The current Trump administration recently signed the “Big Beautiful Bill” into law, the contents of which included an additional budget of $170.7 billion to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (inclusive of its sub-agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] and Customs and Border Protection [CBP]) to tackle the “immigration problem” and to further bolster (i.e., militarize) border security. This sum does not even include the already bloated yet ever increasing “defense” (i.e., military) budget, which would sit at more than $1 trillion for the fiscal year of 2026. With the current context in mind, our focus for this month’s Peace Science Digest round-up is on the topic of borders and migration.
What We’re Reading
For each of the articles mentioned below, we include the central research question and the authors’ main findings:
1) Iglesias Ortiz, A. (2024). Counteracting everyday violence at the border: A view from peacebuilding and border art. Peace Review, 36(4), 706–716. https://doi.org/10.1080/10402659.2024.2387356
How can border art and other peacebuilding efforts counteract everyday realities of violence in border regions, specifically the Mexico-U.S. border?
- Securitized and militarized border regions such as the Mexico-U.S. border subject border-zone communities to multiple, layered forms of violence: structural (deportations, lack of access to basic services), discursive (dehumanization through the rhetoric of “invasion”, “threat”, and “aliens”), institutional (denial of asylum, arbitrary detentions), and direct (physical harm at the hands of criminal organizations and border patrol/police).
- Border art serves to re-politicize public spaces by highlighting the voices and plight of marginalized border-zone communities, thereby challenging the state narratives that justify and normalize violence and the social exclusion of border populations. This is done through visual and symbolic art and performances that highlight shared human values like peace, justice, and dignity.
- Border art is a method and medium for peacebuilding strategies, with murals, art performances, rallies, and storytelling projects having real impacts. For instance, performances and rallies create nonviolent disruptions that reduce direct violence, and murals and storytelling projects create awareness and solidarity that transform relationships between migrants, activists, allies, and the general public.
2) bin Oslan, A. (2024). Economic origins of border fortifications. Journal of Peace Research, 62(4), 882-896. https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241265006
Why do modern nation-states continue to construct border fortifications (securitization/militarization) despite their declining relevance due to modern-day military and surveillance technologies?
- Modern border fortifications between nation-states serve primarily economic rather than national security purposes—ensuring a more efficient extraction of labor and wealth (through taxes, tariffs, consumption, and trade) from the population within a state’s borders.
- The nation-state prioritizes border stability, defined as “the absence of significant unwanted flows of people and goods across a border,” to reduce “wealth leakage” that might occur through illegal labor or untaxed income.
- Border fortifications are more likely to happen when there is greater economic inequality between neighboring states, whereby the “wealthier” country seeks to securitize its border to prevent “wealth leakage” and the “poorer” country is unlikely to do so because the economic benefit of doing so is lower and the costs (of fortification and upkeep) are more prohibitive.
3) Raharjo, S. N. I., Pudjiastuti, T. N., & Nufus, H. (2024). Cross-border cooperation as a method of conflict management: A case study in the Sulu-Sulawesi Sea. Conflict, Security & Development, 24(3), 277–298.
https://doi-org.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/10.1080/14678802.2024.2355528
What are “the impact(s) of cross-border activities and cooperation as an alternative method for conflict management in the Sulu-Sulawesi Sea”?
- There is on-going conflict among the countries in the Sulu-Sulawesi Sea maritime region—Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines—over maritime borders, territorial holdings, and transnational crime.
- Conflict between countries can be actively managed and de-escalated through cross-border cooperation and communication, including engagement at local and/or sub-national levels.
- Two broad categories of cross-border conflict management are identified and explored: efforts to “reduc[e] the use of violence” in addressing transnational crime and efforts to “improv[e] border communities’ welfare” through economic and cross-cultural activities. These two categories are understood to positively influence cross-border cooperation between the countries at the transnational level.
- Efforts to address transnational crime—including piracy, kidnapping, terrorism, illegal fishing, and the smuggling of people, arms, and drugs—include coordination among naval forces with patrols and information-sharing.
- There is a vast array of economic and socio-cultural activities taking place among border communities, especially as communal and familial bonds existed long before the establishment of formal nation-states. Coordination and communication among border agents help to mitigate potential disputes and keep them from escalating to national-level authorities.
4) Dey, N. (2024). Subjects, aliens, and undesirables: Managing mobility and insecurity in the British Empire. Security Dialogue, 56(2), 116-132. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/10.1177/09670106241265634
How did the migration control systems of the British Empire function and what were their implications?
Main Findings:
- The British Empire developed migration control systems not just for border protection but also as mechanisms of internal surveillance and political suppression.
- Migration control systems often blurred the lines between external security threats and internal political dissent, creating a logic of perpetual threat.
- Migration policies were deeply racialized and imperial, shaping who was seen as “belonging” and who was labeled “undesirable.”
- Over time, emergency measures hardened into standard policy, showing how exceptional responses can become permanent infrastructure.
- These colonial tools contributed to modern border regimes that continue to enforce racialized and politicized control over mobility.
Informing Practice
Highly securitized borders, like what we see at the U.S.-Mexico border, are sites of political control where border populations experience varying forms of everyday violence (Ortiz). The predominant approach to border control in many parts of the world serves economic (bin Oslan) and security interests of the state(s), rather than centering the welfare and wellbeing of immigrants and border communities. The way forward, especially with present and future global challenges (including the climate and water crises), is an understanding of border and migration that centers and advocates for human over state interests.
It is deeply ironic that the United States, as a settler-colonial state that expanded through the genocide and expulsion of Indigenous peoples while historically welcoming waves of immigration, is now enforcing a militarized Southern border with Mexico and the intentional harassment, detention, and deportation of immigrants regardless of their documentation status. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), under which ICE exists, is a standing legacy of the Bush administration’s Global War on Terror, serving as an example of Dey’s findings that emergency measures can persist as a state’s permanent infrastructure. In the present day, under the latest Trump administration, ICE has been further bolstered to act with impunity and to terrorize the “people of the global majority” (PGM) within the U.S. The recent surge of ICE raids across the nation has led to everyday people being profiled and violently targeted by masked vigilantes. At the border, policies such as “Prevention Through Deterrence” have also been a source of mass death and disappearances, even during the administrations of former presidents. Often, the human costs to federal policies are just a footnote (if even considered) within decision-making processes, as there is a great disconnect between the political elites and everyday people.
Additionally, as shared by Dey, border enforcement and migration policies also serve as a tool of the state to justify surveillance of its own populace and as a method to suppress political dissent. Domestically, this can be observed through cases like those of Mahmoud Khalil, Rumeysa Ozturk, and Mohsen Mahdawi, who were apprehended and detained for their advocacy on behalf of Palestine (opposing U.S. foreign policy and the diplomatic, military, and media cover it provides for Israel). The use of A.I. in social media surveillance and the U.S. government’s profiling of its own citizens, and those that are entering the country (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services [USCIS] requires visa applicants to include all their social media profiles), have also raised alarm bells for many who are concerned with information privacy.
Why should U.S. audiences care about migration (policies) and a militarized U.S-Mexico border, and what can be done?
- For American taxpayers, funds that can otherwise be used to invest in domestic healthcare, education, and affordable housing infrastructure are funneled into industries of violence and death (arms manufacturing) and domestic and border policing that disproportionately target and harm BIPOC/people of the global majority (PGM) both within and beyond U.S. borders.
- Human life and dignity are sacred. The acceptance and normalization of violence against the “Other” erodes within oneself one’s own humanity, as highlighted by Aimé Césaire in Discourse on Colonialism.
- For American peace funders, practitioners, and justice advocates, centering the rights of migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers should be the priority—particularly against the backdrop of the current Trump administration in its furthering of fascist logics and policies.
- Concerned community members can volunteer and donate to groups that focus on migrant communities, such as Latino Network and National Immigration Project.
- It is an opportune moment to connect with global solidarity and resistance movements that have resisted authoritarianism within their respective contexts.
Recommended Reading
BBC News. (2025, August 1). US offers up to $50k bonus for would-be ICE deportation officers. BBC News. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqle5newg0no
Center for International Policy. (2025, July 17). Climate crisis demands a more humane alternative to mass deportation. International Policy Digest. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://internationalpolicy.org/publications/climate-crisis-demands-a-more-humane-alternative-to-mass-deportation/
Feminist Peace Initiative. (2025, March). Feminist peace playbook: A guide to transforming U.S. foreign policy. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://feministpeaceinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Feminist-Peace-Playbook.pdf
Khan, S. A. (2025). Digital rights, silenced voices: Muslim American experiences online. Muslim Counterpublics Lab. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://www.muslimcounterpublicslab.org/digitalrightsreportmcl
Texas Tribune–ProPublica. (2025, April 16). Trump is spending billions on border security. Some residents living there lack basic resources. The Texas Tribune / ProPublica. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://www.texastribune.org/2025/04/16/trump-border-security-spending-texas-arizona/
The Independent. (2025, July 11). Inside the ICE offices where morale is ‘miserable’ and the deportation push has become ‘mission impossible’. The Independent. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/ice-morale-trump-immigration-raids-b2786659.html
The White House. (2025, January 20). Declaring a national emergency at the southern border of the United States. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/declaring-a-national-emergency-at-the-southern-border-of-the-united-states/
Vega, I. I. (2025). Bordering on indifference: Immigration agents negotiating race and morality. Princeton University Press. https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691262093/bordering-on-indifference
Photo credit: Rawpixel and Jonathan McInstosh via Flickr
