Border requires a real plan, not Guard gesture

AS PRESIDENT BUSH moved to the end of his nationally broadcast speech on immigration Monday night, he struck the right tone, as he has on this issue since he was Texas governor. He rejected any paranoid mistrust of immigrants, and emphasized the real human costs at stake in the debate: “We cannot build a unified country by inciting people to anger, or playing on anyone’s fears, or exploiting the issue of immigration for political gain. We must always remember that real lives will be affected by our debates and decisions, and that every human being has dignity and value no matter what their citizenship papers say.”

Earlier in the speech, he had rightly dismissed as unworkable the idea of deporting millions of illegal immigrants and made clear that he intends to sign one bill that encompasses stricter border enforcement and new rules defining how those already in the United States can become legal.

All that makes it even more of a shame that he marched the National Guard out to protect his political right flank.

The president struggled to justify deployment of the guard on the Southwest border. He wasn’t “militarizing the border” by sending in thousands of troops, he insisted. What, then, is he doing? The soldiers won’t be acting as police, he said. In fact, with deployments of only a few weeks, it’s hard to imagine what useful purpose they will serve in the field. Given the risks our National Guard troops face in Iraq, better that they be drilling for duties in a war zone than offering minor support to the Border Patrol.

How long will this duty continue? One year, the president says — assuming that an immigration bill that greatly beefs up the Border Patrol passes. But that’s far from a sure thing, given how far apart the House and Senate are, and the president’s current unpopularity. What happens if the Guard begins rotating in, and, thanks to a deadlocked Washington, the relief fails to arrive?

The objective of the president’s National Guard maneuver is clear: He wants cover from anti-immigration critics while he sticks up for a rational immigration policy. But using the military, in wartime, for such a political endeavor is the wrong answer.

This nation is at war; multiple long deployments in Iraq have tested our National Guard. It does not need busywork on our Southwestern border.

Sending the Guard there also sends an undeniable message, one heard loud and clear by Hispanic immigrants, legal and not: You are possibly a threat, on a par with an invading army. Even if we are hiring you.

The United States does need better control of the Mexican border, but it is not a national defense-level priority. We need the increase in Border Patrol the president spoke of, and a better way to enforce the rules in the workplace. That will require more manpower and forgery-proof documents. The bill the Senate is debating is likely to contain most of the right elements of such a plan, and Mr. Bush all but implored the House to accede to such legislation.

As the president concluded, he reminded Americans about who these people struggling to come here are, and about who we are: “Our new immigrants are just what they have always been: people willing to risk everything for the dream of freedom.” That’s a fine description of America’s ideal as a home open to all. As this debate continues, let’s make sure that our laws and actions are in line with these values.