New Travel Ban in the Works
by Right Wing Fighter
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is preparing to sign a revised executive order temporarily barring the entry of people from certain Muslim-majority countries and halting the nation’s refugee program.
A White House official says plans to roll out the order are on track for Monday. The official insisted on anonymity in order to discuss the order ahead of the official announcement.
The new order has been in the works since shortly after a federal court blocked Trump’s initial effort, but the administration has repeatedly pushed back the signing as it has worked to better coordinate with the agencies that it will need to implement the ban.
Trump administration officials have said the new order aims to overcome the legal challenges to the first. Its goal will be the same: keep would-be terrorists out of the United States while the government reviews the vetting system for refugees and visa applicants from certain parts of the world.
Trump’s original orders temporarily blocked citizens of Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Syria and Libya from coming to the United States and put on hold the U.S. refugee program.
The revised order is expected to remove Iraq from the list of countries whose citizens face a temporary U.S. travel ban for 90 days. That follows pressure from the Pentagon and State Department, which had urged the White House to reconsider, given Iraq’s key role in fighting the Islamic State group.
It always astonishes me how many anonymous sources exist in the government. Unless Trump wants leaks like this for some purpose, he should clamp down on it.
It’s also aggravating that the State Department and the Pentagon urged Trump to remove Iraq from the list. So what if Iraq is fighting the Islamic State: they are doing it as a matter of self-preservation. Thus there are no kudos to be earned by removing them from the ban list. Will they dislike us more? Sure. But so what: they’ll keep fighting the Islamic State anyway, and will be more than willing to receive our aid.
This is symptomatic of a problem in the Pentagon: they are always looking for ‘partners’ on the world stage to work with. Additionally, they think there can be a personal or emotional connection between the US and other countries. As such, they are aggravatingly careful of the feelings of nations like Iraq. They think that a psychological connection is possible.
But it isn’t. Iraq doesn’t like us and never will. To them, our support is merely a means to an end. There is no way we can ever have a sort of friendship with them. The whole concept of friendship between nations betrays an utter misunderstanding of foreign diplomacy: nations work together to help themselves*. Sentimental connections are wrongheaded.
And thus, the kind of ‘win their hearts and minds’ campaign that the Pentagon and State Department have in mind is wrongheaded. All it will do is weaken our bargaining position. It will also put us in a state of mind that will accept burdens we don’t need.
Again: Iraq is not fighting the Islamic State for our sake. They are fighting it for their own. Thus, there is no need to keep them happy with us. It isn’t possible anyway.
* This is not cynicism: the only right thing for a nation to do for its people is to look after them. That means getting the best deal it can, even at the expense of other nations. To engage their people in a sentimental arrangement with another power would be to betray their own people.