A recent analysis of Donald Trump’s National Security Strategy (NSS) challenges its historical claims about immigration. The document, published late last year, argues that “unchecked migration” threatens Western civilisation and calls for ending “The Era of Mass Migration”. However, historian Daniel Mendiola points out that nation states in the Americas have actually spent more time with open borders than closed.
The NSS states that “throughout history, sovereign nations prohibited uncontrolled migration and granted citizenship only rarely to foreigners”. Mendiola, whose research focuses on border policy, calls this version of history “nonsensical”. He notes that in Latin America, many countries passed affirmative declarations protecting the right to immigrate, often enshrining these rights in constitutions. For example, the Central American constitution of 1824 declared the entire region a “Sacred Asylum for all”.
In the United States, open borders were the default policy for nearly the first 150 years of the country’s existence. Immigrants were presumed admissible, and the federal government did not implement immigration restrictions until the late 19th century, initially targeting Chinese immigrants. It was not until the 1920s that the US experimented with a fully closed-border system, where immigrants were presumed inadmissible unless they met specific criteria.
The NSS, which also dismisses European alliances and previews interventions in Latin America, aligns closely with Kremlin priorities, according to critics. Mendiola argues that the current system of high border security, detention, and deportation has caused thousands of preventable deaths, yet politicians continue to blame “open borders” for problems such as strained resources and increased crime.
