How Much of the Mexican Wall Was Built When Trump Was President and Did He Get Mexico to Pay for It?

The construction of the border wall under President Donald Trump is often seen through a lens of grand promises and alleged forgotten agreements. Let's delve into a detailed analysis of the number of miles actually built and the reality of Mexico’s contributions to border security.

Trump's Border Wall: The Facts

It is a myth that a significant portion of the border wall was built when Trump was president. The reality is quite different:

Partial Construction: According to reports and various sources, only approximately 509 miles of the border wall were ultimately built. This significant figure is often overlooked when discussing the magnitude of the wall's construction. Prefabricated Fencing: Much of the "wall" was actually pre-existing CBP (Customs and Border Protection) fencing that was merely repurposed and replaced. The notion that a concrete or steel structure was built from scratch across a vast stretch of the U.S.-Mexico border is misleading.

Did Mexico Pay for the Wall?

One of the most persistent claims made during the Trump administration was that Mexico would pay for the border wall. The truth, however, involves a more complex interplay of security measures:

Pressure for Immigration Controls: There is an acknowledgment that Mexico did strengthen its southern border to reduce the flow of undocumented immigrants. This move was not directly payment but rather a response to diplomatic pressure from the U.S., aiming to reduce the number of immigrants crossing into the U.S. Deployment of Troops: In response to the Trump administration's demands, Mexico increased the number of troops stationed along its southern border to deter illegal crossings. This effort did contribute to reducing the number of immigrants, but it was a response to the U.S. pressure rather than a direct financial contribution to the wall.

Joe Biden and Border Security

Joe Biden's approach to border security has been vastly different from that of Trump:

Financial Contribution: Under the Biden administration, Mexico committed to spending $1.5 billion over a two-year period on border security measures. This significant financial effort by Mexico stands in stark contrast to the lack of contributions under the Trump administration. Material Support: Unlike Trump, Biden's approach recognizes the need for both economic and physical support, deploying funds for infrastructure and security measures, alongside diplomatic efforts to address the root causes of migration.

NAFTA Renegotiation and Trade Impacts

In the broader context, the Trump administration's trade policies had significant implications for North American trade:

Revised NAFTA: The renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) led to the creation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). The new agreement aimed to address some of the criticisms of the original NAFTA, making trade more equitable and transparent. Trade Rebalancing: While the exact economic impact is debated, the revised agreement had implications for labor, environmental, and intellectual property protections, thereby fostering a more balanced and fair trade relationship between the three nations.

Conclusion

In summary, when examining the facts, the construction of the border wall was largely incomplete and not as grand as the public narrative suggested. Furthermore, Mexico's contributions to border security were more about increasing border controls and deploying troops rather than a direct financial input for the wall. Suffice it to say, the Trump administration's approach to border security was characterized by louder rhetoric and fewer tangible results.

Final Thoughts

While debates continue on the effectiveness and cost of border security measures, it remains evident that the approaches and outcomes under different administrations differ significantly. It is crucial for policymakers to base their strategies on empirical evidence and effective diplomatic negotiations rather than on ideological promises and outdated rhetoric.