Saturday, November 28, 2015

Ben Carson visited a Syrian refugee camp in Jordan. AP.

Dr. Ben Carson. Gage Skinmore. 

Ben Carson visited a Syrian refugee camp in Jordan and says that the United States and other countries should focus on resettling them in the Middle East. AP. Carson visited the Azraq camp in Jordan on a fact finding mission and as an attempt to bolster his foreign policy credentials. The presidential candidate has taken criticism lately for his lack of foreign policy experience. Dr. Carson has been a fierce critic of President Obama's plan to resettle 10,000 Syrian refugees in America, especially after the terrorist attacks in Paris. Echoing a common concern, he fears that "mad dog" terrorists could use the refugee crisis as an opportunity to infiltrate and strike at America. As an alternative, Carson suggests resettling the refugees in the Middle East. Instead of taking in refugees, Carson argues that Western countries should send aid and encouragement to countries like Jordan and Lebanon who have taken in millions of refugees. Those countries have been overwhelmed by a lack of support and money. 

My Comment:
I've wanted to talk about the refugee crisis and Ben Carson for awhile now, and this article was a good opportunity for both. I'm primarily concerned with foreign policy but the news media has not focused on that much during the presidential campaign. Yes there have been some moments, like during the aftermath of the Paris attacks, but for the most part, the press has completely ignored policy and instead focused on character. I'd agree that character is important but it seems like they haven't been focusing on any actual issues. Maybe it's just me but I couldn't care less if Ben Carson bent the truth in his memoirs or if Donald Trump insulted someone. I want to talk about the issues, not stupid faux-scandals. 

And I think there is a lot to criticize when it comes to Ben Carson. Though I think he is a nice guy, I am not sure if I would like him as a president. His only work experience is as a surgeon. That's a noble career of course, but I am not sure if it gives him any foreign policy credentials at all. He's also pretty far away from me politically. Though I have way more in common with him then Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton, the fact that he is so very religious makes me a bit nervous. Not being all that religious myself, I have never been comfortable with the Evangelical wing of the Republican Party, and Carson is the poster boy for Evangelicals this time around. He believes some rather odd things and that combined with his lack of experience makes me wonder if I could even vote for him. There's a few people in the Republican field I like less then Dr. Ben Carson, but he's not even in my top five at this point. 

This trip though will give him a little bit of foreign policy credibility though. To my knowledge, nobody in either party has visited a refugee camp in the Middle East to visit the Syrians living there. During the next debate, expect him to talk about that fact, repeatedly. Though I don't think he could learn all that much from being there, at least he can say that he made the effort and that nobody else even tried. Will it help him? Probably not all that much, but at least now he has gotten his feet wet in the foreign policy waters. I think he should get some credit though for doing something nobody else has so far. 

As for his recommendations, they aren't anything all that new or groundbreaking. Since the refugee crisis really started taking off this summer I have heard other pundits and politicians argue for the exact same thing. That being said I really do think this is probably the best way to do it. The Middle East countries are much closer in terms of culture, religion and climate then Europe and the United States are to Europe. The refugees, if they are allowed to, will have a much easier time assimilating or even returning to Syria if the situation there ever resolves itself. 

It's probably a lot cheaper in the long run as well. Transporting refugees, finding them a home, finding them a job, training them, teaching them our language, all of these things cost money. And all of them can be done a lot cheaper in the Middle East. After all the cost of labor is a lot lower there, and you don't have to deal with as much in terms of logistics. Investing money into the Middle East will also encourage these nations to make an effort at assimilating these people and could help their economy. Nobody is going to make that effort in the United States. 

We would also avoid the kinds of problems that these refugees would inevitably cause. I'm not talking about 1st generation terrorism. I don't think all that many terrorists would be able to slip through to America. Some definitely will, but I don't think the threat here is anywhere near the level of threat in Europe. It's a threat yes, but not a major one. Most of the refugees will be women and children.

But women have kids and children grow up. I'm much more worried about the 2nd generation of Syrian refugees, especially if we can't assimilate them. A good example of this going wrong is the Somalian refugees in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Right now the Somali community there has had massive problems with their young people joining ISIS, and other terrorist groups. The 2nd generation there, for whatever reason, decided that America isn't so great after all, and that they would much rather go to Syria or Iraq to wage Jihad. Now that may not translate to these Syrian refugees, but the possibility is certainly there. If we let these refugees come in we may have a huge mess to clean up in 15 to 20 years. That's certainly what is happening in Europe right now. 

There are non-terror reasons to not allow these refugees into the United States as well. We aren't just getting the cream of the crop here. Sure, very few of the people we bring in will be terrorists, but how many of them will be criminals? Organized crime isn't just a thing that happens in the movies, it's a real threat and these refugees will bring it with them. They will want jobs, drugs, sex and passage, and what do you think will rise up to provide these things? Organized crime. That is something that should be avoided at all costs. And what about the ones that just aren't employable? Not everyone is willing or able to work. Some of these people will not offer anything of value to America.

And how many of them will be offended by some aspect of our culture? Not all of them will, but some will be offended by the way we choose to live our lives in America. We have seen in the past that even moderate Muslims get extremely upset by depictions of Mohamed. That has resulted in attempted murders and terrorist threats in this country already. I'd rather live in a country that allows people to mock anything and anybody, and I'm worried that could change if we get a critical mass of Muslims in this country. The threats that have happened so far are bad enough, and if we let these people in the problem could grow much worse. I don't want the kind of speech stiffing laws that Europe has created due in part to pressure from the Muslim community. Of course, they are far from the only threat for causing that, our own political left is salivating at the idea of restricting speech, but I still think it is a threat.

And what about other cultural issues? Sure Syria was relatively secular before the war, but that all seems to have changed now that the country has spiraled out of control. I'm firmly of the belief that the country was secular because Assad was so brutal in stamping out fundamentalism. Indeed, after he was pushed out, in many places fundamentalism thrived. There are aspects of fundamentalist Islam that nobody in the US should be uncomfortable with. Many Islamic countries have had a long history of mistreating women, homosexuals and anyone else with a different religion. Sure not all Muslims are like that but enough are that it's frightening.  

By now some of you are screaming at your computers or smartphones and saying "even if refugees cause problems, we still should help them". I'd agree. But there are better ways of doing so then bringing them here. Even if there weren't any problems caused by refugees whatsoever, there are still better options. I think Dr. Carson's plan could work. I think it would be cheaper in the long run and could avoid many of the problems inherent in bringing them here. People tend to think that there is only two options for the Syrian refugee crisis. Either bring all of them in or don't do anything to help them at all. It's a false equivalency, and couldn't be further from the truth.

I think that settling the refugees in the Middle East is the best, cheapest option, but there are still other alternatives to bringing them here. Military action is always a possibility. Though it's not a good option, creating a safe zone in Syria where these refugees could be sent to could at least alleviate the pressure a bit. Taking and holding the territory needed would be costly, but still cheaper then the economic costs that Europe and the rest of the world are paying for this crisis. Actually going in and destroying every faction in the country that is a threat is another option, and even that heavy handed plan would probably still be cheaper in the end. After all, once the country is peaceful again, there is no reason for the refugees to flee in the first place. Finally, I like my old, crazy idea of drafting many of the refugees to fight against ISIS. Right now there is no army willing or able to destroy ISIS. Why not make one?  It's probably just a pipe dream but it's a thought at least. 

Still, this situation is not going to be resolved anytime soon. I think that immigration is going to be the defining issue of this election, and perhaps global history for the next 20 years or so. People are not staying where they are from and across the world there is a massive migration of people. Everyone is moving right now and nobody seems to have any long term solutions for all the problems that this will cause. Ben Carson is a least talking about the issue, but I don't think he will be able to do much either. It's already out of control. Though the Syrian Civil War is gathering all the headlines, it is far from the only source of refugees and migrants in the world today... 

No comments:

Post a Comment