State of the Union: There must be an overhaul of any post-1945 human rights framework and refugee conventions that oppose any deportation or martial action to deter migration.

As my colleague Jude Russo recently wrote, the most interesting and important news is not being covered much: the letter from the governor of Texas to the U.S. government declaring that the social compact between the federal government and the states is now broken. At least rhetorically, it appears that around fifteen or so states agree, and some of them have sent material and men to assist Texas in enforcing border control.

The issue isn’t complicated. This was the original idea of the United States: a union with no standing army but equal states helping each other during an invasion, with the federal government’s sole purpose being to come to the aid of the states. The United States is an entity where the states are supreme and decide their own destiny, especially during invasion and war. 

Yet the idea of the social compact being broken is an interesting one, and is now being echoed across the waters in Europe as well. Consider that the head of Frontex, the European Union border security and coast guard force that was created from the ashes of idealism post-2015, is now saying that there is no way to stop migrants. Hans Leijtens, a Dutchman who was recently appointed executive director of Frontex, recently declared that borders are obsolete, and that Europe should accept the fate and pivot away from the “narrative” of “stopping people.”

“Nothing can stop people from crossing a border, no wall, no fence, no sea, no river,” said Leijtens, whose solution was a managerial paean to “more openness.”

This sort of gives the game away. When both the U.S. federal government or Frontex in the E.U. demand more money, it is not to deter mass migration; it is to process illegal immigrants in a smooth, orderly fashion. They do not want to deter mass migration. They desire mass migration both ideologically, and, as recent reports go, materially.

Contrary to consensus wisdom, mass migration can actually be easily deterred.

The powers that be should be willing to sink the boats in the Mediterranean, target the human traffickers and cartels in both North Africa and Latin America, target the financing and processing of migrants by NGOs and other entities willing to aid and abet mass migration, and mass-deport the millions who came illegally after 2015. It can be done.

It is not done for two reasons. One, the post-1945 refugee convention and human rights laws, a relic of a different time, handicaps governments to take drastic actions. Two, the powers that be are ideologically aligned to promote mass-migration. To reverse that, there must be an overhaul of any post-1945 human rights framework and refugee conventions that oppose any deportation or martial action to deter migration. And there must be those willing to take action.

International law is practically a fantasy that states either can follow or disregard. India mass-deported Rohingya migrants. As did Pakistan with millions of Afghans. Israel has started to crack down on African mass migration. As has Saudi Arabia, which has gone as far as to shoot migrants. 

Deterrence needs force. Texas is right. It is up to the rest of the U.S. and Europe to follow.

*****

This article was published by The American Conservative and is reproduced with permission.

Image Credit: Shutterstock