Search This Blog

Thursday, January 4, 2024

Revisionist Zionism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revisionist_Zionism
The Revisionist Zionist platform

Revisionist Zionism is a form of Zionism which is characterized by territorial maximalism. Revisionist Zionism promoted expansionism and the establishment of a Jewish majority on both sides of the Jordan River.

Developed by Ze'ev Jabotinsky, this ideology advocated a "revision" of the "practical Zionism" of David Ben-Gurion and Chaim Weizmann which was focused on the settling of Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) by independent individuals. Differing from other types of Zionism, Revisionists insisted upon the Jewish right to sovereignty over the whole of Eretz Yisrael, which they equated to Mandatory Palestine and Transjordan. It was the chief ideological competitor to the dominant socialist Labor Zionism.

Revisionist Zionism directly opposed Labor Zionism within the general Zionist movement. Revisionist Zionism had its own paramilitary group called the Irgun, out of which another organization known as the Stern Gang emerged. Both the Irgun and the Stern Gang were responsible for several attacks against the British to try to expel them from Palestine.

In 1935, after the Zionist Executive rejected Jabotinsky's political program and refused to state that "the aim of Zionism was the establishment of a Jewish state", Jabotinsky resigned from the World Zionist Organization. He founded the New Zionist Organization (NZO), known in Hebrew as Tzakh, to conduct independent political activity for free immigration and the establishment of a Jewish State.

In its early years under Jabotinsky's leadership, Revisionist Zionism was focused on gaining support from Britain for settlement. Later, Revisionist groups independent of Jabotinsky initiated campaigns against the British to open up immigration during the 1930s following the White Paper, which severely limited Jews' right to immigrate at a time considered critical as the Nazis were gaining power.

Revisionist Zionism has strongly influenced modern right-wing Israeli parties, principally Herut and its successor Likud.

History

Early history of Revisionist Zionism

The British Mandate for Palestine included both Palestine and the Transjordan, the modern-day territories of Israel, the West Bank, Gaza and Jordan. The Mandate allowed Britain to restrict Jewish settlement everywhere in the Mandate including in Transjordan, east of the River Jordan.

Revisionist Zionism was based on a vision of "political Zionism", which Jabotinsky regarded as following the legacy of Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern political Zionism. His main demand was the creation of Greater Israel on both sides of the Jordan River, and was against partitioning Palestine with the Arabs, such as suggested by the Peel Commission.

The 1921 British establishment of Transjordan (the modern-day state of Jordan) adversely affected this goal, and it was a great setback for the movement. Before Israel achieved statehood in 1948, Revisionist Zionism became known for its advocacy of more belligerent, assertive postures and actions against both British and Arab control of the region.

The British establishment of Transjordan, divided the borders of the British Mandate for Palestine, reducing it substantially.

Criticism of the Churchill White Paper of 1922 sparked the establishment of the Revisionist Union. The central committee of the Revisionist Union defined its relationship with Great Britain as one of mutual loyalty but it was at odds with the mandatory administration. In the 1920s, Revisionist leadership wanted to clearly define the relationship of the Revisionist movement and the British Empire. It supported the proposal of British MP Josiah Wedgewood to make Palestine a Seventh Dominion of the British Empire. The proposal was ratified at the third Revisionist world conference which took place from December 26, 1928 to December 30, 1928. A year later, the proposal was approved by the executive committee as part of its working plan.

Jabotinsky established the Revisionist Party in 1925 with the intention of replacing the General Zionists. The 1929 riots by Arabs in Palestine led to the radicalization of the Zionist movement. This led to the dwindling of the General Zionist movement and the struggle for leadership in the 1931 elections to the 17th Zionist Congress between Revisionist Zionists and Labor Zionists. In the 1929 elections to the 16th Congress, the Revisionists won only 7% of the votes, but in the 1931 elections, they won 21% of the votes.

In 1931, Jabotinsky forced Chaim Weizmann to resign as president of the World Zionist Organization. Jabotinsky wanted to establish Revisionist Zionism as a separate movement that existed independent from the general Zionist movement. However, Revisionist delegates would not join Jabotinsky in announcing immediate secession from the Zionist movement. Supporters of Jabotinsky's idea to secede were Abba Ahimeir, Uri Zvi Greenberg, and Zeev von Weisel. Jabotinsky created a political platform called 'The Ultimate Objective' which demanded that Congress proclaim that the ultimate objective of Zionism was the establishment of a Jewish state that had a Jewish majority on both sides of the Jordan River. If the Congress accepted the platform, that would indicate that it supported Revisionist ideas and leadership. If it did not accept the platform, the Revisionists would secede. Ultimately, the platform was rejected after a cable was sent from Palestine by Eliyahu Golomb and Saadia Shoshani. The cable said that acceptance of the platform would lead to an Arab pogrom in Palestine. In response to the rejection of the platform, Jabotinsky tore up his membership card.

The debate over secession continued for two years until shortly before the elections for the 18th Congress in 1933. In March 1933, three months before the elections, Jabotinsky suspended the activities of all party institutions and deposed all central party functionaries. He also appointed himself sole leader of the Revisionist movement.

In 1935, the Revisionists seceded from the World Zionist Organization because of its refusal to declare the establishment of a Jewish state as its immediate aim. The Revisionists formed the New Zionist Organization and elected Jabotinsky as its president. The Revisionist movement was threatened with bankruptcy in 1936 when Jabotinsky moved his headquarters from Paris to London.

The Revisionists opposed the World Zionist Organization's attempts to negotiate a trade agreement with Hitler. Jabotinsky attempted to get a motion passed to support an anti-Nazi boycott which was defeated 249 to 43. After this, Jabotinsky attempted to set up the Revisionist World Union as a boycott center, but this was also unsuccessful.

There were 10 Revisionist Zionist youth groups in Warsaw, Poland, one of which was Betar. Jabotinsky became head of Betar in 1929, but the actual organization was founded by Aron Propes in 1923. Menachem Begin joined Betar in 1929 in Poland and was head of the national unit, which was the largest branch of Betar in the world. Socialist Zionist youth movements in Poland warned of the rise of fascism in Poland in reference to the activities of Betar. Chaim Weizmann, the president of the World Zionist organization, referred to Betar's connection with Italian fascism. In November 1934, Benito Mussolini organized a Betar squadron at Civitavecchia where 134 cadets were trained by the Blackshirts. Their training was ended in 1937 after Mussolini aligned himself with Hitler. One of the main messages of Betar was that Jews would only be able to survive if they fought back against violence or even struck first through violent means. Betar members defended Poland during the German invasion in 1939. In Sosnoweic, Betar members joined Catholic Polish youth in a civilian defense battalion. In Sanok, Betar members set up bomb shelters and dug trenches. In Bursztyn, Betar members joined a self-defense unit that was organized by Catholic Poles to defend against the possibility of a Ukrainian invasion into Polish territory. Jabotinsky and Menachem Begin both expressed solidarity with Poland following the German invasion. However, almost all of Betar's national leadership in Warsaw fled Poland because of rumors that German troops were executing Polish and Jewish political activists. Begin also fled Poland and proposed to a Polish officer that a Jewish brigade should be established within the Polish army to defend against a German attack. Many of the activists who had fled Poland returned to organize underground activity to resist the German troops occupying the country.

In October 1937, Jabotinsky met with Marshall Edward Smygly-Rydz to arrange an alliance between Revisionist Zionist and the anti-semitic Polish regime. Jabotinsky used the Polish press to call for the evacuation of 1.5 million Jews from eastern Europe, mostly from Poland. In spring 1939, Poles set up a guerrilla training school for Revisionist Zionists at Zakopane in the Tatra Mountains. 25 members of the Irgun were brought to Poland from Palestine and were taught sabotage and insurrection by the Polish Army. The Polish Army also provided weapons for 10,000 men for a possible invasion of Palestine in April 1940. In August 1939, Menachem Begin told the Irgun that he wanted the invasion to take place in October 1939. He planned to lead the Betar who would land on the beach at Tel Aviv and the Irgun would occupy the Government House in Jerusalem, hold it for 24 hours, and declare a provisional government. After Jabotinsky died or was arrested, Revisionists in Europe and America would proclaim a government-in-exile. Jabotinsky changed the invasion plan after the 1939 White Paper. Britain restricted Zionist land purchases, limited immigration to 75,000 for the next five years, and suggested an Arab-dominated state be formed in the next 10 years.

After the German invasion of Poland in 1939, Jabotinsky focused on creating another Jewish Legion. The only place where he could recruit people to join this organization was the United States and he did not arrive there until March 1940. He also attempted to convince British politicians to help him recruit this army, but they did not agree to do so. The British believed that they had Jewish support in their war against Nazi Germany and they believed that the creation of another Jewish Legion would create tension in the Middle East.

History of Revisionist Zionism after Israel's establishment

During the first two decades after the Israeli Declaration of Independence in May 1948, the main revisionist party, Herut (founded in June 1948), remained in opposition. The party slowly began to revise its ideology in an effort to change this situation and to gain political power. While Begin maintained the Revisionist claim to Jewish sovereignty over all of Eretz Israel, by the late 1950s, control over the East Bank of the Jordan ceased to be integral to Revisionist ideology. Following Herut's merger with the Liberal Party in 1965, references to the ideal of Jewish sovereignty over "both banks of the Jordan" appeared less and less frequently. By the 1970s, the legitimacy of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan was no longer questioned. In 1994 the complete practical abandonment of the "both banks" principle was apparent when an overwhelming majority of Likud Knesset Members (MKs) voted in favour of the Israel–Jordan Treaty of Peace.

The Herut party in 1948 won 14 seats in the 1949 elections. The official Revisionist party did not win any seats in the 1949 elections and would merge with Herut in 1950. In 1965, Herut became Gahal after merging with the Liberal Party. Gahal joined the government for the first time in 1967 and Menachem Begin became minister without portfolio in Levi Eshkol's government. In July 1970, Begin and his colleagues left the National Unity Government under Golda Meir as a protest against the Rogers Peace Plan.

Gahal would become Likud in 1973 after merging with three nationalist splinter groups. In 1977, Menachem Begin and Likud took power in Israel, with Begin becoming Israel's prime minister.

Menachem Begin, member of the Irgun, founder of the Herut party, and former Prime Minister of Israel as a member of Likud

Following Israel's capture of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in the 1967 Six-Day War, Revisionism's territorial aspirations concentrated on these territories. These areas were far more central to ancient Jewish history than the East Bank of the Jordan and most of the areas within Israel's post-1949 borders. In 1968 Begin defined the "eternal patrimony of our ancestors" as "Jerusalem, Hebron, Bethlehem, Judea, [and] Shechem [Nablus]" in the West Bank. In 1973 Herut's election platform called for the annexation of the West Bank and Gaza. When Menachem Begin became leader of the broad Likud coalition (1973) and soon afterwards Prime Minister (in office: 1977–1983), he considerably modified Herut's expansive territorial aims. The party's aspiration to unite all of mandatory Palestine under Jewish rule was scaled down. Instead, Begin spoke of the historic unity of Israel in the West Bank, even hinting that he would make territorial concessions in the Sinai as part of a complete peace settlement.

When Begin finally came to power in the 1977 election, his overriding concern as Prime Minister (1977–83) was to maintain Israeli control over the West Bank and Gaza.

In 1983, following criticism of the Israeli war in Lebanon in 1982 and the Sabra and Shatila massacre carried out by Israel's Lebanese Christian allies, Begin resigned as prime minister of Israel. Begin was replaced by Yitzhak Shamir who was also a member of Likud in 1983. Another member of Likud, Benjamin Netanyahu, came from a family of Revisionist Zionists. He was elected prime minister of Israel in 1996.

Jabotinsky and Revisionist Zionism

Ze'ev Jabotinsky, founder of Revisionist Zionism

After World War I, Jabotinsky was elected to the first legislative assembly in the Yishuv, and in 1921 he was elected to the Executive Council of the Zionist Organization (known as the World Zionist Organization after 1960). He quit the latter group in 1923, thanks mainly to differences of opinion with its chairman, Chaim Weizmann. In 1925, Jabotinsky formed the Revisionist Zionist Alliance, in the World Zionist Congress to advocate his views, which included increased cooperation with Britain on transforming the entire Mandate for Palestine territory, including Palestine itself and Transjordan, on opposite sides of the Jordan River, into a sovereign Jewish state, loyal to the British Empire. To this end, Jabotinsky advocated for mass Jewish immigration from Europe and the creation of a second Jewish Legion to guard a nascent Jewish state at inception. A staunch anglophile, Jabotinsky wished to convince Britain that a Jewish state would be in the best interest of the British Empire, perhaps even an autonomous extension of it in the Middle East.

When, in 1935, the Zionist Organization failed to accept Jabotinsky's program, he and his followers seceded to form the New Zionist Organization. The NZO rejoined the ZO in 1946. The Zionist Organization was roughly composed of General Zionists, who were in the majority, followers of Jabotinsky, who came in a close second, and Labour Zionists, led by David Ben-Gurion, who comprised a minority yet had much influence where it mattered, in the Yishuv.

Despite its strong representation in the Zionist Organization, Revisionist Zionism had a small presence in the Yishuv, in contrast to Labour Zionism, which was dominant among kibbutzim and workers, and hence the settlement enterprise. General Zionism was dominant among the middle class, which later aligned itself with the Revisionists. In the Jewish Diaspora, Revisionism was most established in Poland, where its base of operations was organized in various political parties and Zionist Youth groups, such as Betar. By the late 1930s, Revisionist Zionism was divided into three distinct ideological streams: the "Centrists", the Irgun, and the "Messianists".

Jabotinsky later argued for a need to establish a base in the Yishuv, and developed a vision to guide the Revisionist movement and the new Jewish society on the economic and social policy centered around the ideal of the Jewish middle class in Europe. Jabotinsky believed that basing the movement on a philosophy contrasting with the socialist-oriented Labour Zionists would attract the support of the General Zionists.

In line with this thinking, the Revisionists transplanted into the Yishuv their own youth movement, Betar. They also set up a paramilitary group, [Irgun, a labour union, the National Labor Federation in Eretz-Israel, and their own health services. The latter were intended to counteract the increasing hegemony of Labour Zionism over community services via the Histadrut and address the refusal of the Histadrut to make its services available to Revisionist Party members.

Irgun Tsvai Leumi

The emblem of the Irgun

The paramilitary organization of the Revisionist movement was called the National Military Organization, or the Irgun. The Irgun (short for Irgun Tsvai Leumi, Hebrew for "National Military Organization" ארגון צבאי לאומי‎) had its roots initially in the Betar youth movement in Poland, which Jabotinsky founded. By the 1940s, they had transplanted many of its members from Europe and the United States to Palestine.

The Revisionists split from the Haganah in 1931 because they opposed its domination by the Histadrut. They formed the "Haganah-B" which was commanded by a Revisionist Zionist, Abraham Tehomi. "Haganah B" was founded by Avraham Tehomi in 1931. Tehomi led "Haganah-B" until December 1936 when he agreed to give the leadership position to Jabotinsky. The group did not became completely Revisionist until April 1937 when Tehomi and about a quarter of the 3,000 men in "Haganah-B" returned to the Haganah due to their support for the Mizrachi, General Zionists, and Jewish State Party. "Haganah B" was transformed into the Irgun after Tehomi split from the group to join the Haganah. Jabotinsky initially adopted the Haganah's doctrine of self-restraint because he wanted a legal legion that was formally affiliated with the military and he thought that an illegal counterinsurgency would make that impossible. However, once "Haganah B" became the Irgun, the organization became an independent underground organization.

The Irgun carried out a number of attacks against the British and Arabs. In September 1937, the Irgun killed 13 Arabs which was said to be in retaliation for the deaths of three Jews. The summer of 1938 was the high point of the Irgun's campaign. On July 6, 1938, the Irgun set off a bomb in a milk can in the Arab market in Haifa which killed 21 and injured 52. On July 15, 1938, an electric mine in David Street in Jerusalem killed 10 and injured 30. On July 25, 1938, the Irgun set off another bomb in the Arab market in Haifa which killed 35 and wounded 70. On August 26, 1938, the Irgun set off a bomb in the market in Jaffa which killed 24 and injured 35.

In response to the White Paper in 1939, the Irgun bombed British facilities. The British responded by arresting Irgun commander David Raziel in May. In addition, on August 31, 1939, the rest of the Irgun high command was apprehended while discussing Jabotinsky's plan to invade Palestine.

The Irgun was commanded by Jabotinsky until his death in 1940. Menachem Begin commanded the Irgun from 1943 until the organization was dissolved in June 1948. In 1939, the Irgun called off their campaign against the British mandatory authorities for the duration of World War Two as the British fought against the Axis powers with the other Allied powers.

Acting often in conflict (but at times, also in coordination) with rival clandestine militias such as the Haganah and the Lehi (or Stern Group), the Irgun's efforts would feature prominently in the armed struggles against British and Arab forces alike in the 1930s and 1940s, and ultimately become decisive in the closing events of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.

Lehi

Flag of the Lehi movement
German covering letter attached to the January 1941 offer by Lehi. The offer was to "actively take part in the war on Germany's side" in return for German support for "the establishment of the historic Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis".

A group of fighters with particularly militant views in the Irgun formed an underground movement called "The Fighters for the Freedom of Israel" or the Stern Gang. This group used terrorism and political assassinations to try to expel the British from Palestine. Following Israel's declaration of independence in May 1948, both the Irgun and the Stern Gang were dissolved and many of the organization's members joined the Israel Defense Forces.

The movement called Lehi, and nicknamed the "Stern Gang" by the British, was led by Avraham "Yair" Stern until his death. Stern did not join the Revisionist Zionist party in university but instead joined another group called Hulda. He formed Lehi in 1940 as an offshoot from Irgun, which was initially named Irgun Zvai Leumi be-Yisrael (National Military Organization in Israel or NMO). Following Stern's death in 1942—shot by a British police officer—and the arrest of many of its members, the group went into eclipse until it was reformed as "Lehi" under a triumvirate of Israel Eldad, Natan Yellin-Mor, and Yitzhak Shamir. Shamir became the Prime Minister of Israel forty years later.

Stern viewed Zionism as a national liberation movement and supported armed struggle to achieve independence. He did not want to wait until Britain's war against Nazi Germany was over to begin an armed revolt against the British occupation of Palestine.

While the Irgun stopped its activities against the British during World War II, at least until 1944, Lehi continued guerrilla warfare against the British authorities. It considered the British rule of Mandatory Palestine to be an illegal occupation, and concentrated its attacks mainly against British targets (unlike the other underground movements, which were also involved in fighting against Arab paramilitary groups).

Stern reached out to Nazi Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini since both of these regimes opposed the British. After World War Two, the triumvirate that replaced Stern reached out to the Soviet Union to try to find an ally against Britain.

Ideology

Ideology of pre-state Revisionist Zionism 

The Revisionist Zionist movement did not have a clearly defined ideology which was more of a feature of Zionists on the left. Initially, the stance of the movement was to reject the policies of the contemporary Zionist leadership under Chaim Weizmann. The lack of a coherent ideology was something the movement took pride in since it removed them from the brand of traditional party politics and did not emphasize identification with religion or social class. However, despite the lack of a clear ideology, one clear belief of the original Revisionist leadership was the need to create a Jewish majority in Palestine despite the protests of the indigenous Arab population in the land. Jabotinsky would not accept the partition of Palestine into two states. He wanted a Jewish state that expanded over all of the Land of Israel, including the Emirate of Transjordan which had been established on the eastern part of the mandate of Palestine by the British. The two central points of the Revisionist program were that Trans-Jordan belonged to the Zionists and that the British must reconstitute the Jewish Legion as a permanent part of the military force in Palestine. The British had dissolved the Jewish Legion and separated Trans-Jordan from the territory given to the Jewish state under the Balfour Declaration after World War I.

Ideologically, Revisionism advocated the creation of a Jewish state on both sides of the Jordan River, that is, a state which would include all of present-day Israel, as well as the West Bank, Gaza and either all or part of the modern state of Jordan. Nevertheless, the terms of the Mandate allowed the mandatory authority, Britain, to restrict Jewish settlement in parts of the mandate territory. In 1922, before the Mandate officially came into effect in 1923, Transjordan was excluded from the terms regarding Jewish settlement. In the Churchill White Paper of 1922, the British Government had made clear that the intent expressed by the Balfour Declaration was that a Jewish National Home should be created 'in' Palestine, not that the whole of Palestine would become a Jewish National Home. All three Revisionist streams, including Centrists who advocated a British-style liberal democracy, and the two more militant streams, which would become Irgun and Lehi, supported Jewish settlement on both sides of the Jordan River; in most cases, they differed only on how this should be achieved. (Some supporters within Labor Zionism, such as Mapai's Ben-Gurion also accepted this interpretation for the Jewish homeland.) Jabotinsky wanted to gain the help of Britain in this endeavour, while Lehi and the Irgun, following Jabotinsky's death, wanted to conquer both sides of the river independently of the British. The Irgun stream of Revisionism opposed power-sharing with Arabs. In 1937, Jabotinsky rejected the conclusion of the Peel Commission, which proposed a partition of Palestine between Jews and Arabs; it was however accepted by the Labor Zionists. On the topic of "transfer" (expulsion of the Arabs), Jabotinsky's statements were ambiguous. In some writings he supported the notion, but only as an act of self-defense, in others he argued that Arabs should be included in the liberal democratic society that he was advocating, and in others still, he completely disregarded the potency of Arab resistance to Jewish settlement, and stated that settlement should continue, and the Arabs be ignored.

Jabotinsky believed Arab opposition to Zionism was inevitable and that any efforts at reconciliation with Arabs would be unsuccessful. He believed that voluntary consent from the Arabs to turn Palestine into a country with a Jewish majority was not possible. Since Jabotinsky anticipated that the Arabs would resist against Jewish settlement in Palestine, he believed that superior military force was the only way to make them accept a Jewish state. Because of this, Jabotinsky advocated for an "iron wall" to assist the Zionist movement, meaning that he wanted a military force independent of the Arab population that the Arabs would not be able to resist successfully. This military force would protect Jewish immigration to Palestine and would allow the goals of Zionism to be achieved. This was one of the more radical and militant perspectives among Zionist thinkers.

Jabotinsky believed that it was necessary for people to own private property in order to have liberty which was part of his anti-materialist, anti-communist world view. Despite this belief, he still promised that the bourgeois regime that he wanted to take power in the Jewish state would eliminate poverty. The economic crises of the Yishuv in 1926 and 1927 caused Revisionists to shift their support to urban development and private capital investment.

Five figures in particular contributed to the formation of Jabotinsky's ideology: English historian Henry Thomas Buckle, Italian philosopher and historian Benedetto Croce, social reformer Josef Popper-Lynkeus, philosopher Antonio Labriola, and Spanish philosopher Miguel de Unamuno. In particular, Jabotinsky sympathized with the ideas of Giuseppe Garibaldi because of Garibaldi's emphasis on European nationalism. Garibaldi believed that it was necessary for the rich and poor of a country to unite through love of their homeland. The strong emphasis on nationalism translated into Jabotinsky's own ideas about establishing a Jewish homeland.

Jabotinsky's position towards Fascism

Jabotinsky was unsympathetic towards fascism in his early years. However, he became increasingly aligned with fascism during the 1930s, agreeing with the outlawing of strikes and militarism that fascism entailed. Leftist propaganda described Jabotinsky as a fascist during the 1930s and he was seen as a fascist by many other Zionists. Jabotinsky supported the outlawing of strikes because he was fervently anti-socialist and saw socialism as incompatible with Zionism. He was sympathetic to the ideology of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini during the 1930s. This changed when Mussolini aligned himself with Adolf Hitler, at which point Jabotinsky ceased to associate with Mussolini. However, Jabotinsky retained his belief that the goals of Zionism could only be achieved by taking over Palestine through a military effort. Jabotinsky organized the Jewish Legion which was a force of 5,000 soldiers that contributed to the British conquest of Palestine during World War I. In addition, Jabotinsky organized the Haganah in 1920 which became a central part of the Israeli army in the future. Jabotinsky ruled out the possibility of establishing a police state, whether it was under communist or fascist leadership due to his belief in the necessity of having a regime under which the individual could thrive. However, he still viewed fascism as a pragmatic option and believed that democracy had not worked well in any country except for England. Jabotinsky said that there were three common factors between fascism and Revisionist Zionism which were the denial of a class struggle, "compulsory arbitration" of labor disputes, and prioritizing national interests over the interests of a specific social or economic class. The organization of the Revisionist movement under Jabotinsky was flawed since Jabotinsky's control of the movement was akin to European far-right groups in the 1930s.

From the Irgun to the Likud

The Irgun largely followed the Centrists' ideals but it followed them with a much more hawkish outlook towards Britain's involvement in the Mandate, and it had an ardently nationalist vision of society and government. After the establishment of the State of Israel, it was the Irgun wing of the Revisionist Party that formed Herut, which in turn eventually formed the Gahal party when Herut and the Liberal parties formed a united list called Gush Herut Liberalim (or the Herut-Liberal Bloc). In 1973 the new Likud Party was formed by a group of parties which were dominated by the Revisionist Herut/Gahal. After the 1977 Knesset elections it became the dominant party in a governing coalition, and up to the present day it has remained an important force in Israeli politics. In the 2006 elections, Likud lost many of its seats to the Kadima party which had formed the previous year when Ariel Sharon and others split to the left from Likud. The Likud bounced back in Israel's 2009 Knesset elections, garnering 27 seats, though still outnumbered by Kadima's 28. In spite of the fact that these right-of-center parties favored a Likud-led coalition, a coalition in which the members of the Likud party comprised the majority; the Likud was chosen to form the coalition. The party re-emerged as the strongest party in the Knesset in the 2013 elections and today it leads the government. In the years since the 1977 election, particularly in the last decade, Likud has undergone a number of splits to the right, including the 1998 departure of Benny Begin, the son of Herut's founder Menachem Begin (he rejoined Likud in 2008).

The party flag of Likud

While the initial core group of Likud's leaders such as Israeli Prime Ministers Begin and Yitzhak Shamir came from Likud's Herut faction, later leaders, such as Benjamin Netanyahu (whose father was Jabotinsky's secretary) and Ariel Sharon, have come from or moved to the "pragmatic" Revisionist wing.

The Revisionist idea of establishing a Jewish homeland over all of the Land of Israel played a role in shaping the ideas of members of Likud. Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, two former Israeli prime ministers and members of Likud, were both inspired by Jabotinsky's ideas. Menachem Begin opposed relinquishing the West Bank after Israel's victory in the Six-Day War. In addition, he opposed UN Resolution 242 because it would mean mean relinquishing Israeli control over part of the Land of Israel. Begin believed that the historic right of Jews to the Land of Israel came before the Palestinian claim to the land. Shamir would not compromise on the issue of the borders of the Land of Israel and opposed the Camp David Accords. Another member of Likud and prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, accepted the Oslo Accords which was a diversion from the Revisionist idea of establishing a Jewish homeland over all of the Land of Israel.

Mexico–United States border wall

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border_wall
Map of the Mexico–United States border wall in 2017
Border fence near El Paso, Texas
Border fence between San Diego's border patrol offices in California, US (left) and Tijuana, Mexico (right)

The Mexico–United States border wall (Spanish: muro fronterizo Estados Unidos–México) is a series of vertical barriers along the Mexico–United States border intended to reduce illegal immigration to the United States from Mexico. The barrier is not a continuous structure but a series of obstructions variously classified as "fences" or "walls".

Between the physical barriers, security is provided by a "virtual fence" of sensors, cameras, and other surveillance equipment used to dispatch United States Border Patrol agents to suspected migrant crossings. In May 2011, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stated that it had 649 miles (1,044 km) of barriers in place. An additional 52 miles (84 km) of primary barriers were built during Donald Trump's presidency. The total length of the national border is 1,954 miles (3,145 km), of which 1,255 miles (2,020 km) is the Rio Grande and 699 miles (1,125 km) is on land. On July 28, 2022, the Biden administration announced it would fill four wide gaps in Arizona near Yuma, an area with some of the busiest corridors for illegal crossings.

Description

The 1,954 miles (3,145 km) border between the United States and Mexico traverses a variety of terrains, including urban areas and deserts. The border from the Gulf of Mexico to El Paso, Texas, follows along the Rio Grande forming a natural barrier. The barrier is located on both urban and uninhabited sections of the border, areas where the most concentrated numbers of illegal crossings and drug trafficking have been observed in the past. These urban areas include San Diego, California, and El Paso, Texas. The fencing includes a steel fence (varying in height between 18 and 27 feet (4.8 and 8.1 meters)) that divides the border towns of Nogales, Arizona, in the U.S. and Nogales, Sonora, in Mexico.

97% of border apprehensions (foreign nationals who are caught being in the U.S. illegally) by the Border Patrol in 2010 occurred at the southwest border. The number of Border Patrol apprehensions declined 61% from 1,189,000 in 2005 to 723,842 in 2008 to 463,000 in 2010. The decrease in apprehensions are the result of numerous factors, including changes in U.S. economic conditions and border enforcement efforts. Border apprehensions in 2010 were at their lowest level since 1972. Total apprehensions for 2017, 2018, and 2019 were 415,517, 521,090, 977,509 respectively. This shows a recent increase in apprehensions. And while the barrier is along the Mexico-United States border, 80% of the apprehended crossers are non-Mexican.

As a result of the barrier, there has been a significant increase in the number of people trying to cross areas that have no fence, such as the Sonoran Desert and the Baboquivari Mountains in Arizona.[14] Such immigrants must cross fifty miles (80 km) of inhospitable terrain to reach the first road, which is located in the Tohono O'odham Indian Reservation.[14][15]

Geography

The Mexico–United States border stretches from the Pacific Ocean in the west to the Gulf of Mexico in the east. Border states include the Mexican states of Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León, and Tamaulipas. U.S. states along the border are California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.


US state Border length Mexican states
California 140.4 miles (226.0 km) Baja California
Arizona 372.5 miles (599.5 km) Baja California, Sonora
New Mexico 179.5 miles (288.9 km) Sonora, Chihuahua
Texas 1,241.0 miles (1,997.2 km) Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León, Tamaulipas
Total 1,933.4 miles (3,111.5 km)

History

Two men scale the border fence into Mexico near Douglas, Arizona, in 2009
Two men scale the border fence into Mexico near Douglas, Arizona, in 2009

Origins

Territorial exchanges in the Mexican–American War (1846–1848) and the Gadsden Purchase (1853) would largely establish the current U.S.–Mexico border. Until the early 20th century, the border was open and largely unpatrolled, with only a few "mounted guards" patrolling its length. However, tensions between the United States and Mexico started to rise with the Mexican Revolution (1910) and World War I, which also increased concerns about weapons smuggling, refugees and cross-border espionage. The first international bridge was the Brownsville & Matamoros International Bridge built in 1910. The first barrier built by the U.S. (a barbed wire fence to prevent the movement of cattle across the border) was built in Ambos Nogales between 1909 and 1911, which was expanded in 1929 with a "six foot–high chain-link fence". The first barrier built by Mexico was likely a six-foot-tall wire fence built in 1918 explicitly for the purpose of directing the flow of people, also in Ambos Nogales. Barriers were extended in the following decades, with barriers becoming a common feature in border towns by the 1920s. In the 1940s, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service built chain-link barriers along the border.

The U.S. Congress approved a $4.3 million request by Immigration and Naturalization Service, in 1978, to build a fence along the border to replace an existing 27-mile fence near San Ysidro, California, and El Paso, Texas, and then build an additional six miles of new fence. Anchor Post Products was contracted to build the new fence in a project inherited from Richard Nixon, who was the first president to propose building a border fence. The proposed construction received press coverage after the company's George Norris, described the fence as a "razor-sharp wall", leading to negative responses in Mexico. The proposed wall, dubbed the "Tortilla Curtain" by critics, was condemned by Mexican politicians such as then-president José López Portillo, and it was raised as an issue during President Jimmy Carter's state visit to Mexico in February 1979. Fencing was ultimately constructed, but had a limited length and did not have razor wire.

U.S. President George H. W. Bush approved the initial 14 miles of fencing along the San Diego–Tijuana border. In 1993, President Bill Clinton oversaw initial border fence construction which was completed by the end of the year. Starting in 1994, further barriers were built under Clinton's presidency as part of three larger operations to taper transportation of illegal drugs manufactured in Latin America and immigration: Operation Gatekeeper in California, Operation Hold-the-Line in Texas, and Operation Safeguard in Arizona. Clinton signed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which authorized further barriers and the reinforcement of the initial border fence. The majority of the border barriers built in the 1990s were made out of leftover helicopter landing mats from the Vietnam War.

Bush administration

The Real ID Act, signed into law by President George W. Bush on May 11, 2005, attached a rider to a supplemental appropriations bill funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which went into effect in May 2008:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall have the authority to waive all legal requirements such Secretary, in such Secretary's sole discretion, determines necessary to ensure expeditious construction of the barriers and roads.

In 2005, there were 75 miles of fencing along the border. In 2005, the border-located Laredo Community College obtained a 10-foot fence built by the United States Marine Corps. The structure led to a reported decline in border crossings on to the campus. U.S. Representative Duncan Hunter of California proposed a plan on November 3, 2005, calling for the construction of a reinforced fence along the entire United States–Mexico border. This would also have included a 100-yard (91 m) border zone on the U.S. side. On December 15, 2005, Congressman Hunter's amendment to the Border Protection, Anti-terrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 (H.R. 4437) passed in the House, but the bill did not pass the Senate. This plan called for mandatory fencing along 698 miles (1,123 km) of the 1,954-mile (3,145-kilometer)-long border. On May 17, 2006, the U.S. Senate proposed the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (S. 2611), which would include 370 miles (600 km) of triple-layered fencing and a vehicle fence, but the bill died in committee.

Secure Fence Act of 2006

The United States Border Patrol in the Algodones Dunes, California
A section of the barrier, made out of steel slats, ending in the Pacific Ocean in San Diego–Tijuana
Douglas, Arizona, 2009
The border fence between El Paso and Juarez has an elaborate gate structure to allow floodwaters to pass under. The grates prevent people being able to cross under, and can be raised for floodwaters carrying debris. Beyond the fence is a canal and levee before the Rio Grande.
Aerial view of El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua; the brightly lighted border can clearly be seen as it divides the two cities at night.
Aerial view of El Paso, Texas, (top and left) and Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, (bottom and right). The brightly lit border can clearly be seen as it divides the two cities at night. The dark section at left is where the border crosses Mount Cristo Rey, an unfenced rugged area.

The Secure Fence Act of 2006, signed into law on October 26, 2006, by President George W. Bush authorized and partially funded the potential construction of 700 miles (1,125 km) of physical fence/barriers along the Mexican border. The bill passed with supermajorities in both chambers. Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff announced that an eight-month test of the virtual fence he favored would precede any construction of a physical barrier.

The government of Mexico and ministers of several Latin American countries condemned the plans. Governor of Texas Rick Perry expressed his opposition, saying that the border should be more open and should support safe and legal migration with the use of technology. The barrier expansion was opposed by a unanimous vote by the Laredo, Texas, City Council. Laredo Mayor Raul G. Salinas said that the bill would devastate Laredo. He stated "These are people that are sustaining our economy by forty percent, and I am gonna close the door on them and put [up] a wall? You don't do that. It's like a slap in the face." He hoped that Congress would revise the bill to better reflect the realities of life on the border.

Secretary Chertoff exercised his waiver authority on April 1, 2008, to "waive in their entirety" the Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act to extend triple fencing through the Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve near San Diego. By January 2009, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Homeland Security had spent $40 million on environmental analysis and mitigation measures aimed at blunting any possible adverse impact that the fence might have on the environment. On January 16, 2009, DHS announced it was pledging an additional $50 million for that purpose, and signed an agreement with the U.S. Department of the Interior for utilization of the additional funding. In January 2009, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported that it had more than 580 miles (930 km) of barriers in place.

Obama administration

On March 16, 2010, DHS announced that there would be a halt to expand the virtual fence beyond two pilot projects in Arizona. Contractor Boeing Corporation had numerous delays and cost overruns. Boeing had initially used police-dispatching software that was unable to process all of the information coming from the border. The $50 million of remaining funding would be used for mobile surveillance devices, sensors, and radios to patrol and protect the border. At the time, DHS had spent $3.4 billion on border fences and had built 640 miles (1,030 km) of fences and barriers as part of the Secure Border Initiative.

In May 2011, President Barack Obama stated that the wall was "basically complete", with 649 miles (1,044 km) of 652 planned miles of barrier constructed. Of this, vehicle barriers comprised 299 miles (481 km) and pedestrian fence 350 miles (560 km). Obama stated that:

We have gone above and beyond what was requested by the very Republicans who said they supported broader reform as long as we got serious about enforcement. All the stuff they asked for, we've done. But ... I suspect there are still going to be some who are trying to move the goal posts on us one more time. They'll want a higher fence. Maybe they'll need a moat. Maybe they want alligators in the moat. They'll never be satisfied. And I understand that. That's politics.

The Republican Party's 2012 platform stated that "The double-layered fencing on the border that was enacted by Congress in 2006, but never completed, must finally be built." The Secure Fence Act's costs were estimated at $6 billion, more than the Customs and Border Protection's entire annual discretionary budget of $5.6 billion. The Washington Office on Latin America noted in 2013 that the cost of complying with the Secure Fence Act's mandate was the reason that it had not been completely fulfilled.

A 2016 report by the Government Accountability Office confirmed that the government had completed the fence by 2015. A 2017 report noted that "In addition to the 654 miles of primary fencing, [Customs and Border Protection] has also deployed additional layers of pedestrian fencing behind the primary border fencing, including 37 miles of secondary fencing and 14 miles of tertiary fencing."

Trump administration

President Donald Trump signing Executive Order 13767

Throughout his 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump called for the construction of a much larger and fortified border wall, claiming that if elected, he would "build the wall and make Mexico pay for it". Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto maintained that his country would not pay for the wall. On January 25, 2017, the Trump administration signed Executive Order 13767, which formally directed the US government to begin attempting to construct a border wall using existing federal funding, although construction did not begin at this time because a formal budget had not been developed.

Trump's campaign promise has faced a host of legal and logistical challenges since. In March 2018, the Trump administration secured $1.6 billion from Congress for projects at the border for existing designs of approximately 100 miles of new and replacement walls. From December 22, 2018, to January 25, 2019, the federal government was partially shut down because of Trump's declared intention to veto any spending bill that did not include $5 billion in funding for a border wall.

On May 24, 2019, federal Judge Haywood Gilliam in the Northern District of California granted a preliminary injunction preventing the Trump administration from redirecting funds under the national emergency declaration issued earlier in the year to fund a planned wall along the border with Mexico. The injunction applies specifically to money the administration intended to allocate from other agencies and limits wall construction projects in El Paso and Yuma. On June 28, Gilliam blocked the reallocation of $2.5 billion of funding from the Department of Defense to the construction of segments of the border wall categorized as high priority by the Trump administration (spanning across Arizona, California and New Mexico). The decision was upheld five days later by a majority in the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court but was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court on July 26. On September 3, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper authorized the use of $3.6 billion in military construction funding for 175 miles of the barrier. The House and Senate have twice voted to terminate Trump's emergency declaration, but the president vetoed both resolutions. In October, a lawsuit filed in El Paso County produced a ruling that the emergency declaration was unlawful, as it fails to meet the National Emergencies Act's definition of an emergency. On December 10, a federal judge in the case blocked the use of the funding, but on January 8, 2020, a federal appeals court granted a stay of the ruling, freeing $3.6 billion for the wall.

As of August 2019, the Trump administration's barrier construction had been limited to replacing sections that were in need of repair or outdated, with 60 miles of replacement wall built in the Southwest since 2017. As of September 12, 2019, the Trump administration plans for "Between 450 and 500 miles (724–806 kilometers) of fencing along the nearly 2,000-mile (3,218-kilometer) border by the end of 2020" with an estimated total cost of $18.4 billion. Privately owned land adjacent to the border would have to be acquired by the U.S. government to be built upon.

On June 23, Trump visited Yuma, Arizona, for a campaign rally commemorating the completion of 200 miles (320 km) of the wall. U.S. Customs and Border Protection confirmed that almost all of this was replacement fencing. By the end of Trump's term on January 21, 2021, 452 miles (727 km) had been built at last report by CBP on January 5, much of it replacing outdated or dilapidated existing barriers.

Contractors and independent efforts

As of February 2019, contractors were preparing to construct $600 million worth of replacement barriers along the south Texas Rio Grande Valley section of the border wall, approved by Congress in March 2018. In mid-April 2019, former Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach visited Coolidge, Arizona, to observe a demonstration by North Dakota's Fisher Industries of how it would build a border fence. The company maintained that it could erect 218 miles of the barrier for $3.3 billion and be able to complete it in 13 months. Spin cameras positioned atop the fence would use facial-recognition technology, and underground fiber optic cables could detect and differentiate between human activity, vehicles, tunneling, and animals as distant as 40 feet away. The proposed barrier would be constructed with 42 miles (68 km) near Yuma and 91 miles (147 km) near Tucson, Arizona, 69 miles near El Paso, Texas, and 15 miles (25 km) near El Centro, California—reportedly costing $12.5 million per mile. In April 2019, U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy said that he traveled with the group of politicians and administration officials over the Easter recess to Coolidge (120 miles north of the Mexico border) because he felt that insufficient barrier and border enhancements had been erected since Trump became president. U.S. senator Kevin Cramer was also there, promoting Fisher Industries, which demonstrated the construction of a 56-foot (18 m) fence in Coolidge.

A private organization founded by military veteran Brian Kolfage called "We Build the Wall" raised over $20 million beginning in 2018, with President Trump's encouragement and with leadership from Kobach and Steve Bannon. Over the 2019 Memorial Day weekend, the organization constructed a 1/2 to 1-mile "weathered steel" bollard fence near El Paso on private land adjoining the US–Mexico border using $6–8 million of the donated funds. Kolfage's organization says it has plans to construct further barriers on private lands adjoining the border in Texas and California. On December 3, 2019, a Hidalgo County judge ordered the group to temporarily halt all construction because of its plans to build adjacent to the Rio Grande, which a lawyer for the National Butterfly Center argues would create a flooding risk. On January 9, 2020, a federal judge lifted an injunction, allowing a construction firm to move forward with the 3 mile project along the Rio Grande. This ended a month long court battle with both the Federal Government and the National Butterfly Center which both tried to block construction efforts.

Biden administration

President Joe Biden signed an executive order on his first day of office, January 20, 2021, ordering a "pause" in all construction of the wall no later than January 27. The government was given two months to plan how to spend the funds elsewhere and determine how much it would cost to terminate the contracts. There are no plans to tear down parts of the wall that have been built. The deployment of 3,000 National Guard troops along the border will continue. The Biden administration has continued to seize land for construction of the border wall. By December 2021, many contracts had been cancelled, including one requiring the possession of the land of a family represented by the Texas Civil Rights Project.

In June 2021, Texas governor Greg Abbott announced plans to build a border wall in his state, saying that the state would provide $250 million and that direct donations from the public would be solicited. On June 29, the Republican Study Committee organized a group of two dozen Republican House members to visit a gap in the border where Central Americans were crossing into the country. Representative Mary Miller (R-IL) stated that "obviously our president has advertised this and facilitated this invasion". Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) praised the effectiveness of Trump's wall and said that because of the halted construction, "thousands of migrants [pass] through this area on a regular basis ... because there's an open door that allows them to do that". In reference to wristbands on migrants used by Mexican cartels and smugglers to track them, Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC) stated, "They're basically treating people like Amazon products. ... There is no care that that is a human being, someone who has a soul, someone who has unalienable rights that predate any government."

On July 28, 2022, the Biden administration announced it would fill four wide gaps in Arizona near Yuma, an area with some of the busiest corridors for illegal crossings.

In October 2023, Biden announced he is restarting wall construction due to the surge of migrant crossings, while White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stated that Biden believes that the border wall is "not effective". In order to expedite production, the Biden Administration will be waiving more than two dozen laws that "protect air, water and endangered species" such as the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act and the National Historic Preservation Act. The administration claimed that the money for the wall construction was "allocated during Trump's term in 2019." The Democratically-controlled congress in 2021 ignored Biden's request to rescind the money. The decision was praised by former President Donald Trump and criticized by Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador as "a step backwards" and Jonathan Blazer, director of border strategies for the American Civil Liberties Union as "doubling down on the failed policies of the past."

Binational River Park

In 2021, in collaboration with United States and Mexican ambassadors, as well as businessmen, a binational park was proposed along the Rio Grande between the border towns of Laredo, Texas, and Nuevo Laredo, Mexico. Supported by the No Border Wall Coalition, the park aims to create a shared recreational space instead of a border wall. Earthjustice estimated that the decision to not build a border wall in Laredo saved 71 miles of river from destruction and over $1 billion in taxpayer dollars.

Arizona container wall

In August 2022, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey ordered the erection of a makeshift wall of shipping containers on the border with Mexico in Cochise County, Arizona. The construction began in the Coronado National Forest without authorization from the U.S. Forest Service, which operates the land. Ecologists at the Center for Biological Diversity argue that the construction, which imperils at-risk species including the ocelot and jaguar, violates the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and have sued to halt its construction. Governor-elect Katie Hobbs stated that she would remove the containers after taking office, and the U.S. Justice Department sued the state to remove the containers and "compensate the [U.S.] for any actions it needs to take to undo Arizona's actions". Deconstruction had begun by January.

Controversy

This 2017 fence upgrade at Anapra was planned by the Obama administration.
Work on a higher replacement fence begins on a section of border fence near Calexico, California and Mexicali, Mexico in 2018.

Effectiveness

Research at Texas A&M University and Texas Tech University indicates that the wall, like border walls in general, is unlikely to be effective at reducing illegal immigration or movement of contraband. In mid-April 2019, U.S. Senator Martha McSally said that a barrier will not resolve the border crisis. Authors of books on the effectiveness have said that aside from the human crossings, drugs among other things will still be making their way to the United States illegally. However, US Customs and Border Protection has frequently called for more physical barriers on the Mexico–United States border, citing their efficacy. Smugglers in 2021 used demolition tools and power saws on pieces of wall in Arizona.

Divided Indigenous land

Tribal lands of three indigenous nations are divided by a proposed border fence.

On January 27, 2008, a Native American human rights delegation in the United States, which included Margo Tamez (Lipan Apache-Jumano Apache) and Teresa Leal (Opata-Mayo) reported the removal of the official International Boundary obelisks of 1848 by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in the Las Mariposas, Sonora-Arizona sector of the Mexico–U.S. border. The obelisks were moved southward approximately 20 m (70 ft), onto the property of private landowners in Sonora, as part of the larger project of installing the 18-foot (5.5 m) steel barrier wall.

The proposed route for the border fence would divide the campus of the University of Texas at Brownsville into two parts, according to Antonio N. Zavaleta, a vice president of the university. There have been campus protests against the wall by students who feel it will harm their school. In August 2008, UT-Brownsville reached an agreement with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for the university to construct a portion of the fence across and adjacent to its property. On August 20, 2008, the university sent out a request for bids for the construction of a 10-foot (3.0 m) high barrier that incorporates technology security for its segment of the border fence project. The southern perimeter of the UT-Brownsville campus will be part of a laboratory for testing new security technology and infrastructure combinations. The border fence segment on the campus was substantially completed by December 2008.

The SpaceX South Texas Launch Site was shown on a map of the Department of Homeland Security with the barrier cutting through the 50-acre facility (20 ha) in Boca Chica, Texas.

Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge

On August 1, 2018, the chief of the Border Patrol's Rio Grande Valley sector indicated that although Starr County was his first priority for a wall, Hidalgo County's Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge had been selected instead for initial construction, because its land was owned by the government.

National Butterfly Center

The proposed border wall has been described as a "death sentence" for the American National Butterfly Center, a privately operated outdoor butterfly conservatory that maintains a significant amount of land in Mexico. Filmmaker Krista Schlyer, part of an all-woman team creating a documentary film about the butterflies and the border wall, Ay Mariposa, estimates that construction would put "70 percent of the preserve habitat" on the Mexican side of the border. In addition to concerns about seizure of private property by the federal government, center employees have also noted the local economic impact. The center's director has stated that "environmental tourism contributes more than $450m to Hidalgo and Starr counties."

In early December 2018, a challenge to wall construction at the National Butterfly Center was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court. According to the San Antonio Express News, "the high court let stand an appeals ruling that lets the administration bypass 28 federal laws", including the Endangered Species Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

Mexico's condemnations

Mexico–United States barrier at the pedestrian border crossing in Tijuana
Mexico–United States barrier at the pedestrian border crossing in Tijuana

In 2006, the Mexican government vigorously condemned the Secure Fence Act of 2006. Mexico has also urged the U.S. to alter its plans for expanded fences along their shared border, saying that it would damage the environment and harm wildlife.

In 2012, Enrique Peña Nieto was campaigning in Tijuana at the Playas de Monumental, less than 600 yards (550 m) from the U.S.–Mexico border adjacent to Border Field State Park. In one of his speeches he criticized the U.S. government for building the barriers and asked for them to be removed, referencing President Ronald Reagan's "Tear down this wall!" speech from Berlin in 1987.

Migrant deaths

The wall at the border of Tijuana, Mexico and San Diego; the crosses represent migrants who have died in crossing attempts.

Between 1994 and 2007, there were around 5,000 migrant deaths along the Mexico–United States border, according to a document created by the Human Rights National Commission of Mexico, also signed by the American Civil Liberties Union. Between 43 and 61 people died trying to cross the Sonoran Desert from October 2003 to May 2004; three times that of the same period the previous year. In October 2004, the Border Patrol announced that 325 people had died crossing the entire border during the previous 12 months. Between 1998 and 2004, 1,954 persons are officially reported to have died along the Mexico–U.S. border. Since 2004, the bodies of 1,086 migrants have been recovered in the southern Arizona desert.

U.S. Border Patrol Tucson Sector reported on October 15, 2008, that its agents were able to save 443 illegal immigrants from certain death after being abandoned by their smugglers. The agents also reducing the number of deaths by 17% from 202 in 2007 to 167 in 2008. Without the efforts of these agents, hundreds more could have died in the deserts of Arizona. According to the same sector, border enhancements like the wall have allowed the Tucson Sector agents to reduce the number of apprehensions at the borders by 16% compared with 2007.

Environmental impact

Shoulder high portrait of reddish brown cat with blue eyes and small round ears
The Gulf Coast jaguarundi is already threatened by extinction.

In April 2008, the Department of Homeland Security announced plans to waive more than 30 environmental and cultural laws to speed construction of the barrier. Despite claims from then Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff that the department would minimize the construction's impact on the environment, critics in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, asserted that the fence endangered species and fragile ecosystems along the Rio Grande. Environmentalists expressed concern about butterfly migration corridors and the future of species of local wildcats, the ocelot, the jaguarundi, and the jaguar.

By August 2008, more than 90% of the southern border in Arizona and New Mexico had been surveyed. In addition, 80% of the California–Mexico border has been surveyed. About 100 species of plants and animals, many already endangered, are threatened by the wall, including the jaguar, ocelot, Sonoran pronghorn, Mexican wolf, a pygmy owl, the thick-billed parrot, and the Quino checkerspot butterfly. According to Scott Egan of Rice University, a wall can create a population bottleneck, increase inbreeding, and cut off natural migration routes and range expansion.

In 2008 a resolution "based on sound and accurate scientific knowledge" expressing opposition to the wall and the harmful impact on several rare, threatened, and endangered species, particularly endangered mammals such as the jaguar, ocelot, jaguarondi, and Sonoran pronghorn, was published by The Southwestern Association of Naturalists, an organization of 791 scientists specializing in the zoology, botany, and ecology of southwestern United States and Mexico. A decade later in 2018, well over 2500 scientists from 43 countries published a statement opposing the Border Wall, affirming it will have "significant consequences for biodiversity" and "Already-built sections of the wall are reducing the area, quality, and connectivity of plant and animal habitats and are compromising more than a century of binational investment in conservation."

An initial 75-mile (121 km) wall for which U.S. funding has been requested on the nearly 2,000-mile (3,200 km) mile border would pass through the Tijuana Slough National Wildlife Refuge in California, the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge and Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge in Texas, and Mexico's Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge and El Pinacate y Gran Desierto de Altar Biosphere Reserve, which is a UNESCO World Heritage Site that the U.S. is bound by global treaty to protect. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection plans to build the wall using the Real ID Act to avoid the process of making environmental impact statements, a strategy devised by Chertoff during the Bush administration. Reuters said, "The Real ID Act also allows the secretary of Homeland Security to exempt CBP from adhering to the Endangered Species Act", which would otherwise prohibit construction in a wildlife refuge.

Polling

A Rasmussen Reports poll from August 19, 2015, found that 51% supported building a wall on the border, while 37% opposed.

In a January 2017 study conducted by the Pew Research Center, 39% of Americans identified construction of a U.S.–Mexico border wall as an "important goal for U.S. immigration policy". The survey found that while Americans were divided by party on many different immigration policies, "the widest [partisan split] by far is over building a southern border wall. Two-thirds of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (67%) say construction of a wall on the U.S.–Mexico border is an important goal for immigration policy, compared with just 16 percent of Democrats and Democratic leaners."

A survey conducted by the National Border Patrol Council found that 89% of border patrol agents said a "wall system in strategic locations is necessary to securing the border". 7% of agents disagreed.

A poll conducted by CBS on June 21 and 22, 2018, found that 51% supported the border wall, while 48% opposed.

A poll conducted by the Senate Opportunity Fund in March of 2021 found that 53% supported finishing construction of the border wall, while 38% opposed.

Modal realism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_realism   ...