Decision: As the U.S. elections approach, the American people must make clear to both parties that they support policies that reduce mass migration and enable massive population transfers. This includes reinforcing border security, completing the border wall, implementing stricter immigration vetting, and an immigration system based on merit and an individual’s willingness to assimilate to American norms. Additionally, the U.S. must vocally defend the right of nation-states -particularly western allies- to defend their sovereignty and national borders against those who seek to subsume them.
Reason: The Trump administration has already taken several significant steps to end the mass transfer of refugees and migrants from areas where vetting of refugee’s backgrounds is not feasible, and has substantially reduced refugee resettlement quotas in favor of supporting refugees in areas closer to conflict zones.
Increasingly hostile nations and non-state actors continue to express a willingness to facilitate mass migration as part of an effort to disrupt and undermine the sovereignty of western countries. Jiihadist groups seek to use the cover of such migrations to infiltrate national borders to engage in terrorism. Despite these threats, U.S. allies continue to face pressure to accept refugees and migrants who cannot be vetted or assimilated.
As the President made clear in his speech in Warsaw in July of 2017, these issues are deeply intertwined with national security:
“The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive… Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?”
The decision whether to continue to advance immigration and border policies which promote American security or to abandon them and adopt the failed policies of Europe is likely to be a major campaign issue in the 2020 election season.
Background: the historical decision by European elites to encourage mass and unregulated migration from Arab and Muslim countries has resulted in substantial disruptions to the social fabric and security of European countries, as Robert Spencer, author of the Center for Security Policy’s newest Monograph, Mass Migration in Europe: A Model of the U.S.? successfully demonstrates.
The rise of the Islamic State resulted in a significant increase in terror attacks as terrorists moved through unsecured borders as part of migrant waves from Libya and across the Turkish border into eastern Europe. So-called “No-Go zones” -where law enforcement faces significant risk of violence to enforce the law in city zones and where support for radical Islam predominates- have become a facet of life in too many European cities. Brutal antisemitism has reemerged and become increasingly tolerated by European authorities.
Rather than address these challenges the European Union, and several leading European states, have chosen a model of suppressing free speech about the challenges created by large scale Muslim migration and continue to promote policies which encourage a refusal to assimilate in European society. Finally, they have chosen to blame and repress populist political reaction to these failed policies rather than address the concerns of citizens, which has in turn further spread domestic disharmony and undermined security.
Governing Laws and Regulations: Using authority provided by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., and section 301 of title 3, U.S.C., President Trump has issued and subsequently refined a number of executive orders aimed at restricting travel and immigration from nations with a significant risk of terrorism. Opponents have falsely smeared these executive orders as a “Muslim ban,” despite that they have encompassed travel from several non-Muslim majority states, and have made their repeal a major campaign point.
The Trump has substantially reduced ceilings on refugee resettlement after record high refugee admission ceilings set during the Obama administration. The Trump Administration has also sought to combat mass migration by seeking “safe third party” agreements with Central American states to reduce the number of migrants illegitimately seeking asylum.
Bottom Line: As Spencer’s book Mass Migration in Europe: A Model for the U.S.? makes clear, Americans should be very concerned about the possibility of adopting European-style immigration and border policies which would harm national security and counterterrorism efforts, weaken the ability of the country to positively assimilate new immigrants, and ultimately undermine the American societal fabric. Voters must make clear that they oppose such policies, and categorically state that Europe is not a model for the U.S. when it comes to mass migration.
- Situation Report: Synagogue held hostage as terrorist seeks release of notorious jihadist - January 17, 2022
- Senate Democrats continue attacks on local law enforcement under cover of preventing “extremism” - January 12, 2022
- Situation Report: Does Molotov cocktail attack on NYPD cruiser signal increase in European-style left-wing militancy? - January 12, 2022