Provoking Xenophobia Only Rationale for Trump’s Muslim Ban: US Analyst

“If the Trump administration was really concerned with protecting American lives they would ban travel to the US from countries like Saudi Arabia…,” Dennis Etler, a professor of Anthropology at Cabrillo College in Aptos, California, said in an interview with the Tasnim News Agency.

“The only rationale for the ban is to fulfill President Trump's demagogic Islamophobic campaign promise to ban Muslim travel to the US and to provoke xenophobic fears within the US body politic,” he said.

“At the same time the ban targets nations that the US has destabilized while protecting those in which it has economic and political assets,” the analyst added.

Following is the full text of the interview:

Tasnim: As you know, US President Donald Trump on January 27 signed an executive order that imposes a 90-day entry ban for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, and Somalia, blocks refugees from Syria indefinitely, and suspends all refugee admissions for 120 days. The move has sparked confusion and anger at major US airports. In fact, Trump's executive order is a Muslim ban. This is while a recent study from Duke University sociologist Charles Kurzman has found that Muslims living in the United State were involved in only one-third of 1 percent of all murders in the country in 2016. What is the aim of such a move? What repercussions will this have?

Etler: The United States is notorious for the number of mass shootings that occur on an ongoing basis. The vast majority of these shootings are perpetuated by native-born White Christians, many motivated by racist White nationalist ideology. These domestic terrorists have attacked Black religious congregations, women's health clinics, and other public spaces. It is true that over the last few years there have been a number of high-profile mass shootings done by people of Middle Eastern heritage. These are however a small percentage of the total number of mass shootings recently conducted in the US. In addition, most of these shooters have been born in the US or have been naturalized US citizens. Moreover, none of them came from or have roots in the countries subject to the travel ban. Their ethnic roots have been Pakistani, Afghan, Chechen, Saudi Arabian, and Jordanian.

There is thus no rational reason for the targeting of the seven Muslim nations under question. If the Trump administration was really concerned with protecting American lives they would ban travel to the US from countries like Saudi Arabia, Chechnya (a republic with the Russian Federation), and Jordan. In addition, Turkey has served as a staging ground and transit point for terrorist attacks in other countries and Egypt which is the motherland of Takfiri terrorist groups. If a travel ban is to be imposed, it would make sense to include both Turkey and Egypt as well. But any travel ban of whatever sort is uncalled for. US vetting of visa applicants and refugees is already extremely rigorous. There is no need for the egregious actions taken by the present administration.

It also should be noted that all the targeted nations have been subject to direct US invasion or US-sponsored proxy wars, generating millions of casualties and refugees and leading to them becoming failed states.

The only rationale for the ban is to fulfill President Trump's demagogic Islamophobic campaign promise to ban Muslim travel to the US and to provoke xenophobic fears within the US body politic. At the same time the ban targets nations that the US has destabilized while protecting those in which it has economic and political assets.

Tasnim: As you know Trump has excluded Saudi Arabia and certain Persian Gulf states in his order. Back in July 2016, the US government released 28 pages of a congressional report on the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, which show the Saudi government may have had a hand in the attacks. “While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government…there is information, primarily from FBI sources, that at least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers,” reads part of the report. What is your take on this?

Etler: The nations targeted by both Obama and Trump have in the past all stood up to US imperialism and asserted independent foreign policies. As a result, they have all been subject to US attempts at regime change. Saudi Arabia and many of the other non-targeted majority Muslim nations have been US allies and have supported US foreign policy, including the funding, arming and training of Takfiri terrorists who have launched proxy wars against the banned nations. It is no surprise then that Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf States have not been included in the ban. In addition to supporting US policy, their elites have close financial ties with US business interests. It would thus be very inconvenient to target them.

Tasnim: How do you see the US move from a legal perspective? Do you agree that it is against the US Constitution and international law? Is there any legal procedure whereby the order can be canceled? Kindly explain.

Etler: There is a good reason to suspect that the bans are unconstitutional and go against International law. They will certainly be contested in US courts. The US consistently ignores international laws and norms when they are not in their interests, but condemns other nations who they say are in contravention to them.

Tasnim: In your opinion, what response should the seven countries, including Iran, make to this move by the new US administration?

Etler: The seven nations should reciprocate in kind and seek alliances with countries such as China and Russia that can help them resolve their internal conflicts and reconstruct their nations.