‘Berg reacts to travel ban
Syria has been a big buzzword throughout the 2016 presidential election, made even more relevant by President Trump’s recent travel ban. The order restricted immigrants from seven countries, including Syria, from entering the United States. While its implications may seem distant, it has made quite an impact in Allentown, home to one of the largest Syrian communities in the United States.
The travel ban was mandated through an executive order that President Trump signed on Jan. 27. The countries affected—Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen—are all Muslim-majority countries. This has led many to believe that the Trump administration is profiling by religion, especially after his frequent use of the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism.”
Allentown is the city with the fifteenth largest population of Syrian-born residents, with nearby Hokendauqua, Pennsylvania as the largest Syrian population in the country, according to city-data.com. Many of the employees that work in the dining services on campus hail from Syria.
“Allentown has a long-standing Syrian Christian community,” explains Professor Sharon Albert, who teaches Religion Studies, including courses on Islam. “It has also for a long time had a serious Syrian Muslim community. Parts of the Syrian Muslim community have been in Allentown for a long time, for multiple generations.”
Albert says that the travel ban, specifically the way it is worded, is very troubling.
“Anybody who hasn’t done so should take a look at the language of the order,” she insists. “The conflation of the word ‘terrorist’ and ‘refugee’ is deeply problematic.”
History professor Mark Stein feels the same way.
“I think the travel ban is a terrible thing,” said Stein. “It goes against long-held American ideals about welcoming refugees as well as humanitarian efforts to help victims of the horrific violence in Syria. It is also terrible policy, alienating our allies in the Muslim world whose assistance is vital in our military efforts in the Middle East.”
The big question about the ban is whether or not it is an act of religious discrimination. While Albert cannot say for certain if it is, she says that the evidence seems pretty clear.
“I would be hard pressed to say unequivocally there’s no question that it’s about religion rather than statehood,” said Albert. “But it’s the kind of thing where the circumstantial evidence is huge.”
Stein is certain the ban is specifically targeting Muslims.
“This is clearly a ban on Muslims,” said Stein. “The Executive Order follows directly on President Trump’s frequent call during his campaign for a ban on Muslims entering the country. Further, the ban specifically states that Christians coming from the seven Muslim countries singled out in the ban should be helped to enter the U.S. The idea of banning people based on religion is a frightening one and one that goes against the basic freedoms enshrined in the Constitution.”
Albert says that if the bill is indeed targeting Muslims in an effort to reduce terrorism, the Trump administration is looking in the wrong place.
“It’s hard to see it as being anything other than a targeting against Muslims.,” said Albert. “Which is deeply problematic because when you look statistically... if you look at the number of Americans killed each year, the numbers don’t make sense for that to be our major focus.”
The Muhlenberg community has responded with opposition to the ban. Students organized a protest march on Feb. 1. The march began in Parents Plaza and ended at the Chapel, where there were spoken and silent reflections, and a candle lighting ceremony. Students wore red, green, black, and white—colors representing the seven countries affected by the ban.
“It happened pretty quickly actually,” said Jouman Barakat, ’20, who had the idea for the march. “I proposed the idea to Callista [Isabelle, Chapel Director] on Sunday, then we planned it on Monday and it all took place on Wednesday.”
Barakat, who is from Jordan, says she was inspired to organize a march on campus because the order “reflects the racism that’s been hidden in this country and the world in general.” Barakat added, “To completely prevent an entire race is an act of ignorance and selfishness.”
As to whether or not she believes the ban is targeting Muslims, she says it’s a bit complicated.
“I think that the ban does target Muslims specifically, but at the same time, it doesn’t. It’s hard and confusing to understand, I won’t lie. The order bans citizens from the seven listed countries, which happen to be Muslim-majority countries. So saying that it’s a Muslim ban would only feed into the stereotype that considers all Arabs to be Muslim. At the same time, one of the main causes of the order is islamophobia and the idea that all Muslims come from those seven countries.”
Belle Goodman, ’20, feels strongly that the ban was made as a direct response to Muslim immigrants.
“White House advisors can say whatever they want, but when Trump talks about it, he calls it a Muslim ban. So I’m pretty sure he intends for it to ban Muslims specifically. It’s awful, and serves absolutely no one.”
National opposition to the ban continues. Feb. 16 was “A Day Without Immigrants,” a protest that asked immigrants all over the country to boycott work in order to show their presence. The protest called for all immigrants, both naturalized citizens and undocumented, to stay home from work or class, and to not go shopping. Many business owners closed their stores for the day.
The students spoke about how their experience at Muhlenberg would be affected without the hard work of immigrants.
“To my knowledge, I know that there are a lot of workers in the dining hall, Mule Express and GQ that are Syrian, Lebanese, and Jordanian,” Barakat says.
“Dining services would have a hard time adjusting to the vacant spots if all the Arabs were to leave. We’d notice a difference.”
“We wouldn’t have all the incredible food that we have,” says Goodman. “Nor would we have our lovely cleaning staff who keeps us healthy, especially after the norovirus going around. We’d be starving and sick!”
On Feb. 9, the ninth circuit court of appeals voted unanimously to block the travel ban. This means that citizens of those seven countries can still travel to America. Trump has recently decided not to seek a rehearing of the decision. However, he has promised to issue a new executive order.
As the debate continues, Barakat notes that most people don’t realize how big of an impact the ban has on them, even if they were born in America.
“There’s always going to be someone you know, someone who served you, someone who’s in your class, someone you love, that is going to be affected by this executive order. Once we all understand that, I think we can come together as a community one way or another—that’s what we need right now.”
Photo courtesy of Ian Adler