Excellent column in the Trib this morning:
If ever there was a time to open America's door to refugees fleeing the Islamic State terror in the Middle East, it's now. Instead, our gatekeepers, including Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner, are slamming that door in their face.
The open-door argument rests only partly on the nation's tradition as a safe haven for the world's "tempest-tossed," as promised by the inscription on the Statue of Liberty. Rather, it's based solidly on America's own self-interest.
Rauner, in joining other Republican governors in blocking any Syrian refugees, recalled "our tradition as a state welcoming of refugees" but said he had to balance that by "ensuring the safety and security of our citizens."
Like those other governors, he got that balance wrong. If the Paris terrorists hoped their attacks would provoke the U.S. and its allies into reacting with small-minded panic, they're getting their wish.
Certainly, the risk exists — but it's small. The upside is huge.
The usual justification for unfettered immigration rests on the fact that much of America's progress over the centuries, from the nation's founding to Silicon Valley, has been the work of immigrants, some of them fleeing awful places.
But there's a more immediate reason, and it's rooted in the havoc posed by the waves of Syrian and other refugees into our Middle Eastern allies and, especially, into Europe.
The history here is frightening. Twice in the last century the United States had to help end two world wars in Europe. The cost to this country, in blood and treasure, was enormous.
After World War II, the West Europeans, backed by the U.S., began the European project, the piece-by-piece unification of the continent that has led to the European Union. Billed as an economic project, it actually had the political and historic goal of uniting Europe so thoroughly it could never again make war on itself.
It's worked, so far. The American analyst Robert Kagan has called the result "a post-national paradise." But it's still unfinished — a European community, but not a United States of Europe.
Europe's future stability rests on maintaining this steady progress, placing one brick on another to build a European house. Suddenly, all this could be thrown into reverse. The near-collapse of the euro shook Europe to its roots. Now comes the refugee crisis, which may destroy another key step in the process, the Schengen Agreement, which has opened Europe's internal borders, permitting free movement between 22 of the EU's 28 member states.
For these historical reasons, a destabilized Europe is too dangerous — for them and for us — to contemplate. We have a deep vested interest in helping the Europeans survive this crisis. This means working with European allies and it means taking in as many refugees ourselves as we can.
Is there a risk? Sure, but it's minuscule. The Migration Policy Institute in Washington, using State Department data, calculates that the U.S. has admitted 784,000 refugees since the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Of all these, only three have been accused of terrorist-related activities, none aimed at this country.
We've been here before. Before and during World War II, we turned down applications from hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees, many of whom later died in the Holocaust. After the war, we admitted 137,000 Jewish refugees. Later, after the Vietnam War, we admitted 402,000 Vietnamese refugees. There certainly were some communists among those Jewish refugees and a few Viet Cong veterans among the Vietnamese. But few Americans doubt that these refugees were a big net plus for this country.
The alternative now to an open-door policy is to leave the Syrian refugees and their children festering in Middle Eastern camps, creating the radical armies of the future.
Timorous know-nothings such as Donald Trump have been spewing the expected hatred toward the Syrian refugees, echoed by too many Republican presidential candidates playing to their party's nativist base. President Barack Obama, who really does know better, has been too silent, even though he has nothing to lose by speaking up for American decency, common sense and self-interest.
Illinois has literally been built by immigrants, including refugees. It's sad now to see Rauner cowering in the corner with the other governors, when so much depended on him doing the right thing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ois-islamic-state-perspec-20151116-story.html
If ever there was a time to open America's door to refugees fleeing the Islamic State terror in the Middle East, it's now. Instead, our gatekeepers, including Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner, are slamming that door in their face.
The open-door argument rests only partly on the nation's tradition as a safe haven for the world's "tempest-tossed," as promised by the inscription on the Statue of Liberty. Rather, it's based solidly on America's own self-interest.
Rauner, in joining other Republican governors in blocking any Syrian refugees, recalled "our tradition as a state welcoming of refugees" but said he had to balance that by "ensuring the safety and security of our citizens."
Like those other governors, he got that balance wrong. If the Paris terrorists hoped their attacks would provoke the U.S. and its allies into reacting with small-minded panic, they're getting their wish.
Certainly, the risk exists — but it's small. The upside is huge.
The usual justification for unfettered immigration rests on the fact that much of America's progress over the centuries, from the nation's founding to Silicon Valley, has been the work of immigrants, some of them fleeing awful places.
But there's a more immediate reason, and it's rooted in the havoc posed by the waves of Syrian and other refugees into our Middle Eastern allies and, especially, into Europe.
The history here is frightening. Twice in the last century the United States had to help end two world wars in Europe. The cost to this country, in blood and treasure, was enormous.
After World War II, the West Europeans, backed by the U.S., began the European project, the piece-by-piece unification of the continent that has led to the European Union. Billed as an economic project, it actually had the political and historic goal of uniting Europe so thoroughly it could never again make war on itself.
It's worked, so far. The American analyst Robert Kagan has called the result "a post-national paradise." But it's still unfinished — a European community, but not a United States of Europe.
Europe's future stability rests on maintaining this steady progress, placing one brick on another to build a European house. Suddenly, all this could be thrown into reverse. The near-collapse of the euro shook Europe to its roots. Now comes the refugee crisis, which may destroy another key step in the process, the Schengen Agreement, which has opened Europe's internal borders, permitting free movement between 22 of the EU's 28 member states.
For these historical reasons, a destabilized Europe is too dangerous — for them and for us — to contemplate. We have a deep vested interest in helping the Europeans survive this crisis. This means working with European allies and it means taking in as many refugees ourselves as we can.
Is there a risk? Sure, but it's minuscule. The Migration Policy Institute in Washington, using State Department data, calculates that the U.S. has admitted 784,000 refugees since the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Of all these, only three have been accused of terrorist-related activities, none aimed at this country.
We've been here before. Before and during World War II, we turned down applications from hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees, many of whom later died in the Holocaust. After the war, we admitted 137,000 Jewish refugees. Later, after the Vietnam War, we admitted 402,000 Vietnamese refugees. There certainly were some communists among those Jewish refugees and a few Viet Cong veterans among the Vietnamese. But few Americans doubt that these refugees were a big net plus for this country.
The alternative now to an open-door policy is to leave the Syrian refugees and their children festering in Middle Eastern camps, creating the radical armies of the future.
Timorous know-nothings such as Donald Trump have been spewing the expected hatred toward the Syrian refugees, echoed by too many Republican presidential candidates playing to their party's nativist base. President Barack Obama, who really does know better, has been too silent, even though he has nothing to lose by speaking up for American decency, common sense and self-interest.
Illinois has literally been built by immigrants, including refugees. It's sad now to see Rauner cowering in the corner with the other governors, when so much depended on him doing the right thing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ois-islamic-state-perspec-20151116-story.html
