USA TODAY International Edition
TRUMP ORDER IGNORES THE REAL DANGER
Xenophobic edict doesn’t address our vulnerability to radicalized Americans
My family arrived in the United States in 1976, when I was 7, as Jewish refugees from the Soviet Union. I might well not be here, enjoying the greatness of America, if Donald Trump had been president back then. And I would definitely not be writing these words on a MacBook because the genius behind Apple computers, Steve Jobs, was born to a Syrian immigrant father.
At the end of his very first week in office, Trump signed a sweeping executive order that bans all refugees from coming here for 120 days while vetting procedures, already tough, are toughened even further.
He also imposed a 90- day suspension on all visitors, not just refugees, from seven Muslim countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — along with an indefinite ban on refugees from Syria. BORN IN THE USA The ostensible justification for this xenophobic edict is to protect us from terrorists. Yet of the 89 individuals who have been implicated in terrorist plots against the U. S. since 2001, the only ones who might have been affected by this ban were three Somali Americans who did not succeed in killing anyone. The Orlando and Fort Hood shooters, along with one of the San Bernardino shooters, were all born in the USA.
Of the killers from abroad, all came from countries not on Trump’s target list. The 9/ 11 hijackers hailed from Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. The second San Bernardino killer, Tashfeen Malik, was born in Pakistan and came here from Saudi Arabia.
Perhaps it’s just a coincidence that the Trump Organization does business in many of the Muslim countries whose citizens are still allowed to come here, such as the UAE, Indonesia and Turkey, but not in the seven countries whose passport- holders are barred. Maybe Trump is still allowing travel from most Muslim nations on the sensible grounds of avoiding a diplomatic crisis with allies and trading partners.
Or it could be that he felt compelled to limit the scope of the edict to avoid a domestic political backlash over instituting a “Muslim ban” — which is what Trump had initially proposed in 2015 and what his adviser, Rudy Giuliani, says he is now trying to achieve through the back door. Whatever the president’s reasoning, it simply underscores that his order is arbitrary and irrational.
The biggest danger we now face is no longer from foreign terrorists because border security measures have been greatly strengthened since 9/ 11. We still remain vulnerable, however, to U. S. citizens who have been radicalized from afar. To the extent that this executive order is perceived as a reflection of “Islamophobia” — a perception that Trump feeds by saying he will give favoritism in refugee admissions to Christians — it will likely galvanize more homegrown terrorists. It is, in short, the best New Year’s present that the Islamic State and al- Qaeda terrorist groups could have received. RAMPANT CONFUSION If this executive order does not stop actual attackers, who is affected? Given the slapdash way it was crafted and implemented, there has been rampant confusion over that very question.
Would permanent residents born in one of the seven verboten countries be forbidden re- entry? What about dual nationals, such as British Iraqis or Canadian Iranians?
Customs and Border Protection agents at various airports, uncertain about how to enforce the order, detained two disabled Iranian green card holders, ages 88 and 83 ( maybe they were hiding bombs in their wheelchairs?); a Sudanese graduate student at Stanford who had graduated from Harvard and lived in the USA since 1993; and an Iraqi refugee who had risked his life for 10 years working for U. S. forces in Iraq. An award- winning Clemson University engineer and a scientist heading to Harvard to do tuberculosis research, both from Iran, were not allowed to board planes for America.
Luckily, several federal judges have blocked various parts of Trump’s order, pending a fuller hearing on its constitutionality. Unfortunately, the president retains wide discretion to determine who is allowed to enter this country. Thus Trump may well prevail in this legal fight.
If so, it will represent a stunning repudiation of all that America has stood for as a haven for refugees from all over the world — including my family. Far from keeping our country safe, Trump is increasing our insecurity by losing sight of what made America great in the first place.