By: Zack Duvall
The Trump administration’s newly announced travel restrictions, and the policies set to be implemented as a result, are glimmers of hope in what should be a series of policy victories that reassure the president’s supporters of why they supported his bid for the White House in the first place.
The new restrictions prove just how well the administration can formulate cohesive and effective policy decisions away from the scrutiny of the media spotlight and political pundits, this being evident by the wording and implementation strategies within the restriction guidelines.
The new set of travel restrictions comes with new direction from the administration that is no longer solely focused on “Islamic extremism”, but targets countries deemed as “security threats”, including 3 non-Muslim majority countries, that the White House and U.S. officials have said fail to cooperate with American security and counter-terror efforts.
This is wording that will likely prevent any potential court action, as seen with the original travel order, by leftist groups from blocking the order from taking affect. A major milestone in the administration that has long sought to overcome the constant hurdle of liberal attempts to obstruct the administration’s progress in the realm of national security using the federal judicial system.
The information that is being presented along with the new security measures is also flawlessly outlined to include specific reasons for why each individual nation on the list has been targeted by the U.S.
Reasons that include sponsoring of global terror in the case of Iran and Syria, failure to share meaningful and vital intelligence with U.S. forces as in the case of Libya and Chad, to allowing their country to become a threat to global peace and security as Venezuela, Yemen, and North Korea do.
All of these reasons are outlined in formal documents accompanying the restriction’s guidelines.
Another key aspect of the new travel restrictions that is very telling in and of itself, is the fact that Sudan was taken off the list of banned countries before the policy was released and after review by the administration.
The reason that this is such an impressive action by the administration is because it shows that officials are actively implementing some kind of tangible and calculable scale by which to determine what nations should be on the list and for what reasons.
It also shows that countries who find themselves on the list can work to improve conditions and remove themselves, meaning placement on the list is not a permanent ban which is another point of criticism the Trump administration has taken away from Democrats.
The fact that the policy effectively addresses both the issues of national security and liberal obstruction through well-thought out and precise wording is something that Americans should be proud of.
It’s a common sense style approach to a threat that has plagued numerous administrations, including the Obama administration who identified these same countries as security threats, that is low cost and effective.
It is already widely known that terror groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIS were actively seeking to exploit the West’s immigration and refugee system, with their success being evident in Europe’s epidemic of terror attacks. The president’s actions this week show he is pragmatic enough to tackle these threats head on.
Another important detail in this whole scenario is that despite what some leftist claim, being on the list of restricted countries does not impede the ability of a working relationship to exist with the U.S. and that particular country.
Just this week the U.S. launched an airstrike that killed numerous militants in Libya, and American special forces are actively working to expand Somalian government control of that nation’s capitol, Mogadishu. Just two examples of American continued involvement with certain nations on the list.
While the previous travel restrictions were implemented via executive order the new restrictions are being put in place by the Department of Homeland Security, something that should allow for smooth enforcement of the new policies by federal and local law enforcement.
Again, the fact that the Trump administration took the time to address a point of criticism, in this case the confusion that ensued after the January order was issued, and develop a comprehensive solution for that criticism is a very encouraging sign from the president.
Especially with the GOP-led healthcare effort stalling abysmally in the Senate. The fact that the Trump administration weathered the intense international backlash over his order and then later deliver an impressive piece of policy-making gold should give Republicans and Americans alike hope that he will revisit the healthcare debate with vengeance.
Time will tell what next great policy move the president will make, but with moves being made on the issues of tax reform and infrastructure, it may be a safe bet that it will be a busy holiday season at the White House.