In December 2001 an economic state of emergency in South County was declared by the San Diego City Council as a result of the crippling of cross-border trade and commerce after the terrorist attacks on 9/11 prompted a “Level 1” alert along all U.S. borders. A Level 1 alert requires border inspectors to check every car and person entering the country. This caused a wait of several hours to cross the border, whether by car or on foot. Mexicans by the thousands stopped crossing, and out of uncertainty for their safety and border traffic congestion, thousands of U.S. citizens stopped visiting Baja. The result: a major binational economic disruption.

We are approaching the third anniversary of that day of infamy, but questions remain about how prepared our border is to ward off potential terrorist attacks and deal with other regional emergencies (e.g. health epidemics), not to mention the binational economic disruptions that both would bring.

To be sure, there have been lots of meetings, lots of plans, lots of rhetoric and lots of good intentions. But thus far we seem to be coming up short on answers and concrete programs. There has been limited progress on border security, though it remains far short of making the border immune to terrorist penetrations. On this issue there is substantial cooperation between the U.S. and Mexican authorities at federal levels, but it falls short locally.

So what’s the problem? Why can’t the two sides work together on such major issues and come up with plans in the event of regional binational emergencies?

It seems that a major obstacle is attitude — ours and theirs. In the United States (San Diego included) terrorism, drug smuggling and illegal immigration border security are the primary issues. Although of importance, none of these is the No. 1 issue on the Mexican side.

Cultural differences also play a part in this failed communication. In the United States we use the term “politically incorrect” to describe the use of derogatory language toward ethnic or racial groups. In Mexico they say that term just means Americans no longer feel free to publicly offend minorities.

A number of binational committees are examining health issues. Problems hindering that effort are spelled out in a study authored by Nuria Homedes, with the School of Public Health at the University of Texas, Houston and Antonio Ugalde with the department of sociology at the University of Texas, Austin. Appearing in the December 2003 issue of Public Health Matters, their report provides insight on the problems affecting the two sides.

The researchers uncovered a “profound distrust between decision makers and health workers on both sides of the border.” There is a negative perception between public health workers that extends into the private health and business professions. Mexicans resent the Americans’ — and the Mexican-Americans’ — arrogance, self-declared superiority and racism.

A professor at a leading Mexican medical school suggested about American counterparts that “There is the view that they are the scientists, we are only the manual labor, the peons of medical care. There is always that feeling of contempt toward Mexico, but the difference is technological and financial, not of scientific knowledge.” The United States respondents criticized the Mexicans’ lack of organization, corruption and low level of training standards.

The distrust carries over into professions. Unless we resolve these issues, both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border are at peril.

The one language we all seem to understand is the language of money — they want ours and we want theirs. This competition is what creates investment and jobs, which makes all other issues at least open to discussion, if the potential economic loss is understood and appreciated.

To shed some light on this subject, meet Donna Blanco. In 1989, Xewt-Channel 12 (Televisa), the Spanish language TV station broadcasting out of Tijuana, had the good fortune of employing Blanco as its marketing and research director. By 1990, what was arguably the first solid economic study on Tijuana residents’ spending in San Diego was made public. A full three years before the now regionally famous San Diego Dialogue border economic study was prepared, Blanco and Channel 12 had already broken that barrier.

Channel 12 remains supportive of Blanco and she in turn continues to provide some of the best available information. Her latest, “The Importance of the Tijuana Market to (the) San Diego Economy,” has some important findings. In addition to the immediate border cities and communities, Tijuanans shop at Horton Plaza, Fashion Valley, Escondido and even South Coast Plaza in Costa Mesa.

One out of every 12 retail dollars spent in San Diego comes from Tijuana and the sales tax generated is the city of San Diego’s second largest source of general fund revenue. Consider that Super Bowl XXXVII at Qualcomm Stadium brought in $366 million dollars — now multiply that number by, say, 8.5 times — that’s what Tijuanans spend annually in San Diego.

These are just vignettes of the economic impact Tijuana has on San Diego. That is what is at stake here when we have border crossing disruptions. Unless we can work our way out of the two-way mistrust and misconceptions about each other, both sides will be severely impacted next time there is an emergency from whatever source.

Patrick Osio Jr. can be reached at posiojr@sandiegometro.com. The veteran consultant also has issued The Mexican Perspective, an intensive primer on business culture and protocol. Copies are available at http://www.hispanicvista.com/sales/book_sale.htm.