Trump’s Wall and Israel’s border walls: a study in contrast and comparison
By: Sasha Kishko
Tags: Border Wall, Trump, Immigration, Palestine, Israel

The Mexican-United States border wall, now colloquially known as “Trump’s Wall” \ “the Wall”, was proposed by President Donald J Trump as part of his campaign policy during the 2016 US Presidential Election. The Wall project was meant to prevent illegal immigrants and refuge seekers from crossing the Mexico-US border. The project is frequently criticized, from both an ideological and practical standpoint. Ideological opponents believe that Trump’s Wall promotes isolationism and racially influenced immigration standards. Practical concerns are raised about the scope, feasibility, financial expense, and effects of the wall project. Supporters of the project often make historical comparisons, under the slogan “Walls Work”. Comparisons include the Great Wall of China, the Berlin Wall, and Israel’s present border fences.

The law office of Cohen, Decker, Pex, Brosh specializes in immigration and relocation, including to the USA and Israel. Most of our founding partners are United States citizens, and we follow US politics beyond the scope to which it affects our work. At the same time, we are intimately familiar with Israeli immigration law and practice. Our law office helps obtain visas for those entitled to make Aliyah under the law of return, foreign spouses and foreign experts. Most relevantly, we also work with asylum seekers \ illegal immigrants and Palestinians seeking status in Israel \ the PA.

As such, we feel we can clarify the relevance and pertinence of the comparison, in terms of goals, means, and effects. The costs of Israel’s security fences are public knowledge, while the estimated costs of the wall vary widely. The influence of Israel’s border barriers on immigration \ “infiltration” across the borders with Egypt and the Palestinian Authority is something our office can estimate based on actual experience, as well as official figures.

Trump’s Wall — Estimates and Projections

Trump had originally estimated the total costs of the wall’s construction at approximately 12 billion USD. As of 2020, $18.4 billion have been allocated to this project, wherein the primary funding is coming from the Defense Department’s military construction budget. The Mexican government has not, to date, paid for any portion of the construction costs.

Trump’s original vision was for the wall to extend over 1000 miles and be made of solid concrete. As of 2020, only 110 miles were constructed. Most of this construction was based on updating or incorporating border barriers constructed by previous administrations. The latest time-table available assumes that an additional 400 miles will be constructed by 2021.

In addition to the physical barrier preventing the entry of illegal immigrants and refugee seekers, Trump’s anti-immigration policy aims to reduce legal immigration and also deport illegal or unwanted foreign citizens currently within the US. In 2019 alone, over 510, 854 people were detained by ICE. If Trump wins a second term, he may surpass the Obama administration in terms of total number of deportations.

The Israel-Egypt Border Wall

The Israel-Egypt barrier was approved for construction in 2010 and completed in 2013. The wall was constructed between Rafah (on the Gaza\Egypt border) and Eilat (Israel’s southernmost city, a port to the Red Sea). The construction, built across flat desert terrain, cost 450 million USD and stands at 245 kilometers (150 miles) long.

The goal of the barrier was to prevent illegal immigration, human trafficking, and infiltration by terrorists across the border. Benjamin Netanyahu proclaimed the wall necessary to preserve Israel’s “Jewish and democratic character.”

According to the Israeli Interior Ministry, in 2010, 26,235 African migrants arrived in Israeli illegally. In 2012, over 50,000 African migrants arrived in Israeli illegally, primarily refuge seekers from Eritrea and Sudan. In 2013, with the barrier nearly complete, a 99% reduction in illegal entry was recorded. By the time the wall was fully constructed in 2016, there were only 11 successful attempts to cross the border by illegal immigrants. The Israel-Egypt wall is largely unpoliticized, primarily as Egypt is not opposed to its construction,

The West Bank Border Wall

The West Bank Wall is a better known Israeli security barrier, built during the administration of Prime Minister Sharon. The barrier ranges over 700 kilometers (440 miles) and runs along the “Green line”; through and around the West Bank, Gaza strip and East Jerusalem. The wall cost around $2 million a mile to build, with the final cost estimate being nearly $1 billion.

Established in the early 2000s, it served as a temporary solution during the Second Intifada to preserve security and reduce terrorist attacks like suicide bombings. Palestinian and international protests have accompanied the construction and enforcement surrounding the barrier. Claims have been made that the barrier expropriates Palestinian land and perpetuates the Israeli occupation.

An Israeli immigration expert’s opinion.

American politicians adore equating these walls, but is this really an accurate representation? The walls clearly differ in size, expense, and goals. For instance, the West Bank wall was planned specifically to prevent terrorist attacks whereas the US-Mexico border wall was built to stop illegal immigration. While crime and drug trafficking may be tangentially slowed by the US-Mexico border wall, the West Bank wall was a direct measure to stop suicide bombing and other threats. The Israel-Egypt border wall may have been built to counteract illegal immigration, but also to prevent human trafficking and terrorist attacks.

We have already noted the much smaller scope and expenses associated with Israel’s security barriers. Not only were they planned and constructed on a smaller scale, but they also incorporated extensive existing walls and fences, established over the course of Israel’s long and often unfriendly history with its neighbors. Furthermore, despite the much smaller length of Israel’s borders, they are heavily and constantly patrolled by the IDF, at great expense.

Due to the previous reasons, as well as the differing political climate between the two countries, it is our contention that a comparison between the walls may be counterproductive. Israel faces terrorist threats from all sides constantly, requiring intense security. However, in the United States, the wall was primarily implemented to curtail the spread of drugs and illegal immigration.

A wall presents a barrier to entry, but one can go over, around, under, or even through a wall. Even with a completed barrier in place, Israel’s border barriers were circumvented by scaling, digging tunnels, and cutting through fences. These attempts were more or less successful based on the degree of security and patrolling in the area at the time. As such, a wall proves a detriment, but not an unconquerable obstacle. Arguably, the desert terrain between Israel and Egypt and between the US and Mexico is a major obstacle in its own right. Illegal immigrants who aren’t helped by professional smugglers must be ready to face an onerous desert trek or perish. In the US, human rights organizations leave water caches to save lives, which are often destroyed by border control officers.

Do Walls really “Just Work”?

Per international law, foreign citizens who arrive at a nation’s port of entry and ask for asylum have to be heard, even if they had to pass a wall to get there. Therefore, even assuming the wall could be completed; it would not be a deterrent to refugees fleeing crime or war.

The Egyptian border wall was a success primarily because Egypt was willing to cooperate with Israel in stopping undocumented traffic. Both sides of the wall are patrolled, often in cooperation, regardless of the occasional violent incident. This is despite the fact that the two sides are only nominally at peace, and don’t have a lot economic or civilian traffic between them. Conversely, Mexico is a major trading partner of the US, and many citizens legally cross the border every day.

Perhaps relying on cooperation is the right solution to prevent illegal immigration. Fostering such conditions as to discourage immigrants and refuge seekers may involve improving conditions in Mexico, rather than worsening conditions in the US. Conversely, referring to this major economic partner as an enemy nation intentionally sending criminal to infiltrate the US will not encourage such cooperation. The side being “walled out” will most likely feel as if their rights are being suppressed. Over time, two nations walled off from one another would naturally drift apart in terms of cultural and economic alignment.

(This article was written in cooperation by Sami Marshak, Sasha Kishko, and attorney Joshua Pex)