The Daily Signal - The Role of the US Military at the Southern Border

Episode Date: February 2, 2025

President Donald Trump is surging resources to America’s southern border, including military personnel, and has every right to do so, according to Robert Greenway.  “It is not unprecedented for the military to be called in [to the border] when the capacity of our law enforcement agencies is exceeded, and that’s almost certainly the case now,” said Greenway, director of the Center for National Defense at The Heritage Foundation. In a new Heritage report titled, “How the President Can Use the U.S. Military to Confront the Catastrophic Threat at the Border with Mexico,” Greenway, who is also a former member of the National Security Council, Greenway breaks down the specific ways the military can step in to secure the border.  The military can help in three general capacities at the border, Greenway explains. First, the military can help with transportation and housing of illegal aliens in the deportation process. Second, the military can provide assistance with the physical security of the border through increased personnel, surveillance, and assistance in the construction of the border wall. And finally, the military can work outside of the U.S. with other countries to help them police their own borders more effectively.  “I think there’s a huge role for the military to play, and advise, equip, support, and assist our partners and allies south of the border,” he said. “The military is uniquely capable of doing that.” Greenway joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to discuss past cases in which the U.S. deployed the military to the U.S. border, and why it is an effective strategy for stopping the flood of illegal immigration.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At Desjardin, we speak business. We speak equipment modernization. We're fluent in data digitization and expansion into foreign markets. And we can talk all day about streamlining manufacturing processes. Because at Desjardin business, we speak the same language you do. Business. So join the more than 400,000 Canadian entrepreneurs who already count on us. And contact Desjardin today.

We'd love to talk, business. From the stories of real Americans to in-depth policy conversations, we are going beyond the headlines to discuss the issues and events that have and are shaping this nation. Welcome to the Daily Signal podcast weekend edition. I'm Virginia Allen, your host today. Thank you so much for joining us. We'll be right back with today's conversation. Robert Greenway currently serves as the Director of the Center for National Defense at the Heritage Foundation

and is also a former member of the National Security Council. He joins me now. Rob, welcome back to the show. Thanks for being here. Thanks for having. It's always a pleasure. Well, congratulations on this new very thorough report that you and your team have just released. It's titled, How the President Can Use the U.S. military to confront the catastrophic threat at the border with Mexico. So I want to kind of begin with the big picture and a little bit of history here, because you all laid this out really thoroughly in this report.

How common is it that the military has been used at the southern border, whether for security reasons or to carry out specific missions? Has this been done before? So it's a great question. It's one of the three major focuses of the report. There is a precedent for it. In fact, before Texas became a state, the U.S. military was active along our southern border. And so has been for over a century to support displaced individuals and to provide border security. and surveillance, the military has been used again since at least 1914 in this capacity with

increased regularity. And so it is not unprecedented for the military to be called in when the capacity of our law enforcement agencies is exceeded. And that's almost certainly the case now. Okay. So there's precedent for it. Obviously, you kind of think, well, in an ideal world, customs and border protection, border officials could handle it all. But when needed, the military does come in to aid and to help. How much at play? How much at play? here is America's relationship with Mexico. How much does that determine those additional resources that are needed at the border and whether or not the military is needed to step in? Well, it's a great question. And while we focus on the Mexican border in particular,

it obviously applies more broadly than that. It includes the maritime domain in the Caribbean. We didn't spend a great deal of time in that, but the principle applies. And so we've been active in the military, has been active in a counter-drug sense. for decades, at least in the Caribbean, again, to interdict the flow of narcotics. For the military, it's sort of three domains in which it can be applied. Inside the border for transportation logistics sake, it has millions of installations and facilities spread across the United States and varying degrees and sizes, many of which have been used to house unaccompanied civilians and individuals prior to deportation or repatriation.

It can provide capacity and capabilities for border security and the construction of border wall, surveillance of the border and individuals to support domestic law enforcement, and also perhaps most uniquely outside of our borders. So to your question, the military has been used successfully in many cases in Latin America and elsewhere with building capacity of our partners in order to increase their ability to police the border on their side of it. So working with vetted units on the Mexican side and across Latin America, they can be used, again, to train, equip, advise, and assist and support those engaged in counter-narotic activities against the cartels and also border enforcement on the other end of it. Because there's a large

flow of individuals that are coming across multiple countries. And again, if their law enforcement has increased capacity, then it makes the problem much more manageable by the time, perhaps preventing even getting all the way to ours. We've done this in Mexico, most successfully, I'd argue, for decades in Colombia. And so I think there's a huge role for the military to play in advise, equip. support and assist our partisan allies south of the border. The military is uniquely capable of doing that. What is the relationship right now with the Mexican government? Are they very willing to help the U.S. in this process of securing the border? Or are we having to put some healthy pressure on

in order to bring them to the table? Well, certainly the problem exists and they contributed to it. And you could debate the degree to which the Biden administration's policies encouraged it to happen. They certainly did. Bad policies get bad outcomes. there are some complicity on the part of the Mexican government, I think there was. I think they weren't in a hurry to stop people or to interdict them on the flow. So as they showed up inside of Mexico, I think Mexico was more than happy to send them on their way so they didn't have to deal with the problem themselves. Also, I think it's necessary to state that the cartels have become a parastatal organ inside Mexico and exert massive amounts of influence, have tremendous resources

in many ways that exceed the capacity of the government of Mexico to enforce its own laws within its own borders. And so I think that is a very real threat which prevents their compliance. And there's a political component. At the moment you've got, and really for the last two, successive Mexican regimes there are pursuing policies that I think are counterproductive and certainly are not consistent with President Trump and his administration. I think it'll be some friction. But in the end, the trade balance requires Mexico's survival, requires a favorable trade relationship to the United States. And that leverage the president has already used will continue to use it, I think, but we'll have to do more to support and assist probably the Mexican

government. The military and law enforcement can play a role in that, increasing their capacity because they are going to have to be able to exert control over terrain and take it away from the cartels. To do that, they'll need support and assistance. It's in their interest to do it, but they're going to need help to do it, and it's in our best interest because it's cheaper to solve the problem in Mexico than it is inside the United States. That's critical. Saving money. Everyone can get behind that. Sure. Yeah. Okay. So that's obviously one, one, element of kind of the role that the military can be playing. But let's break down, as you do in the report, what are the ways that the U.S. military can be used to secure the border and kind of carry

out President Trump's mandate and his promise to the American people to secure the border to deport illegal aliens? Because I think, you know, we kind of see these images in the news of men and women in uniforms, standing at border fencing with a rifle, whatever. But there's more than just the physical standing there. So what are the capacities to which, whether legally, practically, that the president can be deploying U.S. military to actually be the hands and feet on the ground solving this problem? Sure. And it's a good chunk of the report and why we take pains to lay out what the general areas are. Right. Suffice to say that it's about division of labor. It is about accomplishing those tasks appropriate and consistent with U.S. law that doesn't

require U.S. military guard, reserve, or active or activated forces, and to perform a duty or function that they're not legally able to do. So arrests. It's not an area where you're likely to see the military engaged in support, right? That's an area where law enforcement has unique authorities. But the consolidation of large groups of individuals and the transportation, the housing even, as we point out in the report historically, has been an area where the military can provide support and assistance. One thing the military is uniquely gifted at doing is logistics at massive scale. You think about it, right? The U.S. has to project forces into a region. It has to project itself. So it has to move, you know, absolutely insane amounts of logistical support and

personnel on the other side of the planet and build all of the capacity to do it. That skill is resonant and necessary in this case. You have millions of illegal immigrants, hundreds of thousands of them, criminals, tens of thousands of them, perhaps on the terrorist watch list that we're aware of. That's a massive logistical enterprise. The military can provide those support functions and allow law enforcement to focus on those areas where it alone can exercise its legal requirements. And I think that's what you're seeing now. I think we saw Secretary Hegseth announced that there's some 4,000 U.S. troops moving to the border. They could also perform surveillance functions and increase the capacity of law enforcement. The military is uniquely

capable and equipped to do this. And they can also engage in border construction of obstacles, including the wall itself. The Corps of Engineers and other elements of the Army, our Marine Corps, Air Force, all have logistical capacity to do this. It's an area where the military can make a unique contribution. So in those three areas, logistics, in the military construction, and in transportation, I think are the areas where you'll see the most immediate and the most significant contributions the military can make inside of our borders. Okay. There's a lot of moving elements there that I think we don't think about just the practicals, especially when it comes to trying to deport that many individuals and just what are those practicals include? It's, you know, numbers are thrown about. It's hard to know exactly how many, but it's roughly equivalent. Let's say if it's four million people out of the some 17 to 20 million illegal immigrants in the country, if it's just four million have to be repatriated, that's the entire capacity of all U.S. commercial airlines for four days.

Wow. So that's a massive amount of transportation requirements. Again, the military has significant capabilities, but that is a staggering volume of people that may have to be moved from the United States to their country of origin. And again, the military has a role to play here to support law enforcement, but it is a massive task. Is there any world where the U.S. military is engaging in direct action against the cartels? So this is also an area we look at in the report.

it's an option. The president has the constitutional ability to identify adversaries and threats the United States and within his constitutional authority. The military is one means by which they could be employed. Again, as I said, the training, equipping and developing partner capacity is the usual method we use because it's the most preferred. And in the long run, we want capable partners to be able to do this without U.S. support and assistance. However, if the threat is acute and sufficient, the president has the authority to make the determination to be able to designate individual groups, a threat to the United States and employ the military as an instrument to directly engage. It is within the president's authority. It is within the spectrum of

available options. It's seldom used, but when it is, it can be very effective. Okay. So that could be something that U.S. military would be working with military more so in Mexico and strategizing. Has government and military in Mexico, have they appeared open to walking down that path of actually carrying out that direct action against violent cartel members? So I think Mexico's state of position publicly is they don't want the United States conducting unilateral operations inside their sovereign territory. That's an understandable position. Not surprising, yeah. But the question is, is that sufficient to address the threat to the United States and its national security? And for decades, We have been working with law enforcement and the military in Mexico to develop partner capacity.

So it's not new. The question is scale. Is it sufficient? Are we developing enough capacity? Is it sufficient to the problem? And right now, the blanket's too short for the bed. The problem is much bigger than our capacity. That means that either the military and our law enforcement and partners and allies need to develop additional capacity, which I think is true.

Or there may be a legitimate need for the U.S. to take discrete actions outside of the United States. states to address this threat, again, within the president's constitutional authority to do so. Okay. So this is a long list. I feel like we're just scratching the service of all of the things. And as we were talking about before we hit record here, we know that as resources are directed one way, that means that they're not going somewhere else. So what are kind of the tradeoffs that you all acknowledge in this report of if we're surging these military resources to the border? That also means they can't be searched elsewhere. That's right. Everything is about choice. one of the other reasons we wrote this report is to identify that resource requirement and to

equip the administration but also our friends in Congress and let them know that one the military has resources there's a precedent for them to be employed in these roles but it requires resources to do it and now is the time to make sure that those options are available by properly resourcing because if you don't as you said it comes at a choice that means the military have to take funds dedicated for some other activity in operation and use it in a way in which it wasn't intended, which can be done, and you could argue that it should be done. But I think the ideal is, let's account for that and let's budget for it appropriately and let's provide defense the resources necessary so that you don't have to make those difficult choices. And it could be used in this

role appropriately, and it has the resources to do it. Our goal is to be able to identify that in the report and so that our hope, Congress and the administration can ensure that defense is resource in order to do the task it's going to be asked and is being asked to do. Do you picture that as a little bit of an upward climb in Congress, or do you think that there's enough momentum behind the president coming off the election where this was such a pillar, that topic of immigration securing the border was such a pillar of Trump's platform, that there's enough momentum to say, okay, yeah, right now, whatever it costs, we're going to do it, we're on board. I think that's the general sense that I get. What we wanted to make sure happen is the detailed work goes in behind it, right? It's one thing to

agree in principle to it, but somebody has to identify the requirements. I think it was generally accepted what the border roll, you know, would cost and what the resources were required, and I think that was well in motion. I think it was less well understood what defense could do and what it would cost. And our goal was to help be part of that conversation and inform it so that we get to the right outcome. It doesn't need to be an exorbitant expenditure in the broad scheme of things, but it's not zero. And so it does need to be accounted for. I think the report was intended to help guide and inform that conversation. My sense, though, is there is significant appetite to do it, and rightly so. I think we want to see a sovereign

United States. We want to see a secure border. It's one of the mandates of President Trump received, and he's vigorously pursuing it. I think the important thing is to make sure that the resources are available to do it. Yeah. What about intelligence resources? Because, of course, it takes time and a lot of information in order to find criminal illegal aliens to deport them. And I'm also thinking about the number of children unaccompanied illegally alien children that we don't know where they are within the United States. Is there thought behind using military resources and intelligence as well to locate both those threats to the U.S. and those missing kids. So it's a great question. And you're absolutely right. The cost, I think, is sometimes not

fully appreciated of what an open border does to vulnerable populations. Look, I think the military, from an intelligence standpoint, has three contributions to make. Inside of our borders, I think military capacity can be used to identify threats in the United States. States, particularly terrorist threats that are taking directions, support, control, and resources from an external terrorist entity. The away game that the U.S. military and the intelligence community is focused on 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They have the capacity to be able to detect that presence in the United States, and I think

they can support law enforcement. That, again, is a question of scale. That's been going on for decades, but, you know, let's say the population of potential terrorist suspects in the United States were in the hundreds at the maximum. in the tens of thousands. So it's a question of scale. And again, resources come into play. I think that's one area where the military can make a significant contribution to expand its capacity to help point out external connections and threats in the United States. The second is at the border. Again, I said surveillance. The military has massive capabilities

and capacity for surveillance activities. This takes forms from space all the way down to, you know, ground platforms and individual service members and everything in between. Those resources can be brought to bear to really pay close attention to every aspect of the border included those for which there's no natural or man-made obstacle. And I think that is critically important. It's visible, but it's beyond that. So it's the ability to detect threats across the spectrum, not just the visible ones. And it takes place across different domains. The last is outside of our borders. It is expanding our partner's ability to see, detect, and interdict threats before they get to the border. And I think, again, that takes multiple forms, whether it's support a partner or whether it's

unilateral U.S. action at sea in the Caribbean or on land in Latin American countries. So I think those are the three areas where the military has significant, massive, significant potential to contribute to this, to support this effort. What's the timeline we're looking at here? How long would these military assets, resources, personnel be needed in order to really fulfill the priorities that you've laid out in this report and also the priorities that Trump has made very clear. It varies. So some are immediate and are in motion now, whether it's federal troops that have been in order to deploy, or whether it's Guard and Reservienists that have been activated and federalized to support. This has been going on at the Texas border. Governor Abbott has been leading the way, and other states have been doing the same,

including in Florida with Governor DeSantis. So there is an immediate impact that's happening now. At scale, the logistical and transportation requirements, the equipping bases and installations to support large numbers of people will take more time. And the training, equipping, our partners and allies will take additional time. And it's faster if we resource for it. And we don't have to figure out where those resources come from if it hasn't been budgeted. Lastly, I would say the reallocation of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets in order to detect and respond to threats in and outside our borders will take decisions.

And that could happen again in immediate sense in some cases, or we might have to bring an asset that's currently overseas, back to the United States to support the effort. So the answer is it varies. A lot of it, thanks to President Trump and borders our Tom Homan, are already underway and Secretary Hegseth. But there's a lot more assets that could be brought to bear, and some of those could take weeks, some months. Yeah.

As we close here, I want to give you a final word, final thought on, you know, as individuals are reading this, because obviously it's a report that, yes, is meant for members of Congress, but also the American people to kind of understand what the capacities are here and some of the options that our leaders have. What do you hope folks take away as they read this report? So our goal in doing the report inform the administration, inform Congress, and certainly the American public, one that this is not without precedent. The military has been called upon to perform these critical functions to ensure a sovereign secure border in the past war over a century. The second is that its capacity is required because the threat right now to our sovereignty

exceeds domestic law enforcement's capacity to handle. It's an unprecedented. precedent level. And the third is that it takes preparation, time and in our judgment, budgeting, to make sure that these resources are available and can be employed. And I think those were the three purposes behind the paper. I would add one last thought, is that what a stark difference it is to see the change in policies under administrations. And you see how serious President Trump and his team are taking border security and how quickly they're moving to shut the border and the flow of illegal immigrants and to start the deportations to make America a safer place. What a radical and welcome changes to see the change of administrations.

The Heritage Foundation's Robert Greenway. Thank you so much for being with us. My great pleasure. Thanks for having me. We're going to leave it there for today. Don't forget to hit that subscribe button. Do you never miss out on new shows from the Daily Signal podcast. Every weekday, catch top news in 10 right here in this podcast feed.

Keep up with the news that you care about in just 10 minutes every weekday around 5 p.m. And go deep with us right here every weekend for the Daily Signal's podcast interview edition. And if you like what you hear, be sure to leave us a comment. We love hearing your feedback. And we're across all podcast platforms. So you can let us know if you like this show, whether it's on Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you listen. Thanks again for being with us today. Have a great rest of your weekend.

The Daily Signal podcast is made possible because of listeners like you. Executive producers are Rob Bluey and Katrina Trinko. Hosts are Virginia Allen, Brian Gottstein, Tyler O'Neill, and Elizabeth. Mitchell. Sound designed by Lauren Evans, Mark Geine, John Pop, and Joseph von Spakovsky. To learn more or support our work, please visit DailySignal.com.