In my previous article, Frontier Deterrence: A Real Security Challenge: Part I, published in December 2024, I explored the intricate dynamics reshaping modern border management. As borders evolve from simple territorial markers to complex points of interaction, their security challenges have become increasingly multifaceted. That analysis emphasized the need to redefine border management as a comprehensive effort that integrates governance, stability, and regional development.

Building on that foundation, this second part delves deeper into strategic responses to transversal threats—challenges that transcend national boundaries, intertwining security, economic stability, and social cohesion. Using the PCCR model (Prevention, Containment, Concretion, and Reaction) as a guiding framework, this article focuses on the first two phases: Prevention and Containment, which are crucial for establishing a robust and sustainable border management strategy.

Irregular migration, driven by poverty, violence, and systemic vulnerabilities, continues to test national resilience. At the same time, transnational criminal networks exploit these dynamics, further complicating border security efforts. In this context, prevention emerges as a proactive pillar, targeting the structural and operational mechanisms that drive migration and empower illicit activities. Containment complements this approach by addressing immediate threats and creating the conditions for long-term stability.

This article bridges theoretical insights with actionable strategies, demonstrating how a multidimensional approach can strengthen state sovereignty, protect vulnerable communities, and mitigate the cascading effects of migration-driven instability. By examining these challenges through the lenses of prevention and containment, we set the stage for a more adaptive and resilient border management paradigm.

The PCCR formula: a simple model for strategic construction

The PCCR formula (Prevention, Containment, Concretion, and Reaction) is a conceptual framework designed to offer an integrated and structured response to complex transversal threats such as migration pressure and transnational criminal networks. While the model may appear simple in structure, its effectiveness lies precisely in its systematic approach to addressing the various stages of a security strategy. From risk anticipation and mitigation to the execution of immediate responses, the PCCR framework allows states to organize resources, prioritize actions, and ensure the sustainability of their security policies.

Prevention: anticipate to avoid

Prevention stands as the most crucial pillar of the PCCR model, forming the bedrock for crafting effective strategies to address the challenges posed by irregular migration and associated threats. Its core purpose is not only to identify and anticipate potential risks but also to mitigate them before they can materialize, thereby enhancing resource efficiency and reducing long-term costs. In this context, prevention is proactive and anticipatory, focusing on averting disruptions before they occur.

In the framework of the PCCR method, preventive actions are geared toward forecasting and addressing risks at their earliest stages. This involves rigorous planning, comprehensive risk assessments, and the implementation of tailored security measures designed to eliminate or reduce vulnerabilities. Effective prevention requires gathering detailed data on migration trends, analyzing past incidents, and forecasting future dynamics. For example, analyzing the drivers of migration, such as poverty, violence, and political instability, allows governments to implement policies that address these root causes before they trigger mass migration flows. The two strategic pillars of prevention are deeply rooted in information and education. Accurate, real-time information provides the foundation for identifying risks, understanding migration patterns, and anticipating potential crises, while comprehensive education programs empower stakeholders—governments, communities, and border authorities—to apply this knowledge effectively, fostering resilience and proactive responses to emerging challenges.

Prevention in border security includes the creation of robust systems for monitoring and managing migration patterns, ensuring that authorities can respond swiftly to emerging risks. This can be achieved through advanced technologies, such as predictive analytics, satellite monitoring, and intelligence sharing with regional and international partners. Predicting changes in migration trends allows for the early deployment of resources and preventive measures that mitigate the risk of overstretching border control systems.

A key aspect of prevention also involves enhancing the capacity of governments, local communities, and border authorities through extensive training programs. These initiatives ensure that all stakeholders are equipped with the knowledge and skills needed to manage migration flows effectively, recognize emerging threats, and implement appropriate responses. In this sense, prevention serves as both a strategic tool for national security and a means to promote social cohesion, reducing tensions and fostering integration between migrants and host communities.

In the context of irregular migration, a multidimensional approach is essential. It involves not just managing the migration flow at the border but addressing the broader social, economic, and political factors that drive people to leave their home countries. By combining detailed analysis of migration dynamics with targeted prevention programs and community-based interventions, states can proactively shape migration patterns and reduce the systemic vulnerabilities that allow transnational criminal organizations to exploit them. This integrated approach ensures that prevention is not only about avoiding the immediate risks associated with migration but also about creating a sustainable framework for managing future challenges, thus safeguarding both national security and social stability.

Analyzing migration flows to the border

Migration flows toward the southern U.S. border have grown exponentially over the past decade, driven by a combination of structural and situational factors. Structural factors include extreme poverty, violence, corruption, and lack of opportunities in countries of origin, particularly in regions like Central America’s Northern Triangle and Venezuela. These chronic issues create an environment where millions see migration as their only viable option for achieving a safer and more stable life.

Situational factors, such as perceptions of changes in U.S. immigration policies or misinformation spread by criminal networks benefiting from irregular flows, compound the problem. For example, perceived relaxation of certain immigration policies or rumors of “windows of opportunity” to cross the border can cause spikes in migration flows, overwhelming border systems within weeks. This highlights the need for constant, real-time monitoring to anticipate these variations and prepare adequate responses.

Analyzing migration flows must include mapping migration routes, identifying key crossing points, and gathering demographic data about migrants, such as country of origin, age, gender, and educational level. Migration routes to the southern border, often through Mexico, are highly dangerous due to the presence of criminal networks that extort, kidnap, and exploit migrants. These same networks also use these flows as cover for illicit activities such as drug, weapons, and human smuggling. Tools like big data analysis, satellite monitoring, and partnerships with international organizations are essential for anticipating movements and designing more effective control strategies.

Drawing the criminal networks behavior

A key component of the prevention strategy within the PCCR model is addressing the operations and behaviors of criminal networks that exploit irregular migration. These organizations, particularly those involved in human trafficking and smuggling, play a dual role as facilitators of border crossings and beneficiaries of systemic vulnerabilities. Their influence extends beyond borders, deeply embedded in the transnational dynamics of migration.

Preventing irregular migration requires dismantling the networks that facilitate it. These organizations monopolize access to the U.S. border for thousands of migrants, charging exorbitant fees often funded by relatives already residing in the United States. This financial relationship highlights an often-overlooked reality: a significant portion of the funds sustaining these networks originates from communities within the United States, funneled through remittance systems or informal methods.

The operational model of these networks is designed to perpetuate dependency and exploitation. By providing transportation, false documentation, and guidance along dangerous routes, they control the flow of migrants while using these operations as a cover for other illicit activities, such as drug trafficking. Women and children are particularly vulnerable, facing a higher risk of falling victim to trafficking or sexual exploitation during their journey.

Integrating the fight against these criminal networks into a preventive framework requires a multidimensional approach. Identifying and blocking financial flows is a priority, necessitating effective coordination among U.S. financial institutions, law enforcement agencies, and international organizations. Strengthening regulations on informal transactions and promoting greater transparency can significantly limit these organizations' resources. Regional cooperation and intelligence sharing are also critical, as these networks operate across borders, exploiting governmental weaknesses and a lack of coordination.

Multilateral agreements to share information and conduct joint operations enable the identification of key actors and the dismantling of logistical systems sustaining these illicit activities. Moreover, community education and awareness campaigns are essential to inform migrant families, both in countries of origin and destination, about the risks of relying on trafficking networks. These initiatives can discourage participation in such dynamics while promoting legal and safe migration alternatives.

In combination, these measures make prevention more proactive, directly addressing one of the structural causes of irregular migration. Criminal networks thrive in the absence of coordinated strategies, and their dismantling is an indispensable step in reducing the incentives and opportunities that fuel this phenomenon.

Reviewing internal migration patterns in the U.S.

Once migrants cross the border, their settlement and activity patterns within U.S. territory must also be monitored and analyzed. Traditionally, migrants tend to settle in areas with established communities from their country of origin, where support networks and specific job opportunities exist. However, in recent years, the unprecedented volume of migrants has significantly altered these patterns. Many areas that were not traditionally settlement points are now experiencing increases in migrant populations, creating new challenges for host communities.

These shifts in settlement patterns have been accompanied by saturation in the demand for social services, such as education, healthcare, and housing. For example, some schools in states like Texas and California have reported sharp increases in enrollment of migrant students, exceeding their capacity to provide basic services, such as English as a Second Language (ESL) programs. Similarly, hospitals and clinics, particularly in rural areas, struggle to meet the medical needs of this growing population, often without a proportional increase in resources or staff.

In terms of housing, markets in many regions have become even more competitive, with significant increases in rental costs and a critical shortage of affordable options. This affects not only migrants but also local residents, exacerbating social tensions and complicating community integration. In this context, analyzing internal migration flows is not only a tool for migration management but also a necessity for the sustainable development of host communities.

Measuring socio-community impact

The impact of migration flows must be assessed through a multidimensional approach that considers economic, social, cultural, and security aspects. Economically, migrants often play essential roles in key sectors such as agriculture, construction, and services. However, inadequate planning can create negative perceptions among local residents, who often feel they are competing for limited resources like jobs and public services.

Socially, massive migration flows can enrich the cultural diversity of host communities but may also generate tensions if not properly managed. These tensions often arise when local resources are insufficient to meet everyone’s needs, potentially fueling xenophobic narratives and exacerbating community conflicts. From a security perspective, the lack of adequate controls can allow criminal actors to exploit systemic weaknesses and operate within the territory.

Sharing information and training communities

Migration flow analysis should not be limited to government authorities. Host communities and local organizations must also have access to this information to understand the dynamics at play and act proactively. However, access to data alone is insufficient; it is essential to train authorities and communities to interpret this information from a multidimensional perspective and make informed decisions.

Training should include education on topics such as community resource management, promoting social cohesion, and identifying risk factors associated with migration. Communities must be empowered to actively participate in planning and implementing integration strategies. This not only strengthens their resilience but also helps reduce tensions and prevent conflicts.

For instance, community leaders can receive training in mediation and conflict resolution, enabling them to act as bridges between migrants and local residents. Similarly, law enforcement can be trained to handle migration-related situations ethically and effectively, respecting human rights while ensuring security.

Prevention as a strategic investment

From an efficiency standpoint, prevention is the most cost-effective phase of the PCCR model. Every dollar invested in analysis, training, and awareness can translate into significant savings in the subsequent phases of containment and reaction. Additionally, by anticipating and mitigating risks, prevention reduces the likelihood of crises overwhelming existing systems.

However, prevention requires a long-term political and financial commitment. This involves allocating sufficient resources not only to implement preventive strategies but also to continuously evaluate and adjust them. Prevention is not an expense but an investment in the stability and security of host communities and the nation as a whole.

In the end, prevention is the foundation of any effective strategy for addressing migration flows and associated threats. Through detailed analysis of migration dynamics and the training of authorities and communities, it is possible to anticipate risks and design responses that strengthen both security and social cohesion. In an increasingly interconnected global context, investing in prevention is not only a strategic necessity but also an ethical and pragmatic responsibility toward future generations.

Containment: immediate risk management

Containment, the second phase of the PCCR model, plays a pivotal role in managing immediate risks posed by irregular migration and the operations of transnational criminal networks. This phase focuses on implementing mechanisms to mitigate the impact of these threats while safeguarding the safety of host communities and maintaining the integrity of national sovereignty systems.

In the PCCR framework, containment involves strategies and actions designed to limit the scope and severity of emerging crises. This includes activating contingency plans and deploying rapid responses to prevent adverse situations from escalating. Effective containment requires swift, decisive actions and often involves creating specialized response teams trained to manage crises efficiently. For instance, in a migration context, containment might involve mobilizing resources to manage sudden surges at border entry points or deploying advanced surveillance systems to monitor high-risk areas.

One of the most controversial debates in containment strategies has been the proposal to construct a wall along the southern U.S. border, introduced by President Donald Trump in 2018. Although politically divisive, the proposal aimed to reinforce border infrastructure to curb irregular crossings and alleviate pressure on security systems and public resources in border communities. Trump initially requested $18 billion from Congress over a decade to fund the project. However, despite its strategic rationale, the initiative faced legislative opposition and ultimately failed to secure the required support.

Estimates for the cost of a complete border wall ranged from $12 billion to $40 billion, depending on design specifications and the integration of complementary technologies. While these figures drew criticism, proponents argued that the wall could reduce irregular migration flows and lower the long-term costs associated with managing undocumented migrants and combating illicit activities. However, the failure to implement such containment measures in the past has resulted in significantly higher costs today. For instance, deporting approximately 1.5 million irregular immigrants with criminal records or those involved in criminal activities is estimated to cost $90 billion—far exceeding the projected cost of the border wall.

Containment strategies cannot rely solely on physical measures like walls, but neither should they be dismissed outright. Physical barriers, when combined with advanced technologies such as high-resolution cameras, biometric systems, drones, and sensor networks, can play an essential role in reducing irregular flows and enabling the early detection of criminal activities. These technologies enhance the effectiveness of containment by providing real-time intelligence and improving operational efficiency. For instance, drones can monitor remote areas, while biometric systems can ensure accurate identification at border checkpoints.

The effectiveness of containment depends on its adaptability to specific regional contexts and the strategic allocation of resources. Physical barriers might be suitable for high-vulnerability areas, while in others, mobile surveillance units, partnerships with neighboring countries, and intelligence-sharing agreements might be more effective. This flexibility ensures that containment efforts are not only responsive but also sustainable over time.

International cooperation

Containment must integrate international cooperation to manage migration and associated criminal activities effectively. Collaborative efforts with neighboring countries, such as intelligence-sharing and joint border operations, enhance the ability to identify and intercept threats before they escalate. Multilateral agreements that strengthen logistical and financial support can bolster containment capabilities while fostering a shared responsibility for managing migration flows.

An example of such collaboration is the joint efforts between Mexico and the United States in managing the southern border, including joint operations, intelligence sharing, and logistical support. However, these agreements must be strengthened with more robust mechanisms, including financial and operational commitments from both parties.

Humanitarian containment

In terms of humanitarian containment, the creation of processing centers and temporary shelters can play an important role in managing migration flows without compromising the security of host communities. These centers, designed to process migrants efficiently, must ensure respect for human rights while facilitating the identification of individuals who pose potential threats.

Containment, as a component of the PCCR model, should not be seen as an isolated solution but as part of an integrated approach combining infrastructure, technology, international cooperation, and humanitarian sensitivity. While physical barriers like the border wall have limitations, their role within a broader strategy should not be underestimated. The question is not whether a wall should be built, but how to integrate available tools to maximize impact and minimize long-term costs.

Resuming, containment is a critical phase in managing transversal threats, especially in the context of migration pressure and transnational criminal networks. Through a combination of physical infrastructure, advanced technologies, international cooperation, and humanitarian measures, states can more effectively manage immediate risks while preparing to address future challenges. Strategic investment in containment measures not only reduces pressure on border systems and host communities but also contributes to regional stability and security. Failing to implement these measures today will inevitably lead to higher costs tomorrow, both financially and in terms of social cohesion and national security.

Additional considerations

Border management in the 21st century presents challenges that surpass the traditional capacities of states, demanding more sophisticated and integrated approaches. Irregular migration, transnational criminal networks like Tren de Aragua, and the increasing interconnection of transversal threats not only compromise the security of host communities but also erode state sovereignty and threaten regional stability. These dynamics highlight the need to redesign traditional paradigms of border management.

One often-overlooked dimension is the financial flows that sustain criminal networks. These organizations rely on a complex web of remittances, informal transactions, and money laundering to fund their operations. A significant portion of these funds originates from within the United States, as families pay exorbitant fees to smugglers to help relatives cross the border. Addressing this issue requires robust financial oversight, including stricter regulations on informal money transfer systems and enhanced collaboration between law enforcement agencies and financial institutions. Tracking and disrupting these flows can weaken criminal networks and limit their ability to exploit migration systems.

A balanced approach is also critical. As we explained, border security cannot rely solely on physical barriers or enforcement tactics. It must incorporate mechanisms that address the root causes of migration, such as poverty, violence, and instability in countries of origin. Collaborative efforts to promote economic development and create local opportunities can help reduce the incentives for irregular migration.

Border management systems must also embrace technological innovation. Advanced surveillance tools, biometric systems, and artificial intelligence offer opportunities to enhance both efficiency and accuracy. Predictive analytics, for example, can help policymakers identify migration trends and allocate resources effectively. This integration of technology ensures that strategies are forward-looking and adaptable to evolving challenges.

Public trust and understanding are equally essential. Transparent communication strategies can dispel myths, counter xenophobia, and foster support for policies that balance national security with humanitarian obligations. By engaging communities and ensuring clear, consistent messaging, governments can build consensus around comprehensive migration management policies.

In the third part of this article, we will explore Concretion and Reaction as the next phases of the PCCR model. These phases focus on translating strategies into actionable solutions and responding to immediate crises, providing a complete framework to address the present and future complexities of border management.