Time
By Ian Bremmer
November 30, 2015
In the wake of the Paris attacks, the U.S. has turned against Syrian refugees. Here's why:
Of
the 4.2 million Syrians displaced since that country’s civil war began
in 2011, America has taken in 2,290—or 0.0005 percent of the total. But
to hear many American
politicians speak in the wake of the terrorist attacks in Paris, Syrian
refugees pose an immense security threat. So far, all they’ve brought
about is a serious identity crisis for the U.S. These five facts explain
America’s reaction to Syrian refugees.
1. Governors
Some
31 U.S. governors—all but one Republican—have announced that Syrian
refugees would not be welcome in their states. Given the press coverage,
you would think that
individual states have a say in U.S. refugee policy—they don’t. Once
refugees are admitted into the U.S. by the federal government, they are
free to settle wherever they choose. So far in 2015, the lion’s share of
the 1,869 Syrian refugees admitted have settled
in six states—California (218 refugees), Michigan (198), Texas (194),
Illinois (136), Arizona (153) and Pennsylvania (138). Of these states,
only California and Pennsylvania—both with Democratic governors—continue
to “welcome” Syrian refugees.
Among
the politicians who have come out against Syrian refugees is GOP
hopeful and Ohio Governor John Kasich. His own state offers a
counterexample. In 2012, local refugee
services in Cleveland spent about $4.8 million to help refugees get
settled in the area. In turn, these refugees had a positive impact on
the economy worth about $48 million, a ten-fold return on investment.
Refugees, when given the proper support, can be
a boon to local economies.
2. Presidential Candidates
Over
the last four decades, the U.S. has admitted nearly 3 million refugees.
You wouldn’t know it from the way presidential candidates are talking.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz
plans to introduce legislation that would ban Muslim Syrian refugees
from entering the U.S. If there is any presidential candidate who should
appreciate the plight of refugees, it’s Cruz, whose father fled
Castro’s regime in Cuba in the 1950s. Ben Carson has
used a particularly offensive analogy to rabid dogs when explaining why
he is against letting in Syrian refugees. Donald Trump has pushed for
increased surveillance of “certain mosques” and a specialized Muslim
database to track their activities. Of the 12
GOP candidates actually polling (sorry Jim Gilmore), 7 have come out
against Syrian refugees outright, 3 want to “pause” their admission, and
Jeb Bush and Cruz make special allowances for Christian Syrians. How
Christian of them.
Democratic
candidates have avoided the same colorful rhetoric, but their proposals
don’t move the needle much more. Bernie Sanders is content supporting
Obama’s 10,000
Syrian refugee policy. Both Hillary Clinton and Martin O’Malley have
called for an additional 65,000 Syrian refugees to be accepted over the
next five years. That’s a paltry sum compared to the hundreds of
thousands of Syrian refugees currently fleeing to
Europe.
3. Congress
In
September, President Obama proposed allowing an additional 10,000
Syrian refugees to come to the U.S. over the next year. The White House
has the authority to unilaterally
determine how many refugees can be admitted into the U.S., but it is up
to Congress to fund the resettlements. In the 2014 fiscal year, it cost
$1.1 billion to resettle and train 70,000 refugees, or roughly $15,700
per refugee.
Congress
is having none of it. The House last week voted 289-137 to pass a bill
requiring the FBI director, the secretary of homeland security and the
director of national
intelligence to all certify that each individual refugee poses no
security risk to the U.S. In the name of increased security, the House
is aiming to slow Syrian refugee intake to a crawl. The vote was
bipartisan, with 47 Democrats joining 242 Republicans
in voting for the bill, giving the legislation a veto-proof majority if
those numbers hold. The U.S. has been the largest contributor of aid to
Syria since 2011, sending more than $4 billion to date in humanitarian
aid. But as events this year have shown,
simply throwing money at Syria is not going to help solve the
humanitarian crisis.
4. The American Public
In
a Gallup poll conducted this past summer, 63 percent of Americans said
that immigration is a “good thing” for the country overall. But a
Bloomberg Politics poll last
week, conducted in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Paris,
found that 53 percent of Americans don’t want to accept any Syrian
refugees; 11 percent said they would only accept Christian refugees from
Syria. Unfortunately, this is well in line with
America’s history with refugees. In 1948, a Gallup poll found that 57
percent of Americans would disapprove of resettling 10,000 displaced
Europeans in their state. In 1975, only 36 percent of Americans wanted
to take in Vietnamese refugees; in 1980, 71 percent
of Americans were against Cuban refugees coming to the U.S. Some habits
die hard.
5. Other Countries
Over
the last four years, the Turkish government has spent roughly $5.72
billion to feed and shelter Syrian refugees, who number 2.2 million in
the country. Despite the
apparent economic burden, the Turkish economy is expected to grow 3
percent this year. Smaller Lebanon, which is currently housing 1.1
million refugees, will see an economic growth rate of 2 percent. Jordan
has taken in 630,000 Syrian refugees—more than 10
percent of its own population—and is also expected to see its GDP rise 3
percent this year. Sometimes, doing the right thing pays off.
On
the other side of the Atlantic, Canada’s new Prime Minister Justin
Trudeau showed that it’s possible to win elections by promising to do
more, not less, to help Syrian
refugees. During his campaign, he pledged to accept 25,000 Syrian
refugees by the end of 2015. As prime minister, he now has six weeks
left to follow through. Meanwhile, France repeated its promises to take
in 30,000 Syrian refugees over the next two years,
a statement of defiance after the Paris attacks. It’s a message America
should listen to.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment