Mothers carrying their children smile, give me a thumbs up, and then point to a riverbank 50 metres or so away.
We’re on a walkway bridge between the Mexican city of Matamoros and Brownsville in Texas. The riverbank is of course the United States – so close you feel you can almost touch it.
For these families wide-eyed with excitement, this is the moment they’ve dreamt of. Many have endured months, even years, on the road.
Sometimes travelling thousands of miles through hostile countries, outwitting cartel gangs, and managing dizzyingly contradictory bureaucracy, all to get to this point: an asylum interview with United States border officials, and almost certain entry.
On its face, this all sounds like a system working in perfect harmony with the needy being helped by a welcoming country.
But in reality, migration is a hotly disputed issue that is likely to dominate the Trump-Harris debate, and the run-up to the presidential election itself.
You can watch live coverage of the debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump from midnight tonight on Sky News, on web and on mobile
The group I am with on the bridge is mostly from Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Venezuela.
They’re claiming asylum, and with their paperwork and appointment email in hand, they approach the border with some trepidation but mostly with excitement and joy.
Many have waited months for their appointment to come through after applying for asylum on the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) app.
This group of a few hundred people on the bridge are now just a few steps from America.
As they shuffle forward, CBP guards check their papers, make sure there are no errors, and wave them through to the other side for their case interviews.
These families, these children, are about to start a new life.
Along the border here in Matamoros, there’s little sign of Donald Trump’s border wall, but he’d doubtless approve of the razor wire fortifications on the American side of the Rio Grande.
Experts here say there’s no doubt who those seeking asylum are backing in this election and this debate – and that’s Kamala Harris, who is seen to have a far less hostile approach to immigration.
“I think the best would be a flexible US immigration policy again, like President Biden’s when he began his administration,” Oscar Misael Hernandez-Hernandez said as we chatted alongside the dozens of cars and trucks crossing the border.
Image: Professor Oscar Misael Hernandez-Hernandez
A professor of social anthropology at the El Colegio de la Frontera Norte research centre and an expert on Mexico-US border issues, he added: “Biden broke with ultra-conservative vision and immigration policy.
“So, I think if Harris implements a migration policy like this if she wins the presidency of the United States, it would be not only quite good for migrants in terms of human rights, but also quite good for international diplomacy, because the relations of the United States, at least with President Trump, if he wins, would be quite disastrous as they were in the past.”
In shelters and hostels across Mexico, many other migrant families simply have to wait for their border appointments.
It’s like a lottery, and it can take a long time for their number to come up.
Few leave the shelter; they would be easy prey for cartel gangs who would kidnap and hold them for ransom.
Marlen Cabrera, 39, from Honduras, and her family are waiting it out along with 200 others at the Casa del Migrante San Francisco de Asis shelter.
Image: Marlen Cabrera says making it the US is the only option she and her family have
Any tightening of the immigration rules – as threatened by Donald Trump – would be a disaster for her.
I asked her what she would do if the laws changed with a Trump victory. She says she doesn’t like to think about what-ifs.
“I’ve been here so long, and not being able to get in would be hard because it’s the only option I have,” she said.
“I have to get in. It would be really terrible if we couldn’t. And I don’t just speak for myself, I speak for everyone here.”
Jose Valdivia, the Nicaraguan manager of the shelter, is even clearer.
“Everybody, since the last election, we all wanted the Democrats to win, right? Because the Democrats look out for the little guy,” he told me.
“That’s what everybody here as a migrant wants, we want the Democrats to win. No one wants Trump.”
Image: A US border agent checks migrant paperwork
Day in, day out, in any weather, the migrants line up for their appointment here at the border in Matamoros.
Along the almost 2,000-mile-long border separating Mexico and the United States, thousands of applicants are screened every day and allowed to enter America legally to start new lives in their new home country.
But these migrants are at the centre of one of the most divisive issues in America right now.
Since the summer, border restrictions introduced by the Biden administration, combined with assistance from Mexican authorities who hamper the movement of migrants to the border, has brought about a large reduction in the number of people illegally entering America.
Despite this, President Biden is widely considered to have failed on immigration, and while Kamala Harris’s team have been working hard to cast her as a sort of new candidate and a breath of fresh air, she is – whether they like it or not – part of this administration and is tainted by its perceived failures.
The latest polls suggest Donald Trump scores well on the immigration issue, and his team have been releasing pointed “attack ads” on Kamala Harris and her team on this subject. They in turn have released adverts attacking Trump.
In the debate itself, Trump is widely expected to try to nail Harris on immigration, and she will have to find a way to counter that.
Undoubtedly, she will point out that Trump’s supporters kiboshed a cross-party action plan for migration, but she is still tainted for certain.
While this will all play out in the political rough and tumble of the electoral process, it is important not to forget that thousands upon thousands of people will be affected by America’s future stance on immigration.
And for some asylum seekers, it is quite literally a matter of life and death.
President Trump’s “America First” agenda has been spelt out in a new White House National Security Strategy that should make stark reading for allies and foes of the United States alike.
The new 33-page document outlines an upending of American foreign policy objectives and priorities which have stood largely unchanged through different administrations stretching back decades.
The document says American strategy went “astray” over many years. It seeks to reframe America’s strategic interests as being far narrower now than at any time in its modern history.
Among the key points, the document says:
• Europe faces “civilizational erasure” and could be “unrecognisable in 20 years or less”
• “Certain NATO members will become majority non-European” within a few decades
• America will “shift away” from the “burden” of the Middle East seeing it now as a “source and destination of international investment”
• In the Western hemisphere, America should pursue a policy of “enlist and expand… restoring American pre-eminence”
• In Africa, American policy focus should be on trade not “providing and spreading liberal ideology”
Image: America will ‘shift away’ from the ‘burden’ of the Middle East. Pic: Reuters
In black-and-white, the text articulates a dramatic strategic shift which has been playing out at lightning speed over the past year.
The document underlines the end of the concept of America as an arbiter of the democratic rules-based order.
“American foreign policy elites convinced themselves that permanent American domination of the entire world was in the best interests of our country. Yet the affairs of other countries are our concern only if their activities directly threaten our interests,” the paper says.
Every US administration publishes at least one National Security Strategy during a presidential term.
The focus of this one is starkly different from that published by President Biden in 2022.
It’s also notably different from the document which President Trump published during his first term. His 2017 paper cast the world as a contest between “repressive regimes” and “free societies”.
Image: Trump doesn’t want the US to be the arbiter of the democratic rules-based order. Pic: Reuters
This new one places the necessity to do trade above the imposition of values.
“We seek good relations and peaceful commercial relations with the nations of the world without imposing on them democratic or other social change that differs widely from their traditions and histories.”
Mass migration and Europe
The new document is highly critical of mass migration.
It warns that uncontrolled migration is destroying the concept of nation states which could impact America’s strategic alliances and the countries it counts as reliable allies.
The paper is particularly critical of Europe, of the European Union as a concept and of individual European nations.
“Should present trends continue, the continent will be unrecognizable in 20 years or less,” the paper says.
It continues: “As such, it is far from obvious whether certain European countries will have economies and militaries strong enough to remain reliable allies.
“Many of these nations are currently doubling down on their present path. We want Europe to remain European, to regain its civilizational self-confidence, and to abandon its failed focus on regulatory suffocation.”
Image: Trump will seek to support ‘patriotic European parties’. Pic: AP
The document’s language around the politics of governing parties across Europe is particularly stark.
Regarding Ukraine, the document says: “The Trump Administration finds itself at odds with European officials who hold unrealistic expectations for the war perched in unstable minority governments, many of which trample on basic principles of democracy to suppress opposition.
“A large European majority wants peace, yet that desire is not translated into policy, in large measure because of those government’s subversion of democratic processes.”
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
The document outlines how his administration will seek to support “patriotic European parties”.
This is entirely in line with President Trump’s rhetoric but still represents a major departure from the longstanding principle of not interfering in the politics of allies.
It says: “American diplomacy should continue to stand up for genuine democracy, freedom of expression, and unapologetic celebrations of European nations’ individual character and history.
“America encourages its political allies in Europe to promote this revival of spirit, and the growing influence of patriotic European parties indeed gives cause for great optimism.”
Image: Trump has at times had a fiery relationship with Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy. Pic: Reuters
Ukraine and Russia
On European-Russia relations, the document raises the prospect of war but curiously does not presume that such a conflict would involve America.
“Managing European relations with Russia will require significant US diplomatic engagement, both to reestablish conditions of strategic stability across the Eurasian landmass, and to mitigate the risk of conflict between Russia and European states.”
By contrast, President Biden’s National Security Strategy, published in 2022, underlined repeatedly the “iron-clad” commitment the United States had to Europe’s security.
Chinese risk and opportunity
The document presents Asia and the Indo-Pacific region as a source of opportunity for strategic and economic cooperation.
Image: Maintaining US military strength over China is also outlined. Pic: Reuters
“President Trump is building alliances and strengthening partnerships in the Indo-Pacific that will be the bedrock of security and prosperity long into the future…”
And specifically on China, the paper presents a goal of “economic vitality” achieved through a balanced economic relationship between the two countries combined with an “ongoing focus on deterrence to prevent war”.
Deterrence would be achieved, it outlines, by maintaining preeminent military strength over China.
It says: “This combined approach can become a virtuous cycle as strong American deterrence opens up space for more disciplined economic action, while more disciplined economic action leads to greater American resources to sustain deterrence in the long term.”
Hemispheres of influence
In line with President Trump’s focus on spheres of influence, particular focus is given to the western hemisphere.
There are clear references to the impact of drugs from south and central America into the US and more subtle references to control of the arctic.
“The United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American pre-eminence in the Western Hemisphere, and to protect our homeland and our access to key geographies throughout the region,” the paper says.
It continues: “We will deny non-Hemispheric competitors the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own or control strategically vital assets, in our hemisphere.”
US President Donald Trump has been awarded FIFA’s new peace prize at the draw for next year’s World Cup.
FIFA President Gianni Infantino presented Mr Trump with a large golden trophy – formed of hands holding the earth – and a gold medal, which he wore around his neck.
The certificate, which Mr Infantino handed over at Washington DC’s Kennedy Center on Friday, recognises the US president for his actions to “promote peace and unity around the world”.
World football’s governing body, which announced the annual award last month, said it would be given to “individuals who have taken exceptional and extraordinary actions for peace”.
Mr Trump said it was “truly one of the greatest honours of my life”.
He said: “We saved millions and millions of lives. The Congo is an example – over 10 million people killed. It was heading for another 10 million very quickly.”
Image: US President Donald Trump. Pics: Reuters
He also pointed to India and Pakistan, saying, “so many wars that we were able to end, in some cases a little before they started”.
Ahead of the draw, Mr Trump told reporters he did not care about the prize, but noted that he had “settled eight wars” in nearly 11 months in office.
The United States, along with Canada and Mexico, will host the tournament in 2026.
Mr Infantino, who has built up a strong relationship with the US president, backed him for the Nobel Peace Prize earlier this year.
“This is what we want from a leader – a leader that cares about the people,” Mr Infantino said of Mr Trump.
The FIFA leader said to Mr Trump, “this is your prize, this is your peace prize”.
Image: US President Donald Trump and FIFA President Gianni Infantino. Pic: Reuters
Mr Trump thanked his family, including his wife, first lady Melania Trump, and praised the leaders of the other two host nations – Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum – in his brief remarks.
Mr Infantino has often spoken about football as a unifier for the world, but the prize is a departure from the federation’s traditional focus on sport.
FIFA has described the prize as one that rewards “individuals who have taken exceptional and extraordinary actions for peace, and by doing so have united people across the world”.
The award comes during a week where Mr Trump’s administration has been under scrutiny for lethal strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and as Mr Trump hardens his rhetoric against immigrants.
The Nobel Peace Prize this year was eventually awarded to Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, who said shortly after receiving the prize that she was dedicating it in part to Mr Trump for “his decisive support of our cause”.
Netflix has agreed a $72bn (£54bn) deal to secure Warner Bros Discovery’s film and TV studios and supercharge its library through rights to top franchises including Harry Potter and Game Of Thrones.
It had been reported that the US streaming giant was in exclusive talks over the deal following a bidding war for the assets.
Paramount Skydance and Comcast, the ultimate owner of Sky News, were the rival suitors for the bulk of WBD that also includes HBO, the HBO Max streaming platform and DC Studios.
While Netflix has agreed a $27.75 per share price with WBD, which equates to the $72bn purchase figure, the deal gives the assets a total value of $82.7bn.
It will see WBD come under Netflix ownership once its remaining Discovery Global division, mostly legacy cable networks including CNN and the TNT sports channels, is separated.
However, the agreement is set to attract scrutiny from competition regulators, particularly in the United States and Europe.
More from Money
Both WBD and Netflix do not see the prospect of the deal being completed until late 2026 or 2027.
The main stumbling block is likely to be the fact that Netflix, which has hits including Stranger Things and Squid Game, is already the world’s biggest streaming service.
Image: Stranger Things is one of Netflix’s biggest hits. Pic: Netflix
Further drama could come in the form of a complaint by Paramount, which had previously made a bid for the whole company.
CNBC reported this week that Paramount had claimed the auction process was biased in favour of Netflix.
Entertainment news provider Variety has also reported that major studios fear an institutional crisis for Hollywood unless the move is blocked.
Ted Sarandos, the co-chief executive of Netflix, said: “By combining Warner Bros’ incredible library of shows and movies – from timeless classics like Casablanca and Citizen Kane to modern favourites like Harry Potter and Friends – with our culture-defining titles like Stranger Things, KPop Demon Hunters and Squid Game, we’ll be able to do that even better.
“Together, we can give audiences more of what they love and help define the next century of storytelling.”
Netflix shares were trading down more than 3% in pre-market deals but recovered much of that loss when Wall Street opened. Those for WBD were up by more than 2%.
David O’Hara, managing director at the advisory firm MKI Global Partners, said of the proposed deal: “The 12-18 month timeline signals a long antitrust review, but despite the overlap between Netflix and HBO Max, there is a path to approval through possible HBO divestment.
“Netflix would not accept a $5.8bn break fee if it didn’t see at least a small chance of the deal closing.”