In sharp contrast to his first term, President Donald Trump has been oddly quiet about building the border wall during his second term.
One might chalk up the silence to the mass resistance against the wall from before … but it is also clear that Trump is not afraid to fight back.
In fact, the president almost appears to relish the fight at times.
However, one thing that Trump has been fairly consistent about – at least from an ideological standpoint – is his aversion to mass migration.
Thus far, the Trump administration has apparently already shattered various records, with illegal migration dropping to the “lowest level in history” before the end of this year’s first fiscal quarter.
That said, Trump has also made it clear he is just getting started.
Which may well be why he conceived of a different type of “wall” … of the full-blown, militarized variety.
According to a report from ABC News, upwards of one-third of the border will be militarized in the near future.
Which is quite a significant amount, to put it mildly.
The first two militarized zones span from Fort Hancock through El Paso in Texas, and they continue westward “to partially encircle” Columbus, a border village in New Mexico.
The addition of a 250-mile militarized area within Texas’s Rio Grande Valley, in conjunction with other plans near Yuma, will result in one-third of the U.S.-Mexico border becoming “militarized.”
Moreover, is no big mystery as to whether or not specific areas of the border have been militarized … in fact, the militarization has been literally spelled out to whoever may stumble across that particular section of the border.
Multiple thousands of no-entry signs have been posted in the militarized zones, which proclaim, “restricted area by authority of the commander.”
ABC News also noted that the latest militarization has left even some Americans on edge, including hunters and hikers, who may no longer have access to public lands.
That said, it is unlikely that Trump will shift his position anytime soon, especially when considering that the latest militarization of the border traces back to an executive order passed over six months ago.
In an executive action dated January 20, 2025 – “Securing our Border” – Trump made it abundantly clear that the border was one of his top priorities … and that is one of the agendas that his administration has repeatedly pursued for months.
And that agenda, according to the presidential action, is motivated by national security.
“Deadly narcotics and other illicit materials have flowed across the border while agents and officers spend their limited resources processing illegal aliens for release into the United States. These catch-and-release policies undermine the rule of law and our sovereignty, create substantial risks to public safety and security, and divert critical resources away from stopping the entry of contraband and fugitives into the United States,” the order detailed.
Unfortunately, the deadly narcotics became especially problematic during the pandemic, which witnessed a drastic uptick in overdoses.
One can only hope that Trump will keep these overdoses in mind when “negotiating” with China … considering that the hostile Asian nation is one of the most significant suppliers of fentanyl.
That said, fentanyl is arguably just one of “the disastrous effects” of effectively unfettered access to the United States.
“One of my most important obligations is to protect the American people from the disastrous effects of unlawful mass migration and resettlement. My Administration will marshal all available resources and authorities to stop this unprecedented flood of illegal aliens into the United States,” the order noted.
It would appear that one of the latest uses of “all available resources” includes widespread militarization.
With one-third of the border set to be militarized within just three fiscal quarters of Trump’s second presidency, one naturally wonders whether or not the entire southern border may be militarized by midterms.
One might also wonder which, if any, militarization Trump will deploy to the northern border … especially amid continuous “51st state” chatter.
Author: Jane Jones
