Second, President Trump excuses much of the legality of his executive order by saying that it’s a national security; though it is a fear tactic that he has used throughout his presidency, a few Google searches will confirm that there is not a national security risk. After the attacks on September 11, there were many freedoms restricted for a period while the nation worked on increasing national security and diminishing risks.
The terrorist attacks instilled fear towards the entire Muslim community and much of the middle east (Kennedy); however, the nations listed on Trump’s immigration ban are not even the same nations that the terrorists behind the September 11 attacks. After the executive order was signed, a news agency from Iran wrote that it was a double standard because Saudi Arabia wasn’t even listed; they even said that the attacks on 9/11 were carried out by people from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon, United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Russia, and Kyrgyzstan who are not banned (Chappell).
It has also been said that countries that were involved with the attacks on 9/11 were economic interests (Kennedy). Either way, the latest attacks like the Boston marathon bombing, Fort Lauderdale airport shooting, Orlando nightclub shooting, and the Charleston church shooting were done by United States citizens (Kennedy). The United States people are so concerned with keeping the “bad people” out that they are looking right past the awful people living in their own neighborhoods. Thousands of people are killed each year by people other United States citizens, but there is still fear of immigrants in search of a new life or a safer home.
Third, the countries that are listed on the ban are in dire need of help, and the ban is detrimental to the safety of those people. “‘This shows who the ban really impacts: the world’s most vulnerable women and children who are fleeing terror,’ said Jennifer Sime, a senior vice president at the International Rescue Committee, a humanitarian organization focused on refugees. ‘America is turning away from its leadership role on refugee settlement, and its the refugees who are paying the price’” (Goldman).
The United Nations did an assessment of children in all different countries to find out the ones in the greatest need of emergency international assistance, and they discovered that the top five nations of children in need were in Trump’s list of seven banned countries: Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen (Goldman). The same people in the United States that are preaching from their soap boxes about the importance of child health and welfare are turning their backs on entire nations of children need in critical conditions.
Over 5. 1 million children are displaced in Iraq, Somalia is described as a state of chronic humanitarian crisis, and Unicef, an organization working internationally advocating for children, says that Syria’s humanitarian crisis is equal to that of World War II (Goldman). America used to be a nation to set a standard of humanitarianism, and after decades of helping countries out when people were in a time of need, the nation has sent people away that are in need of help and shut the borders to keep others out.
Fourth, the ban is a double standard for the United States to implement whenever Americans are allowed to enter nations around the world without hassle. There has been years of recovery taken to improve relations between the Middle East and the United States; however, the president is ensuring that those will be ruined. A month before the executive order was signed, the president of Syria had said that President Trump would be a naturally ally, but now they are on the list of banned immigrants.
The Bashar Assad, Syrian president, even went as far as saying that Trump’s approach to terrorism would prosper (Chappell). The Syrian president, and the entire nation, were taken aback by the executive order since they naturally thought that the two countries were in good standings. In fact, most of the countries that were on Trump’s list of banned nations were offended, and rightly so. According the article by Bill Chappell, an influential Shiite Cleric named Muqtada al-Sadr said, “the ban shows ‘swagger and an arrogance’” (Chappell).
He also said that the nation banning immigrants is also allowed to enter other countries freely including those that they have banned list. Iraq has even gone as far as having their parliament set up a reciprocal ban against United States immigrants that enter Iraq (Chappell). The countries on the list are making their own system to keep people out, and it’s almost based on the same reasons. There isn’t valid excuses to prohibit immigration based on fear of terrorism, but if the United States can ban them for no reason, they have every right to do the same.
In the same article, the Yemeni government released a statement saying, “attempts to classify Yemen or it’s citizens as a possible source of terrorism are illegal and illegitimate. (Chappell). Chappell also wrote “the Foreign Ministry said that while it is ‘aware that such action is the sovereign right for the United States, however, identifying specific countries as potential sources of terrorists needs more assessment and revision’” (Chappell). The Yemeni government is aware of that there has been terrorist attacks on the United States, but understands that the attacks were not from the countries listed.
Continuously excusing this executive order by saying that it is a safety measure is obviously an inadequate argument, and it’s even clear to other countries. Another key component the United States is not considering is the importance of foreign relations with certain Middle East countries. Consider Iraq, who has been a key ally during the war on ISIS, but also homes about 6,000 troops from the United States who are fighting ISIS (Chappell). There could be any amount of retaliation, and there are American people in the countries right now that are being that they are banned from entering the United States.
Additionally, according to the article by Alicia Parlapiano and Anjali Singhvi, there will be a screening process that determines if some bans will be indefinite (Singhvi). This could make national relations even worse, not to mention the fact that other countries that are not on the list could disapprove of the ban and back up the nations listed on the order; this would ruin relations with countries globally. In conclusion, whenever the rest of the world is in time of need, the nation that has the means to offer assistance should not turn their backs on those that are helpless.
Trump signing the executive order to ban immigrants was a brash solution to a problem that hasn’t been fully addressed, and there is no reason to keep the travel ban in effect. This ban has affected thousands of lives, is closing opportunities for those in need, and it isn’t even a valid security measure since the attacks on the United States have not been by people from the list of banned nations. It sets a double standard that ruins the reputation of the United States for years promising to help those in need and look past religion. For these reasons, the immigration ban executive order should be vetoed and overridden immediately.
