Scapegoats in the War on Terror
Excerpted from the Conclusion of We Are All Suspects Now.
What does a criminal deportee have to do with a family seeking asylum, or an undocumented migrant or a Muslim post-9/11 detainee? In the expanded security system that deals with crime, immigration, asylum, borders and migration, all these people are treated as threats to national security. This same system disproportionately punishes noncitizens. If they commit a crime, they not only serve the sentence but then are exiled for life from the country. Any mistake becomes cause for detention and deportation, the loss of livelihoods and uprooting of families. Race, religion and national origin all dictate the terms upon which a person or a community is deemed suspect, monitored and regulated.
Within suspect communities, the profiling and policing done in the name of anti-terrorism or immigration enforcement leads to remarkably similar results as the policing and imprisonment that African-American communities have faced under the war on drugs. These policies have turned up scant terrorism leads, no arrests related to the September 11 attacks and instead have netted thousands of people mostly for administrative violations and petty crime.
For noncitizens, the entry points into this security policing system are numerous. It could be from a traffic stop, domestic violence, a neighbor's tip to the FBI or upon arrival to the country as an asylum seeker. In Somali communities, chewing a traditional stimulant called khat has landed some people in deportation proceedings, since the leaf is now categorized as a controlled substance.
Law enforcement has been ratcheted up in suspect communities and that means from local police as well as federal immigration crackdowns and FBI scrutiny in the form of surveillance and questioning. These agencies have all sought ways to expand their powers and collaboration. The FBI now has the power to detain immigrants; the Border Patrol gained the power to deport without referring their arrests to the immigration courts. Police departments have for the most part resisted taking on immigration responsibilities, but that too is eroding. In Los Angeles, a city that maintained for two decades a separation of police and immigration powers, national security has provided the impetus for federal and local agencies to collaborate in pursuing suspected criminals and undocumented immigrants.
Super Threats
Post-9/11, what has changed is the surge in suspicion and scapegoating that can employ the racialized language of illegal immigration, drugs and crime, and terrorism. This is a fluid language, as Chris Simcox and other nativists at the border have demonstrated. "To me, crime is a form of terrorism. Gangs are terrorists," Simcox said, updating the image of the superpredator into a super threat to national security whether he is a migrant border crosser, drug smuggler, gang member or potential terrorist.
Old, formerly discredited ideas about race and culture are on the ascendance once again. Represented by influential academics such as Samuel Huntington and Bernard Lewis, these ideas espouse a view of Islam in a "clash of civilizations" with the West.
For Hassan Mohamud, who serves as imam of a Somali mosque in St. Paul, Minnesota, these ideas have dangerous consequences.
"If the war on terrorism is a war on Islam, then I have no optimism at all. Because if you are attacking one-fifth of the world, you are attacking the world," Mohamud said.
Minneapolis represents an example of how counterterrorism based on ethnic and religious profiling can seamlessly slip into stereotypes and wholesale targeting of a population. As one law enforcement officer told the local newspaper, "Minneapolis is close to the Canadian border, it has a large Muslim community, it's a nice place to live for terrorists."
The idea that a Muslim community is a potential safe haven for terrorists has gained traction from a largely one-sided public debate, Mohamud believes.
"The community is feeling a high level of scrutiny. Many of the people who give lectures at the mosque have quit. Even if they aren't saying anything against the government—just speaking about Islam, it looks like a crime. It draws attention to them," Mohamud explained. "How can a lot of people live in this fear from society? If I doubt and I fear my neighbor, it's not a healthy society."
A growing intolerance can be seen in the pressure ethnic and religious minorities have felt to go underground with their identities. Somalis have Americanized their names in order to apply for jobs and housing, Mohamud said. As imam, he receives calls asking him if it is halal (allowed) or haraam (forbidden) to change their Muslim names. Because Islam allows the bending of rules in circumstances of survival, Mohamud asks them to clarify whether they are being forced to do this or whether they have a choice.
"They answer that nothing is by choice now. So then you have to balance, how far is the fear?" Mohamud explained. "I decided it's not at the level where a person should change his name or values because of a threat to his life. So I say, don't change anything. Be the person you are, but fight for your rights."
Whose Security?
As the roundups and raids have lessened in the years following the crisis, those policies born after 9/11 are being integrated and absorbed into systemwide practice toward all immigrants.
The post-9/11 crisis was but one part of a continuum of conflict surrounding communities targeted by the war at home. Most crucial in overcoming the discriminatory policies of the war on terror is exposing the implicit question in the phrases "national security" or "homeland security." That question is: "security for whom?" Thus far the answer has not included communities of color.
