Wrong Message To the Muslim
World
The Washington
Post, February 5, 2003
Ejaz Haider, Visiting
Fellow, Foreign Policy Studies
On Jan. 28, two agents from
the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) arrested me
outside my office at the Brookings Institution. In a matter of
moments I was transformed from research scholar at a venerable
Washington think tank to suspect, from a person with a name and a
face to a "body," a non-person. I was put in a car, taken to a
detention center, locked in a cell, and stripped not just of my belt
and shoelaces but of my pride and dignity—all because of my
nationality.
As a visiting scholar from
Pakistan, where I am an editor, I had visited the State Department
and attended functions with senior U.S. officials. But as far as the
Justice Department was concerned, I was someone to be stalked and
brought in by burly federal agents. I am only one of hundreds of
victims, from Pakistan and elsewhere, who have suffered such
indignities under the absurd new policy that requires foreign
nationals from numerous Muslim countries to register with the INS:
the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System. Many have
fared far worse than I.
your view
After reading this opinion,
tell us what you think. We'll post the most interesting
comments.
send YOUR
VIEW
| For more than a century,
people from all over the world have come to the United States to
escape repression and enjoy its freedoms. Perhaps for the first time
in American history, we are witnessing the spectacle of families
migrating from the United States in search of safety.
It is argued that this policy
is meant to increase security for the United States. A worse way of
doing so could hardly be imagined. The policy is an attempt to draw
a Maginot line around America. Not only is it likely to fail in
securing the homeland, it is creating more resentment against the
United States. Does America need a policy that fails to
differentiate between friend and foe? Not only has the Justice
Department designed such a policy, it has authorized the INS,
arguably the most inefficient of the bureaucratic organizations, to
implement it.
The argument that, as a
Brookings scholar, I should have known or did know about the
registration policy is wrong.
On Oct. 22, 2002, I was
registered at the airport. I was told to return for a second
interview on or before Dec. 2. But before that date I learned that
Pakistan was not on the INS list of countries. So I checked with the
INS help line and was told that I did not need to go in for a second
interview. Later in December, Pakistan (along with Saudi Arabia) was
put on the list and the INS issued another deadline for
registration, sometime in February. But even then, the registration
requirement related only to Pakistani nationals who had entered the
United States before Sept. 30, 2002.
I did not know I was in
violation of the INS policy. Brookings did not know I was in
violation. My friends in the State Department did not know I was in
violation. And if—even after following the policy closely and
calling the INS for information—we could not understand the law,
what hope can there be for the cabdriver or the restaurant worker
who doesn't have the leisure to discover the letter and intent of
INS policies?
The Justice Department's job
is not foreign policy, of course, and part of its duty is to prevent
both American citizens and legitimate visitors from doing or
suffering harm in this country. The INS should keep a watchful eye
on potentially dangerous foreigners, but it must do a much better
job of distinguishing them from the vast majority of foreign
nationals in this country who seek only to work, study and obey the
law. Moreover, the law itself must be clear and fair for those to
whom it applies.
As matters stand, the policy
draws on the "us vs. them" syndrome. The very question of "why they
hate us" is begotten of the binary logic of terrorism and does
incredible damage by removing the distinction between the U.S.
government and America, between the official United States and
American society. The irony is that confusing these two distinct
categories is the big achievement not of "terrorists" but of the
U.S. government itself. There are many people out there who may not,
and do not, agree with U.S. policies, but neither do they hate
America.
Mere rhetoric about Islam's
being a great religion or the fact that the war on terrorism is not
a war on Islam or even that registration is not about racial and
religious profiling will not do. People out there are neither stupid
nor intellectually challenged. It does not serve any purpose for the
United States to test their intelligence.
©
Copyright 2003 The
Washington Post
Note: The views
expressed in this piece are those of the author and should not be
attributed to the staff, officers or trustees of The Brookings
Institution |