At
War Critics say immigration tactics threaten security
By JOE FEUERHERD
Washington
Heavy-handed enforcement of immigration laws designed to unearth
terrorist cells within U.S. Muslim communities is backfiring and makes
Americans more susceptible to attack, according to some immigration and
national security experts.
That critique of the ongoing crackdown on Middle Easterners who
overstay visas or who otherwise violate U.S. immigration laws is widely shared
by civil libertarians and advocates for the undocumented, who argue that the
Justice Department and the Immigration and Naturalization Services
approach to apprehending terrorists within U.S. borders is wrongheaded. (In
March, the functions of the Immigration and Naturalization Service were
subsumed into the Department of Homeland Security under two new bureaus: the
Border and Transportation Security Directorate and the Bureau of Citizenship
and Immigration Services.)
But another voice in the debate is being increasingly heard:
Security experts who warn that the government is missing the terrorist forest
for the immigration trees.
Secret detentions, deportations and registration requirements
targeted to citizens of 25 mostly Muslim countries have alienated a lot
of these communities, caused a great deal of fear and reinforced the tendency
of immigrant communities to huddle together and not trust authorities, which
works against intelligence gathering by law enforcement, particularly the
FBI, said Vincent Cannistraro, former director of Counterterrorism
Operations and Analysis at the Central Intelligence Agency.
The idea that you stigmatize whole classes of people and
profile them because you think this is going to prevent the next terrorist
attack is exactly the wrong way [to go about it], Cannistraro told
NCR. There may very well be another clandestine al-Qaeda cell in
North America, but none of these methodologies has contributed to identifying
them, Cannistraro said.
Critics of the administrations approach point to more than
60 administrative actions taken by the Justice Department and the INS over the
past 19 months, including expanded detention without charges, closed
immigration hearings, coordinated arrests of illegal aliens working at airports
and other sensitive security sites, and a gag order that prevents state
authorities from releasing information on detainees.
As a recent part of the governments effort, foreign-born,
non-citizen males age 16 or over from countries considered high-risk terrorist
exporters must register at a designated immigration office. The
deadline for Pakistani and Saudi Arabian males was March 21, while citizens of
Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan and Kuwait have until April 25. Those
registering will be photographed, fingerprinted and interviewed under oath,
according to the immigration officials.
Rather than face deportation, hundreds of non-residents who have
overstayed their visas -- most of them natives of Pakistan -- have applied to
Canada for refugee status. They are being assisted and housed by the Salvation
Army in Vermont.
The rationale for the crackdown was stated by Attorney General
John Ashcroft soon after Sept. 11: Aggressive detention of lawbreakers
and material witnesses is vital to preventing, disrupting or delaying new
attacks. It is difficult for a person in jail or under detention to murder
innocent people or to aid or abet in terrorism.
And there are those who say the Ashcroft approach hasnt gone
far enough. The immigration measures taken since 9/11 are small steps in
the right direction, for the most part, but remain woefully inadequate,
said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies.
Immigration enforcement is one of the best tools for tripping up
terrorists because if you are coming here to commit an act of terrorism and
your visa expires, youre not going to say, Oh, my visa expired and
I have to go back to my home country and give up my dreams of terrorism.
Youre going to do whatever it takes, even if it includes violating
immigration law.
To Don Kerwin, executive director of the Catholic Legal
Immigration Network, aggressive immigration enforcement as an antiterror tool
is unproductive overkill. A lot of the security measures have targeted
undocumented people and thats not a very efficient way to go about it
because the lions share of the undocumented come from Mexico, Central
America and South America -- and theyre not your al-Qaeda producing
countries. The administrations approach, said Kerwin,
doesnt catch the right people and it drives the people you ought to
be befriending underground or pushes them to Canada, and that is
counterproductive as a long-term strategy.
The registration effort, said Kerwin, is particularly punitive.
Its not just registration. Its arrest and detention and
deportation. It would be a little bit different if it was in a different
climate, where the FBI was trying to befriend immigrant communities, where it
was asking people to come voluntarily forward, and if there was a firewall
between immigration enforcement and this particular program, but thats
not whats happening.
Meanwhile, the crackdown has negatively affected one group of
potential immigrants most everyone agrees are unlikely to engage in terrorism:
displaced people fleeing political or religious persecution in their home
countries. The number of refugees entering the United States has dropped from
72,000 in 2000 to 26,000 last year, and will fall far short of the ceiling of
50,000 approved by the president for this year.
Terrorists have used every other component of the
immigration system, whether its temporary visas, permanent visas, the
asylum system, sneaking across the border, coming through airports or land
crossing, Krikorian said. The only thing terrorists seem never to
have done is come here as resettled refugees. Its ironic that the one
flow of immigrants that was substantially reduced after 9/11 is the only
immigrant flow that has never contributed a terrorist to the U.S.
Following Sept. 11, the government suspended its refugee
resettlement program, explained Mark Franken, director of migration and refugee
services for the U.S. bishops conference. But even with the moratorium
lifted, concerns about security (combined with a generally understaffed
process) have stymied refugee resettlement, he said.
Now, said Franken, the cumbersome process of checking refugee
backgrounds against government security databases has slowed resettlement to a
crawl. Until there is a response from that [security] process, no refugee
can move, said Franken. And in many cases, he continued,
theres just no response -- requests between government
agencies frequently go unanswered.
Franken, too, sees irony. We are talking about
the
very people who are fleeing the terrorists and the regimes we are at war
against.
From his perspective, former CIA anti-terror chief Cannistraro
says the focus on undocumented aliens as terrorists will get worse before it
gets better. The policy, said Cannistraro, is driven by Ashcroft, not Homeland
Security Secretary Tom Ridge or others likely to have a more balanced
approach.
Said Cannistraro: The issue is extremism and John Ashcroft,
in this policy of trying to put in place legal barriers to terrorism in the
United States, is an extremist.
Meanwhile, says Krikorian, asserting control over U.S. borders is
like quitting smoking or ripping off your Band-Aid: Its not without
a certain amount of pain. And the people who are going to suffer that pain are
the illegal aliens and the businesses that have been employing them. And
thats just the way it is.
Joe Feuerherd is NCR Washington correspondent. His
e-mail address is jfeuerherd@natcath.org
Related Web
sites |
Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration
Services www.immigration.gov
Catholic Legal Immigration
Network www.cliniclegal.org
Center for Immigration
Studies www.cis.org
Department of
Justice www.usdoj.gov
Department of Homeland
Security www.dhs.gov
U.S. Bishops Office of Migration
and Refugee Services www.nccbuscc.org/mrs |
National Catholic Reporter, March 28,
2003
|