confederations that have the ability to make EVER LARGER Mistakes when something DOES go wrong … or when outright graft and/or other forms of corruption occur…..government is better when it’s as local as possible and as accountable as possible!
OK – on to the book / report.
I’ll take a “pros and cons” approach in this review and share 2 separate lists of excerpts and ideas from the publication:
1) Mexico needs to do more to contribute to the security of the “region”
(note that when they say “region” – they mean the three sovereign nations formerly called Mexico, The United States and Canada)
2) The introduction at least makes reference to ensuring that each other’s sovereignty should continue to be respected…..BUT…..how does that happen when you’re actually ERODING sovereignty (and probably accountability)…seems to me that if this type of arrangement were created – the idea of “sovereignty” may not exist within another generation…….so I guess that was more like a “con” posing as a “pro” (not unlike our last President!)
3) They acknowledge that 9/11 showed that we need BETTER BORDER MANAGEMENT – wait………what? Are they ALLOWED to say that??? They also cite new regulations put in place by “Little Bush” (Ref: “The Container Security Initiative”) as a good example of cooperation between nations in regards to security. That initiative put common sense communication channels in place between exporting nations and the importing USA ports — the intent was to be more detailed in the inspection and vetting of inbound cargo.
4) When they discuss information sharing – the acknowledge that you should be gathering data on foreign nationals who are entering and exiting your country, They propose that the 3 nations would make improvement on how and to what extent (“fully”) that information is shared……that generally strikes me as a good idea, although it seems shameful that we’d need a massive new 3-Nation Entity to make it happen.
5) They emphasize N. American cooperation on energy production (citing Canada’s oil sands and Mexico’s significant oil supply and their status as the 2nd largest exporter of oil to the US. While not overtly stated, progress in this area would almost certainly promote energy independence from the Middle East……HOWEVER the same section then mentions how Mexico would ultimately need more “investment” which they (THANKFULLY) clarify as …. “especially financial” (HIDDEN COSTS YET AGAIN…)
1) The new “Space” that would be created would allow un-fettered, free flowing movement of people (and capital). So once you DO get in — you’re free to wander around anywhere. In addition to having concerns from a security perspective I would be concerned about the public health risk as well. At a minimum you’d have to find a way to harmonize vaccinations …. which means that there would be either a) Massive hidden costs or b) Increases in the prevalence of diseases that aren’t necessarily native to certain locales…..which is also a source of possible increases of mortality and morbidity….which (aside from being sad) – is another source of MASSIVE HIDDEN COSTS.
2) Citizens of MexiAmada would be issued a BORDER PASS — with biometric identification elements ….. I’m not a fan of proposing a BIGGER GOVT – that’s outside the scope of our Constitution and THEN having them issue our “PAPERS”
3) They call for a new Tri-National Threat intelligence Center — sounds like overhead and bureaucracy that won’t guarantee anyone anything other than:
a) More tax revenue taken from hard working citizens in all of the three regions of Enchanted Mexiamada…..
b) Pensions for the faceless bureaucrats that would be “working” in this new place
c) MORE REGULATIONS!! MORE HIDDEN COSTS!!
4) They call for the US and Canada to set up an “Investment Fund” to encourage private capital flow into Mexico – they go on to say that the Fund should consider incentives and DEBT ABSORPTION. I am not an economist – and I know they’re talking about “private capital” here….but people and/or agencies with enough spare capital to invest in this scheme WILL find a way to mitigate or just PASS ALONG the costs to others. This just sounds like basic wealth redistribution to me with NO REFERENCE to what we all do if the practices and policies that originally created that – don’t change (ask Germans how they feel about Greek debt)
So while we’re talking about paying for someone else’s spending….here’s a quick reference guide to the list of states that would be bearing a TREMENDOUS new load of taxation (and other forms of burden) to support this concept…..
The State Map reflects the country that most closely aligns with the GDP os each state.
Here’s a link to the source for the map – Hope it Helps Make My Point – Which is Primarily Economic
5) They propose merging some aspects of our university systems. Oh boy.
Specifically, the report recommends The authors cite 13,000 Mexican citizens currently (Again, as of 2006) in U.S. Universities and 27,000 Canadian citizens as well. Then they note how India has also contributed 80,000 citizens and there are many more eager learners from China, S. Korea and Japan. They note that our emphasis and incidents of ‘swapping students’ should be “expanded dramatically”.Of course the report envisions a NEW FUND that would be established to pay for tuition – and it should be paid for by “state, provincial, and federal governments…”
Aside from facilitating wider Marxist indoctrination — I believe our States should probably FIRST find a way to ensure funding for PENSIONS that they’ve GUARANTEED TO TAX PAYING CITIZENS who served them for years. This is a growing concern in the U.S. and the issue is getting more attention finally (do some searches – I’m not linking that rabbit trail right now).
So – this one angle shows clear (and clearly KNOWN) risk that should have been included in the report in one way or another. It would have lent more (some?) intellectual honesty and, therefore, credibility – to the report.
Bringing this into focus for current news / events. For the true Globalist Believers that propose arrangements like this – you can understand how they’d be offended, angered and SCARED to see a reversal in policy direction that emphasizes sovereignty, national borders …. and perhaps WALLS.
As I read this report, I couldn’t help but admire the degree of thought that went into it.
However it seems that there are serious holes in the research and there’s no section to responsibility address RISKS to the proposal…..which erodes my trust a bit to be honest.
Ultimately what I LIKE about this book is the “intel” of keeping up with the ongoing “borderless” / “New World Order” type movements that are very real and very organized. When I read information like this it further affirms that most of the Flak our President is getting right now has a LOT more to do with his policies pushing back on movements like this – as opposed to his administration’s ideas somehow being inherently bad.
I recommend picking it up – even though its dated – if you like to build a nice reference library of your own.
The CFR would do well to publish a followup report that takes into account the limitations of the first, the lack of a real risk assessment AND make mention of how the European Union has been going through some very clear political fracturing exacerbated by widening economic and ideological rifts. Not to mention their “shared borders” are proving to be a slow motion DISASTER as people with bad intent are taking full advantage of the arrangement…….
….the follow up report could perhaps be called “HAHAHA – What were WE Thinking??”
Finally, the book. while well organized ends up sounding like highly intelligent, university Presidents sitting around and talking about the magic wishing well they’re going to build….and how there’s absolutely NOTHING that can go wrong with that…
Have a nice night….