One Lawmaker Taking a Stand on Border Tunnels: Rashida Tlaib, in the House, Is Only One Opposing Crackdown on Cartels
Editor’s note: you are receiving this email because you have opted into the United States Today newsletter. If you would prefer not to receive future issues, you can unsubscribe here. This unusual status has provoked widespread debate, attracting severe criticism from lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle. This controversy is really centered around Tlaib’s claim that such actions do more to hurt border communities and throw too many resources at punitive measures on the border as drug smuggling and illegal immigration continue to rise.
As divided Congress discusses an immigration solution, Tlaib’s position adds a new layer to the national security debate. The fight over border tunnels, used by cartels to sneak in narcotics, weapons, and even humans to the U.S. — is far from over, and Tlaib’s pushback against the crackdown could be a turning point in the ongoing debate within the U.S. about the direction of immigration policy.
What Are Border Tunnels and Why Are They So Controversial?
Before turning to Tlaib’s opposition, it’s worth discussing the issue at stake — Mexican cartels’ use of border tunnels. These subterranean tunnels, snaking under the U.S.-Mexico border, enable cartels to transport illicit goods and people from one side to the other. The tunnels — sometimes outfitted with lighting, ventilation and even rail systems — have become an increasingly efficient means of smuggling illegal goods and people.
The Scale of the Problem
The uptick in tunnel activity parallels increased security at the border. As the border’s walls and patrols have grown harder to breach, the cartels have resorted to increasingly impractical and clandestine tactics for moving drugs, especially opioids such as fentanyl, that have driven the continuing U.S. opioid crisis. The problem has become so acute that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) estimates the discovery of over 200 tunnels since scrap activity since the early 1990s, primarily in harder to monitor regions.
These tunnels allow cartels to transport products like:
- Narcotics (primarily fentanyl, methamphetamines, and heroin)
- Firearms (used to arm violent groups inside the U.S.)
- People (including those that are victims of human trafficking and undocumented migrants)
In the case of the tunnels, the criminal activity associated with the systems has highlighted their role in fueling violence and the spread of illicit drugs in U.S. cities.
The Leaders of the Opposition: A Humanitarian Perspective Rashida Tlaib
Challenging the tunnel crackdown has sparked heated debates, say, on Rashida Tlaib’s vocal opposition to it. Although the issue has become a matter of national security and border enforcement, Tlaib argues that the focus on tunnels fails to address the root causes of migration or the policies that could more effectively tackle cartel violence. Her critique rests on the notion that the crackdown prioritizes enforcement over humanitarian solutions.
End Militarization of Borders, Not Angels and Water Protectors
Tlaib is a Democrat who advocates against militarization and has a strong record on immigrant rights issues. She has argued that severe measures — such as the crackdowns on tunnels — simply criminalize migrants instead of addressing the deeper issues of poverty, violence and systemic corruption that drive migration from Central America and Mexico.
Tlaib said in a statement Thursday:
“This is hard work that must be done to address violence, poverty, and political instability—root causes of migration—and drive us to appeal to the humane instead of continuing enforcement measures that obsessively harm people seeking refuge.”
For Tlaib, the concern extends not just to preventing cartels from utilizing tunnels, but to changing how the U.S. approaches immigration and border security. She thinks that while the government is prioritizing tightening border security, it is failing to take action on real reform of the immigration system.
Punitive Border Measures — Gabbard vs. Tlaib
Tlaib’s opposition to the tunnel crackdown is symptomatic of broader views she has on U.S. immigration policy. She has repeatedly called for measures such as:
- A pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants
- Decriminalizing border crossings when asylum seekers enter.
- To stop family separations at the border
- Promoting diplomatic solutions to create better conditions in countries of origin
Her stance comes from the belief that the lives of people and the dignity of migrants should not be subordinated to punitive measures that affect people fleeing violence and destitution.
The Emerging Push for Crackdowns on Cartels’ Tunnels
Though Tlaib’s position is a minority one, it is at odds with more mainstream national attitudes about tunnels at the border. Lawmakers on both sides of the political spectrum are increasingly demanding harsher measures against cartel operations. The tunnels have become a symbol of cartels’ growing power, and moves to destroy them have won broad backing.
GOP Backing for Stiffer Enforcement
Republican lawmakers in particular contend that the tunnels are a national security issue. They cite the smuggling of fentanyl and other deadly substances as a direct threat to public health and safety. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who has advocated for stricter border security measures, said:
“These tunnels, they’re not an immigration issue, they are a national security issue. The drugs and weapons that pass through them are devastating American communities.”
Border security and countering cartel operations are high priorities for many Republicans. Bolstering enforcement and investing in technology to detect tunnels are viewed as key to stopping the illegal drug trade and staving off cartel violence.
Democrats on Border Security and Immigration
On the other side of the aisle, many Democrats seem equally worried about cartel activity but are reluctant to embrace an overly aggressive response. Although they are mutually interdependent to certain degrees, other traditional law enforcement agencies often give less credence to the need for a military response than in Mexico, and they prefer approaches that involve new diplomatic, economic, and humanitarian visions of security, rather than just calls for new enforcement efforts.
While Tlaib’s position amid this tension is a reminder of the gap within her party. And, while she has expressed her concerns over the focus on militarizing the border, other Democrats, especially from border states, have pushed for more funding for law enforcement and border patrol agents.
Learning New Tricks: How Technology Can Spot and Stop Border Tunnels
Detecting and stopping the enemy from building tunnels is one of the most urgent challenges facing the fight against cartel smuggling through tunnels. As cartels evolve and their methods become more sophisticated, the U.S. government has had to turn to an increasingly sophisticated suite of technologies.
Main Technologies of Tunnel Detection
- Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR) — used to detect underground activity of different forms using electromagnetic waves to identify anomalies below the earth’s surface.
- Seismic Sensors: These devices can detect vibrations from actions like digging or moving large amounts of dirt, identify potential tunnels, and more.
- Drones and Robots: Drones with cameras can travel over the border, surveying areas for Signs of Illegal Activity. Where traditional methods are too dangerous, robots can be deployed to investigate.
Experts agree, though, that despite technological advancements, the only solution to combat the cartels’ underground war is a mix of new detection systems paired with enhanced border security.
What Tlaib’s Position Means for Future Border Policy
Mexican authorities also want to find the border tunnels because many of them lead to fortified ceilings in U.S. warehouses and other locations where an earthquake would have a big impact, as well as knocking more illegal goods at the north side of the border. Her resistance highlights the growing rift between the enforcement hawks and those who want to pass a comprehensive immigration reform.
Will Congress Be Able to Come Together?
Given Tlaib’s stance, a lot of people seem to be asking if there is a compromise to be had. Policymakers have different views on how best to balance national security concerns with humanitarian values. While some Roy’s colleagues argue that stronger border enforcement is needed to protect U.S. citizens from the cartels’ activities, other lawmakers, including Tlaib, advocate for reforms aimed at human rights and long-term solutions to root causes of migration.
How this debate is resolved will have repercussions for U.S. immigration policy and border security approaches for years to come.
Conclusion: A Baxterian Problem with No Easy Answers
Now, Rashida Tlaib’s opposition to the intensifying crackdown on Mexican cartels’ border tunnel systems has injected a new element into a bitter national debate about border security and immigration reform. Tlaib believes that, without addressing the underlying causes of migration and cartel violence, there is no solution, and that the emphasis on punitive measures alone will not work.
With the debate center stage, one thing is clear, the U.S. must strike a balance between defending its national security interests, protecting the rights of immigrants and addressing the fundamental issues that lead to illegal migration. Only time will tell, but Tlaib’s stance has much assured that this is an
