US border patrol UAV programs in Texas - Case Study Example

? US BORDER PATROL UAV PROGRAMS IN TEXAS US border patrol UAV programs in Texas I. INTRODUCTION The successful implementation of plans related to issues of national importance, such as the protection of a country’s borders, is usually depended on a series of factors, such as the resources and the time available, the conditions in the internal and external environment and the willingness of participants to support the particular plans in all their aspects. The US Customs and Border Protection is an Agency quite known for its role in the protection of US borders. In fact, the specific Agency is responsible for the safety of Americans from terrorism or from illegal trade developed through the country’s borders. The illegal entrance in USA is also controlled by the above Agency. Because of its crucial role in securing the safety of Americans from illegal activities, as indicatively mentioned above, the US Customs and Border Protection Agency has increased its value as a workplace offering many prospects to interested candidates. Current paper examines the profile of the specific Agency and its potentials/ value as a workplace; reference is made to a particular program of the above Agency: the US border patrol UAV programs in Texas. It is proved that the particular programs could offer a series of benefits to candidates who would be interested in working in the particular area. Of course, certain challenges related to the particular sector, as a workplace, cannot be avoided; however, these challenges could be easier confronted if the candidates were given the necessary support since their entrance in the particular service. II. US BORDER PATROL UAV PROGRAMS IN TEXAS IIa. US Customs and Border Protection - profile The U.S. Customs and Border Protection is an Agency focusing on the protection of the borders of US from any potential threat – meaning terrorist attacks, violation of trade laws, illegal immigration and so on. The value of the Agency in enhancing the safety of the public in USA can be made clear through the Agency’s mission statement: ‘We safeguard the American homeland at and beyond our borders; we protect the American public against terrorists and the instruments of terror’.1 The Agency’s mission statement also refers to the enforcement of the national laws especially in regard to the ‘international trade and travel’.2 In other words, the Agency has the responsibility for controlling the areas cited near the borders of US for any illegal activity; borders, in the above context, include land, water and air. The importance of the above targets for the members of the Agency is reflected in the Agency’s statement regarding its core values, as promoted through its members; it is explained that ‘the safety of all Americans’3 is the key priority of the members of the Agency. Additional values of the Agency are the following ones: the enhancement of the rules of the American constitution and the alignment of the Agency’s activities with ‘the highest morals principles’.4 The mission of the particular Agency, as described above, is quite challenging, especially if taking into consideration the importance of the country’s borders not just in terms of the economy, i.e. for controlling the value of goods imported in the country, but also in terms of the risks for criminal activity. Reference is made especially to the continuous increase of illegal immigrants entering the country – despite the hard efforts of CBP to monitor carefully the movement of persons and goods through the country’s borders. However, the effectiveness of CBP cannot be denied – especially if taking into consideration the size of USA – and the expansion of its borders. In order for the Agency to be able to respond to its mission, emphasis has been given on its structure.5 The Commissioner monitors all activities of the Agency; at the next level, five directors and the Chief of the Staff have been appointed to its of the CBP main departments –‘ Civil Rights, Policy & Planning, Trade Relations, State, Tribal and Liaison Office and the Office of the Executive Secretariat’.6 Additional departments have been developed for addressing specific issues (for instance, the international affairs or marine issues).7 The existence of different offices for responding to the needs of the organization is particularly helpful towards the achievement of the organization’s targets. At this point reference should be made to the following detail: the structure of the organization is differentiated from the structure of other, similar organizational entities: the offices of the organization are not directly under the monitoring of the organization’s directors but of the Commissioner. In this way, the Commissioner can be aware of all organizational issues, without the intervention of Directors. In fact, all offices of the organization – apart from the offices of Directors – are characterized as Assistant Commissioner, reflecting the direct involvement of the Commissioner in the organization’s daily operations. As of its financing, the Agency is funded by the State, a fact which can have two different aspects: from one hand, this way of funding ensures the continuation in the organization’s activities, meaning that the funds necessary for covering the organizational needs can be retrieved directly by the state on a stable (usually annually) basis. The negative aspect of the above fact is the following one: the level of the funding provided by the State may not be high – meaning that it can reach a particular (upper) level. On the contrary, the intervention of the private sector in the funding of the specific organization could lead to the retrieval of more funds that would be offered for expanding the organization’s operations, helping to the improvement of the organization’s performance. However, it seems that the above problem has been effectively resolved by the State. In accordance with a report published by CBP in March, ‘Congress provided additional resources in the Emergency Supplemental for Border Security’.8 In the context of the above text – which became law in August 2010 – ‘1,000 agents and 250 officers’ were added in the organization’s existing workforce.9 The continuous efforts of the government for the improvement of the performance of CBP are reflected to the significant increase of the organization’s agents – in 2010, the organization’s agents were estimated to 20,500 compared to 10,000 of 2004.10 The US Customs and Border Protection offers a series of roles for candidates interested in working in the particular field. The job positions available in the particular agency are the following ones: a) patrol agents – monitoring the borders of US with Mexico and Canada, b) CBP officers – checking passengers and cargo in selected points of entry in USA, c) Air and Marine Interdiction Agents – focusing on the prevention of the entrance in the country of illegal immigrants or substances/ cargo, d) CBP Agriculture specialists; checking plants and soil aiming to ensure that farms across the country are sufficiently protected against diseases that can severely harm the agricultural production, e) CBP revenue positions; these employees are responsible for ‘the collection of taxes and entry duties for cargo in accordance with the existing tariff laws’.11 In addition, there are employees who support the Agency’s operations and missions in various roles (for instance, IT or HR specialists and so on). These roles also are quite important for the success of the operations of the Agency.12 Particular reference should be made to the patrol agents, as a role incorporating a series of potentials for the interested candidates. The specific job position needs to be further analyzed being the key theme of this paper, as explained earlier. The border patrol agents have a particular role: they are involved in the Agency’s operations aiming to prevent the entrance of terrorists in USA; they also have to prevent the entrance in the country of illegal immigrants; in the context of their role, they can apprehend immigrants who try to enter the USA without the necessary documentation.13 The candidates interested in working as border patrol agents need to meet specific requirements, like for instance, to be US citizens and over 40; these requirements are analytically presented in the website of the Agency and are mandatory – meaning that the lack of any one of them leads immediately to the disqualification of the candidate.14 There are also certain requirements which should be met by candidates for the particular positions and which are not mandatory but they can negatively influence the application of a candidate for such position: for instance, the existence of convictions or arrests.15 If accepted in the particular service, candidates have to participate in a 55-days educational program emphasizing on physical training and on laws related to the particular job position, meaning especially US immigration laws. Moreover, additional training may be required for candidates who do not speak Spanish.16 In the website of the Agency it is made clear that the specific position is quite demanding; patrol agents are likely to be asked to respond to emergent calls, i.e. to participate in operations which are decided in a quite short period of time. Also, the hours of work can be a preventive factor for those candidates interested in entering the specific field: patrol agents may be asked to work during nights or in another area – on a temporary or a permanent basis – in accordance with the needs of the Agency.17 On the other hand, the benefits of the specific position can be many; particular reference should be made to the employees’ Health benefits, the financing benefits (the Flexible Spending Accounts) and the Care Insurance (as funded by the state).18 It could be possibly argued that the benefits of the position are balanced with its risks and requirements. However, the value of the specific position, as a way for supporting the nation’s effort in confronting cross border illegal activities cannot be measured. On the other hand, the support of the government to the Agency is important, a fact proved through the UAV Programs in Texas, a scheme for involving ‘unmanned aircraft in patrolling the Texas-Mexico border’.19 The specific project was developed because of the failure of other measures, which had been used in the past for protecting the border of USA with Mexico – reference is made particularly to the failure of the government to stop the illegal immigrants from Mexico to enter the USA.20 The specific project is analyzed below, aiming to show its role in increasing the effectiveness of the Agency and attracting more candidates – referring to the Agency as a workplace which could offer a series of potentials to employees, as explained above. IIb. US border patrol UAV Programs in Texas The use of predator drones for supporting the staff in the particular Agency has been regarded as the most appropriate solution for improving the effectiveness of the specific service. In fact, despite the involvement of these drones in the monitoring of the US borders, still failures are identified in the Agency’s daily operations across the US borders. The increase of the number of predator drones fleet, as decided by the US government, would result to the improvement of the performance of the patrol agents checking the Mexico-Texas border. At least, such explanation was given by the Department of Homeland Security in order to justify the involvement of a new predator drone in the monitoring of the Mexico-Texas border.21 The further development of the UAVs programs in the Mexico-Texas border has been decided because of the increase of violence in the particular zone. The problem has become so severe that a request for an emergent meeting was submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The request, made by the Senator John Cornyn, has been based on the claim that efforts are made by the drug cartels of Mexico to corrupt the patrol agents working across the Mexico-Texas border.22 The use of the new predator drone for monitoring the Mexico-Texas border has decided in the context of the Southwest Border Initiative, a plan developed in 2009 aiming to improve the screening of the US border with Mexico and prevent the entrance of illegal immigrants. The UAV program is combined with the increase of patrol agents across the Mexico-Texas border.23 In accordance with the DHS Secretary, the particular system is not effective in all occasions. In the particular case, the use of such technology was considered as the only solution for improving the performance of the petrol agents in regard to the screening of the Mexico-Texas border. At the same time, the potential performance of the chosen system in the specific task was careful reviewed; it was decided that the risks involved would be significantly less compared to the benefits achieved.24 III. CONCLUSION The increase of the support provided to the patrol agents working across the Mexico-Texas border could lead to the improvement of their performance, even in the long term. However, at this point, there are certain issues that should be taken into consideration: is the increase of performance of employees only related to the involvement of appropriate technology in their activities? The answer should be negative. Even if the UAVs programs used in the particular field are carefully checked for their potentials, meaning their technological advances compared to existing equipment already used in the specific tasks, still there are problems to be resolved. The willingness of employees to support the above programs is of critical importance for the success of the relevant plans. In other words, employees and not technology have the power to influence the performance of the specific Agency; this fact is revealed through the argument used by Senator Cornyn in order to persuade the Senate Judiciary Committee to intervene for improving the performance of patrol agents in the Mexico-Texas border. The above senator did not focus on the technology required for the development of the relevant operations but on the loyalty of the patrol agents to the law. Under such pressure and having such responsibility, the patrol agents should be given increased incentives for responding to their daily tasks, a fact that has not been proved through the research developed in the particular field. In this context, the following assumption could be made: working in the specific Agency is quite satisfactory in terms of contributing to the safety of the public and the enforcement of the national laws. However, the benefits related to the particular position can be characterized as inadequate – taking into consideration the demands of this job. The increase of these benefits would be a condition for more candidates to be interested in entering the particular service. Bibliography Aguilar, Julian. “Cornyn Urges Discussion on Border Violence.” The Texas Tribune. 23 March 2010. http://www.texastribune.org/texas-mexico-border-news/?page=5 (accessed June 26, 2011) CBP “Careers” 10 January 2010 http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/careers/customs_careers/we_are_cbp.xml (accessed June 26, 2011). CBP “Mission Statement and Core Values.” 17 February 2009. http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/about/mission/guardians.xml (accessed June 26, 2011). CBP “Explanation of Benefits for New Employees” 28 April 2011 http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/careers/neo_kit/benefits/employee_benefits.xml#SavingsBonds (accessed June 26, 2011). CBP “Organization.” 23 February 2011. http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/about/organization/orgcha1.ctt/orgcha1.pdf (accessed June 26, 2011) CBP “Securing America’s Borders: CBP Fiscal Year 2010 in Review Fact Sheet.” 15 March 2011 http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/newsroom/fact_sheets/cbp_overview/fy2010_factsheet.xml (accessed June 26, 2011). Daly, Kyle. GAO report shows a porous U.S.-Mexico border. The American Independent, 18 February 2011. http://www.americanindependent.com/170216/gao-report-shows-a-porous-u-s-mexico-border (accessed June 26, 2011). Del Bosque, Melissa “Droning In Dollars. With unmanned aircraft now patrolling the Texas-Mexico border, safety risks aren't the only concerns.” Observer. 26 August 2010. http://www.texasobserver.org/cover-story/droning-in-dollars (accessed June 26, 2011). Herrmann, Lynn “Predator drone to patrol Texas-Mexico border beginning Wednesday.” Digital Journal, 31 August 2010. http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/296825 (accessed June 26, 2011). SNOW “Border security. More UAVs, personnel, money for U.S.-Mexico border protection.” Homeland Security Newswire, 25 June 2010. http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/more-uavs-personnel-money-us-mexico-border-protection?page=0,1 (accessed June 26, 2011). Janes, Jared. “Predator drone cleared to fly border in September.” The Monitor, 23 June 2010. http://www.themonitor.com/common/printer/view.php?db=monitortx&id=40144 (accessed June 26, 2011). Janes, Jared “Aerial surveillance drone to start patrolling border today.” The Monitor, 31 August 2010. http://www.themonitor.com/articles/aerial-42357-today-state.html (accessed June 26, 2011). McLeary, Paul “Border Patrol Aided by New Technologies.” Texas Insider, 10 November 2010. http://www.texasinsider.org/?p=37374 (accessed June 26, 2011). McLeary, Paul, Ariz, Nogales “New Technologies Aid Border Patrol.” Aviation Week, 3 November 2010. http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/dti/2010/11/01/DT_11_01_2010_p37-262578.xml&headline=New%20Technologies%20Aid%20Border%20Patrol&next=10 (accessed June 26, 2011). Pew, Glenn. “FAA Approves Predator For Border Patrol .” AVWeb, 23 June 2010. http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/PredatorDrone_UAV_BorderPatrol_FAAApproval_202775-1.html (accessed June 26, 2011). Appendix Read More