EDITORIAL: National community should not deny Syrian refugees


screen_shot_20151122_at_85934_pm

The United States has accepted less than 2,000 Syrian refugees and President Barack Obama plans to welcome 10,000 by the end of the year.

On Thursday, the House of Representatives passed a bill that imposes additional security measures on refugees from Syria. Last week, more than half of our country's governors, including Gov. Rick Snyder, declared they would not allow refugees into their states.

The reactions of these politicians imply that civilians at risk of death should be turned away from protection because of their nationality, ethnicity or religion. A climate of fear and paranoia has settled in since the violent attacks in Paris, eliciting a knee-jerk reaction that promotes dangerous forms of xenophobia and prejudice.

A plan to resettle the 10,000 refugees in the United States has come under intense scrutiny after a Syrian passport was found near one of the attackers in Paris. The discovery has heightened fears that terrorists could exploit resettlement programs to attack America from the inside.

It's easy to understand why some fear poorly-vetted immigrants from Syria. But that's not how this process works. Refugees can't just fly across the Atlantic Ocean and earn citizenship; it's a process that can take years.

Refugees are subject to the strictest form of security screening of any class of traveler to the U.S., with extensive background, security and health checks. The resettlement process is run by the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Health and Human Services.

It's sad to see some elected officials decide not to educate and inform, but instead fan the flames of suspicion and intolerance. It's embarrassing that Snyder was one of more than 30 governors who said they will not accept Syrian refugees in their state, something they are not even legally capable of doing.

At different moments in history, the United States has excluded or profiled people under the guise of national security. History has always proven these actions to be wrong.

In 1939, the U.S. turned away the St. Louis, a boat of Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi Germany. Half of the passengers were killed in the Holocaust after returning to Europe.

The Great Depression left millions of people in the U.S. unemployed and fearful of competition for the scarce few jobs available. It also fueled xenophobia, nativism, and isolationism with the creation of immigration acts that specifically excluded some ethnicities.

After Pearl Harbor, Japanese American citizens were forced into internment camps, losing their homes and properties in the process. In 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act, which apologized for the internment and admitted that those government actions were based on "race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership."

After 9/11, a wave of Islamaphobia swept through the United States. Before the world trade center attacks, the FBI recorded just 28 hate crimes against Muslims. The following year it increased to 481.

It's hard to argue with fear. It allows little room for cool-headed decision making.

In that context, the response of many Americans after the Paris attacks is at least understandable. It is manifested as a resistance to accept refugees from a place where the Islamic State holds territory.

People who trek hundreds of miles on foot or cram into rubber rafts for voyages across oceans have more pressing objectives than violence. They do it to escape extremism, not to spread it.

Fear leaves little room for rational thought or compassion, but should not be an excuse to turn thousands of refugees away from safety.

 The fact that our elected leaders have chosen indifference over compassion.

Share: