When Paris was attacked by ISIS supporters, the result in the United States was a broad call for more air strikes against ISIS and closing our borders to Syrian refugees. The recent killings/murders in San Bernardino, California has underlined these calls and seemingly strengthened these avenues of response.
In an article today on Salon, however, the opposite case is made by French journalist Nicolas Héninonce held by now dead ISIS captor “Jihadi John” for ten months prior to release. The article is a good one, but the actual interview is powerful and instructive beyond words.
“At the moment, with the bombings, we are more like pushing people into the hands of ISIS.” --Nicolas Héninonce
I encourage you to watch the soft spoken journalist make his powerful case in six or so minutes and giving it a bit of thought.
Discussions on the Syrian refugee crisis and our American plan—or lack thereof—in dealing with it on our shores are becoming more and more desperate. Positions become hardened as terrible tragedies continue to occur. The visceral reaction to shootings, bombing and threats is palpable leaving, in essence, two far slung positions; give in and do not accept refugees out of fear or accept refugees. Continue to bomb Syria or stop bombing Syria.
Lost in these stark and desperate arguments are the reasons for the Syrian mass exodus and the potential results of whatever action our country takes.
I cannot write the opinion of anyone but myself. I deeply care about our involvement in the Middle East. I want us to stop the bombing. I want us to take in refugees. I want ISIS to whither and die as quickly as possible.
There is a synergy in what is going on in Syria. Héninonce makes the case, but doesn’t use that word in particular. If we want to stop the problem, we have to quit causing it.
We have a choice to make. Let’s make the right one.