Yesterday Governor Bruce Rauner added Illinois to a growing list of states—including Midwestern neighbors Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio, and Wisconsin—that have said they will temporarily stop accepting Syrian refugees in the wake of last week’s attacks in Paris and Beirut.
States can’t technically block approved refugees, but that point is moot in the big picture. Instead, the fear and rhetoric driving these state-level announcements raises larger, more important humanitarian issues, with significant implications for local economies and national security.
The threat of terrorism is real—the attacks in Paris have claimed an estimated 129 lives, with another 43 victims in Beirut.
But refugees aren’t the source of violence.
Instead, turning away refugees actually turns away would-be allies in the fight against terrorism, driving them back towards the very forces they are fleeing. It also compromises an important source of human capital in the economically and demographically stagnant Midwest, where cities like Chicago, Dayton, Detroit, Minneapolis, and St. Louis had previously called on President Obama to expand the cap on the number of Syrian refugees. Mayors of these cities—many the economic anchors of states now calling for bans—cited the “economic, social, and cultural” contributions of refugees. And it wasn’t long ago that Michigan Governor Rick Synder said he was considering welcoming more Syrian refugees to the state, calling it “part of being a good Michigander.”
The United States has long understood the importance of resettling refugees, and has a long history of successfully doing so, even in times of conflict. Over the past 30 years, our government has resettled some three million refugees, including 207,000 Vietnamese and 125,000 Cubans in 1980 alone. Since 2001, only two refugees have been accused of terrorist-related activities—incidents related to the war in Iraq that posed no immediate threat to the United States.
Most recently, the United States has safely opened its doors to Syrians. Since October 2011, we’ve taken in over 2,100 Syrian refugees without incident. Of these, just 94 have been resettled in Illinois, hardly justifying a block—even a temporary one—on resettling more.
Refugees are subject to the highest levels of scrutiny and background checks of any group admitted to the United States. In fact, the full vetting process—which includes health checks, biometric identity verification, biographical and background screenings, and in-person interviews—can take an average of two years to complete. Screenings are conducted via coordination amongst multiple security agencies, including the FBI, State Department, DHS, the National Counterterrorism Center, and the Department of Defense.
Also worth noting is that any refugee who has arrived in the United States for resettlement has been fully vetted by the United Nations in its own separate, detailed process.
Pre-Paris, public opinion reflected an understanding that refugees pose minimal threat to the United States. The 2014 Chicago Council Survey recorded a 20-year low in perceived threat from refugees and immigrants last spring, down 33 points from a high of 72 percent in 1994. (To be fair, the 2015 survey registered a slight uptick in concern, but overall levels remain low.)
Post-Paris, the challenge facing the Obama administration is to ensure that escalating anti-refugee rhetoric doesn’t compromise what is currently a safe and sound refugee resettlement system.
It also can’t let calls for a “temporary” stop to refugee resettlement devolve into a permanent block on this important source of humanitarian relief—and of human capital, especially in the Midwest.
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs is an independent, nonpartisan organization that provides insight – and influences the public discourse – on critical global issues. We convene leading global voices and conduct independent research to bring clarity and offer solutions to challenges and opportunities across the globe. The Council is committed to engaging the public and raising global awareness of issues that transcend borders and transform how people, business, and governments engage the world.
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs is an independent, nonpartisan organization. All statements of fact and expressions of opinion in blog posts are the sole responsibility of the individual author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Council.
Protesters in high-visibility vests have taken to the streets in France for weeks. Sophie Pedder of The Economist and Benjamin Haddad of the Atlantic Council explain what the demonstrations mean for France and Europe.
With global investments and commitments to sustainable development seemingly strong, one wonders, how are we doing? Is the world on track to achieve these lofty goals?
The chief of naval operations explains how the US Navy can retain its supremacy in the years ahead—and against new and growing threats.
Venezuela has two claimants to presidential power: Juan Guaidó and Nicolás Maduro.
Mrs. Margaret S. Hart passed away on Sunday, January 27, 2019. She was an important donor of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs for over 50+ years and a wonderful partner in building a program series focused on Latin America.
From Berlin to Brussels, what can we expect after German Chancellor Angela Merkel leaves office? See Council President Ivo Daalder's response in the latest installment of #AskIvo.
In this episode, US Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi, a Council Emerging Leader Program alum, answers questions on the top global challenges facing the United States and what issues will be the most important during the 2020 presidential race.
On a recent trip to Europe, people kept coming back to me with one question: Will the United States really withdraw from NATO this year?
China announced its slowest annual growth rate since 1990. At the same time, Beijing and Washington remain locked in a trade war.
Britain’s holiday from history was supposed to end this week. However, Parliament voted 2-to-1 against Theresa May's Brexit deal.
China is investing billions of dollars in Africa each year. But is Beijing’s largesse made with the best of intentions? See Council President Ivo Daalder's response in the latest installment of #AskIvo.
It is not possible for the president to make well-considered decisions without the detail and knowledge of seasoned officials, including unpopular and dissenting views revealed in the memoranda that emerge from the Sit Room.
President Trump's decision to withdraw US troops from Syria will have wide-ranging consequences for US policy in Syria.
A president's ability to enact a vision is constrained by international laws and by the willingness of allies and partners to go along with what the White House wants.
President Donald Trump's recent decisions have added new urgency to an old debate: Should the European Union have its own army?