September, 16 2019, 12:00am EDT
U.S. Border Militarization Driven By Arms And Security Industry Rather Than Trump, Argues New Report
The world's biggest arms firms, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Boeing, are among the key corporations that have shaped border policy over the last three decades and then profited from the massively expanding budgets for border militarization, reveals a new report by the international research group Transnational Institute (TNI).
Davis/Tucson/Amsterdam
The world's biggest arms firms, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Boeing, are among the key corporations that have shaped border policy over the last three decades and then profited from the massively expanding budgets for border militarization, reveals a new report by the international research group Transnational Institute (TNI).
The report, More than a Wall: Corporate Profiteering and Border Militarization, argues that rather than Trump, it is these global corporations with their political and media allies that make up a border-industrial complex which poses the biggest obstacle to a humane and compassionate response to migration.
Examining the development of border policy and expenditure over the last three decades, the report shows that the influence of the border-industrial complex has led to more than a doubling of budgets in the last 15 years ($9.1 billion in 2003 to $23.7 billion in 2018) and an incredible overall 1875% increase since 1990 (when it stood at only $1.2bn). It has also solidified a predominately militarized response to migration in which the US government continuously fortifies the border with the latest military technology rather than address the underlying causes of migration.
The research explores in depth the contracts issued by the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency and the political donations and activities of the corporations that most benefit. It reveals that major arms firms (as well as security and IT firms) are not only the biggest winners of border control expenditures but also the most active donors and lobbyists in Congress on border policy.
- Between 2006 and 2018, CBP issued contracts worth $26.1 billion which exceed the accumulated Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) budgets from 1975 to 1998.
- The report identifies 14 companies as the giants in the border security business. These are Accenture, Boeing, Elbit, Flir Systems, G4S, General Atomics, General Dynamics, IBM, L3 Technologies, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, PAE, Raytheon, UNISYS. While dominated by the arms industry, they also include security and IT firms and one major consultancy firm (Accenture).
- One contract in 2009 issued to Lockheed Martin of $945 million for maintenance and upkeep of surveillance planes was equal to the total entire border and immigration enforcement budgets from 1975 to 1978 (around $923 million).
- The major CBP contract winners Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Atomics, General Dynamics, and Raytheon are also the biggest campaign contributors to members of the Congress Appropriations Committee and Homeland Security Committee responsible for budgets and policy related to borders. Between 2006 and 2018, these corporations that provide border security services gave $27.6 million and $6.5 million to the Appropriations and Homeland Security Committee members respectively. While this lobbying also relates to military expenditure, border contracts are also central to the same corporations' business.
- Many of the same border security corporations firms are also the most active in lobbying within Congress. In 2018, the largest border and immigration budget in US history followed intense lobbying by representatives of these firms (General Dynamics lobbied 44 times, Northrop Grumman 19, Lockheed Martin 41 and Raytheon 28, in addition to lobbyists by other border-security giants including L3 Technologies, IBM, Palantir, CoreCivic and Geo Group).
- Between 2003 and 2017, at least four CBP commissioners and three DHS Secretaries went onto homeland security corporations or consulting companies after leaving government.
This lobbying is accompanied by constant interactions between border security corporate executives and government officials, in particular at annual border security expos. The event currently includes a pre-Expo golf day and a series of seminars where border-security corporations are able not only to hawk their wares, and promote their latest technological 'solutions', but also develop a common perspective, language, and policy approach to border security.
The evidence on the US border-industrial complex parallels research on the European Union by the Transnational Institute (TNI). In a previous 2016 report, Border Wars: The arms dealers profiting from Europe's refugee tragedy, TNI's research showed that arms firms in Europe were also both the principal beneficiaries and most influential corporations in shaping EU policy on borders and migration that has led to rising death tolls for migrants.
Researcher and author of the report, More than a Wall, Todd Miller said: "This report reveals the profound and pervasive connections between security and arms corporations and the politicians who both make border policy and determine the money allocated to its enforcement apparatus. All too often these very entrenched and lucrative bonds are hidden from the public eye and, thus, erased from the public conversation. The exact opposite needs to happen: the fact that giant corporations are both benefiting from and driving border militarization needs to be front and center of one of the most important discussions happening in the United States at this time."
Co-editor of the report and researcher for Transnational Institute, Nick Buxton added: "Militarisation of borders worldwide is increasingly driven by the world's largest arms firms who are reaping huge profits while creating an ever more deadly environment for migrants who cross borders. What is worse, these same arms firms are often fuelling the conflicts that force people to migrate. If we want a humane and compassionate solution to migration, a first step must be putting an end to the arms industry's involvement in politics and policy."
Hannah Taleb of border humanitarian aid organization, No More Deaths, which co-sponsored the report said, "US border policies, over the past three decades, have continued to push migration further and further into these deeply militarized zones. This has not only boosted corporate profits but also caused untold human suffering. No More Deaths has decided to co-sponsor this new report because of the important link between US Customs and Border Protection spending and the massive crisis of death and disappearance of migrants in the US borderlands.
LATEST NEWS
'Jews for Jamaal' and Squad Push Back Against AIPAC Attack on Bowman
"It's our duty to fight back," said Rep. Summer Lee, arguing that no super PAC "should be able to drop millions to usurp the conversation for their agenda."
May 16, 2024
As the leading U.S. pro-Israel lobby's political action committee unleashes a nearly $2 million ad blitz targeting Congressman Jamaal Bowman, Jewish allies of the New York Democrat—who is an outspoken critic of what he and many experts call Israel's genocide in Gaza—on Thursday joined progressive lawmakers in condemning right-wing efforts to defeat pro-Palestine incumbents.
United Democracy Project (UDP), the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's (AIPAC) super PAC, has booked $1.9 million in television ads to influence the outcome of the Democratic primary in New York's 16th Congressional District, according to Wednesday reporting by Sludge's David Moore.
"This new ad spending in New York shows once and for all that my opponent, George Latimer, is bankrolled by a right-wing super PAC that has received over $40 million from Republican megadonors who want to defend Republican insurrectionists, overturn voting rights, and ban abortion nationwide," Bowman said in a statement.
"Democrats across New York deserve better, and will reject these attempts to buy our elections and undermine our democracy," he added.
Jews for Jamaal, a pro-Bowman coalition spearheaded by the group Jews for Racial & Economic Justice Action, said in a statement that "we recognize this media blitz for what it is: a desperate move by powerful interests to silence the district's first Black representative in history."
"UDP is overwhelmingly spending its millions in Democratic primaries, mostly against Black and brown Democratic incumbents who speak out against war and for the human rights of Palestinians," the coalition continued. "This massive amount of spending distorts the political landscape, drowning out the needs and voices of everyday constituents with the interests of a few wealthy donors."
"It undermines the very foundation of our democracy, which must be built on the principles of transparency, accountability, and genuine representation," Jews for Jamaal added.
As more and more Democrats speak out against Israel's assault on Gaza—which according to Palestinian health officials has killed, maimed, or left missing more than 125,000 people—and violent repression by Israeli soldiers and settlers in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, AIPAC has lashed out at even the mildest criticism of Israeli government policies and practices, which many experts around the world call genocidal.
Last November, Slate's Alex Sammon reported that UDP was set to spend approximately $100 million in a bid to unseat both pro-Palestine congressional progressives and more moderate Democratic candidates who the powerful lobby group believes don't sufficiently support Israel. Sammon said that Bowman, along with fellow "Squad" members Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), and Summer Lee (D-Pa.) are among UDP's top targets.
Some of those lawmakers also rallied to Bowman's defense on Thursday.
"It's our duty to fight back," Lee said on social media. "As somebody who knows these folks intimately, I can speak to the damage UDP causes not just to the candidates they target and smear, but to the communities attached to us and democracy itself."
The congresswoman—who won her primary last month—continued:
Their campaign against me in 2022 was steeped in dog whistles and disinformation. Their most shameful million-dollar attack against me was just unsubtly implying I was a [former U.S. President Donald] Trump supporter... in mailers where my skin was oddly shadowed or darker. For three weeks, they plastered the airwaves and mailboxes in wall-to-wall attacks that overwhelmed our midsized media market. Cable and broadcast, digital and streaming... even children's programming on YouTube was targeted.
Omar asserted on social media that "a people-powered movement will always be stronger than special interest groups."
"We got your back, Jamaal Bowman," she added.
Bush said that Latimer "is being used as a Trojan Horse for far-right billionaires and anti-abortion extremists."
"But from the Bronx to St. Louis, we won't let them win," she vowed.
Bowman, in turn, posted in support of Bush, whom he pledged to defend against "Republican billionaires... coming for her."
Last month, another coalition—the youth-led Protect Our Power campaign—was launched in support of progressive congressional incumbents under attack by AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups.
"The only thing that beats organized money is organized people," the young organizers said at the time. "Fortunately, that's what we know how to do best."
Keep ReadingShow Less
"Yes, Trump, 'I Am a Hater' of Yours," Omar Responds to Ex-President
"You traffic in hate," the Minnesota Democrat said, pointing to his dozens of felony charges and "history of sexually assaulting women."
May 16, 2024
"Yes, Trump, 'I am a hater' of yours."
That's how U.S. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) on Thursday responded to former President Donald Trump's attack on her during an on-camera interview with the right-wing Minnesota outlet Alpha News.
Reporter Liz Collin pointed out that the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party just endorsed Omar for reelection and asked Trump, the Republican presidential candidate, whether he thinks she is serving Minnesota's 5th Congressional District well.
"Well she hates Jewish people and she hates Israel, there's no question about that, and I think she does a terrible job," Trump claimed, while noting that she may be popular in some areas. "She's a hater, and she hates at levels... rarely seen before."
Since Omar, a Muslim Somali refugee, was elected to Congress in 2018, she has faced an onslaught of Islamaphobia, racism, and mischaracterizations of her positions and statements from right-wing political leaders and media—particularly her criticism of the Israeli government that is currently waging war on Gaza—which have fueled attacks from the public, including death threats.
Republicans last year voted to remove Omar from the House Foreign Affairs Committee. She said at the time: "Is anyone surprised that I am somehow deemed unworthy to speak about American foreign policy? Frankly, it is expected, because when you push power, power pushes back."
In her social media response to Trump on Thursday, Omar pointed to the ex-president's four ongoing criminal cases. He faces a total of 88 felony charges for two federal cases and two state cases—in Georgia and New York. A pair of them stem from Trump's efforts to overturn his 2020 loss to President Joe Biden, which culminated in the January 6, 2021 insurrection.
"You traffic in hate," she told Trump, "and have a history of sexually assaulting women."
Over two dozen women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct, including E. Jean Carroll. Last year, a jury in New York City found the former president civilly liable for sexually abusing Carroll in the 1990s and defaming her after she publicly accused him.
The group Justice Democrats also responded to Trump's attack on Omar Thursday, saying that "there's no greater threat or thorn to Trump and MAGA extremism than the Squad and progressives like Ilhan Omar. The Democratic Party should learn that and listen to them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Which Side Are You On?' Mountain Valley Pipeline Foes Block Road to Fracking Project
"I see no choice but to rebel against these systems in any small way I can," said a campaigner. "To choose to fight on the side of the mountains, the rivers, the critters, and the people. Against the extraction, empires, and all death-making institutions."
May 16, 2024
Decrying both the environmental harms and the U.S. fossil fuel industry's support of Israel's assault on Palestinian rights, a pipeline opponent on Thursday morning locked themself to two barrels in the middle of a road on Poor Mountain in Roanoke County, Virginia, blocking access to the Mountain Valley Pipeline easement.
The campaigner, who was supported by other demonstrators in the road, was identified by Appalachians Against Pipelines as Mullein. The protest took place close to where environmental protectors spent more than two and a half years holding the Yellow Finch Tree Sit protest, stopping the destruction of the last remaining trees in the MVP's path.
Mullein said they were driven to block the road by "the interlocking systems of colonization and capitalism," in light of Israel's U.S.-backed assault on Gaza, for which MVP would provide support.
"Today, as I sit in the road on so-called Poor Mountain, it is the day after Nakba Day," said Mullein, referring to the anniversary of more than 700,000 Palestinians' forced displacement when Israel declared statehood. "Today, through this ongoing genocide, Palestinians have been resisting colonization for over 76 years. MVP claims that this pipeline would supply fracked gas to various U.S. military locations including the Pentagon and the Radford Army Ammunition Plant, which is operated by BAE systems, a weapons company supplying weapons to 'Israel' during their genocidal campaign."
"The destruction of land and lifeways is interconnected, from Turtle Island to Palestine," said Mullein, using the Indigenous name for North America. "As a settler here, these systems have disconnected me from land, from others, from myself.
Appalachians Against Pipelines reported that the blockade went on for seven hours. Mullein was arrested and charged with two misdemeanors, with their bail set at $2,000.
The protest comes a week ahead of a deadline for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to grant MVP permission to place the pipeline in service, despite a recent citation by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality for over a dozen violations. The fracked gas pipeline would stretch across at least 300 miles of the Appalachian region, and has been opposed by local and national environmental justice groups.
"I'm sitting locked to two barrels today because I see no choice but to rebel against these systems in any small way I can," said Mullein. "To choose to fight on the side of the mountains, the rivers, the critters, and the people. Against the extraction, empires, and all death-making institutions. Which side are you on?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular