The Indian Express (Delhi Edition)
Silicon Valley’s ambivalence toward Trump turns to anger
TRAVELLERS WERE stranded around the world, protests escalated in the United States and anxiety rose within President Trump’s party on Sunday as his order closing the nation to refugees and people from certain predominantly Muslim countries provoked a crisis just days into his administration.
With thousands of protesters chanting outside his White House windows and thronging the streets of Washington and other cities, Trump late on Sunday defended his order. “To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as the media is falsely reporting,” he said in a written statement. “This is not about religion — this is about terror and keeping our country safe.”
“We will again be issuing visas to all countries once we are sure we have reviewed and implemented the most secure policies over the next 90 days,” he said.
While Trump denied that his action focused on religion, the first iteration of his plan during his presidential campaign was framed as a temporary ban on all Muslim visitors.
The White House pulled back on part of Trump’s temporary ban on visitors from seven countries by saying that it would not apply to those with green cards granting them permanent residence in the US. By the end of the day, the Department of Homeland Security formally issued an order declaring legal residents exempt from the order.
But the recalibration did little to reassure critics at home or abroad who saw the President’s order as a retreat from American values. European leaders denounced the order, and some Republican lawmakers called on Trump to back down. As of Sunday evening, officials said no one was being held at American airports, although lawyers said they believed that dozens were still being detained.
More than any of the myriad moves Trump has made in his frenetic opening days in office, the immigration order has quickly come to define his emerging presidency as one driven by a desire for decisive action even at the expense of deliberate process or coalition building. It has thrust the nine-day-old administration into its first constitutional conflict, as multiple courts have intervened to block aspects of the order, and into its broadest diplomatic incident, with overseas allies objecting.
White House officials blamed what they portrayed as a hyperventilating news media for the confusion and said the order had been successfully carried out. Only about 109 travellers were detained in the first 24 hours, out of the 325,000 who typically enter the United States in a day, they said.
Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, said Trump simply did what he had promised on the campaign trail and would not gamble with American lives. “We’re not willing to be wrong on this subject,” he said on Face the Nation on CBS. “President Trump is not willing to take chances on this subject.”
Republican backlash
Some Republicans grew increasingly alarmed by the backlash to the order. “This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country,” Senators John Mccain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said in a statement. “That is why we fear this executive order may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improve our security.”
Some conservative donors also criticised the decision. Officials with the political network overseen by Charles G and David H Koch, the billionaire conservative activists, released a statement on Sunday criticising Trump’s handling of the issue.
“We believe it is possible to keep Americans safe without excluding people who wish to come here to contribute and pursue a better life for their families,” said Brian Hooks, a chairman of the Kochs’ donor network. “The travel ban is the wrong approach and will likely be counterproductive.”
Senator Bob Corker, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said the order was “poorly implemented” and urged the president to “make appropriate revisions.” Other Republicans were more circumspect. Senator Mitch Mcconnell, the Republican majority leader, said the issue would be decided by the courts.
Trump fired back at Mccain and Graham on Twitter. “They are sadly weak on immigration,” he wrote. “Senators should focus their energies on ISIS, illegal immigration and border security instead of always looking to start World War III.” NYT ON FRIDAY morning, Silicon Valley was largely ambivalent about Donald Trump. They might not have voted for him, but they werehopefulaboutfindingcommon ground with the new administration. By Saturday, that optimism had yielded to anger and determination.
The travel directives struck at the heart of Silicon Valley’s cherished values.
In response, a significant part of the tech community went to the barricades. Netflix’s CEO, Reed Hastings, wrote that Trump’s actions “are so unamerican it pains us all” and that “it is time to link arms together to protect American values of freedom and opportunity.”
Brian Chesky, chief of Airbnb, made the same point. “We must stand with those who are affected,” he wrote on Twitter.
Sergey Brin, a Google founder who immigrated from the Soviet Union when he was 6, seemed to take that suggestion literally, attending an impromptu protest on Saturday at San Francisco International Airport. “I’m here because I’m a refugee,” Brin said.
Just about everyone in Silicon Valley came from somewhere else or is a son or daughter of someone who did or is married to someone who did.
That list starts with the most famous Silicon Valley citizen of all: Steve Jobs, the Apple cofounder, whose biological father immigrated from Syria in 1954.
Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, wrote on his website on Friday, “Like many of you, I’m concerned about the impact of the recent executive orders signed by President Trump.”
Elon Musk, chief executive of Tesla and Spacex, who sits on two of Trump’s advisory committees, wrote that the ban was “not the best way to address the country’s challenges.” Musk was born in South Africa.
The larger tech companies tended to be less forceful in their reactions to the executive order than the smaller ones. Google said it was “concerned.” Apple said, “It is not a policy we support.” Amazon said only that it was committed to diversity. Oracle did not respond to requests for comment. NYT