Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free – maybe

Christopher Curran
Posted 9/21/15

The words of poet Emma Lazarus which are mounted at the base of the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor may not hold the same meaning they once did. At least that may be true in regard to the Syrian …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in

Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free – maybe

Posted

The words of poet Emma Lazarus which are mounted at the base of the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor may not hold the same meaning they once did. At least that may be true in regard to the Syrian refugee crisis.

Those who have fled the war-torn country of Syria have faced death and deprivation. However, regardless of the conspicuous needs of these imperiled people, their exodus has caused extensive unrest throughout many countries in the Middle East and Europe. This destabilization has prompted the question of who else is responsible for this distress beyond the obvious devilment of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Also, has the United States done enough to aid the fleeing and to provide a permanent destination for the displaced?

So far, Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan have borne the brunt of this mass migration in search of havens of relative safety. However, the capacity of these nations to accommodate the wayward has reached critical mass. As a result, both Eastern European and now Western European countries are receiving those fleeing Syria in varying yet growing numbers.

The scope of this crisis continues to escalate, and international refugee agencies are no longer able to cope with the ever-escalating burdens of meeting the needs of the displaced. Thus, the current circumstances beg the question of whether the degree of American involvement in the refugees’ rescue is appropriate, as well as how culpable our country may be in the causes of this problem in the first place.

According to the “Encyclopedia of Ellis Island,” over one-fifth of the current population of the United States is descended from immigrants who came through Ellis Island, beckoned by the “Lady with the Lamp,” the Statue of Liberty. Whereas open immigration was once the law of the land, at times our country has periodically had to restrict the number of newcomers.

Quota laws and entrance requirements weeded out those who would augment our society, those who might harm us, and those who would rely on our largesse. Since the 9/11 attacks and the following “War on Terror,” our government has stated a policy of stricter scrutinizing of who resides in our nation. This vigilance is not only warranted but absolutely necessary to guard against possible acts of terrorism.

Although the policing of our southern border had certainly belied our government’s policy assertion in this regard, in theory our objective is to safeguard against the possible entrance of suspected terrorists.

Therein is the problem in opening our borders to Syrian refugees. To date, the United States has accepted 1,500 Syrian refugees. This week President Obama has ordered the further accommodation of 10,000 more Syrian citizens into our country. The problem with this proposed benevolence is that there is no way to vet the newcomers. Seeded within the immigrant populous could be Al Qaeda operatives or Islamic State sleeper cells/terrorists. We simply would have no way of knowing. Backgrounds are not verifiable. To possibly welcome ticking time bombs into our nation is foolish. Thus far, our country has contributed over $3 billion through international agencies to the care of these refugees overseas. We should continue this policy on a humanitarian basis, but we should not open our doors to possible harm.

Obama is responding imprudently to global criticism and is committing another foreign policy blunder. Moreover, by increasing the amount of Syrian refugees accepted to our shores, the president is endangering our homeland security. Perhaps his motivation is guilt.

When the president ordered the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, he failed to strike a “status of forces” agreement with the Iraqi government. Our military leaders recommended that we leave between 15,000 and 30,000 quick response troops in the country to avoid factional violence. Obama elected not to take the generals’ advice. Other than a token force of military trainers, we left extensive supplies of armaments that are now being used by Islamic State forces to conquer Iraq and Northern Syria. The Iraqi army for the most part has tucked tail and ran in the face of the Islamic State forces.

Similarly mistaken were the president’s actions regarding Syria. When the Syrian Civil War broke out following the “Arab Spring” movement of 2011, the president make repeated assertions on how Assad should act or else there would be repercussions. Obama warned of a “red line” that Assad should not cross regarding certain offensive weapons the Syrian leader was using against the rebels within his country. Subsequently, Assad surpassed that red line and Obama did nothing other than utter more empty rhetoric.

Maybe admitting possibly dangerous people into the United States will somehow demonstrate Obama’s mea culpa for several missteps in Middle East policy.

There is no doubt that the Syrian people are suffering. Their country has been ripped apart by a heinous dictator who is being propped up by Russia and Iran. Simultaneously, the vicious religious zealots from the Islamic State (ISIS-ISIL) are encroaching brutally into their country as well.

As a result, half of the Syrian population is on the move. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), as of January 2012, there were 5,238 registered Syrian refugees. As of July 2015, that number has escalated to 1.7 million. Beyond those refugees registered with international aid agencies, the aggregate amount of refugees outside Syria is estimated at four million, while there are an additional two million displaced people who have lost their homes but are still within Syria’s borders.

Unquestionably benevolent and undeniably risky, Germany has been the most welcoming of Western European countries to Syrians on the run. Last week alone, Germany accepted 40,000 refugees. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has faced great and intensifying criticism for her open-door policy from both the opposing political parties and her own Christian Democrats. Despite this, Merkel has committed to receiving up to 800,000 fleeing Syrians. Although border guards have been beefed up to effectuate an orderly entrance to Germany, Germany is being overwhelmed. German Vice-Chancellor Signor Gabriel has expressed the government’s exasperation, “Because of the speed of which large numbers people are coming in, Germany is approaching a situation where we are reaching our limits.”

Germany should be heralded for its blind kindness toward these displaced people. However, the danger they may be unwittingly embedding into their society may arise disastrously in the future. Presumably, most of these refugees are simply unfortunate displaced people searching for a stable home. Yet, if even a small percentage of them harbor a zealous harmful intent, then accepting them is not worth the risk.

The United States should continue with aid to these refugees through international agencies, for we are a benevolent nation, but we should not be a foolish nation. In a world where Islamic extremists seek any opportunity to murder Americans, we must tread carefully. Obama’s gesture of increasing the amount of Syrian newcomers to 10,000 is yet another mistake in a long series of mistakes concerning this region.

Give us your tired, your poor, and your huddled masses – providing you don’t intend your new neighbors any harm!

Comments

1 comment on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • Broken02919

    These characters will be the easiest way for ISIS to infiltrate the U.S.

    Wait and see...

    Monday, September 21, 2015 Report this