WASHINGTON: Over 130 US foreign policy experts have denounced President Donald Trump’s revised travel ban, saying it undermines America’s national security and interests as much as the original order barring travelers from some Muslim-majority countries and refugees.
“To Muslims — including those victimized by or fighting against ISIS (Daesh) — it will send a message that reinforces the propaganda... that falsely claim the US is at war with Islam,” read the letter by former government officials and experts.
“Welcoming Muslim refugees and travelers, by contrast, exposes the lies of terrorists and counters their warped vision,” added the document.
Among the 134 signatories were some who served in either or both Republican and Democratic administrations, including former senior diplomat Nicholas Burns, ex-National Security Council (NSC) counter-terrorism Director Richard Clarke and ex-Undersecretary of Defense Michele Flournoy.
Most served under Democratic presidents, including former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, ex-National Security Adviser Susan Rice and ex-National Counterterrorism Director Matthew Olsen.
Their comments echo those being made in court by US states claiming the modified measures discriminate against Muslims and are detrimental to US interests.
“Bans like those included in this order are harmful to US national security and beneath the dignity of our great nation,” the letter read.
The executive order “weakens this country’s ability to provide global leadership and jeopardizes our national security interests by failing to support the stability of our allies that are struggling to host large numbers of refugees,” it added.
The letter was also sent to Trump’s Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Defense Secretary James Mattis, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Homeland Security chief John Kelly and Acting Director of National Intelligence Michael Dempsey.
The revised directive temporarily closes US borders to all refugees and citizens from six mainly-Muslim countries.
It denies US entry to all refugees for 120 days and halts for 90 days the granting of visas to nationals from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
The new order is due to go into effect March 16 and replaces the previous Trump directive that was blocked in federal court.
The blocked order included an indefinite Syrian refugee travel ban and its blacklist of barred countries included Iraq.
Trump’s revised travel ban undermines American security: Experts
Trump’s revised travel ban undermines American security: Experts
Philippine lawmakers start VP Duterte impeachment hearings
- The revived impeachment bid leans heavily on allegations that the younger Duterte misused public funds
MANILA: A Philippine congressional committee began impeachment hearings Monday that could dash Vice President Sara Duterte’s run for the country’s top job.
The daughter of former president Rodrigo Duterte, who recently announced her candidacy for the 2028 presidential election, was impeached by the country’s House of Representatives last year only to see the Supreme Court toss the case out over procedural issues.
The revived impeachment bid leans heavily on allegations that the younger Duterte misused public funds while in office and will see the House justice committee debate three such complaints.
A fourth case was dropped by complainants who hoped to speed up the process.
Duterte also stands accused of making a death threat against her former ally and current President Ferdinand Marcos, with whom she is engaged in an explosive political feud.
Under the Philippine constitution, an impeachment triggers a Senate trial. A guilty verdict would result in Duterte being barred from politics and sidelined from the 2028 presidential race.
The latest impeachment bid faces a changed environment with the vice president ahead in recent polls, analysts told AFP.
“The political context will be very different, especially now that Sara declared her candidacy,” University of the Philippines political science professor Jean Franco said.
“It’s definitely going to weigh on the minds of the members of the House of Representatives,” Franco said, adding that a vote for impeachment would effectively see a lawmaker’s career “marked for death.”
Anthony Lawrence Borja, an associate professor of political science at De La Salle University agreed saying: “It is ultimately a question of whether the patronage of the current administration outweighs their fear of Duterte’s condemnation.”
The same committee hearing the case against Duterte last month tossed out a pair of impeachment complaints against Marcos, ruling that allegations of corruption over a scandal involving bogus flood control projects lacked substance.
Michael Wesley Poa, spokesman for Duterte’s defense team, told AFP they were closely monitoring deliberations and trusted “the same standards” used in the Marcos hearing would be applied.
