http://www.willcoxrangenews.com/article ... /news1.txt

Special Report: Who owns the border?
Published: Thursday, December 30, 2010 11:18 AM CST
Tue, 12/28/2010 - 23:03

To some southern Arizonans, the line between the U.S. and Mexico is just imaginary. Others believe it should be a fortified barrier. Either way, the border is again a flashpoint in American politics, with the spotlight shining on Cochise County. The Herald/Review and our sister Wick Communications newspapers in southern Arizona have prepared a special report examining our region's complex border issues. As an introduction, we review the history of border relations and how we got to this point. Additionally, this special project focuses on:


•The changing nature of border crime. The slayings of Cochise County rancher Robert Krentz and Sierra Vista Border Patrol agent Brian Terry have intensified fear, but is life truly getting more dangerous on the border?
•Why illegal border crossers would risk their lives in the harsh desert and what drives some volunteers' determination to save those lives.
•How the border fence ranges from nearly impermeable in some areas of Cochise County to little more than a visible marker to foot crossers.
•Operation Copper Cactus, which has sent soldiers to support federal border agents. Will the duty be extended?
•The reasons some Arizonans and Mexicans have decided that life on the border is not for them. Their defining moments might surprise you.
•The hazards posed by mounds of border trash left by illegal immigrants, and how the well-documented situation has drastically changed in recent months.
•Your friends and neighbors who own land on the border, ranging from ranchers to homeowners, developers, environmentalists, preservationists and others.
•Aerial photography that gives you a bird's-eye view of the situation, from the condition of the border fence to the differences between sister communities on the border.
•How the character of the border has changed. A longtime resident reminisces about the days when the most dangerous border crossers were cranky burros.
•Finally, the question: Where do we go from here? If you believe that the governments of the United States and Mexico own the border and determine its fate, then you might agree with the experts we interviewed.

Who owns the border? Who bears the burden of solving its problems? These are the questions raised in this special report.

INTRODUCTION: HOW DID WE GET HERE?

By Bill Hess, Herald/Review

SIERRA VISTA - The U.S.-Mexican border issue "is a complicated story" involving straight-forward politics, conspiracies, payments, passion, crime and a multitude of other issues that go back to the mid-1800s, a University of Arizona professor of Mexican history said. A snapshot of the issues, historic and current, can be seen when it comes to the border states of Arizona in the U.S. and Sonora in Mexico, professor Bill Beezley said.

While there is an official boundary, it is not seen as such by many people on either side of the border, he said. Border issues have their roots in Manifest Destiny, the United States' westward move, exasperated by the purchase of Mexican territory a few years after the Mexican-American War, Beezley said. "For us in Arizona, the Gadsden Purchase complicated things," he said, noting that people who once lived in Mexican territory found themselves in a quandary after the sale was completed.

While most of the Gadsden Purchase land was in what would become the Territory of Arizona, some also was in the future Territory of New Mexico. Many Mexican citizens had to decide whether they should pack up and go south over the new border or remain and become citizens of the United States, Beezley said. "We ended up with a complicated story when it comes to Arizona and New Mexico," the history professor said. The Mexican-American War, which lasted from 1846 to 1848, led to the Gadsden Purchase, which was finalized in 1854, he said.

The U.S. was looking for a southern route to California to take advantage of business opportunities, which became more important with the 1848 discovery of gold in the Pacific Coast area, Beezley said. An overland stage route - the Butterfield - from El Paso, Texas, to Los Angeles was followed by the Southern Pacific railroad, he said. But the Civil War led to a halt on the southern route, Beezley said. The U.S. pressure to acquire land was great. The willingness of Mexican President Antonio L�pez de Santa Anna and the need for money led to the Treaty of La Mesilla, a community in what is now New Mexico. The treaty became better known as the Gadsden Purchase, named after U.S Ambassador James Gadsden, who completed the negotiations.

"Santa Anna was broke" and had to pay the Mexican army and creditors, Beezley said. The United States was willing to buy the land, eventually spending $10 million and acquiring the territory that would become southern Arizona. Beezley said the U.S. acquired territory under the various administrations of Santa Anna through events that included the revolt in Texas, military battles and the Gadsden Purchase. Eventually, nearly a third of what had been Mexico became part of the U.S. Many in Mexico thought Santa Anna was leading the country to ruin, and they felt he would continue to sell off portions of the nation to the detriment of Mexicans, Beez-ley said. Santa Anna fled Mexico - into exile for a second time - living in different countries until an 1874 return to his homeland, where he died a couple of years later.

Starting with the Texas Revolution in 1836, there have been desires by many in Mexico to right what they consider a wrong, Beezley said. This has led to groups forming and seeking the return of homeland that they feel was unfairly taken, Beezley said. He added that while the focus is mainly on the Gadsden Purchase, other issues also impact psyches both south and north of the border. The purchase not only took away Mexican land but separated families, including tribes that occupied both sides of the border and still cannot comprehend the political boundary that separates families, he said. Other nations became involved. French intervention in Mexico drew the ire of the U.S., which at the time was engaged in its own Civil War. This increased border tensions.

Beezley also said German spies, intelligence officers and other provocateurs, including Mexicans, were looking to keep the U.S. confused as Europe headed toward World War I, and some in Mexico saw the opportunity to right a wrong. "The German military from 1913 on were very involved both in the United States and Mexico," he said. The Germans set up networks with an eye on the U.S. while at the same time supporting revolutionaries in Mexico, Beezley said. "They were kind of fishing, stirring up border trouble," he said.

The German goal was to keep the U.S. out of World War I "by keeping the nation's leaders focused on the Mexican border," Beezley noted. When Pancho Villa attacked Columbus, N.M., and the U.S. responded by mobilizing a force to try to run Villa to ground - without success - the Germans concluded the U.S. Army was not much of a threat, Beezley said. However, by 1917, with potential growing for the U.S. to enter the war, German Foreign Secretary Arthur Zimmermann sent a telegram to the German ambassador in January with a proposal for Mexico to side with Germany. The idea was that former Mexican territory, especially in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona, would return to Mexico if Germany won the conflict. Mexico declined.

While the Mexican Revolution was taking place, there were those who wanted to spread the conflict into the United States by drawing Mexican-Americans to their side, along with African-Americans, through a large but unrealistic plan under which Mexico would see all its former territory returned and African-Americans would be given their own country made up of Mississippi and Alabama, he said. Again, the flashpoint would have been the U.S.-Mexican border, he said.

There will always be some kind of border issue to be addressed because from the onset, the boundary has not been seen as real by many on both sides of the line, Beezley. "Emotions come into play a lot," he said.

THE MILITARY

In the early 1900s, a punitive expedition led by Gen. John "Blackjack" Pershing tried to capture Mexican revolutionary leader Pancho Villa, after some of his forces attacked Columbus, N.M., causing the deaths of a number of U.S. citizens. While Pershing and his forces, including some from Fort Huachuca, were trying to capture Villa, other U.S. forces, including members of the National Guard, were called up for border duty.

They and active-duty forces set up three camps, one in Douglas, one in Naco and the other in Nogales, which operated from 1910 to as late as the early 1930s.

The camps:

•The installation east of Douglas was named Camp Harry J. Jones, honoring a soldier stationed in the community who had been killed by cross-border firing as Mexican revolutionary forces battled Mexican federal forces.
•Fort Naco, also called Fort Newell, Camp Naco or Camp Newell, first saw soldiers stationed in the area near the Sonoran border town of Naco in 1910. In 1917, it was a major staging area for American troops protecting the American side of the boundary as part of the United States' Mexican Border Project. That project initially called for the building of a 1,200-mile boundary barrier of Army sites along the entire border, but was never completed. The Naco site was an active Army installation until the early 1930s.
•Outside of Nogales, Camp Stephen D. Little was established in 1910 and named after a soldier who also was killed by cross-border firing incident. The camp was primarily manned by Army National Guard units from four states outside of Arizona, and 10,000 of them served together in 1916. Later, guardsmen from other states rotated in and out of the camp. Records do not indicate when the camp was closed.

ZIMMERMANN TELEGRAM

Before the United States entered World War I, German Foreign Secretary Arthur Zimmermann transmitted a telegram to the Mexican government through the German ambassador to Mexico in January 1917 promising return of lands formerly part of Mexico if the country joined the European nation in the war. The Mexican government declined to participate for many reasons, including partially because it was still in the throes of an internal revolution, which lasted from 1910 to 1920. The telegram:

"We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare. We shall endeavor in spite of this to keep the United States of America neutral. In the event of this not succeeding, we make Mexico a proposal of alliance on the following basis: Make war together, make peace together, generous financial support and an understanding on our part that Mexico is to reconquer the lost territory in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona. The settlement in detail is left to you. You will inform the president (Venustiano Carranza of Mexico) of the above most secretly as soon as the outbreak of war with the United States of America is certain and add the suggestion that he should, on his initiative, invite Japan to immediate adherence and at the same time mediate between Japan and ourselves. Please call the president's attention to the fact that the ruthless employment of our submarines now offers the prospect of compelling England in a few weeks to make peace. Signed Zimmermann"

While many in Mexico probably yearned for their nation's former lands to be returned, the Mexican president did not signal any interest, as he was still engaged in revolutionary problems, professor Bill Beezley said. "The Germans were up to a lot of things. They were continuing to fish, and they saw the border as a flashpoint," Beezley said.

The Zimmermann telegram was leaked to the U.S. media by British intelligence, which had decoded it.

VIEW THE REST OF THIS SPECIAL REPORT:

www.svherald.com/content/special-sectio ... wns-border