The article the sheriff wrote was in response to a recent exposé by the Arizona Republic questioning many of the sheriff’s statements on trafficking and crime related statistics. The sheriff did a commendable job of spinning the article by focusing on a whole new set of statistics instead of addressing the inaccuracies found in the report.

But beyond the typical sound bites claiming we must choose between border enforcement and amnesty, the sheriff brought up a valid point in the debate on security — helping Mexico in its war against the drug cartels.

This is a topic with little traction but one that should be a major focus in immigration reform. As the sheriff pointed out, Mexico is not our enemy but rather our neighbor. We share not just a border but also a vested interest in eliminating the drug cartels and the violence that accompanies it.

So why are we doing so little to help Mexico in the fight against the drug cartels?

Part of the problem lies in our resistance to clamping down on illegal gun trafficking. Arizona, regrettably, does a great deal to contribute to this problem. With the loosest gun laws in the nation combined with our close proximity to Mexico, we are a haven for gunrunners.

If politicians such as Sheriff Babeu, Senator McCain and Governor Brewer are truly serious about taking on the drug cartels and securing Arizona’s borders, then they should be the first to deny the NRA from influencing policy meant to track gunrunners and expose businesses and individuals involved in illegal gun sales. They should be the first to demand additional resources to stop these practices and the first to work toward ending registry loopholes.

Another part of the problem lies in our resistance to getting involved in yet another country’s affairs. We are already involved in several wars, and Americans are tired of spending billions of dollars to police the world. But Mexico isn’t just another country half way around the world. It happens to be one of our top trading partners and our second largest export market. And the drug cartel isn’t just their problem. Many believe it is only a matter of time before the violence in Mexico spills over, and we are forced to take a more active role. If we wait much longer, we could be in for a very costly conflict.

Last month, U.S. Representative Michael McCaul of Texas introduced a bill to add six of Mexico’s drug cartels onto the State Department’s Foreign Terrorists Organizations list. One would hope this type of move would mean increased resources toward fighting the cartels as well as stricter penalties for those convicted of aiding them, namely those who traffic weapons and launder money.

No doubt those who have benefited from the drug trade, including special interest groups and American businesses, will resist any attempt to put restrictions on their livelihoods. Do doubt politicians will be fiercely lobbied to prevent any type of meaningful reform meant to track those who aid the cartels. It will be up to our current crop of politicians to resist the urge to cave to the interests and dollars attached to those groups. Let’s hope they have the will to do so.

When it comes to our southern border, the biggest threat to our country isn’t the flow of immigrants coming across it but rather the trafficking of humans and drugs. If we could make ending trafficking the focus of our efforts, we might actually find a way to come together on this debate and provide safety and humanity on both sides of the border.

Where I take issue is when Mr. Flake blames this hostile environment on the current administration. That’s the type of partisan political spin that does nothing to address why we’re in this situation to begin with or how we can fix it. And when pointing fingers, let’s keep in mind that neither this administration nor the previous administration put up roadblocks to immigration reform. The barriers to real reform have always been rooted in Congress, and Congressman Flake is keenly aware of that.

I appreciate that Mr. Flake, unlike many of his colleagues, attempted to be more specific about border security, saying we need to make the Tucson Sector look more like the Yuma Sector. At least now he’s established a concrete goal and one that could and should be attainable. However, let’s not forget that law enforcement officials attributed part of the Yuma Sector’s security to the fact that some illegal crossers simply moved over to the Tucson Sector. And as Mr. Flake admitted, even when we secure the Tucson Sector, “we still face considerable immigration challenges.”

Again, Representative Flake is correct when he speaks of the changing nature of illegal crossings and the escalating violence in Mexico. This is reason number one why we need more than just boots on the ground to combat the problem. We must take bigger steps toward ensuring that American weapons are no longer smuggled across the border and used in the raging drug wars. We must take a more active role in helping Mexico end the violence that our country helped create by its addiction to drugs.

If Mr. Flake can convince his colleagues that those types of reform are part of the ‘secure the border’ mantra his party is rallying for, then maybe, just maybe we could attain real security on our borders. But to believe that ignoring our role in the illegal drug and gun trafficking trade and simply putting more bodies on the border will get us to secure levels is like believing we can end crime simply by hiring more police officers.

Perhaps comprehensive immigration reform is a dead end. Perhaps our political will is too bent against it. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t tackle parts of the problem a little bit at a time. It doesn’t mean we give up the fight. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.

Without question border security is a necessary and vital part of reform, but border security alone will not solve our immigration ills. I know this, millions of Americans know this, and Jeff Flake knows this. So let’s stop arguing about reform and semantics and start finding ways to implement change. We may not get the big reform bill we’ve hoped for, but that doesn’t mean we can’t make incremental changes that will take us down the path toward solutions.