World News

CSS.Ethz.ch: Support for Terrorism in Muslim Majority Countries and Implications for Immigration Policies in the West

Posted by: Berhane Habtemariam

Date: Wednesday, 24 May 2017

Support for Terrorism in Muslim Majority Countries and Implications for Immigration Policies in the West

According to the polling data collected by Russell Berman and Arno Tausch, 1) 8.3% of Muslims worldwide support the so-called Islamic State; 2) 18% of Syrian refugees sympathize with the group, while 30% of them want to establish a theocratic state in their war-torn country; and 3) 52% of all Arabs agree that US meddling in their region justifies terrorist responses. These percentages, Berman and Tausch are quick to note, tell a more complex and differentiated tale than one might first suspect, but they also raise legitimate questions about the hostility being directed towards certain Western immigration policies.

 

The Wind of Change across Europe

With elections in 2017 in key European Union states (France: presidential, April 23, second round May 7, National Assembly, June 11, second round June 18; Germany: Federal Diet, September 24; Netherlands: Second Chamber, March 15),1 an intensified debate about migration to Europe and Middle East terrorism – its origins, trajectories, dangers, and the extent of its mass support – is highly likely. Marine Le Pen, leader of the far right Front National in France, predicted that European elections in 2017 will bring a wind of change across the region.2 With the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom and Donald Trump’s US presidential victory, far right political parties throughout Europe are now capitalizing on Euroscepticism and anxieties about migration.3

German Chancellor Angela Merkel appears to have responded to Le Pen’s challenge by defending her own refugee policy as an act of moral and legal obligation by a “state of laws,” while asserting that Europeans must stand by the principle of offering asylum to all those fleeing war and oppression.4 The fact that the Berlin terrorist Amis Amri was shot in Milan, Italy, after crossing several European borders following his attack in the heart of Germany, where he had previously applied for asylum, further fuels the controversy about the alleged failures of existing European refugee, immigration, and security policies.5

The debate intensified because Merkel’s decision to welcome hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Middle East and North Africa during the summer and fall of 2015 was designated “a catastrophic mistake” by Donald Trump.6 Similar to right wing European populist opposition politicians, who are poised to benefit from the upcoming European elections, Trump asserted that “people don’t want to have other people coming in and destroying their country.” Trump’s own election campaign rhetoric included a call to ban Muslims from entering the US until “our representatives” find out “what the hell is going on there.”7

To shed light on “what is going on there,” this article examines selected open sources regarding attitudes toward terrorism, terrorists, and other extremist groupings. This social scientific evidence paints a complex picture. On the one hand, it finds considerable support for terrorism among large sections of Arab and Muslim publics, although the support is not at all uniform or undifferentiated. On the other hand, despite considerable hostility toward the United States and Israel, there are large sections of the Arab and Muslim publics that do not support terrorism. It is therefore difficult to draw unambiguous conclusions regarding these publics or to derive a simple formula for refugee or immigration policies. It is not, however, difficult to recognize significant levels of support for terrorism, which could presumably justify certain restrictive refugee and immigration policies.

Reactions by incumbent Western political leaders to the Trump’s administration’s first attempt at a travel ban against nationals from Libya, Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and Sudan in late January 2017 were quick and predictable.8 Merkel said that she “regrets” the move.9 Her opposition was echoed throughout Europe, as well as by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. However, even as these voices were criticizing the US administration’s efforts to limit entry for a temporary period, European states, including Germany, were taking their own steps (with Turkish cooperation) to reduce the inflow of refugees and accelerate deportation processes of individuals whose applications for refugee status were denied.

Despite Merkel’s criticism of the Trump administration’s restrictive immigration policy, Europe arguably stands at the dawn of a post-global and Eurosceptical era driven by nationalistic movements that have developed in response to increased immigration from Africa, Asia (including Turkey), and even parts of Europe itself (the Balkans, for example).10 The rise of centrifugal movements in key EU countries, the argument runs, reflects the weakening of the pan-European spirit and the gains of extreme nationalism at its expense.11 The severe economic crisis that has particularly affected Europe’s south since 2008 and threatens the very existence of the European Monetary Union is not the focus of this essay, but it has certainly amplified these centrifugal tendencies.12..............................

 


6ይ ክፋል: ማዕበል ስርሒት ፈንቅል - የካቲት 1990 - ሰነዳዊት ፊልም| sirihit fenkil 1990 - part 6 - ERi-TV Documentary

Dehai Events