THE RIGHT KIND OF PROFILING

The New York Times reports that the Bush Administration is finally acting to plug some of the leaks in the sieve that is our immigration system.

The Justice Department will propose new regulations this week requiring tens of thousands of Muslim and Middle Eastern visa holders to register with the government and be fingerprinted, administration officials said today.

The initiative, the subject of intense debate within the administration, is designed for "individuals from countries who pose the highest risk to our security," including most visa holders from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and many other Muslim nations, officials said. More than 100,000 foreigners, including students, workers, researchers and tourists, all foreigners from designated countries who do not hold green cards, would probably be covered by the plan, an official said.

This will lead to howls of protests from three groups: immigration advocates, civil libertarians and minority rights activists. None of these protests justify watering down or junking this needed reform.

The immigration lawyers have the weakest case. Quite simply, they oppose any policy to actually enforce our immigration laws. There has been widespread abuse of student and tourist visas. As 9/11 showed, the costs of ignoring this abuse has grown dramatically. The fact that the concept that visa-holders should obey the terms of the visa or face the consequences has become a matter of controversy demonstrates the insanity of our current discourse on immigration.

The civil libertarians have a point with emotional resonance, but little rational sway. Yes, it just doesn't "feel" right for the American government to be systematically fingerprinting, registering and tracing people. It does have the smell of a police state. However, the civil libertarians once more miss the central point - these people are not Americans. They do not have the presumptive right to be in this country whenever they want, for however long they want. It is not xenophobia for the United States to trust American citizens more than foreigners - its common sense.

Finally, the most salient argument comes from Arab & Muslim community activists. These regulations are clearly imposing a burden on Arabs and other Muslims that is not being imposed on European, East Asian or Latin American visitors. This is profiling, and it does have a cost. However, lets be totally clear - this is not ethnic profiling, but national profiling which is quite different. These regulations do not apply to Arab & Muslim Americans, nor do they apply to Arabs & Muslims on the path to American citizenship. More than anything else, these regulations reflect which nations 1) are sources of anti-American militancy, and 2) are taking insufficient steps to combat such militancy. This policy sends a clear message to the host countries - the freedom of your citizens when visiting America is dependent on your efforts to combat anti-American terror.

The 9/11 hijackers were not Mexicans, or Chinese, or Indians, or Haitians, or Senagalese or any other group of would-be immigrants that flout our immigration laws to join us. They came from a select group of nations, with a specific ideology and a far more sinister reason for evading our immigration laws - to kill us. This threat calls for an altogether different, smarter and tougher response.