Geopolitics, like thermodynamics, has its laws of conservation. If a wall comes down in one place, you can bet that it will go up somewhere else. It wasn’t long after the Berlin Wall fell that different kinds of walls went up in Eastern Europe. New borders separated the Czech Republic from Slovakia, and then, after much bloodshed, the new successor states of former Yugoslavia.

By the end of the 1990s, barriers were being established in small towns in the Czech Republic, in Slovakia and in Romania to separate Roma and non-Roma populations. Germans on both sides of the former Berlin Wall were declaring that they were one people. But in other countries in the region, the majority population was insisting, rule of law notwithstanding, that the citizenry was not one people and a wall was necessary to emphasise the distinction.

These discriminatory walls anticipated the next round of walls in the region: to keep out immigrants. Hungary built a wall on its border with Serbia in 2015, and then a second one in 2017 just to be sure. Germany was letting in more than a million desperate people. Hungary and most of the rest of Eastern Europe, after making the earlier case that they belonged in the European Union, were shutting the door after themselves.

It’s not just Eastern Europe. The Brexit vote was basically an effort to build a big wall across the English Channel to separate the United Kingdom from Europe. Keeping out immigrants was a major motivating factor.

Walls are practically everywhere, alas. You can find a very sad set of walls separating Israel from the Occupied Territories. Spain has walled off its cities of Ceuta and Melilla from the rest of Morocco (yes, there are two Spanish towns in North Africa). There’s a wall between Saudi Arabia and Iraq. According to Elisabeth Vallet, a geography professor at the University of Quebec-Montreal, there were 15 border walls around the world in 1989. That has jumped to 77 today.

Donald Trump's wall 
 
As with so many of his fixations, Donald Trump’s call for a wall is hardly original. And this wall, too, is a response to the collapse of walls elsewhere. Economic globalisation was responsible, from the 1980s on, for gradually tearing down all manner of barriers: to trade, to finance and to the movement of manufacturers. Trump and his economic populists have done as much as they can to put back some of those barriers — for instance, by withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and by slapping tariffs on products from allies and adversaries.

But Trump’s wall along the US-Mexico border is first and foremost about keeping people out. Economic globalisation removed some barriers to the movement of people, but primarily those with highly sought-after skills. As for the truly desperate who were trying to climb over walls and breach borders, they were often motivated more by war and the violence of non-state actors.

These two types of “open borders” — one for money, the other for bodies — have often been confused in the public imagination. Or politicians have deliberately conflated the two, as Trump supporters did in the case of the infamous Hillary Clinton quote about “open borders.” She quite obviously meant economic globalization, not immigration, which was troubling in its own right, but for different reasons.

Trump is not a big fan of openness, in any of its manifestations. He loves the idea of exclusivity: private jets, elite parties, membership-only clubs like Mar-a-Lago. He prefers not to reveal his tax returns. He’d like to keep all of his financials well hidden. In Trump’s mind, walls define the parameters of privilege. Whenever he can wall off the press, his “low-intelligence” critics, the populations of “shit-hole” countries, he does so in a New York minute. He devises travel bans. He instructs his press secretary to dispense with the traditional daily press briefings. He stays within his Fox News enclosure. Even when he prances before the public in mass events, he wants to make sure that everyone in the crowd is on his side.

The Trump brand has always been about exclusivity, though of a rather tawdry variety: the appearance of prestige instead of the reality. As the writer Fran Lebowitz once remarked, Trump is “a poor person’s idea of a rich person.” It could also be said that he’s a non-political person’s idea of a president. He projects the appearance of a president — handshakes with other leaders, photo ops in the Oval Office — without any of the substance. All of his talk of “fake news” is just an indirect admission of his own doubts about his own authenticity as a president.

No surprise, then, that Trump is offering the appearance of security rather than the reality of security. A wall is largely a symbol. It means nothing when the United States refuses to address the true causes of insecurity, both at home and abroad. Nicholas Kristof did a nice column in The New York Times, drawn in part from my IPS colleagues’ National Priorities Project data, about all the sensible ways to spend $5.7 billion: on America’s children, on gun buybacks and drug treatment programs, on job training for prisoners, and on helping people overseas. That’s what a real president would support, not a “fake president.”

Insecurity

But let’s dig a little deeper. The wall addresses a core psychological insecurity. Trump supporters — and many others — feel as if their own privileges are evaporating. Those privileges are connected to race and gender (the angry white men who now swell the ranks of the Republican Party). But they are also connected to class (the blue-collar workers that once formed the backbone of the Democratic Party).

And don’t forget the oft-overlooked privilege of being American. US citizens are feeling increasingly anxious as they watch the United States fail to achieve its objectives in one war after another — even as China expands its influence and Russia regains its great power status. Americans watch conflict, extremism, disease and the other horsemen of the Apocalypse engulf other countries, and they feel as if America can no longer ride in on its white horse to save the day (the last time was perhaps World War II). Worse, they can hear the drumbeat of those hooves approaching the very shores of this country.

Trump and his supporters want that wall to prevent all these privileges — individual, communal, national — from leaking out. It’s the architectural equivalent of a gun. It’s for defense, a way for people to “stand their ground.” But it’s also compensation for powerlessness and lack of control. As with guns, the sense of safety and security is almost entirely illusory.

Liberals, unfortunately, don’t offer much of an alternative. They use more inclusive language when it comes to individual and communal privilege — though liberals are also guilty of constructing walls when they live in the ghettoes of the wealthy, send their children to private schools or expunge any discordant viewpoints from their social media networks. These walls are largely invisible — just like the financial red lines that helped to create America’s urban wastelands — but they are no less powerful.

In terms of national privilege, liberals also believe in American supremacy, though they speak more in terms of restoring American leadership. America, in other words, has not really adjusted to a multipolar world, its more modest place within it or the resulting anxieties that torment the souls of Americans.

The US military, after all its failures around the world, no longer preserves American privilege. The US dollar, weakened by US debt and the strengthening of other national currencies, may soon lose its special glow. A wall is a fallback position, and a rather pathetic one at that. The United States desperately needs a leader — actually, a cadre of leaders — who can reconcile America’s relationship with the world, who can redefine US privilege and who can see the importance of a shift from global power over to global power with. It would be a true privilege to elect such visionaries to leadership positions. The world is waiting.

(John Feffer is the director of Foreign Policy In Focus at the Institute for Policy Studies)

(This article was originally published on The Fair Observer. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/north_america/us-mexico-border-wall-donald-trump-american-politics-world-news-headlines-today-79083/">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Geopolitics, like thermodynamics, has its laws of conservation. If a wall comes down in one place, you can bet that it will go up somewhere else. It wasn’t long after the Berlin Wall fell that different kinds of walls went up in Eastern Europe.

Geopolitics, like thermodynamics, has its laws of conservation. If a wall comes down in one place, you can bet that it will go up somewhere else. It wasn’t long after the Berlin Wall fell that different kinds of walls went up in Eastern Europe. New borders separated the Czech Republic from Slovakia, and then, after much bloodshed, the new successor states of former Yugoslavia. By the end of the 1990s, barriers were being established in small towns in the Czech Republic, in Slovakia and in Romania to separate Roma and non-Roma populations. Germans on both sides of the former Berlin Wall were declaring that they were one people. But in other countries in the region, the majority population was insisting, rule of law notwithstanding, that the citizenry was not one people and a wall was necessary to emphasise the distinction. These discriminatory walls anticipated the next round of walls in the region: to keep out immigrants. Hungary built a wall on its border with Serbia in 2015, and then a second one in 2017 just to be sure. Germany was letting in more than a million desperate people. Hungary and most of the rest of Eastern Europe, after making the earlier case that they belonged in the European Union, were shutting the door after themselves. It’s not just Eastern Europe. The Brexit vote was basically an effort to build a big wall across the English Channel to separate the United Kingdom from Europe. Keeping out immigrants was a major motivating factor. Walls are practically everywhere, alas. You can find a very sad set of walls separating Israel from the Occupied Territories. Spain has walled off its cities of Ceuta and Melilla from the rest of Morocco (yes, there are two Spanish towns in North Africa). There’s a wall between Saudi Arabia and Iraq. According to Elisabeth Vallet, a geography professor at the University of Quebec-Montreal, there were 15 border walls around the world in 1989. That has jumped to 77 today. Donald Trump's wall As with so many of his fixations, Donald Trump’s call for a wall is hardly original. And this wall, too, is a response to the collapse of walls elsewhere. Economic globalisation was responsible, from the 1980s on, for gradually tearing down all manner of barriers: to trade, to finance and to the movement of manufacturers. Trump and his economic populists have done as much as they can to put back some of those barriers — for instance, by withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and by slapping tariffs on products from allies and adversaries. But Trump’s wall along the US-Mexico border is first and foremost about keeping people out. Economic globalisation removed some barriers to the movement of people, but primarily those with highly sought-after skills. As for the truly desperate who were trying to climb over walls and breach borders, they were often motivated more by war and the violence of non-state actors. These two types of “open borders” — one for money, the other for bodies — have often been confused in the public imagination. Or politicians have deliberately conflated the two, as Trump supporters did in the case of the infamous Hillary Clinton quote about “open borders.” She quite obviously meant economic globalization, not immigration, which was troubling in its own right, but for different reasons. Trump is not a big fan of openness, in any of its manifestations. He loves the idea of exclusivity: private jets, elite parties, membership-only clubs like Mar-a-Lago. He prefers not to reveal his tax returns. He’d like to keep all of his financials well hidden. In Trump’s mind, walls define the parameters of privilege. Whenever he can wall off the press, his “low-intelligence” critics, the populations of “shit-hole” countries, he does so in a New York minute. He devises travel bans. He instructs his press secretary to dispense with the traditional daily press briefings. He stays within his Fox News enclosure. Even when he prances before the public in mass events, he wants to make sure that everyone in the crowd is on his side. The Trump brand has always been about exclusivity, though of a rather tawdry variety: the appearance of prestige instead of the reality. As the writer Fran Lebowitz once remarked, Trump is “a poor person’s idea of a rich person.” It could also be said that he’s a non-political person’s idea of a president. He projects the appearance of a president — handshakes with other leaders, photo ops in the Oval Office — without any of the substance. All of his talk of “fake news” is just an indirect admission of his own doubts about his own authenticity as a president. No surprise, then, that Trump is offering the appearance of security rather than the reality of security. A wall is largely a symbol. It means nothing when the United States refuses to address the true causes of insecurity, both at home and abroad. Nicholas Kristof did a nice column in The New York Times, drawn in part from my IPS colleagues’ National Priorities Project data, about all the sensible ways to spend $5.7 billion: on America’s children, on gun buybacks and drug treatment programs, on job training for prisoners, and on helping people overseas. That’s what a real president would support, not a “fake president.” Insecurity But let’s dig a little deeper. The wall addresses a core psychological insecurity. Trump supporters — and many others — feel as if their own privileges are evaporating. Those privileges are connected to race and gender (the angry white men who now swell the ranks of the Republican Party). But they are also connected to class (the blue-collar workers that once formed the backbone of the Democratic Party). And don’t forget the oft-overlooked privilege of being American. US citizens are feeling increasingly anxious as they watch the United States fail to achieve its objectives in one war after another — even as China expands its influence and Russia regains its great power status. Americans watch conflict, extremism, disease and the other horsemen of the Apocalypse engulf other countries, and they feel as if America can no longer ride in on its white horse to save the day (the last time was perhaps World War II). Worse, they can hear the drumbeat of those hooves approaching the very shores of this country. Trump and his supporters want that wall to prevent all these privileges — individual, communal, national — from leaking out. It’s the architectural equivalent of a gun. It’s for defense, a way for people to “stand their ground.” But it’s also compensation for powerlessness and lack of control. As with guns, the sense of safety and security is almost entirely illusory. Liberals, unfortunately, don’t offer much of an alternative. They use more inclusive language when it comes to individual and communal privilege — though liberals are also guilty of constructing walls when they live in the ghettoes of the wealthy, send their children to private schools or expunge any discordant viewpoints from their social media networks. These walls are largely invisible — just like the financial red lines that helped to create America’s urban wastelands — but they are no less powerful. In terms of national privilege, liberals also believe in American supremacy, though they speak more in terms of restoring American leadership. America, in other words, has not really adjusted to a multipolar world, its more modest place within it or the resulting anxieties that torment the souls of Americans. The US military, after all its failures around the world, no longer preserves American privilege. The US dollar, weakened by US debt and the strengthening of other national currencies, may soon lose its special glow. A wall is a fallback position, and a rather pathetic one at that. The United States desperately needs a leader — actually, a cadre of leaders — who can reconcile America’s relationship with the world, who can redefine US privilege and who can see the importance of a shift from global power over to global power with. It would be a true privilege to elect such visionaries to leadership positions. The world is waiting. (John Feffer is the director of Foreign Policy In Focus at the Institute for Policy Studies) (This article was originally published on The Fair Observer. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Psychology of the Wall: In Donald Trump’s mind, walls define the parameters of privilege

President <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-will-sign-shutdown-bill-but-will-also-issue-emergency-declaration-senator-mcconnell-197500">Donald Trump</a> on Friday announced he would declare a national emergency at the US-Mexico border, a move Democrats vowed to challenge as an unconstitutional attempt to fund his promised border wall without approval from Congress.

"I'm going to be signing a national emergency," Trump said from the Rose Garden of the White House.

"We have an invasion of drugs, invasion of gangs, invasion of people, and it's unacceptable," he said.

The president said he would <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-not-happy-with-budget-deal-but-shutdown-unlikely-197021">sign the authorising paperwork</a> later in the day in the Oval Office.

Trump was also expected on Friday to sign a bipartisan government spending bill approved by Congress on Thursday that would prevent another partial federal government shutdown by funding several agencies that otherwise would have closed on Saturday morning.

The bill, which contains no money for his wall, is a defeat for Trump in Congress, where his demand for $5.7 billion in barrier funding yielded no results, other than a record-long, 35-day December-January partial government shutdown that damaged the US economy and his opinion poll numbers.

Reorienting his wall-funding quest toward a legally uncertain strategy based on declaring a national emergency could plunge Trump into a lengthy battle with Democrats - and divide his fellow Republicans.

Fifteen Democrats in the Republican-controlled Senate introduced legislation on Thursday to prevent the transfer of funds from accounts Trump likely would target to pay for his wall.

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives, and Chuck Schumer, the Senate's top Democrat, swiftly responded to Trump's declaration.

"The president's actions clearly violate the Congress’s exclusive power of the purse, which our Founders enshrined in the Constitution," they said in a statement. "The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities in the Congress, in the courts, and in the public, using every remedy available.”

The president acknowledged that his order would face a lengthy legal challenge. "We'll win in the Supreme Court," Trump said.

Trump has argued the wall is needed to curb illegal immigrants and illicit drugs streaming across the southern border despite statistics that show illegal immigration there is at a 20-year low and that many drug shipments are likely smuggled through legal ports of entry.

At Friday's White House event, a half-dozen women holding poster-sized pictures of family members killed by illegal immigrants preceded Trump into the Rose Garden. He cited their presence in announcing the emergency declaration.

A senior White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the administration had found nearly $7 billion to reallocate to the wall, including $600 million from a Treasury Department forfeiture fund, $2.5 billion from a Defense Department drug interdiction fund and $3.5 billion from a military construction budget.

Trump on Friday estimated the order could free up as much as $8 billion to construct the wall.

The funds would cover just part of the estimated $23 billion cost of the wall promised by Trump along the nearly 2,000-mile (3,200-km) border with Mexico.

The Senate Democrats' bill also would stop Trump from using appropriated money to acquire lands to build the wall unless specifically authorized by Congress.

President Donald Trump on Friday announced he would declare a national emergency at the US-Mexico border, a move Democrats vowed to challenge as an unconstitutional attempt to fund his promised border wall without approval from Congress.

President Donald Trump on Friday announced he would declare a national emergency at the US-Mexico border, a move Democrats vowed to challenge as an unconstitutional attempt to fund his promised border wall without approval from Congress. "I'm going to be signing a national emergency," Trump said from the Rose Garden of the White House. "We have an invasion of drugs, invasion of gangs, invasion of people, and it's unacceptable," he said. The president said he would sign the authorising paperwork later in the day in the Oval Office. Trump was also expected on Friday to sign a bipartisan government spending bill approved by Congress on Thursday that would prevent another partial federal government shutdown by funding several agencies that otherwise would have closed on Saturday morning. The bill, which contains no money for his wall, is a defeat for Trump in Congress, where his demand for $5.7 billion in barrier funding yielded no results, other than a record-long, 35-day December-January partial government shutdown that damaged the US economy and his opinion poll numbers. Reorienting his wall-funding quest toward a legally uncertain strategy based on declaring a national emergency could plunge Trump into a lengthy battle with Democrats - and divide his fellow Republicans. Fifteen Democrats in the Republican-controlled Senate introduced legislation on Thursday to prevent the transfer of funds from accounts Trump likely would target to pay for his wall. Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives, and Chuck Schumer, the Senate's top Democrat, swiftly responded to Trump's declaration. "The president's actions clearly violate the Congress’s exclusive power of the purse, which our Founders enshrined in the Constitution," they said in a statement. "The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities in the Congress, in the courts, and in the public, using every remedy available.” The president acknowledged that his order would face a lengthy legal challenge. "We'll win in the Supreme Court," Trump said. Trump has argued the wall is needed to curb illegal immigrants and illicit drugs streaming across the southern border despite statistics that show illegal immigration there is at a 20-year low and that many drug shipments are likely smuggled through legal ports of entry. At Friday's White House event, a half-dozen women holding poster-sized pictures of family members killed by illegal immigrants preceded Trump into the Rose Garden. He cited their presence in announcing the emergency declaration. A senior White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the administration had found nearly $7 billion to reallocate to the wall, including $600 million from a Treasury Department forfeiture fund, $2.5 billion from a Defense Department drug interdiction fund and $3.5 billion from a military construction budget. Trump on Friday estimated the order could free up as much as $8 billion to construct the wall. The funds would cover just part of the estimated $23 billion cost of the wall promised by Trump along the nearly 2,000-mile (3,200-km) border with Mexico. The Senate Democrats' bill also would stop Trump from using appropriated money to acquire lands to build the wall unless specifically authorized by Congress.

Going to be signing, today, and registering a national emergency: Donald Trump on border wall

The US House of Representatives on Thursday approved a<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-will-sign-shutdown-bill-but-will-also-issue-emergency-declaration-senator-mcconnell-197500"> bipartisan border security bill </a>aimed at averting a government shutdown and sent it to President Trump, including new barriers for part of the US-Mexico border but not the $5.7 billion he sought.

"I rise to support this bipartisan agreement, which while not perfect, keeps our government open and funds many essential crucial needs," Democratic representative Debbie Wasserman said, adding," I can not stay silent on the President's threat to declare a national emergency to pay for his boondoggle of a border wall."

The Democratic-run House backed the measure, a spending bill providing over $300 billion for several government departments and agencies, 300 to 128. It passed the Senate earlier on Thursday. The White House has said Trump will sign it into law, but will also attempt to use unilateral powers to obtain money for a wall.

"Now, this is not the bill I would have written. And this is probably not the bill that any of my colleagues on the other aisle would have written. But we have all finally found a compromise that the Congress can pass," Republican John Rutherford said.

Top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell had told colleagues that he spoke by phone with Trump, who "indicated he's prepared to sign the bill. He will also be issuing a national emergency declaration at the same time."

The White House confirmed the plan minutes later.

"He will also take other executive action - including a national emergency - to ensure we stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the border," Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said.

Trump is expected to sign the spending bill, expected ahead of a Friday midnight deadline.

Pelosi, Trump's Democratic nemesis, expressed disdain for the president's upcoming emergency declaration, warning that he was doing "an end run around Congress." "It's not an emergency, what's happening at the border," she said.

Trump's declaration is expected to be challenged in court.

The US House of Representatives on Thursday approved a bipartisan border security bill aimed at averting a government shutdown and sent it to President Trump, including new barriers for part of the US-Mexico border but not the $5.

The US House of Representatives on Thursday approved a bipartisan border security bill aimed at averting a government shutdown and sent it to President Trump, including new barriers for part of the US-Mexico border but not the $5.7 billion he sought. "I rise to support this bipartisan agreement, which while not perfect, keeps our government open and funds many essential crucial needs," Democratic representative Debbie Wasserman said, adding," I can not stay silent on the President's threat to declare a national emergency to pay for his boondoggle of a border wall." The Democratic-run House backed the measure, a spending bill providing over $300 billion for several government departments and agencies, 300 to 128. It passed the Senate earlier on Thursday. The White House has said Trump will sign it into law, but will also attempt to use unilateral powers to obtain money for a wall. "Now, this is not the bill I would have written. And this is probably not the bill that any of my colleagues on the other aisle would have written. But we have all finally found a compromise that the Congress can pass," Republican John Rutherford said. Top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell had told colleagues that he spoke by phone with Trump, who "indicated he's prepared to sign the bill. He will also be issuing a national emergency declaration at the same time." The White House confirmed the plan minutes later. "He will also take other executive action - including a national emergency - to ensure we stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the border," Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said. Trump is expected to sign the spending bill, expected ahead of a Friday midnight deadline. Pelosi, Trump's Democratic nemesis, expressed disdain for the president's upcoming emergency declaration, warning that he was doing "an end run around Congress." "It's not an emergency, what's happening at the border," she said. Trump's declaration is expected to be challenged in court.

US House passes border security bill, sends it to Trump

President <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-not-happy-with-budget-deal-but-shutdown-unlikely-197021">Donald Trump</a> is ready to sign a border security funding deal, despite failing to get anywhere close to the money he sought for a US-Mexico border wall, US media reported Wednesday.

CNN and NBC television quoted sources close to the president saying that Trump has resigned himself to the deal crafted by his Republican Party and the Democrats in Congress.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders would not confirm or deny the reports but said Wednesday that "there are positive pieces" in the deal.

"We want to see the final piece of legislation," she told reporters.

Trump had demanded $5.7 billion for a dramatic extension of fences and walls along the Mexican border, claiming that the United States faces an "invasion" of criminals and illegal immigrants.

Democrats refused, accusing him of exaggerating the situation for political gain.

Trump retaliated in December by cutting funding to swaths of government in a five-week shutdown. He had threatened to trigger a new shutdown this Friday if his demands were not met.

The deal worked out in Congress this week will provide less than $1.4 billion for wall construction.

On Tuesday, Trump said he was not happy with the deal but "I don't think you're going to see a shutdown."

Trump says he can still add to that from other sources not requiring congressional approval, although he has been vague about how this would work.

President Donald Trump is ready to sign a border security funding deal, despite failing to get anywhere close to the money he sought for a US-Mexico border wall, US media reported Wednesday.

President Donald Trump is ready to sign a border security funding deal, despite failing to get anywhere close to the money he sought for a US-Mexico border wall, US media reported Wednesday. CNN and NBC television quoted sources close to the president saying that Trump has resigned himself to the deal crafted by his Republican Party and the Democrats in Congress. White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders would not confirm or deny the reports but said Wednesday that "there are positive pieces" in the deal. "We want to see the final piece of legislation," she told reporters. Trump had demanded $5.7 billion for a dramatic extension of fences and walls along the Mexican border, claiming that the United States faces an "invasion" of criminals and illegal immigrants. Democrats refused, accusing him of exaggerating the situation for political gain. Trump retaliated in December by cutting funding to swaths of government in a five-week shutdown. He had threatened to trigger a new shutdown this Friday if his demands were not met. The deal worked out in Congress this week will provide less than $1.4 billion for wall construction. On Tuesday, Trump said he was not happy with the deal but "I don't think you're going to see a shutdown." Trump says he can still add to that from other sources not requiring congressional approval, although he has been vague about how this would work.

Trump ready to sign border deal, averting shutdown: Reports

US lawmakers have reached an agreement in principle to <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-that-its-up-to-the-democrats-if-government-shuts-down-again-196783">avoid a new government shutdown</a> at the end of the week, senators announced Monday, including $1.375 billion for a wall on the southern US border.

"We've reached an agreement in principle between us on the Homeland Security and the other six bills," Senator Richard Shelby, a key Republican negotiator, told reporters.

Senior congressional aides told AFP the agreement included $1.375 billion in funding for a wall on the US-Mexico border -- a key campaign promise of President Donald Trump, who had demanded $5.7 billion for his pet project.

The agreed figure would fund approximately 89 kilometres, all to be located in the Rio Grande Valley area of south Texas, the aides said.

The deal still faces White House approval.

The Democrats and Trump have been clashing for weeks over funding a barrier on the border.

The gridlock prompted the longest government shutdown in US history -- lasting over a month -- that ended January 25 when Trump signed into law a deal giving lawmakers three weeks to come up with an agreement or face further paralysis.

As Monday's tentative deal was announced, the president was holding a campaign-style rally in the frontier city of El Paso, Texas -- a place where he claims walls have eradicated an out-of-control influx of criminals from Mexico.

US lawmakers have reached an agreement in principle to avoid a new government shutdown at the end of the week, senators announced Monday, including $1.375 billion for a wall on the southern US border.

US lawmakers have reached an agreement in principle to avoid a new government shutdown at the end of the week, senators announced Monday, including $1.375 billion for a wall on the southern US border. "We've reached an agreement in principle between us on the Homeland Security and the other six bills," Senator Richard Shelby, a key Republican negotiator, told reporters. Senior congressional aides told AFP the agreement included $1.375 billion in funding for a wall on the US-Mexico border -- a key campaign promise of President Donald Trump, who had demanded $5.7 billion for his pet project. The agreed figure would fund approximately 89 kilometres, all to be located in the Rio Grande Valley area of south Texas, the aides said. The deal still faces White House approval. The Democrats and Trump have been clashing for weeks over funding a barrier on the border. The gridlock prompted the longest government shutdown in US history -- lasting over a month -- that ended January 25 when Trump signed into law a deal giving lawmakers three weeks to come up with an agreement or face further paralysis. As Monday's tentative deal was announced, the president was holding a campaign-style rally in the frontier city of El Paso, Texas -- a place where he claims walls have eradicated an out-of-control influx of criminals from Mexico.

Reached agreement 'in principle' to avoid new US government shutdown: Senator Shelby

California Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday signed an order withdrawing more than two-thirds of the state's National Guard troops from the US-Mexico border, calling claims of an illegal immigration crisis there nothing but "political theatre."

Newsom said most of the roughly 360 National Guard members deployed to the border would be reassigned to other duties in the state, with about 100 remaining behind as part of a task force targeting drug trafficking and cartels.

"This whole border issue is a manufactured crisis. We are not interested in participating in this political theatre," Newsom said at an afternoon news conference in Sacramento.

The governor, a Democrat who took office in January, said border crossings were at their lowest level since 1971 and that the state's undocumented population had dropped to a more than 10-year low.

"This is pure politics, period full stop," he said.

The move was a rebuke to President Donald Trump, who won the election in 2016 partly on a populist pledge to build a wall on the southern US border which he said in his campaign Mexico would pay for.

Trump's demand for $5.7 billion to help build that wall was central to a 35-day partial US government shutdown that ended last month. He agreed to reopen the government for three weeks to allow lawmakers time to find a compromise and avert another shutdown on February 15.

Newsom's predecessor, Governor Jerry Brown, agreed to send National Guard troops to the border last April after reaching agreement with the Trump administration that they would focus on fighting criminal gangs and smugglers and not enforce immigration laws.

New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham last week ordered the withdrawal of most National Guard troops deployed at the border by her Republican predecessor at Trump's request last year.

Trump has deployed an extra 3,750 US troops on the border this month.

Newsom said some of the National Guard troops would be re-deployed to help fight what he said were mushrooming illegal marijuana farms following approval of a 2016 ballot measure to legalize recreational cannabis - legislation the governor helped champion.

"We have to hold accountable those who are not participating in the legal cannabis market," he said. "These illegal grows are manifesting, getting bigger."

California Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday signed an order withdrawing more than two-thirds of the state's National Guard troops from the US-Mexico border, calling claims of an illegal immigration crisis there nothing but "political theatre.

California Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday signed an order withdrawing more than two-thirds of the state's National Guard troops from the US-Mexico border, calling claims of an illegal immigration crisis there nothing but "political theatre." Newsom said most of the roughly 360 National Guard members deployed to the border would be reassigned to other duties in the state, with about 100 remaining behind as part of a task force targeting drug trafficking and cartels. "This whole border issue is a manufactured crisis. We are not interested in participating in this political theatre," Newsom said at an afternoon news conference in Sacramento. The governor, a Democrat who took office in January, said border crossings were at their lowest level since 1971 and that the state's undocumented population had dropped to a more than 10-year low. "This is pure politics, period full stop," he said. The move was a rebuke to President Donald Trump, who won the election in 2016 partly on a populist pledge to build a wall on the southern US border which he said in his campaign Mexico would pay for. Trump's demand for $5.7 billion to help build that wall was central to a 35-day partial US government shutdown that ended last month. He agreed to reopen the government for three weeks to allow lawmakers time to find a compromise and avert another shutdown on February 15. Newsom's predecessor, Governor Jerry Brown, agreed to send National Guard troops to the border last April after reaching agreement with the Trump administration that they would focus on fighting criminal gangs and smugglers and not enforce immigration laws. New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham last week ordered the withdrawal of most National Guard troops deployed at the border by her Republican predecessor at Trump's request last year. Trump has deployed an extra 3,750 US troops on the border this month. Newsom said some of the National Guard troops would be re-deployed to help fight what he said were mushrooming illegal marijuana farms following approval of a 2016 ballot measure to legalize recreational cannabis - legislation the governor helped champion. "We have to hold accountable those who are not participating in the legal cannabis market," he said. "These illegal grows are manifesting, getting bigger."

California pulls most National Guard troops from US-Mexico border

New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has ordered most of the National Guard troops deployed at the state's border with Mexico to withdraw, rejecting US President <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-hardens-stance-on-mexico-border-says-15000-troops-could-be-sent-174771">Donald Trump's contention there was a border crisis</a>.

Most of the 118 National Guard troops deployed in the state will be withdrawn, Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, said in a statement late Tuesday. She called Trump's frequent declarations of an immigration crisis at the border a "charade."

The troops had been deployed by her Republican predecessor, Susana Martinez, last year at the request of Trump, also a Republican.

A small, though unspecified, number of troops will remain in place to help with the "humanitarian needs" of communities near the border and vulnerable migrants arriving at the border, Lujan Grisham said.

"We will support our neighbours where the need for assistance is great, and we will offer a helping hand when we can to those vulnerable people who arrive at our border, but New Mexico will not take part in the president's charade of border fear-mongering by misusing our diligent National Guard troops," her statement said.

Trump's promise to build a wall on the border, with construction paid for by Mexico, was a key message of his 2016 campaign. Mexico has refused to fund the project and Congress rejected Trump's demands for $5.7 billion in funding for the project. That triggered a 35-day partial US government shutdown, the longest in the nation's history.

New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has ordered most of the National Guard troops deployed at the state's border with Mexico to withdraw, rejecting US President Donald Trump's contention there was a border crisis.

New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has ordered most of the National Guard troops deployed at the state's border with Mexico to withdraw, rejecting US President Donald Trump's contention there was a border crisis. Most of the 118 National Guard troops deployed in the state will be withdrawn, Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, said in a statement late Tuesday. She called Trump's frequent declarations of an immigration crisis at the border a "charade." The troops had been deployed by her Republican predecessor, Susana Martinez, last year at the request of Trump, also a Republican. A small, though unspecified, number of troops will remain in place to help with the "humanitarian needs" of communities near the border and vulnerable migrants arriving at the border, Lujan Grisham said. "We will support our neighbours where the need for assistance is great, and we will offer a helping hand when we can to those vulnerable people who arrive at our border, but New Mexico will not take part in the president's charade of border fear-mongering by misusing our diligent National Guard troops," her statement said. Trump's promise to build a wall on the border, with construction paid for by Mexico, was a key message of his 2016 campaign. Mexico has refused to fund the project and Congress rejected Trump's demands for $5.7 billion in funding for the project. That triggered a 35-day partial US government shutdown, the longest in the nation's history.

In defiance of Trump, New Mexico governor pulls National Guard troops from US-Mexico border

The United States will send an additional 3,750 troops to its frontier with <a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/mexico-is-bleeding-can-its-new-president-stop-the-violence-193818">Mexico</a>, the Pentagon said on Sunday, as President Donald Trump doubled down on his call for a wall to boost border security.

Soldiers were originally deployed to the border under an order President Donald Trump gave before midterm elections in November as <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-delays-returning-asylum-seekers-to-mexico-192849">"caravans" of migrants </a>made their way to the border to seek asylum from violence and poverty in their own countries.

But the mission, under which troops assist civilian border patrol agents by providing logistical support and installing concertina-wire fencing, has been described by opponents as a political stunt designed to create the illusion of a crisis.&nbsp;

"The Department of Defense will deploy approximately 3,750 additional US forces to provide the additional support to CBP (Customs and Border Protection) at the southwest border that Acting Secretary of Defense (Pat) Shanahan approved Jan. 11," a statement said.

This additional deployment is for three months, the statement added and will bring to 4,350 the total number of troops at the border.

Their tasks will include "a mobile surveillance capability through the end of September 2019, as well as the emplacement of approximately 150 miles of concertina wire between ports of entry."

The news comes ahead of a February 15 deadline that President Donald Trump set for Congress to agree on funding for building a border wall which he made a key pledge in his election campaign.

The president says that existing sections of walls should be extended along the border to stop what he describes as an uncontrolled invasion of criminals.

Trump underscored these claims Sunday. "With Caravans marching through Mexico and toward our Country, Republicans must be prepared to do whatever is necessary for STRONG Border Security," he tweeted.&nbsp;

"Dems do nothing. If there is no Wall, there is no Security. Human Trafficking, Drugs and Criminals of all dimensions - KEEP OUT!"

Democrats, who control the lower house, have repeatedly rejected Trump's funding demands, saying that he has made the wall project a political crusade to demonize immigrants and to satisfy his base.

He previously tried to pressure Congress into backing his idea by refusing to sign off on budgets for swathes of the federal government, leading to a five-week shutdown of some 800,000 government jobs.

The border troop deployment was one of several issues on which Trump and former defence secretary Jim Mattis disagreed before he quit in December after Trump's shock decision to pull troops from Syria.

The United States will send an additional 3,750 troops to its frontier with Mexico, the Pentagon said on Sunday, as President Donald Trump doubled down on his call for a wall to boost border security.

The United States will send an additional 3,750 troops to its frontier with Mexico, the Pentagon said on Sunday, as President Donald Trump doubled down on his call for a wall to boost border security. Soldiers were originally deployed to the border under an order President Donald Trump gave before midterm elections in November as "caravans" of migrants made their way to the border to seek asylum from violence and poverty in their own countries. But the mission, under which troops assist civilian border patrol agents by providing logistical support and installing concertina-wire fencing, has been described by opponents as a political stunt designed to create the illusion of a crisis. "The Department of Defense will deploy approximately 3,750 additional US forces to provide the additional support to CBP (Customs and Border Protection) at the southwest border that Acting Secretary of Defense (Pat) Shanahan approved Jan. 11," a statement said. This additional deployment is for three months, the statement added and will bring to 4,350 the total number of troops at the border. Their tasks will include "a mobile surveillance capability through the end of September 2019, as well as the emplacement of approximately 150 miles of concertina wire between ports of entry." The news comes ahead of a February 15 deadline that President Donald Trump set for Congress to agree on funding for building a border wall which he made a key pledge in his election campaign. The president says that existing sections of walls should be extended along the border to stop what he describes as an uncontrolled invasion of criminals. Trump underscored these claims Sunday. "With Caravans marching through Mexico and toward our Country, Republicans must be prepared to do whatever is necessary for STRONG Border Security," he tweeted. "Dems do nothing. If there is no Wall, there is no Security. Human Trafficking, Drugs and Criminals of all dimensions - KEEP OUT!" Democrats, who control the lower house, have repeatedly rejected Trump's funding demands, saying that he has made the wall project a political crusade to demonize immigrants and to satisfy his base. He previously tried to pressure Congress into backing his idea by refusing to sign off on budgets for swathes of the federal government, leading to a five-week shutdown of some 800,000 government jobs. The border troop deployment was one of several issues on which Trump and former defence secretary Jim Mattis disagreed before he quit in December after Trump's shock decision to pull troops from Syria.

US to send 3,750 more troops to Mexico border: Pentagon

President Donald Trump stepped up his attacks on House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday, saying "she's very bad for our country" and "doesn't mind human trafficking" because she opposes his long-promised wall along the US-Mexico border.

The Republican president also said there is a "good chance" he will follow through on his previous threats to bypass Congress and declare a national emergency to obtain funding for a wall.

Trump, known for personal attacks on critics and political adversaries, made his comments a week after agreeing to end a 35-day partial government shutdown without getting the $5.7 billion he had demanded from Congress to help build the wall. His retreat was seen as a political victory for Pelosi, who became speaker last month when Democrats took over control of the House from the Republicans.

Trump, in an interview with CBS News, called Pelosi "very rigid" and said she was trying to "win a political point" by opposing his demands to fund the wall. Trump has said the wall is needed to curb illegal immigration and drug trafficking. Pelosi has called the wall expensive, ineffective and immoral.

Democratic control of the House, even as Republicans maintain a majority in the Senate, endangers Trump's legislative goals including wall funding. Democrats have proposed billions of dollars for border security, but no money for a wall.

"I think she's very bad for our country," Trump said when asked what he learned in his negotiations with Pelosi.

"Basically she wants open borders. She doesn't mind human trafficking or she wouldn't do this," Trump added.

Pelosi has previously backed legislation to fight human trafficking and called it "an abhorrent crime."

A bipartisan House-Senate committee is considering proposals for funding border security measures for the current fiscal year ahead of a deadline in two weeks when stopgap funding ends and a new partial federal shutdown could begin. Pelosi said on Thursday, "There's not going to be any wall money in the legislation" to fund border security for the rest of this year.

'Wild and predictable'

Drew Hammill, a spokesman for Pelosi, in a statement, condemned Trump's "wild and predictable misrepresentations about Democrats' commitment to border security."

"Democrats have put forward strong, smart and effective border security solutions in the bipartisan conference committee, while the president still refuses to take a second shutdown off the table," Hammill said.

Under the US&nbsp;Constitution, Congress holds the national purse strings and approves major expenditures of taxpayer funds.

Trump said at a White House event he might declare an emergency because it did not appear Democrats in Congress were moving toward a deal to provide wall money. Such a step likely would prompt a court challenge from Democrats.

"I think there's a good chance that we'll have to do that," Trump added, referring to the possibility of an emergency declaration.

Pelosi has said she was open to negotiating to fund for more ports of entry or additional border security technology. She said the 17 House and Senate negotiators working on legislation to fund homeland security for the fiscal year should decide components of border security.

Democratic negotiators unveiled a detailed opening position containing no money for additional physical barriers on the border to control the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs. Previously they had supported $1.3 billion for new fencing and improvements to existing barriers.

Construction of a border wall was one of Trump's signature 2016 campaign promises, and he previously said Mexico would pay for it.

President Donald Trump stepped up his attacks on House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday, saying "she's very bad for our country" and "doesn't mind human trafficking" because she opposes his long-promised wall along the US-Mexico border.

President Donald Trump stepped up his attacks on House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday, saying "she's very bad for our country" and "doesn't mind human trafficking" because she opposes his long-promised wall along the US-Mexico border. The Republican president also said there is a "good chance" he will follow through on his previous threats to bypass Congress and declare a national emergency to obtain funding for a wall. Trump, known for personal attacks on critics and political adversaries, made his comments a week after agreeing to end a 35-day partial government shutdown without getting the $5.7 billion he had demanded from Congress to help build the wall. His retreat was seen as a political victory for Pelosi, who became speaker last month when Democrats took over control of the House from the Republicans. Trump, in an interview with CBS News, called Pelosi "very rigid" and said she was trying to "win a political point" by opposing his demands to fund the wall. Trump has said the wall is needed to curb illegal immigration and drug trafficking. Pelosi has called the wall expensive, ineffective and immoral. Democratic control of the House, even as Republicans maintain a majority in the Senate, endangers Trump's legislative goals including wall funding. Democrats have proposed billions of dollars for border security, but no money for a wall. "I think she's very bad for our country," Trump said when asked what he learned in his negotiations with Pelosi. "Basically she wants open borders. She doesn't mind human trafficking or she wouldn't do this," Trump added. Pelosi has previously backed legislation to fight human trafficking and called it "an abhorrent crime." A bipartisan House-Senate committee is considering proposals for funding border security measures for the current fiscal year ahead of a deadline in two weeks when stopgap funding ends and a new partial federal shutdown could begin. Pelosi said on Thursday, "There's not going to be any wall money in the legislation" to fund border security for the rest of this year. 'Wild and predictable' Drew Hammill, a spokesman for Pelosi, in a statement, condemned Trump's "wild and predictable misrepresentations about Democrats' commitment to border security." "Democrats have put forward strong, smart and effective border security solutions in the bipartisan conference committee, while the president still refuses to take a second shutdown off the table," Hammill said. Under the US Constitution, Congress holds the national purse strings and approves major expenditures of taxpayer funds. Trump said at a White House event he might declare an emergency because it did not appear Democrats in Congress were moving toward a deal to provide wall money. Such a step likely would prompt a court challenge from Democrats. "I think there's a good chance that we'll have to do that," Trump added, referring to the possibility of an emergency declaration. Pelosi has said she was open to negotiating to fund for more ports of entry or additional border security technology. She said the 17 House and Senate negotiators working on legislation to fund homeland security for the fiscal year should decide components of border security. Democratic negotiators unveiled a detailed opening position containing no money for additional physical barriers on the border to control the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs. Previously they had supported $1.3 billion for new fencing and improvements to existing barriers. Construction of a border wall was one of Trump's signature 2016 campaign promises, and he previously said Mexico would pay for it.

There is good chance we will have to declare emergency, says Trump on wall funding row

By Eleanor Paynter

President Trump has long called migration a security crisis, but in recent weeks he has also referred to the situation along the southern border as a humanitarian crisis.

As he ended the government shutdown in a televised speech on January 25, Trump reiterated his claim that a border wall between the United States and Mexico would save the lives of Central American migrants, many of whom are women and children.

“Walls work,” he said. “They save good people from attempting a very dangerous journey from other countries.”

As my doctoral research into Europe’s 2015-2016 refugee crisis shows, however, stricter border control doesn’t stop migration. Often, it makes it more dangerous.

Open arms or closed borders?

An estimated, 1.3 million migrants entered the European Union in 2015 — more than double the year before. They were seeking asylum protection from war, conflict and extreme poverty.

To put that figure in context, just half-a-million migrants — including asylum-seekers, who typically give themselves up to border agents — were apprehended at the US-Mexico border in 2018.

Most of Europe’s migrants came from Syria, Afghanistan or Iraq. Generally, these asylum-seekers entered the European Union via Turkey, crossing Macedonia, Serbia and other Balkan countries by foot.

Well over 100,000 migrants from sub-Saharan African countries reached southern Europe by the sea in 2015, crossing the Mediterranean from North Africa.

Overwhelmed with these increased arrivals, national governments in Europe took dramatically different approaches to manage their borders.

Germany threw its doors open. Almost 900,000 migrants arrived there in 2015 after the country suspended an EU rule requiring that migrants apply for asylum in the first EU country they set foot in.

Migrants arriving at southern nations like Greece and Italy generally hoped to continue north to Germany.

Greece, however, was unable to process the more than 850,000 migrants who arrived to its shores in 2015. It built holding camps on its Aegean islands, where people stayed in overcrowded, often inhospitable conditions for up to two years as their asylum claims were processed.

Other EU governments were openly hostile to refugees. Across Eastern Europe, countries along the Balkan route began to build and extend border barriers.

Europe had five border walls in 2014, built following the 1985 Schengen agreement amid concerns about immigration at the bloc’s external borders. By 2017, it had 15 barriers, according to the not-for-profit Transnational Institute, and a heavily patrolled maritime border.

Hungary, perhaps the EU’s least immigrant-friendly country, built a high-tech fence that uses thermal detection and cameras to monitor movement, with speakers that blare warnings in five languages.

Walls make migration more dangerous

Border walls have not stopped migration into Europe.

Tens of thousands of migrants still cross the Balkans to reach the EU each year – they just do so in more dangerous conditions.

Before the walls, migrants travelled in groups, with or without the help of smugglers.

Now, paying a smuggler is the only way for migrants to avoid border guards and pass barriers. For several thousand dollars, smugglers bribe EU border agents, hide migrants in trucks or walk them across EU borders under cover of darkness.

Europe’s refugee crisis has now become a housing crisis.

At least 10,000 migrants now live in homeless encampments or squats across Italy. And after the French refugee camp known as “The Calais Jungle” was demolished in 2016, nearly as many people scattered to makeshift camps or the streets of French cities.

Stopping migrants before they arrive

Italy, where most refugees arrive by boat from North Africa, has tried to keep migrants out in a different way: It outsources its border security.

In 2017, Italy struck a deal to supply the Libyan coast guard with vessels and anti-smuggling training. The agreement promised $325 million if Libyan agents would intercept migrants crossing the Mediterranean and return them to Libyan detention centres.

Human rights organisations have questioned the deal, citing Libya’s political unrest and documented history of migrant enslavement and torture. Returning migrants to detention centres in Libya may also violate international law since refugees cannot be kept safe there.

In my own interviews with African migrants in Italy who’d crossed the Sahara to Libya, many told me that they eventually boarded a boat there not as a final step toward Europe, but to escape imprisonment or torture in Libya.

Libyan coast guard boats have left many migrants stranded at sea. In September 2018, when a boat carrying 100 migrants capsized, Italy and Libya blamed one other for the failed rescue.

Libya’s deterrence mission conflicts with the rescue operations of aid boats that bring migrants to Europe. Italy says rescues invite more migration, despite research disproving this claim.

Last June, 629 migrants, including 123 unaccompanied minors and seven pregnant women, were held at sea for over a week, unable to seek asylum or aid.

Malta, Spain and France have since repeatedly closed their ports to rescue vessels, refusing to bear responsibility for the migrants on board.

Lessons for the US

Irregular migration to Europe did decrease last year, primarily because fewer Syrians are fleeing their war-torn country. More migrants – nearly 700,000 people – are also being detained in Libya.

Migrant routes into the EU also continue to shift in response to closing borders. Spain, for example, has seen sea arrivals increase tenfold since 2015.

In my assessment, Trump’s crackdown along the US-Mexico border will have similar results. There are signs of this already.

A decades-old US policy of paying Mexico to secure its southern border with Guatemala to keep Central American migrants out has merely made the journey riskier, according to a 2018 United Nations report.

To avoid apprehension by Mexican border patrol, some migrants get from Guatemala to Mexico by water, on boats that are often operated by traffickers.

As in Europe, migrants now increasingly rely on smugglers to get across the US-Mexico border, who may charge more than $10,000 per family.

That does not guarantee safe passage. Between August and October last year, smugglers abandoned more than 1,400 migrants, including children, in the sweltering Arizona desert. Hoping to find safety in large groups, more migrants are now travelling in caravans.

As the US and the EU struggle to resolve their border crises, migrants will continue to flee their home countries seeking protection. Heightened border control certainly won’t make them safer.

(Eleanor Paynter is PhD Candidate, Comparative Studies, The Ohio State University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/europes-refugee-crisis-explains-why-border-walls-dont-stop-migration-110414">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By Eleanor Paynter President Trump has long called migration a security crisis, but in recent weeks he has also referred to the situation along the southern border as a humanitarian crisis.

By Eleanor Paynter President Trump has long called migration a security crisis, but in recent weeks he has also referred to the situation along the southern border as a humanitarian crisis. As he ended the government shutdown in a televised speech on January 25, Trump reiterated his claim that a border wall between the United States and Mexico would save the lives of Central American migrants, many of whom are women and children. “Walls work,” he said. “They save good people from attempting a very dangerous journey from other countries.” As my doctoral research into Europe’s 2015-2016 refugee crisis shows, however, stricter border control doesn’t stop migration. Often, it makes it more dangerous. Open arms or closed borders? An estimated, 1.3 million migrants entered the European Union in 2015 — more than double the year before. They were seeking asylum protection from war, conflict and extreme poverty. To put that figure in context, just half-a-million migrants — including asylum-seekers, who typically give themselves up to border agents — were apprehended at the US-Mexico border in 2018. Most of Europe’s migrants came from Syria, Afghanistan or Iraq. Generally, these asylum-seekers entered the European Union via Turkey, crossing Macedonia, Serbia and other Balkan countries by foot. Well over 100,000 migrants from sub-Saharan African countries reached southern Europe by the sea in 2015, crossing the Mediterranean from North Africa. Overwhelmed with these increased arrivals, national governments in Europe took dramatically different approaches to manage their borders. Germany threw its doors open. Almost 900,000 migrants arrived there in 2015 after the country suspended an EU rule requiring that migrants apply for asylum in the first EU country they set foot in. Migrants arriving at southern nations like Greece and Italy generally hoped to continue north to Germany. Greece, however, was unable to process the more than 850,000 migrants who arrived to its shores in 2015. It built holding camps on its Aegean islands, where people stayed in overcrowded, often inhospitable conditions for up to two years as their asylum claims were processed. Other EU governments were openly hostile to refugees. Across Eastern Europe, countries along the Balkan route began to build and extend border barriers. Europe had five border walls in 2014, built following the 1985 Schengen agreement amid concerns about immigration at the bloc’s external borders. By 2017, it had 15 barriers, according to the not-for-profit Transnational Institute, and a heavily patrolled maritime border. Hungary, perhaps the EU’s least immigrant-friendly country, built a high-tech fence that uses thermal detection and cameras to monitor movement, with speakers that blare warnings in five languages. Walls make migration more dangerous Border walls have not stopped migration into Europe. Tens of thousands of migrants still cross the Balkans to reach the EU each year – they just do so in more dangerous conditions. Before the walls, migrants travelled in groups, with or without the help of smugglers. Now, paying a smuggler is the only way for migrants to avoid border guards and pass barriers. For several thousand dollars, smugglers bribe EU border agents, hide migrants in trucks or walk them across EU borders under cover of darkness. Europe’s refugee crisis has now become a housing crisis. At least 10,000 migrants now live in homeless encampments or squats across Italy. And after the French refugee camp known as “The Calais Jungle” was demolished in 2016, nearly as many people scattered to makeshift camps or the streets of French cities. Stopping migrants before they arrive Italy, where most refugees arrive by boat from North Africa, has tried to keep migrants out in a different way: It outsources its border security. In 2017, Italy struck a deal to supply the Libyan coast guard with vessels and anti-smuggling training. The agreement promised $325 million if Libyan agents would intercept migrants crossing the Mediterranean and return them to Libyan detention centres. Human rights organisations have questioned the deal, citing Libya’s political unrest and documented history of migrant enslavement and torture. Returning migrants to detention centres in Libya may also violate international law since refugees cannot be kept safe there. In my own interviews with African migrants in Italy who’d crossed the Sahara to Libya, many told me that they eventually boarded a boat there not as a final step toward Europe, but to escape imprisonment or torture in Libya. Libyan coast guard boats have left many migrants stranded at sea. In September 2018, when a boat carrying 100 migrants capsized, Italy and Libya blamed one other for the failed rescue. Libya’s deterrence mission conflicts with the rescue operations of aid boats that bring migrants to Europe. Italy says rescues invite more migration, despite research disproving this claim. Last June, 629 migrants, including 123 unaccompanied minors and seven pregnant women, were held at sea for over a week, unable to seek asylum or aid. Malta, Spain and France have since repeatedly closed their ports to rescue vessels, refusing to bear responsibility for the migrants on board. Lessons for the US Irregular migration to Europe did decrease last year, primarily because fewer Syrians are fleeing their war-torn country. More migrants – nearly 700,000 people – are also being detained in Libya. Migrant routes into the EU also continue to shift in response to closing borders. Spain, for example, has seen sea arrivals increase tenfold since 2015. In my assessment, Trump’s crackdown along the US-Mexico border will have similar results. There are signs of this already. A decades-old US policy of paying Mexico to secure its southern border with Guatemala to keep Central American migrants out has merely made the journey riskier, according to a 2018 United Nations report. To avoid apprehension by Mexican border patrol, some migrants get from Guatemala to Mexico by water, on boats that are often operated by traffickers. As in Europe, migrants now increasingly rely on smugglers to get across the US-Mexico border, who may charge more than $10,000 per family. That does not guarantee safe passage. Between August and October last year, smugglers abandoned more than 1,400 migrants, including children, in the sweltering Arizona desert. Hoping to find safety in large groups, more migrants are now travelling in caravans. As the US and the EU struggle to resolve their border crises, migrants will continue to flee their home countries seeking protection. Heightened border control certainly won’t make them safer. (Eleanor Paynter is PhD Candidate, Comparative Studies, The Ohio State University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Europe’s refugee crisis explains why border walls don’t stop migration

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/pope-says-killing-of-women-has-become-plague-in-latin-america-192583">Pope Francis</a> criticised those who build walls and sow fear about strangers on Thursday to a global gathering of young Catholics in Panama city.

"The father of lies, the devil, always prefers a divided people at odds with each other. He is the master of division, and he is afraid of a people that learns to work together, and this is a criteria to recognize people: the builders of bridges and the builders of walls,'' Pope said.

The 82-year-old pope received a rock-star welcome by tens of thousands of young people when he arrived for the World Youth Day event at a palm-fringed park on the shores of Panama Bay.

The comment was clearly pointed to US President Donald Trump's proposal of building a wall at US-Mexico border.

When the Pope asked the crowd, ''What do you want to be?'' The crowd replied back ''builders of bridges.''

Meanwhile, Pope urged Latin America's leaders to shun corruption and tackle gang violence, drug trafficking and the killing of women, which he said had become a "plague" in his native continent.

Francis also addressed migration for the second straight day, saying more had to be done to overcome fears and suspicions because migrants were seeking a better life.

Pope Francis criticised those who build walls and sow fear about strangers on Thursday to a global gathering of young Catholics in Panama city. "The father of lies, the devil, always prefers a divided people at odds with each other.

Pope Francis criticised those who build walls and sow fear about strangers on Thursday to a global gathering of young Catholics in Panama city. "The father of lies, the devil, always prefers a divided people at odds with each other. He is the master of division, and he is afraid of a people that learns to work together, and this is a criteria to recognize people: the builders of bridges and the builders of walls,'' Pope said. The 82-year-old pope received a rock-star welcome by tens of thousands of young people when he arrived for the World Youth Day event at a palm-fringed park on the shores of Panama Bay. The comment was clearly pointed to US President Donald Trump's proposal of building a wall at US-Mexico border. When the Pope asked the crowd, ''What do you want to be?'' The crowd replied back ''builders of bridges.'' Meanwhile, Pope urged Latin America's leaders to shun corruption and tackle gang violence, drug trafficking and the killing of women, which he said had become a "plague" in his native continent. Francis also addressed migration for the second straight day, saying more had to be done to overcome fears and suspicions because migrants were seeking a better life.

Pope Francis criticises those who 'build walls', 'sow fear'

FBI agents complained Monday that the month-old <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/without-a-wall-our-country-can-never-have-national-security-says-trump-as-government-shutdown-enters-second-month-192081">US government shutdown</a> is preventing them from paying informants, buying drugs undercover in narcotics busts, and even renewing their own security clearances.

Investigations and prosecutions are suffering from the lack of money to travel to interview witnesses or funds to pay translators, agents are saying, according to Tom O'Connor, president of the FBI Agents Association (FBIAA).

"Every day that the shutdown continues, the operational impediments created by the shutdown get worse and damage our counterterrorism and counterintelligence operations around the globe," said O'Connor, raising the pressure on the White House and Congress to end the shutdown.

The shutdown began on December 22 after President Donald Trump rejected a proposed government funding bill that did not meet his demand for billions of dollars to build a wall on the US-Mexico border.

Since then Trump and Democrats have stuck to their positions, leaving no end in sight for 800,000 federal workers and millions of contract workers furloughed without pay.

Most of the 13,000 FBI special agents still have to work, and O'Connor said a new FBIAA report shows training, investigations and recruitment are all suffering.

Several agents said the dwindling operations resources make it impossible to keep paying tipsters and informants.

"Not being able to pay Confidential Human Sources risks losing them and the information they provide FOREVER. It is not a switch that we can turn on and off," said an unidentified agent from the central part of the US.

One said they cannot get timely subpoenas because many Justice Department lawyers have been furloughed. Another said he doesn't have funds to refill a "cold" phone he uses to talk to sources in a terror investigation.

One bureau reports running out of DNA testing kits, replacement tires for office vehicles and copy paper. And agents deployed abroad say they cannot get repaid for thousands of dollars in expenses, because the back-office staff processing reimbursements is not working.

According to O'Connor, many agents are reporting personal financial strains -- which normally the FBI considers renders them security risks.

"This Friday, nearly 13,000 special agents of the FBI and thousands of professional support employees, will for the second time not receive a paycheck," said O'Connor.

"The FBIAA report makes it absolutely clear that our leaders in Washington must fund the FBI immediately," he said.&nbsp;

FBI agents complained Monday that the month-old US government shutdown is preventing them from paying informants, buying drugs undercover in narcotics busts, and even renewing their own security clearances.

FBI agents complained Monday that the month-old US government shutdown is preventing them from paying informants, buying drugs undercover in narcotics busts, and even renewing their own security clearances. Investigations and prosecutions are suffering from the lack of money to travel to interview witnesses or funds to pay translators, agents are saying, according to Tom O'Connor, president of the FBI Agents Association (FBIAA). "Every day that the shutdown continues, the operational impediments created by the shutdown get worse and damage our counterterrorism and counterintelligence operations around the globe," said O'Connor, raising the pressure on the White House and Congress to end the shutdown. The shutdown began on December 22 after President Donald Trump rejected a proposed government funding bill that did not meet his demand for billions of dollars to build a wall on the US-Mexico border. Since then Trump and Democrats have stuck to their positions, leaving no end in sight for 800,000 federal workers and millions of contract workers furloughed without pay. Most of the 13,000 FBI special agents still have to work, and O'Connor said a new FBIAA report shows training, investigations and recruitment are all suffering. Several agents said the dwindling operations resources make it impossible to keep paying tipsters and informants. "Not being able to pay Confidential Human Sources risks losing them and the information they provide FOREVER. It is not a switch that we can turn on and off," said an unidentified agent from the central part of the US. One said they cannot get timely subpoenas because many Justice Department lawyers have been furloughed. Another said he doesn't have funds to refill a "cold" phone he uses to talk to sources in a terror investigation. One bureau reports running out of DNA testing kits, replacement tires for office vehicles and copy paper. And agents deployed abroad say they cannot get repaid for thousands of dollars in expenses, because the back-office staff processing reimbursements is not working. According to O'Connor, many agents are reporting personal financial strains -- which normally the FBI considers renders them security risks. "This Friday, nearly 13,000 special agents of the FBI and thousands of professional support employees, will for the second time not receive a paycheck," said O'Connor. "The FBIAA report makes it absolutely clear that our leaders in Washington must fund the FBI immediately," he said.

'We can't pay informants': FBI on US government shutdown

US President Donald Trump bitterly attacked top Democrat Nancy Pelosi on Sunday after she rejected a deal on immigration and the Mexico border wall that would end a 30-day-old government shutdown.

Pelosi, speaker of the House of Representatives, on Saturday called Trump's offer of temporary protections for about a million immigrants in return for $5.7 billion to fund the wall a "non-starter."

"Nancy Pelosi has behaved so irrationally &amp; has gone so far to the left that she has now officially become a Radical Democrat," Trump tweeted. "She is so petrified of the 'lefties' in her party that she has lost control."

"...And by the way, clean up the streets in San Francisco, they are disgusting!" he added, in a seemingly gratuitous aside. Pelosi is from San Francisco.

The offer also was assailed by prominent anti-immigrant voices, which denounced it as tantamount to amnesty.

"No, Amnesty is not a part of my offer. It is a 3-year extension of DACA," Trump said in another tweet, referring to former president Barack Obama's program to shield undocumented immigrants who entered the country as children.

Besides the 700,000 immigrants already enrolled in the so-called DACA or "Dreamers" program, Trump's proposal would also extend to another 300,000 people who had been protected from deportation under another program.

He said that while there would be "no big push" to remove the 11 million people in the country illegally, he warned: 'but be careful, Nancy!"&nbsp;

Vice President Mike Pence, who has been leading the administration's contacts with members of Congress, said a bill with the president's proposal would be introduced in the Republican-controlled Senate as early as Tuesday.

US President Donald Trump bitterly attacked top Democrat Nancy Pelosi on Sunday after she rejected a deal on immigration and the Mexico border wall that would end a 30-day-old government shutdown.

US President Donald Trump bitterly attacked top Democrat Nancy Pelosi on Sunday after she rejected a deal on immigration and the Mexico border wall that would end a 30-day-old government shutdown. Pelosi, speaker of the House of Representatives, on Saturday called Trump's offer of temporary protections for about a million immigrants in return for $5.7 billion to fund the wall a "non-starter." "Nancy Pelosi has behaved so irrationally & has gone so far to the left that she has now officially become a Radical Democrat," Trump tweeted. "She is so petrified of the 'lefties' in her party that she has lost control." "...And by the way, clean up the streets in San Francisco, they are disgusting!" he added, in a seemingly gratuitous aside. Pelosi is from San Francisco. The offer also was assailed by prominent anti-immigrant voices, which denounced it as tantamount to amnesty. "No, Amnesty is not a part of my offer. It is a 3-year extension of DACA," Trump said in another tweet, referring to former president Barack Obama's program to shield undocumented immigrants who entered the country as children. Besides the 700,000 immigrants already enrolled in the so-called DACA or "Dreamers" program, Trump's proposal would also extend to another 300,000 people who had been protected from deportation under another program. He said that while there would be "no big push" to remove the 11 million people in the country illegally, he warned: 'but be careful, Nancy!" Vice President Mike Pence, who has been leading the administration's contacts with members of Congress, said a bill with the president's proposal would be introduced in the Republican-controlled Senate as early as Tuesday.

Trump attacks Democrat Nancy Pelosi for rejecting Mexico wall deal

In an attempt to boost tourism in Mexico, AeroMexico is offering a discount to travellers based on their Mexican DNA percentage in their latest ad video.

The tagline of the airline's new "DNA Discounts" campaign is "there are not border with us". The ad talks about how America is a choice for Mexican people to travel but it vice versa for people living in America.

According to the ad, a DNA test will be conducted on US residents which will determine the percentage of their Mexican DNA based on that they will get a discount on their flight to Mexico.

Also read: Trump blocks Pelosi's trip as tensions mount over US government shutdown

In the ad, a group Texans are being interviewed in Wharton, about 300 miles north of the US-Mexico border. They are telling how they don't want to travel to Mexico until, to their surprise, they discover via DNA testing that they are part Mexican and can enjoy significant discounts.

"Oh, wow," says one young man who is told he's 18 per cent Mexican.

"That’s bullshit!" says an irritated elderly man when informed that he is 22 per cent, Mexican, however, after discovering he says, "can I take my wife also".

The ad, published by AeroMexico's ad agency Ogilvy on Twitter, has gone viral on social media, however, it is receiving mix response from people.

"Not really sure if this is more an ad to get bigoted Americans to go to Mexico or a warning to Mexicans that they really won't like the people in America," wrote one user in response to the ad on Twitter.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Not really sure if this is more an ad to get bigoted Americans to go to Mexico, or a warning to Mexicans that they really won't like the people in America.
— Bryan Lawrence🧔🏻 (@BreatheNewWinds) <a href="https://twitter.com/BreatheNewWinds/status/1085987412239560704?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"So if a guy from Mexica flew to America, he could get a free ride back to Mexico," asked another user on microblogging site.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
So if a guy from Mexica flew to America, he could get a free ride back to Mexico.
— Utkarsh🌐 (@nanomine9) <a href="https://twitter.com/nanomine9/status/1085994103446425602?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Watch the full ad here:

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Title: DNA Discounts 
Client: Aeroméxico 
Office: Mexico City 
 
To inspire more travelers to visit Mexico, Aeroméxico revealed some surprising information to Americans about their own heritage. 
 
See more creative work, here: <a href="https://t.co/unXxF8YVmc">https://t.co/unXxF8YVmc</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ClientWork?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ClientWork</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AdOfTheDay?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AdOfTheDay</a> <a href="https://t.co/E8EahCJgZq">pic.twitter.com/E8EahCJgZq</a>
— Ogilvy (@Ogilvy) <a href="https://twitter.com/Ogilvy/status/1083015540149551104?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 9, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The ad comes at a time when&nbsp;President Donald Trump has called a partial government shutdown over his demand to fund a wall at the&nbsp;US-Mexico border.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

In an attempt to boost tourism in Mexico, AeroMexico is offering a discount to travellers based on their Mexican DNA percentage in their latest ad video. The tagline of the airline's new "DNA Discounts" campaign is "there are not border with us".

In an attempt to boost tourism in Mexico, AeroMexico is offering a discount to travellers based on their Mexican DNA percentage in their latest ad video. The tagline of the airline's new "DNA Discounts" campaign is "there are not border with us". The ad talks about how America is a choice for Mexican people to travel but it vice versa for people living in America. According to the ad, a DNA test will be conducted on US residents which will determine the percentage of their Mexican DNA based on that they will get a discount on their flight to Mexico. Also read: Trump blocks Pelosi's trip as tensions mount over US government shutdown In the ad, a group Texans are being interviewed in Wharton, about 300 miles north of the US-Mexico border. They are telling how they don't want to travel to Mexico until, to their surprise, they discover via DNA testing that they are part Mexican and can enjoy significant discounts. "Oh, wow," says one young man who is told he's 18 per cent Mexican. "That’s bullshit!" says an irritated elderly man when informed that he is 22 per cent, Mexican, however, after discovering he says, "can I take my wife also". The ad, published by AeroMexico's ad agency Ogilvy on Twitter, has gone viral on social media, however, it is receiving mix response from people. "Not really sure if this is more an ad to get bigoted Americans to go to Mexico or a warning to Mexicans that they really won't like the people in America," wrote one user in response to the ad on Twitter. Not really sure if this is more an ad to get bigoted Americans to go to Mexico, or a warning to Mexicans that they really won't like the people in America. — Bryan Lawrence🧔🏻 (@BreatheNewWinds) January 17, 2019 × "So if a guy from Mexica flew to America, he could get a free ride back to Mexico," asked another user on microblogging site. So if a guy from Mexica flew to America, he could get a free ride back to Mexico. — Utkarsh🌐 (@nanomine9) January 17, 2019 × Watch the full ad here: Title: DNA Discounts Client: Aeroméxico Office: Mexico City To inspire more travelers to visit Mexico, Aeroméxico revealed some surprising information to Americans about their own heritage. See more creative work, here: https://t.co/unXxF8YVmc #ClientWork #AdOfTheDay pic.twitter.com/E8EahCJgZq — Ogilvy (@Ogilvy) January 9, 2019 × The ad comes at a time when President Donald Trump has called a partial government shutdown over his demand to fund a wall at the US-Mexico border.

Airline AeroMexico offers 'DNA discounts' to Americans with Mexican heritage

By Chris Edelson

If President Donald Trump declares a national emergency to fund some portion of a wall along the US-Mexico border without congressional authorisation, what would happen next?

Would the courts step in? What is Congress’ role?

As I explain in my book “Emergency Presidential Power,” presidents generally claim emergency power in two ways: through inherent or implied authority under the US Constitution or under statutory authority granted by Congress.

Relying on the Constitution as a basis for emergency power is controversial, and less likely to stand up to meaningful congressional or judicial review. The US Constitution says nothing specific about presidential emergency power: Presidents can only claim such authority is implied or inherent.

The emergency powers the Constitution does describe are actually assigned to Congress. Congress has delegated some emergency powers to the president through statutes, including the National Emergencies Act. But Congress retains the power to reject a president’s declaration of a national emergency.

If President Trump does declare an emergency, the question is: Will Congress use the power available to it, or will it play the role of the passive spectator?

Gaining congressional approval

Since presidents lack any specific constitutional emergency power, they often find it necessary to gain congressional authorisation. For instance, at the start of the Civil War, with Congress out of session, President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and took other unilateral actions. He later sought and gained retroactive approval from Congress for these actions.

This precedent of gaining congressional approval was put to the test nearly 100 years later. In 1952, President Harry Truman claimed emergency power to take control of steel factories during the Korean War in response to a labour strike. He invoked a “very great inherent power to meet great national emergencies.” Congress took no specific action to approve or disapprove, though a pre-existing statute on the books weighed against Truman.

When factory owners sued the administration, the Supreme Court, by a 6-3 vote, ruled against Truman in the famous Youngstown Sheet decision. Justice Robert H. Jackson’s concurring opinion, in that case, has been especially influential and is often cited by legal scholars and judges. He outlined a three-part test to be used as a starting point in determining when presidential action is constitutionally permissible.

Under Jackson’s test, presidents are on the strongest possible footing when acting with congressional approval. In this case, Jackson said, Truman’s position was weak since he was taking action that did not comply with the relevant legislative framework. In Jackson’s view, Truman’s reliance on inherent emergency power under the Constitution would dangerously concentrate power in the president’s hands, something the framers would not have wanted.

Congress’s role

Jackson’s opinion in Youngstown suggested that emergency power could be defined by Congress in statutes.

Congress took up that suggestion with the National Emergencies Act of 1976. Though the act was designed to set limits on presidential power to declare national emergencies of indefinite length, it has ended up providing a largely unregulated way for presidents to take unilateral action. Congress has failed to fulfill its responsibilities under the law.

The National Emergencies Act permits the president to declare a national emergency without congressional approval, triggering specific statutory powers that the president can use. For instance, presidents have used this law to impose economic sanctions against terrorists after 9/11 or regulate foreign ships in U.S. waters. Thirty-one emergency declarations are currently in effect under the statute.

Congress can vote at any time to terminate a state of emergency, and is required by the statute to meet every six months while an emergency is in effect to consider whether it should continue. However, it has never voted on an emergency declared by a president or held meetings as required by the statute.

Perhaps most importantly for Trump, the National Emergencies Act provides no criteria for deciding whether a national emergency exists. We know from history that presidents can contrive emergencies as a pretext for action.

For example, in 1846 President James Polk falsely claimed that Mexico had spilled American blood on US soil as a pretext for gaining a declaration of war from Congress.

In 1942, President Franklin D Roosevelt justified the decision to intern 110,000 Japanese-Americans without trial based on false claims that time was of the essence, and at least some Japanese-Americans were known to be disloyal.

Although both of these examples pre-date the 1976 Act, they serve as cautionary tales about the wisdom of accepting at face value a president’s claim that an emergency exists. However, because the law now in effect provides no specific standards to define the existence of an emergency, courts might be inclined to defer to presidential discretion. If President Trump declares a national emergency at the border, it is far from clear that courts would strike it down.

By contrast, it would be straightforward for Congress to reverse a declaration of national emergency. The National Emergencies Act gives legislators authority to reject a presidential declaration of national emergency through simple legislation that would require majorities in the House and Senate. President Trump would presumably veto such action. Legislators would have the opportunity to override a presidential veto with a two-thirds majority vote. That, of course, would be no easy task in the current Congress.

Because of the way the National Emergencies Act was drafted, Congress is better positioned to take action than the courts – assuming enough members are moved to act. If Congress does nothing, then the law could become a vehicle for presidential abuse, especially because the act’s language seems to grant the president broad discretion that could insulate an emergency declaration from legal challenge. If the president moves ahead with a controversial plan to declare a national emergency as a way to free up money for construction of a border wall, all eyes should be on Congress.

(Chris Edelson is Assistant Professor of Government, American University School of Public Affairs)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/if-trump-declares-a-national-emergency-could-congress-or-the-courts-reverse-it-109752">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

By Chris Edelson If President Donald Trump declares a national emergency to fund some portion of a wall along the US-Mexico border without congressional authorisation, what would happen next?

By Chris Edelson If President Donald Trump declares a national emergency to fund some portion of a wall along the US-Mexico border without congressional authorisation, what would happen next? Would the courts step in? What is Congress’ role? As I explain in my book “Emergency Presidential Power,” presidents generally claim emergency power in two ways: through inherent or implied authority under the US Constitution or under statutory authority granted by Congress. Relying on the Constitution as a basis for emergency power is controversial, and less likely to stand up to meaningful congressional or judicial review. The US Constitution says nothing specific about presidential emergency power: Presidents can only claim such authority is implied or inherent. The emergency powers the Constitution does describe are actually assigned to Congress. Congress has delegated some emergency powers to the president through statutes, including the National Emergencies Act. But Congress retains the power to reject a president’s declaration of a national emergency. If President Trump does declare an emergency, the question is: Will Congress use the power available to it, or will it play the role of the passive spectator? Gaining congressional approval Since presidents lack any specific constitutional emergency power, they often find it necessary to gain congressional authorisation. For instance, at the start of the Civil War, with Congress out of session, President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and took other unilateral actions. He later sought and gained retroactive approval from Congress for these actions. This precedent of gaining congressional approval was put to the test nearly 100 years later. In 1952, President Harry Truman claimed emergency power to take control of steel factories during the Korean War in response to a labour strike. He invoked a “very great inherent power to meet great national emergencies.” Congress took no specific action to approve or disapprove, though a pre-existing statute on the books weighed against Truman. When factory owners sued the administration, the Supreme Court, by a 6-3 vote, ruled against Truman in the famous Youngstown Sheet decision. Justice Robert H. Jackson’s concurring opinion, in that case, has been especially influential and is often cited by legal scholars and judges. He outlined a three-part test to be used as a starting point in determining when presidential action is constitutionally permissible. Under Jackson’s test, presidents are on the strongest possible footing when acting with congressional approval. In this case, Jackson said, Truman’s position was weak since he was taking action that did not comply with the relevant legislative framework. In Jackson’s view, Truman’s reliance on inherent emergency power under the Constitution would dangerously concentrate power in the president’s hands, something the framers would not have wanted. Congress’s role Jackson’s opinion in Youngstown suggested that emergency power could be defined by Congress in statutes. Congress took up that suggestion with the National Emergencies Act of 1976. Though the act was designed to set limits on presidential power to declare national emergencies of indefinite length, it has ended up providing a largely unregulated way for presidents to take unilateral action. Congress has failed to fulfill its responsibilities under the law. The National Emergencies Act permits the president to declare a national emergency without congressional approval, triggering specific statutory powers that the president can use. For instance, presidents have used this law to impose economic sanctions against terrorists after 9/11 or regulate foreign ships in U.S. waters. Thirty-one emergency declarations are currently in effect under the statute. Congress can vote at any time to terminate a state of emergency, and is required by the statute to meet every six months while an emergency is in effect to consider whether it should continue. However, it has never voted on an emergency declared by a president or held meetings as required by the statute. Perhaps most importantly for Trump, the National Emergencies Act provides no criteria for deciding whether a national emergency exists. We know from history that presidents can contrive emergencies as a pretext for action. For example, in 1846 President James Polk falsely claimed that Mexico had spilled American blood on US soil as a pretext for gaining a declaration of war from Congress. In 1942, President Franklin D Roosevelt justified the decision to intern 110,000 Japanese-Americans without trial based on false claims that time was of the essence, and at least some Japanese-Americans were known to be disloyal. Although both of these examples pre-date the 1976 Act, they serve as cautionary tales about the wisdom of accepting at face value a president’s claim that an emergency exists. However, because the law now in effect provides no specific standards to define the existence of an emergency, courts might be inclined to defer to presidential discretion. If President Trump declares a national emergency at the border, it is far from clear that courts would strike it down. By contrast, it would be straightforward for Congress to reverse a declaration of national emergency. The National Emergencies Act gives legislators authority to reject a presidential declaration of national emergency through simple legislation that would require majorities in the House and Senate. President Trump would presumably veto such action. Legislators would have the opportunity to override a presidential veto with a two-thirds majority vote. That, of course, would be no easy task in the current Congress. Because of the way the National Emergencies Act was drafted, Congress is better positioned to take action than the courts – assuming enough members are moved to act. If Congress does nothing, then the law could become a vehicle for presidential abuse, especially because the act’s language seems to grant the president broad discretion that could insulate an emergency declaration from legal challenge. If the president moves ahead with a controversial plan to declare a national emergency as a way to free up money for construction of a border wall, all eyes should be on Congress. (Chris Edelson is Assistant Professor of Government, American University School of Public Affairs) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US-Mexico wall: If Trump declares a national emergency, could Congress or the courts reverse it?

The United States President Donald Trump said on Thursday said that&nbsp;he will skip the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland if a government shutdown over his US-Mexico wall continues.

Trump is planning to attend the Davos meeting in just under two weeks, but said, "if the shutdown continues, I won't go."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Because of the Democrats intransigence on Border Security and the great importance of Safety for our Nation, I am respectfully cancelling my very important trip to Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum. My warmest regards and apologies to the <a href="https://twitter.com/wef?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@WEF</a>!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1083426878336036865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 10, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"I intended to go and speak in front of the world financial community in Davos. That's still on, but if the shutdown continues ... I won't go. I had planned to go, it's been very successful when I went. We have a great story to tell," Trump told reporters before leaving the White House to visit Texas.

Swaths of the US government have already been without funding for three weeks while Trump rows with opposition Democrats over his demand for them to authorize construction of hundreds of miles of wall along the Mexican border.

China's Vice President Wang Qishan is also expected to attend the Davos meeting, but it is not clear whether there will be any arrangements for a meeting between him and Trump during the annual gathering. China and the United States have taken a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/explaining-the-us-china-trade-war-which-grabbed-spotlight-in-2018-185043">90-day pause in implementing tariffs to hammer out a trade deal</a>.

The Swiss meeting could also provide Trump with opportunities to discuss better terms of trade with the European Union, Japan, Canada and Mexico.

Meanwhile, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-heads-to-us-mexico-border-to-push-wall-plan-189442">Trump headed to the US-Mexico border</a> to push his demand for a wall, a day after he walked out of negotiations with Democrats in a political crisis paralysing the government.

Trump left early from the White House en route for Texas, where he was expected to visit the community of McAllen and meet with local border patrol agents.

"We need border security," Trump told journalists before boarding the Marine One helicopter.

The Texas trip gives Trump yet another high-profile stage to push his wall plan, following a national television address Tuesday and his drama-filled abandonment of talks with Democratic opponents on Wednesday.

Trump wants $5.7 billion for construction of a wall that he says is needed to stop a violent crime crisis caused by an unsecured border.

But Democrats say the wall would not solve real US immigration problems and is being promoted as a gimmick to satisfy the president's right-wing base.

Trump has tried to pressure Congress by refusing to sign off on a host of unrelated, normally uncontroversial government spending, resulting in a partial government shutdown. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees, including air traffic controllers and members of the Coast Guard, have been without pay for three weeks.

The United States President Donald Trump said on Thursday said that he will skip the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland if a government shutdown over his US-Mexico wall continues.

The United States President Donald Trump said on Thursday said that he will skip the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland if a government shutdown over his US-Mexico wall continues. Trump is planning to attend the Davos meeting in just under two weeks, but said, "if the shutdown continues, I won't go." Because of the Democrats intransigence on Border Security and the great importance of Safety for our Nation, I am respectfully cancelling my very important trip to Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum. My warmest regards and apologies to the @WEF! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 10, 2019 × "I intended to go and speak in front of the world financial community in Davos. That's still on, but if the shutdown continues ... I won't go. I had planned to go, it's been very successful when I went. We have a great story to tell," Trump told reporters before leaving the White House to visit Texas. Swaths of the US government have already been without funding for three weeks while Trump rows with opposition Democrats over his demand for them to authorize construction of hundreds of miles of wall along the Mexican border. China's Vice President Wang Qishan is also expected to attend the Davos meeting, but it is not clear whether there will be any arrangements for a meeting between him and Trump during the annual gathering. China and the United States have taken a 90-day pause in implementing tariffs to hammer out a trade deal. The Swiss meeting could also provide Trump with opportunities to discuss better terms of trade with the European Union, Japan, Canada and Mexico. Meanwhile, Trump headed to the US-Mexico border to push his demand for a wall, a day after he walked out of negotiations with Democrats in a political crisis paralysing the government. Trump left early from the White House en route for Texas, where he was expected to visit the community of McAllen and meet with local border patrol agents. "We need border security," Trump told journalists before boarding the Marine One helicopter. The Texas trip gives Trump yet another high-profile stage to push his wall plan, following a national television address Tuesday and his drama-filled abandonment of talks with Democratic opponents on Wednesday. Trump wants $5.7 billion for construction of a wall that he says is needed to stop a violent crime crisis caused by an unsecured border. But Democrats say the wall would not solve real US immigration problems and is being promoted as a gimmick to satisfy the president's right-wing base. Trump has tried to pressure Congress by refusing to sign off on a host of unrelated, normally uncontroversial government spending, resulting in a partial government shutdown. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees, including air traffic controllers and members of the Coast Guard, have been without pay for three weeks.

Trump cancels trip to Davos World Economic Forum as US government shutdown continues

President Donald Trump headed Thursday to the US-Mexico border to push his demand for a wall, a day after he walked out of negotiations with Democrats in a political crisis paralyzing the government.

Trump departed the White House en route for Texas, where he was expected to visit the community of McAllen and meet with local border patrol agents.

"We want a secure country," Trump told journalists just before departing.

The Texas trip gives Trump yet another high-profile stage to push his wall plan, following a national television address Tuesday and his drama-filled abandonment of talks with Democratic opponents on Wednesday.

Trump wants $5.7 billion for construction of a wall that he says is needed to stop a violent crime crisis caused by an unsecure border. Democrats say the wall would not solve real US immigration problems and is being promoted as a gimmick to satisfy the president's right-wing base.

Trump has tried to pressure Congress by refusing to sign off on a host of unrelated, normally uncontroversial government spending, resulting in a partial government shutdown. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees, including air traffic controllers and members of the Coast Guard, have been without pay for three weeks.

The frustrated president again repeated his threat that if the Democrats don't back down, he will declare a national emergency to give himself authority to go around Congress.

"If we don't make a deal, I think it would be very surprising to me" not to declare a national emergency, he said.

Analysts say the declaration would likely be challenged in court as a case of presidential overreach, in which case the wall still would face being blocked.

However, it would still give Trump political cover with his base by showing he'd done what he could. At that point, Trump could end the partial government shutdown.

Indicating that the impasse could drag on, Trump said that he will skip an international forum in Davos in just under two weeks "if the shutdown continues."

Temper tantrum?

Trump, who revels in telling stories about his negotiating skills as a New York real estate magnate, has not managed to get the Democrats to budge on his demand for the $5.7 billion.

On Wednesday, he invited Democratic leaders to the White House and began by asking if they would approve the wall in exchange for him ending the government shutdown. When the Democrats said no, he walked out.

"A total waste of time," Trump tweeted. "I said bye-bye, nothing else works!"

Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, told journalists Trump "sort of slammed the table," then "got up and walked out."

"Again, we saw a temper tantrum because he couldn't get his way," Schumer said.

Trump disputed that Thursday, saying "I didn't pound the table. That is a lie."

"I don't have temper tantrums," he said. "All of that narrative is a lie."

Illegal immigrants danger disputed

In Texas, aid workers say that people crossing the border do not present the menace that Trump claims.

"The truth is that a great number of percentage of people entering our country, asking to come in to the country, are not criminals: they are families, children, mothers, who really are asking for protection," said Sister Norma Pimentel, head of the Catholic Humanitarian Respite Center in McAllen, Texas.

"They're not coming here to hurt us but rather for us to help them."

A 23-year-old Honduran who gave his name only as Kevin said he came with his toddler-age daughter in search of a better life.

"We left because of the crime, because there is a lot of unemployment. The education system is bad and all of us, we parents, want a better future for our children," he told AFP.

President Donald Trump headed Thursday to the US-Mexico border to push his demand for a wall, a day after he walked out of negotiations with Democrats in a political crisis paralyzing the government.

President Donald Trump headed Thursday to the US-Mexico border to push his demand for a wall, a day after he walked out of negotiations with Democrats in a political crisis paralyzing the government. Trump departed the White House en route for Texas, where he was expected to visit the community of McAllen and meet with local border patrol agents. "We want a secure country," Trump told journalists just before departing. The Texas trip gives Trump yet another high-profile stage to push his wall plan, following a national television address Tuesday and his drama-filled abandonment of talks with Democratic opponents on Wednesday. Trump wants $5.7 billion for construction of a wall that he says is needed to stop a violent crime crisis caused by an unsecure border. Democrats say the wall would not solve real US immigration problems and is being promoted as a gimmick to satisfy the president's right-wing base. Trump has tried to pressure Congress by refusing to sign off on a host of unrelated, normally uncontroversial government spending, resulting in a partial government shutdown. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees, including air traffic controllers and members of the Coast Guard, have been without pay for three weeks. The frustrated president again repeated his threat that if the Democrats don't back down, he will declare a national emergency to give himself authority to go around Congress. "If we don't make a deal, I think it would be very surprising to me" not to declare a national emergency, he said. Analysts say the declaration would likely be challenged in court as a case of presidential overreach, in which case the wall still would face being blocked. However, it would still give Trump political cover with his base by showing he'd done what he could. At that point, Trump could end the partial government shutdown. Indicating that the impasse could drag on, Trump said that he will skip an international forum in Davos in just under two weeks "if the shutdown continues." Temper tantrum? Trump, who revels in telling stories about his negotiating skills as a New York real estate magnate, has not managed to get the Democrats to budge on his demand for the $5.7 billion. On Wednesday, he invited Democratic leaders to the White House and began by asking if they would approve the wall in exchange for him ending the government shutdown. When the Democrats said no, he walked out. "A total waste of time," Trump tweeted. "I said bye-bye, nothing else works!" Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, told journalists Trump "sort of slammed the table," then "got up and walked out." "Again, we saw a temper tantrum because he couldn't get his way," Schumer said. Trump disputed that Thursday, saying "I didn't pound the table. That is a lie." "I don't have temper tantrums," he said. "All of that narrative is a lie." Illegal immigrants danger disputed In Texas, aid workers say that people crossing the border do not present the menace that Trump claims. "The truth is that a great number of percentage of people entering our country, asking to come in to the country, are not criminals: they are families, children, mothers, who really are asking for protection," said Sister Norma Pimentel, head of the Catholic Humanitarian Respite Center in McAllen, Texas. "They're not coming here to hurt us but rather for us to help them." A 23-year-old Honduran who gave his name only as Kevin said he came with his toddler-age daughter in search of a better life. "We left because of the crime, because there is a lot of unemployment. The education system is bad and all of us, we parents, want a better future for our children," he told AFP.

Trump heads to US-Mexico border to push wall plan

President Donald Trump will use his first prime-time Oval Office speech on Tuesday to tell Americans that <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-will-visit-us-mexico-border-on-thursday-spokeswoman-188879">the US-Mexico border is in "crisis" and that a wall must be built</a>, despite the government shutdown triggered by his inability to get Democratic approval for the project.

After weeks of lashing out at Democrats, mostly via Twitter and occasional impromptu press conferences, Trump will pull out the presidency's biggest PR gun — the formal address to the nation at 9 pm (0200 GMT) from the White House's most storied room.

Vice President Mike Pence told ABC television that Trump will express his "deep desire to do his job to protect the American people" in the face of "a real humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border."

Trump wants $5.7 billion to construct high fencing along the border. Democrats have refused, saying he has hyped up immigration issues to appeal to his right-wing base.

In retaliation, Trump has refused to sign off on a broader spending bill, leaving some 800,000 federal employees and many more contractors without pay -- a partial government shutdown about to enter its 18th day.

Trump may use the Oval Office address to calm the waters and seek a compromise solution ending the shutdown and getting at least some funding for his cherished wall project.

Alternatively, he could double down, following through on his warning that he might bypass Congress by declaring emergency powers to fund the wall -- a move that would send political temperatures to boiling point.

Pence would not rule out an emergency declaration, telling CBS television it was something Trump was "considering."

Credibility question 
The Oval Office has witnessed historic announcements, ranging from George W. Bush's reaction to the 9/11 attacks to John F. Kennedy's televised appearance at the height of the Cuba missile crisis.

Trump's gambit is that the solemn setting will give him back the momentum on the Mexico wall issue which helped him get elected in 2016 and has become an obsessive goal for supporters. He will follow up with a rare trip to the Mexico border itself on Thursday.

But with many Americans far from sold on Trump's lurid claims about illegal immigrants, criminals and terrorists overwhelming the border, the speech faces its own high barrier: credibility.

Democrats, who ended the Trump presidency's dominance of domestic politics by seizing the House of Representatives from his Republicans in November, cried foul before a word was spoken.

"If his past statements are an indication (the speech) will be full of malice and misinformation," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the senior Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, said.

And illustrating the controversy around Trump's signature domestic policy, several of the main US broadcast networks reportedly agonized over whether or not to accept the White House request for them to clear airtime for the speech.

In the end, the networks agreed, prompting Democrats to demand they be given airtime afterward to respond.

Compromise or attack? 
The big question was whether Trump would use the occasion to try and heal the nation or to drive the wedge between left and right even further.

Both sides are so far dug in on the issue that even agreement on whether there is a crisis is lacking.

Trump's government has been caught making a series of bald-faced exaggerations and lies, including the completely erroneous suggestion that around 4,000 terrorist suspects crossed into America via the border.

Democrats agree that the US immigration system is creaking under the strain of huge numbers of poor Latin Americans who want to get in for work or to escape violence. But most illegal immigrants in the country are people who overstayed visas, rather than crept across the harsh frontier.

Trump's surprise 2016 election win was in part based on his popular slogan "build the wall" and analysts say he feels he cannot afford to back down.

Democrats, emboldened by their partial control of Congress after spending the first two years of the Trump presidency on the sidelines, appear similarly fixated on denying him any semblance of victory.

Declaration of a national emergency, possibly giving Trump power to get military funding for his wall, would undoubtedly spark a political firestorm -- even if national emergency declarations on a variety of problems are in fact relatively common.

If Trump tries to "extend the executive power and try to get our military to build the border wall, declaring this a national security emergency, I think that he’ll face a significant and likely successful challenge in court," Democratic Senator Chris Coons said on CNN.

For now, the White House is hedging its bets, but seems to indicate it is ready to keep talking.

Americans "deserve Democrats to come back to the table, start negotiating and we believe we can resolve this through the legislative process," Pence said on CBS.

President Donald Trump will use his first prime-time Oval Office speech on Tuesday to tell Americans that the US-Mexico border is in "crisis" and that a wall must be built, despite the government shutdown triggered by his inability to get Democratic approval for the project.

President Donald Trump will use his first prime-time Oval Office speech on Tuesday to tell Americans that the US-Mexico border is in "crisis" and that a wall must be built, despite the government shutdown triggered by his inability to get Democratic approval for the project. After weeks of lashing out at Democrats, mostly via Twitter and occasional impromptu press conferences, Trump will pull out the presidency's biggest PR gun — the formal address to the nation at 9 pm (0200 GMT) from the White House's most storied room. Vice President Mike Pence told ABC television that Trump will express his "deep desire to do his job to protect the American people" in the face of "a real humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border." Trump wants $5.7 billion to construct high fencing along the border. Democrats have refused, saying he has hyped up immigration issues to appeal to his right-wing base. In retaliation, Trump has refused to sign off on a broader spending bill, leaving some 800,000 federal employees and many more contractors without pay -- a partial government shutdown about to enter its 18th day. Trump may use the Oval Office address to calm the waters and seek a compromise solution ending the shutdown and getting at least some funding for his cherished wall project. Alternatively, he could double down, following through on his warning that he might bypass Congress by declaring emergency powers to fund the wall -- a move that would send political temperatures to boiling point. Pence would not rule out an emergency declaration, telling CBS television it was something Trump was "considering." Credibility question The Oval Office has witnessed historic announcements, ranging from George W. Bush's reaction to the 9/11 attacks to John F. Kennedy's televised appearance at the height of the Cuba missile crisis. Trump's gambit is that the solemn setting will give him back the momentum on the Mexico wall issue which helped him get elected in 2016 and has become an obsessive goal for supporters. He will follow up with a rare trip to the Mexico border itself on Thursday. But with many Americans far from sold on Trump's lurid claims about illegal immigrants, criminals and terrorists overwhelming the border, the speech faces its own high barrier: credibility. Democrats, who ended the Trump presidency's dominance of domestic politics by seizing the House of Representatives from his Republicans in November, cried foul before a word was spoken. "If his past statements are an indication (the speech) will be full of malice and misinformation," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the senior Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, said. And illustrating the controversy around Trump's signature domestic policy, several of the main US broadcast networks reportedly agonized over whether or not to accept the White House request for them to clear airtime for the speech. In the end, the networks agreed, prompting Democrats to demand they be given airtime afterward to respond. Compromise or attack? The big question was whether Trump would use the occasion to try and heal the nation or to drive the wedge between left and right even further. Both sides are so far dug in on the issue that even agreement on whether there is a crisis is lacking. Trump's government has been caught making a series of bald-faced exaggerations and lies, including the completely erroneous suggestion that around 4,000 terrorist suspects crossed into America via the border. Democrats agree that the US immigration system is creaking under the strain of huge numbers of poor Latin Americans who want to get in for work or to escape violence. But most illegal immigrants in the country are people who overstayed visas, rather than crept across the harsh frontier. Trump's surprise 2016 election win was in part based on his popular slogan "build the wall" and analysts say he feels he cannot afford to back down. Democrats, emboldened by their partial control of Congress after spending the first two years of the Trump presidency on the sidelines, appear similarly fixated on denying him any semblance of victory. Declaration of a national emergency, possibly giving Trump power to get military funding for his wall, would undoubtedly spark a political firestorm -- even if national emergency declarations on a variety of problems are in fact relatively common. If Trump tries to "extend the executive power and try to get our military to build the border wall, declaring this a national security emergency, I think that he’ll face a significant and likely successful challenge in court," Democratic Senator Chris Coons said on CNN. For now, the White House is hedging its bets, but seems to indicate it is ready to keep talking. Americans "deserve Democrats to come back to the table, start negotiating and we believe we can resolve this through the legislative process," Pence said on CBS.

In TV address to country, Trump to declare 'crisis' on US-Mexico border

Donald Trump will visit the US-Mexico border on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Monday.&nbsp;

"President @realDonaldTrump will travel to the Southern border on Thursday to meet with those on the frontlines of the national security and humanitarian crisis, " Sanders tweeted.&nbsp;

"More details will be announced soon," she added.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
President <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a> will travel to the Southern border on Thursday to meet with those on the frontlines of the national security and humanitarian crisis. More details will be announced soon.
— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) <a href="https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/1082319456246923267?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The visit is being seen as an effort by Trump to pressure Congress to fund his border wall, one of the US president's central campaign promises.&nbsp;

Trump has pushed the US federal government into a partial shutdown — <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/government-will-not-reopen-until-we-have-the-mexican-border-wall-trump-to-us-troops-186467">the shutdown is now in its third week</a> — demanding that Congress fund the wall.&nbsp;The Democrats have rejected the idea outright, bringing about the shutdown.&nbsp;

Trump had earlier sent some 6,000 troops to defend the border against what is says is an "<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/troops-will-not-fire-on-migrant-caravan-trump-175260">immigrant invasion</a>".&nbsp;

Donald Trump will visit the US-Mexico border on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Monday. "President @realDonaldTrump will travel to the Southern border on Thursday to meet with those on the frontlines of the national security and humanitarian crisis, " Sanders tweeted.

Donald Trump will visit the US-Mexico border on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Monday. "President @realDonaldTrump will travel to the Southern border on Thursday to meet with those on the frontlines of the national security and humanitarian crisis, " Sanders tweeted. "More details will be announced soon," she added. President @realDonaldTrump will travel to the Southern border on Thursday to meet with those on the frontlines of the national security and humanitarian crisis. More details will be announced soon. — Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) January 7, 2019 × The visit is being seen as an effort by Trump to pressure Congress to fund his border wall, one of the US president's central campaign promises. Trump has pushed the US federal government into a partial shutdown — the shutdown is now in its third week — demanding that Congress fund the wall. The Democrats have rejected the idea outright, bringing about the shutdown. Trump had earlier sent some 6,000 troops to defend the border against what is says is an "immigrant invasion".

Trump will visit US-Mexico border on Thursday: Spokeswoman

Mexico called on the United States Thursday to investigate the use of force by border patrol agents against members of a Central American migrant caravan who tried to rush the US-Mexican border on New Year's.

"The foreign ministry sent a diplomatic cable today to the United States embassy about the incident that occurred on January 1 in the border zone... In it, the ministry requested an exhaustive investigation of events that day," it said in a statement.

Mexico also repeated its call for an investigation into a similar incident on November 25, when some 1,000 migrants from the caravan tried to force their way into the United States and were pushed back by border patrol agents.

In both incidents, US Border Patrol fired tear gas to stop the migrants from crossing the border fence between the Mexican city of Tijuana and San Diego, California. They also fired rubber bullets during the November incident.

Around 100 migrants were involved in the New Year's border crossing attempt.&nbsp;

Most were forced to turn back by the tear gas. Twenty-five were arrested, US Border Patrol said.

Mexico "regrets any act of violence along the border" and "reiterates its commitment to safeguarding the human rights and safety of all migrants," it said.

The migrants are part of a caravan of several thousand people that left Honduras in October and spent more than a month trekking across Mexico to reach the US border.

The caravan has triggered frequent tirades from US President Donald Trump, who says it includes dangerous criminals and regularly cites it as evidence of the need for his planned border wall.

It once comprised some 7,000 people, but it has gradually dispersed as migrants cross the border, move elsewhere in Mexico or return home. Around 1,500 migrants are currently staying at the shelter set up for the caravan in Tijuana.

The government of Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who took office on December 1, has so far sought to avoid confrontation with the Trump administration over the issue.

Instead, it is lobbying for a US-Mexican plan to promote economic development across the region as a means to slow migration.

The caravan has triggered frequent tirades from US President Donald Trump, who says it includes dangerous criminals and regularly cites it as evidence of the need for his planned border wall.

Mexico called on the United States Thursday to investigate the use of force by border patrol agents against members of a Central American migrant caravan who tried to rush the US-Mexican border on New Year's. "The foreign ministry sent a diplomatic cable today to the United States embassy about the incident that occurred on January 1 in the border zone... In it, the ministry requested an exhaustive investigation of events that day," it said in a statement. Mexico also repeated its call for an investigation into a similar incident on November 25, when some 1,000 migrants from the caravan tried to force their way into the United States and were pushed back by border patrol agents. In both incidents, US Border Patrol fired tear gas to stop the migrants from crossing the border fence between the Mexican city of Tijuana and San Diego, California. They also fired rubber bullets during the November incident. Around 100 migrants were involved in the New Year's border crossing attempt. Most were forced to turn back by the tear gas. Twenty-five were arrested, US Border Patrol said. Mexico "regrets any act of violence along the border" and "reiterates its commitment to safeguarding the human rights and safety of all migrants," it said. The migrants are part of a caravan of several thousand people that left Honduras in October and spent more than a month trekking across Mexico to reach the US border. The caravan has triggered frequent tirades from US President Donald Trump, who says it includes dangerous criminals and regularly cites it as evidence of the need for his planned border wall. It once comprised some 7,000 people, but it has gradually dispersed as migrants cross the border, move elsewhere in Mexico or return home. Around 1,500 migrants are currently staying at the shelter set up for the caravan in Tijuana. The government of Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who took office on December 1, has so far sought to avoid confrontation with the Trump administration over the issue. Instead, it is lobbying for a US-Mexican plan to promote economic development across the region as a means to slow migration.

Mexico demands US probe on use of force against migrants

President Donald Trump on Tuesday invited Republican and Democratic leaders from Congress for a meeting to seek an end to the federal government shutdown now in its second week.

The two sides have appeared at an impasse, with Trump's Democratic foes seeking a vote on spending bills to keep the government open -- without addressing the hot-button issue of border wall funding -- as soon as they take control of the House of Representatives, on Thursday.&nbsp;

But the legislation's future appears uncertain, as it does not contain funding for a wall along the US-Mexico border, as demanded by Trump.

But Trump appeared to strike a more conciliatory tone seeking to bring Democrats to the table after acerbic remarks over the weekend.

"Border Security and the Wall 'thing' and Shutdown is not where Nancy Pelosi wanted to start her tenure as Speaker! Let's make a deal?" he tweeted.

Pelosi is set to become House speaker on Thursday.

At the same time, Trump characterized their opposition to the wall as embracing "Open Borders and all of the crime and drugs that Open Borders bring!"

US media reported the lawmakers were invited to a session at the White House, though it was unclear who would attend, and whether any Democrats would be present.

Democrats say the wall idea -- one of the president's key election campaign platforms -- is a distraction from more complicated immigration problems and a tool for Trump to whip up support among his conservative base.

They are proposing to pass most administrative budgets lasting through September 30, while only financing until February 8 the thornier budget of the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees border security.

Trump expressed outrage at the idea.

"The Democrats, much as I suspected, have allocated no money for a new Wall. So imaginative! The problem is, without a Wall there can be no real Border Security - and our Country must finally have a Strong and Secure Southern Border!" he wrote on Twitter.

US media reported the lawmakers were invited to a session at the White House, though it was unclear who would attend, and whether any Democrats would be present.

President Donald Trump on Tuesday invited Republican and Democratic leaders from Congress for a meeting to seek an end to the federal government shutdown now in its second week. The two sides have appeared at an impasse, with Trump's Democratic foes seeking a vote on spending bills to keep the government open -- without addressing the hot-button issue of border wall funding -- as soon as they take control of the House of Representatives, on Thursday. But the legislation's future appears uncertain, as it does not contain funding for a wall along the US-Mexico border, as demanded by Trump. But Trump appeared to strike a more conciliatory tone seeking to bring Democrats to the table after acerbic remarks over the weekend. "Border Security and the Wall 'thing' and Shutdown is not where Nancy Pelosi wanted to start her tenure as Speaker! Let's make a deal?" he tweeted. Pelosi is set to become House speaker on Thursday. At the same time, Trump characterized their opposition to the wall as embracing "Open Borders and all of the crime and drugs that Open Borders bring!" US media reported the lawmakers were invited to a session at the White House, though it was unclear who would attend, and whether any Democrats would be present. Democrats say the wall idea -- one of the president's key election campaign platforms -- is a distraction from more complicated immigration problems and a tool for Trump to whip up support among his conservative base. They are proposing to pass most administrative budgets lasting through September 30, while only financing until February 8 the thornier budget of the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees border security. Trump expressed outrage at the idea. "The Democrats, much as I suspected, have allocated no money for a new Wall. So imaginative! The problem is, without a Wall there can be no real Border Security - and our Country must finally have a Strong and Secure Southern Border!" he wrote on Twitter.

Trump seeks to end government shutdown, calls for meeting with US Congress

Outgoing White House chief John Kelly said he had "nothing but compassion" for undocumented migrants crossing into the US and undercut the idea of a border wall in an interview Sunday that jarred with President Donald Trump's tough rhetoric on immigration.

Speaking as a partial government shutdown went into a ninth day due to an impasse over Trump's demands for funding for a wall at the US-Mexico border, Kelly told the Los Angeles Times: "To be honest, it's not a wall."

"The president still says 'wall.' Oftentimes frankly he'll say 'barrier' or 'fencing,' now he's tended toward steel slats," Kelly said.

"But we left a solid concrete wall early on in the administration, when we asked people what they needed and where they needed it."

A former Marine general who led the military command responsible for Latin America, Kelly was Trump's Homeland Security secretary before becoming White House chief of staff in July last year.

But his relationship with the president reportedly deteriorated and he is due to be replaced at the end of the year by Mick Mulvaney, who currently serves as budget director.

Trump has been excoriated by opposition Democrats, who oppose his demand for $5 billion in border wall funding, after he blamed them for the deaths of two Guatemalan children in US custody in a tweet on Saturday.

"Illegal immigrants, overwhelmingly, are not bad people.... I have nothing but compassion for them, the young kids," Kelly told the LA Times adding that many had been manipulated by traffickers.

The remarks were a sharp contrast to the rhetoric of the president who regularly appeals to his overwhelmingly white political base by taking a hard line on immigration.&nbsp;

Building a wall along the 2,000-mile (3,200-kilometer) US-Mexico frontier was a central plank of his 2016 election campaign.

He has spoken of an "invasion" of migrants and complained of "many gang members and some very bad people" among a thousands-strong caravan of immigrants that traveled to the US in October.

He has also threatened to cut aid to Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, despite migrants from those countries saying they are fleeing poverty and gang violence.

In comments that are likely to irritate his boss, Kelly said the way to halt illegal immigration was to "stop US demand for drugs, and expand economic opportunity" in Central America.

Speaking as a partial government shutdown went into a ninth day due to an impasse over Trump's demands for funding for a wall at the US-Mexico border, Kelly told the Los Angeles Times: 'To be honest, it's not a wall.'

Outgoing White House chief John Kelly said he had "nothing but compassion" for undocumented migrants crossing into the US and undercut the idea of a border wall in an interview Sunday that jarred with President Donald Trump's tough rhetoric on immigration. Speaking as a partial government shutdown went into a ninth day due to an impasse over Trump's demands for funding for a wall at the US-Mexico border, Kelly told the Los Angeles Times: "To be honest, it's not a wall." "The president still says 'wall.' Oftentimes frankly he'll say 'barrier' or 'fencing,' now he's tended toward steel slats," Kelly said. "But we left a solid concrete wall early on in the administration, when we asked people what they needed and where they needed it." A former Marine general who led the military command responsible for Latin America, Kelly was Trump's Homeland Security secretary before becoming White House chief of staff in July last year. But his relationship with the president reportedly deteriorated and he is due to be replaced at the end of the year by Mick Mulvaney, who currently serves as budget director. Trump has been excoriated by opposition Democrats, who oppose his demand for $5 billion in border wall funding, after he blamed them for the deaths of two Guatemalan children in US custody in a tweet on Saturday. "Illegal immigrants, overwhelmingly, are not bad people.... I have nothing but compassion for them, the young kids," Kelly told the LA Times adding that many had been manipulated by traffickers. The remarks were a sharp contrast to the rhetoric of the president who regularly appeals to his overwhelmingly white political base by taking a hard line on immigration. Building a wall along the 2,000-mile (3,200-kilometer) US-Mexico frontier was a central plank of his 2016 election campaign. He has spoken of an "invasion" of migrants and complained of "many gang members and some very bad people" among a thousands-strong caravan of immigrants that traveled to the US in October. He has also threatened to cut aid to Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, despite migrants from those countries saying they are fleeing poverty and gang violence. In comments that are likely to irritate his boss, Kelly said the way to halt illegal immigration was to "stop US demand for drugs, and expand economic opportunity" in Central America.

Have nothing but compassion for migrants: Outgoing White House chief John Kelly

President Donald Trump threatened Friday to seal off the US-Mexico border "entirely" if Congress does not approve billions of dollars in funding for a wall.

In a burst of early morning tweets the president said the alternative to funding his hugely controversial wall project would be total separation from Mexico -- including making US car companies pull out their factories based on the other side of the frontier.

The threat yet again upped the ante in a political row that has led to a partial shutdown of the US government and seems set to dominate the start to the third year of Trump's presidency.

"We will be forced to close the Southern Border entirely if the Obstructionist Democrats do not give us the money to finish the Wall &amp; also change the ridiculous immigration laws that our Country is saddled with," Trump tweeted.

With the border shut, Trump said he would take US-Mexican relations back to the days before the NAFTA agreement opened free trade across Canada, Mexico and the United States.

That would "bring our car industry back into the United States where it belongs," he said.

Trump did not make any mention of the new free trade agreement, known as the USMCA, which he only recently signed with the two neighboring countries to replace NAFTA and which he has repeatedly praised as a huge boost for American commerce.

$5 billion question

Trump wants $5 billion in funding for a wall along the more than 2,000-mile border, which he says is currently too porous to stop illegal immigration and which he says has become a magnet for criminals, drugs and even terrorists.

Opponents -- especially in the Democratic party but also some in Trump's Republican party -- say that a physical wall is impractical and that the idea is being used as a political tool to whip up xenophobia in Trump's right-wing voter base.

Both sides have dug in. Democrats refuse to approve funding and the president -- who has made hardline immigration polices a centerpiece of his presidency -- has retaliated by refusing to sign off on a wider spending bill, leaving some 800,000 federal employees without pay.

Negotiations on lifting that partial government shutdown, perhaps by providing some border security funding, have sputtered out and no new debate is scheduled before next Wednesday.

Caravan 'invasion'

Experts are divided on solutions to policing the long, often inhospitable border separating the world's biggest economy from the far poorer countries to its south.

Although there is a huge cross-border drug trade and immigrants often enter illegally, many do have genuine claims for asylum.&nbsp;

Central Americans also are already deeply integrated in the US economy, often performing physically demanding, low-pay jobs in construction, agriculture and other vital sectors.

Despite this, Trump has consistently painted the asylum seekers and economic migrants in outlandish terms, raising the specter of rapists, gang members and people with infectious diseases roaming freely across the border.&nbsp;

In November, Trump threatened to close the "whole border" with Mexico if "it gets to a level where we're going to lose control or people are going to start getting hurt."

Trump and media outlets friendly to his administration have latched particularly on to what have become known as the "caravans" -- groups of several hundred or even more migrants who walk on epic treks across Central America and Mexico to try and reach the United States.

Although many in the "caravans" are families and people simply desperate for better, safer lives, Trump has portrayed the groups as organized attempts to invade the United States.

In one tweet Friday, Trump warned: "word is that a new Caravan is forming in Honduras and they are doing nothing about it."

As a result, he said, "we will be cutting off all aid" to El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, impoverished, often dangerous countries where American assistance aims to boost democracy, human rights, education and security. 
&nbsp;

President Donald Trump threatened Friday to seal off the US-Mexico border "entirely" if Congress does not approve billions of dollars in funding for a wall. In a burst of early morning tweets the president said the alternative to funding his hugely controversial wall project would be total separation from Mexico -- including making US car companies pull out their factories based on the other side of the frontier.

President Donald Trump threatened Friday to seal off the US-Mexico border "entirely" if Congress does not approve billions of dollars in funding for a wall. In a burst of early morning tweets the president said the alternative to funding his hugely controversial wall project would be total separation from Mexico -- including making US car companies pull out their factories based on the other side of the frontier. The threat yet again upped the ante in a political row that has led to a partial shutdown of the US government and seems set to dominate the start to the third year of Trump's presidency. "We will be forced to close the Southern Border entirely if the Obstructionist Democrats do not give us the money to finish the Wall & also change the ridiculous immigration laws that our Country is saddled with," Trump tweeted. With the border shut, Trump said he would take US-Mexican relations back to the days before the NAFTA agreement opened free trade across Canada, Mexico and the United States. That would "bring our car industry back into the United States where it belongs," he said. Trump did not make any mention of the new free trade agreement, known as the USMCA, which he only recently signed with the two neighboring countries to replace NAFTA and which he has repeatedly praised as a huge boost for American commerce. $5 billion question Trump wants $5 billion in funding for a wall along the more than 2,000-mile border, which he says is currently too porous to stop illegal immigration and which he says has become a magnet for criminals, drugs and even terrorists. Opponents -- especially in the Democratic party but also some in Trump's Republican party -- say that a physical wall is impractical and that the idea is being used as a political tool to whip up xenophobia in Trump's right-wing voter base. Both sides have dug in. Democrats refuse to approve funding and the president -- who has made hardline immigration polices a centerpiece of his presidency -- has retaliated by refusing to sign off on a wider spending bill, leaving some 800,000 federal employees without pay. Negotiations on lifting that partial government shutdown, perhaps by providing some border security funding, have sputtered out and no new debate is scheduled before next Wednesday. Caravan 'invasion' Experts are divided on solutions to policing the long, often inhospitable border separating the world's biggest economy from the far poorer countries to its south. Although there is a huge cross-border drug trade and immigrants often enter illegally, many do have genuine claims for asylum. Central Americans also are already deeply integrated in the US economy, often performing physically demanding, low-pay jobs in construction, agriculture and other vital sectors. Despite this, Trump has consistently painted the asylum seekers and economic migrants in outlandish terms, raising the specter of rapists, gang members and people with infectious diseases roaming freely across the border. In November, Trump threatened to close the "whole border" with Mexico if "it gets to a level where we're going to lose control or people are going to start getting hurt." Trump and media outlets friendly to his administration have latched particularly on to what have become known as the "caravans" -- groups of several hundred or even more migrants who walk on epic treks across Central America and Mexico to try and reach the United States. Although many in the "caravans" are families and people simply desperate for better, safer lives, Trump has portrayed the groups as organized attempts to invade the United States. In one tweet Friday, Trump warned: "word is that a new Caravan is forming in Honduras and they are doing nothing about it." As a result, he said, "we will be cutting off all aid" to El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, impoverished, often dangerous countries where American assistance aims to boost democracy, human rights, education and security.

Trump threatens to 'entirely' close US-Mexico border unless wall demands met

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/business-economy/sensex-nifty-choppy-amid-weak-global-cues-186088">BSE benchmark Sensex</a> extended its losses for the second session Monday in the holiday-shortened week by declining 272 points on heavy selling in realty, consumer durables, metal and auto counters amid weak global cues as political uncertainties in the US dampened sentiment.

After rising briefly to 35,910.67 at the outset, the 30-share quickly slipped into the negative terrain in line with a weak trend at other Asian markets and touched a low of 35,423.24 before ending at 35,470.15, down by 271.92 points, or 0.76 per cent.&nbsp;

The gauge had plunged 572.04 points Friday.

Also, the broader NSE Nifty, after shuttling between 10,649.25 and 10,782.30 points, finally settled 90.50 points, or 0.84 per cent lower at 10,663.50.

Stock exchanges will remain closed Tuesday on account of Christmas.

According to experts, global equities were subdued as a partial US government shutdown that entered was set to stretch through Christmas, after Congress adjourned for the weekend with no deal in sight to end an impasse over funding for President Donald Trump's wall on the US-Mexico border.

Also, investors were nervous after reports emerged that Trump privately asked cabinet members if he had the authority to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell after interest rates were increased and the stock market tanked.

On a net basis, domestic institutional investors (DIIs) sold shares worth Rs 488.55 crore, while foreign portfolio investors (FPIs) bought shares worth Rs 134.14 crore on Friday, provisional data showed.

Meanwhile, the GST Council Saturday reduced tax rates on 23 goods and services, including movie tickets, TV and monitor screens and power banks, and exempted frozen and preserved vegetables from the levy.

The reduced rates are likely to come into effect from January 1, 2019, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley told reporters after the 31st meeting of Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council here.

BSE benchmark Sensex extended its losses for the second session Monday in the holiday-shortened week by declining 272 points on heavy selling in realty, consumer durables, metal and auto counters amid weak global cues as political uncertainties in the US dampened sentiment.

BSE benchmark Sensex extended its losses for the second session Monday in the holiday-shortened week by declining 272 points on heavy selling in realty, consumer durables, metal and auto counters amid weak global cues as political uncertainties in the US dampened sentiment. After rising briefly to 35,910.67 at the outset, the 30-share quickly slipped into the negative terrain in line with a weak trend at other Asian markets and touched a low of 35,423.24 before ending at 35,470.15, down by 271.92 points, or 0.76 per cent. The gauge had plunged 572.04 points Friday. Also, the broader NSE Nifty, after shuttling between 10,649.25 and 10,782.30 points, finally settled 90.50 points, or 0.84 per cent lower at 10,663.50. Stock exchanges will remain closed Tuesday on account of Christmas. According to experts, global equities were subdued as a partial US government shutdown that entered was set to stretch through Christmas, after Congress adjourned for the weekend with no deal in sight to end an impasse over funding for President Donald Trump's wall on the US-Mexico border. Also, investors were nervous after reports emerged that Trump privately asked cabinet members if he had the authority to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell after interest rates were increased and the stock market tanked. On a net basis, domestic institutional investors (DIIs) sold shares worth Rs 488.55 crore, while foreign portfolio investors (FPIs) bought shares worth Rs 134.14 crore on Friday, provisional data showed. Meanwhile, the GST Council Saturday reduced tax rates on 23 goods and services, including movie tickets, TV and monitor screens and power banks, and exempted frozen and preserved vegetables from the levy. The reduced rates are likely to come into effect from January 1, 2019, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley told reporters after the 31st meeting of Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council here.

Sensex, Nifty drop on global selloff

us-mexico-border

Us Mexico Border, News on Us Mexico Border, stories on Us Mexico Border, articles on Us Mexico Border, Us Mexico Border stories at Wion, Us Mexico Border news, Us Mexico Border latest news

us mexico-border