ALTHOUGH it may be a watered-down version of the Trump administration’s original plan to prevent people from Muslim-majority countries and refugees from entering the US, the current order still sends a disturbing message that in today’s America, those fleeing conflict and persecution are not welcome. The US Supreme Court recently ruled that parts of the ban can be enforced, leaving citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen unable to enter the US, with some limited exceptions. The court’s ruling is certainly controversial, but it is the US administration’s intent behind the ban that must be questioned here. It is quite apparent that the move is discriminatory and singles out people fleeing some of the world’s worst conflicts. While courageous individuals and organisations within the US have challenged and questioned the ban, it appears that for now the Trump administration has achieved a partial victory.

The ban is only the latest sign that the US is not immune to the current global trend of rising xenophobia and intolerance. This state of affairs has become acute ever since President Donald Trump took up residence in the White House. Hate crimes against Muslims have been on the rise in the US; when those in power give the green signal for intolerance, or look the other way when such crimes are committed, the extremists are emboldened further. While every country has the right to protect itself from terrorism and violence, will closing the gates on some of the most vulnerable people in the world achieve this? We’d like to believe the US already has a strong system in place to police its borders without resorting to such discriminatory bans. It seems refugees in general and those fleeing violence in the Middle East in particular are caught between two extremes: at home they face war, disease and persecution, while in the West, a rising tide of right-wing sentiment has ensured they are offered no shelter.

Published in Dawn, July 2nd, 2017