Only the Panama Canal prevents all ships from having to go down and around the South American continent, which is a much longer, and much more dangerous ocean route.
US border security can't get much stronger than a wide, deep waterway. That prevents both underground and overland illegal border crossings, and limits border crossings to bridges, airplane, and boats.
With increasing emphasis on Pacific Rim military security, rapid-response, multiple theater, special forces, and terrorism by the US national security community, the concern over sudden blockage of the Panama Canal grows. The national security value becomes as important, if not more important than border security.
Loss of access to the Panama Canal would strike a major blow to US commercial shipping as well as military mobility. Such a logistics nightmare scenario would through the U.S. into recession and shock the prices of many goods, given how much travels through the Panama Canal. Isn't that a border security issue too?
Now think about the positive side in economic-jobs issues how many jobs would be created by excavating and dredging a Rio Grand Canal -- both in the U.S. and in Mexico.
Imagine how many jobs would be created just by digging the canal. Imagine how many jobs would be created by serving the needs of all of the canal building employees.
Imagine how many jobs would be created by the build-up along the shores -- U.S. and Mexican.
Imagine how many people who would have tried to cross the U.S.-Mexican border would instead find jobs related to the new canal. Isn't that a major, and positive, effect on border security?
Imagine the economic growth and flexibility from a series of ports built along both U.S. and Mexican shores of a Rio Grand Canal. The land value of what are now mostly dessert acres would soar. Access to water, even if desalination were required for drinking and farming, would greatly help the persistent and growing water shortages in the entire Southwestern region of the U.S. and Northern region of Mexico and support economic growth in both countries.
Building a long canal to connect major bodies of water for economic development as well as national security is not a new idea. It's been done successfully in the past and even being done now.
In the 1800's the Erie Canal was built connected New York City harbor for the Atlantic Ocean with the St. Lawrence Seaway for the Great Lakes Mid-West ... as well as all of the towns that sprang up along the canal. Of course, in the 1800's, Canada was part of England, with whom we'd just fought 2 wars (Revolutionary War and War of 1812) and where the New York waterways and forts played major roles.
Even today, China is building the Grand Canal to connect its inland cities and farms to the Pacific Oceans and coastal centers.
Yes, building the Rio Grand Canal would be very expensive. But the return on that investment would be immediate and much greater.
By Steve Reichenstein
I am a high school debater in Kansas and this exact idea was thought up by my mother and I last year. We used it as our affirmative case and did wonderfully! This year, the national debate topic involves increasing economic involvement with Cuba, Mexico, or Venezuela. I was hoping to change my evidence but reuse my plan for this year's topic. I had a really hard time finding any evidence from credible sources to support this idea. I would love to talk to you more about it! If you could email me, I would be ecstatic!
ReplyDelete