March 2019

Image Courtesy of Evan Vucci/AP

America has always been the land of the free, a place where people from all backgrounds can come and make a better life for themselves and experience the American dream. That is unless you’re of Hispanic or Middle Eastern descent. Prejudice towards Hispanics and Middle Easterners has always been a part of the US, but ever since Trump began his campaign based around his ‘Make America Great Again’ slogan and targeted these two groups the prejudice has been more prevalent than ever before. His campaign rhetoric – which stressed building a wall to block Mexicans who were “rapists and drug dealers” – has been his supporters’ justification for tensions between Hispanic immigrants and US citizens. Trump also installed the infamous Muslim ban as his first executive order, which halted immigration from certain Muslim-majority countries. This also led to an increase in hate and discrimination after the ban was installed. This propaganda from America’s highest office has served as ammunition for many domestic terror attacks and hate crimes against these communities.

Many Americans may wonder where this unjustified disgust for Latin Americans comes from. Leo Chavez suggests something called the Latino Threat Narrative (LTN) in his book The Latino Threat. The LTN serves as the justification for Trump’s anti-Latino policies. It is broken down into three parts. The first part is Invasion. The Invasion part of the LTN treats Latinos as invaders of the US who are here to take what Americans have. It also warns that if Latinos continue to have children the increase in American’s Latino population will make the US lose its sense of identity as a country.

The next part of the LTN is the idea of Reconquest. This idea arises from the aftermath of the Mexican-American War in which Mexico lost a large part of what is now the American southwest north of present-day Mexico to the US. The LTN advances the belief that Latinos – specifically Mexicans – aim to take back the land lost in the war. Author Samuel Huntington believes that this reconquest is already underway in the Southwest United States.

The last part of the LTN is the Quebec Model, which stresses that Latino immigrants are not here to assimilate into American culture but will instead try to form their own country along the lines of how Quebec operates. This logic that inspires the LTN has led to an increase in discrimination and even domestic terrorism against the Latino community. Many white supremacists have used Trump’s rhetoric to convince themselves they are saviors of the white race against invaders. Studies show that crimes against the Latino community have jumped exponentially since 2010. Trump has associated certain negative language with Latinos such as caravan and migrants. A user on 4chan, a chat room for conspiracy theorists and the alt-right stated that, “when he hears the word caravan he reaches for his gun”. Daryl Johnson, a former analyst on domestic terrorism stated that, “The rhetoric coming out of the White House is giving people license to target these people”. An example was the hate crime committed against Rodolfo Rodriguez, a 91 year old man who was attacked by a woman in California with a brick. Many believe that he was targeted due to his Hispanic heritage. In fact, in California alone there has been a 50 percent increase in hate crimes since 2016, when Trump was elected.

Ever since 9/11, Islamophobia has been rampant in the US. Many Muslims were targeted after the events just because they were Muslim. Fast forward 18 years and not much has changed. In fact, actions by the president such as the Muslim Ban have further perpetuated Islamophobia. Many Muslim Americans have been subjected to extra surveillance and law enforcement in their neighborhoods and near mosques for years. The media has continued this pattern of associating Muslims with danger. A study from the University of Alabama stated that terror attacks by Muslims receive 357% more attention from US news outlets than acts committed by non-Muslims. This equates to about 105 headlines about Muslim terror acts compared to 15 about non-Muslim terror acts. This is especially interesting because white and far right extremists have committed twice as many terror attacks as Muslims between 2008-2016. In 2018, a trio of right wing extremists from Kansas were arrested in connection to a plot to bomb Muslim refugees living in an industrial area. Luckily the plot was foiled before they could commit the attack. Another potential domestic terror attack against a Muslim community was stopped in Islamberg, a Muslim community in Delaware County. Three extremists were charged with conspiracy to commit terror after three homemade bombs and 23 firearms were recovered. These are just a few of the plots to kill Muslims that have occurred in our country since the election of our president.

The only solution to combat this fear of Hispanics and Muslims is acceptance. People fear what they do not know. The majority of migrants from Latin America are here because they are fleeing violence in their home country and want to experience the American dream. The majority of Muslims do not condone the acts of terror groups such as ISIS and al-Qaeda, and the Quran actually stresses peace. The US will not get rid of discrimination and prejudice until propaganda like the LTN and Islamophobia in the media that fuels these biases stops. That will take a concerted effort by all parties involved, specifically the President’s administration, to keep our country’s position as a hallmark of freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Chavez, L. (2013). The Latino Threat Constructing Immigrants, Citizens and the Nation. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.

Hoda Muthana, an American-born Yemeni woman who decided to drop out of the University of Alabama at Birmingham to join ISIL now wants to return to the United States. In 2014, Muthana, used her tuition money to travel to Syria where she married an ISIS fighter. After her first husband’s death, she got remarried twice and gave birth to a child. After the demise of ISIS-held territory in December, she surrendered to Kurdish forces who placed her in a refugee camp. In 2015, she used her social media accounts to call for the death of America. Hoda Muthana’s case is not an isolated incident. Recruitment of women by terrorist groups has become a sophisticated strategy that groups like ISIL use to attract women from all over the world to their ranks.

According to a 2018 study by the international Centre for the Study of Radicalization, 13 percent (4,761) of foreign recruits into ISIL were women. That number could be significantly underestimated. For a group that has radicals views about women, how is ISIL able to recruit many women to its cause? Reasons for the indoctrination of women into ISIL are extremely complex. They range from feelings of isolation in American culture to a sense of empowerment that is facilitated by jihadist propaganda.

When interviewed by NBC News’ Richard Engel, Hoda Muthana said her family in Alabama was deeply conservative, which contributed to her radicalization. It is certainly odd to hear that a woman joined ISIL because her family was restrictive, considering the group’s oppressive views about female participation in society.

Some individuals may cite lack of education as a reason for recruitment. However, that seems implausible. The International Center for the Study of Radicalization further reports that many ISIL foreign recruits are educated university graduates.

ISIL offers a different version of female empowerment. The terrorist group often uses the term “jihadi brides” and although it forces many women to marry ISIL fighters, many other women are willing to do so as a sign of support for their brother fighters. Sexual pleasure, through marriage, is a reward or compensation for what fighters are willing to give up in their fight against the non-Islamic world. If an ISIL fighter dies, their wives are regarded as martyrs and their wives receive praise and glory from the rest of the group.

Women are also important caregivers to ISIL fighters. They provide food, medicine, and whatever else ISIS fighters desire. As reductive as it is, recruited women are not oblivious to how important they are to a successful ISIL strategy and that is exactly why they are drawn to the cause. According to a study by the Royal United Services Institute for Defense and Security Studies, possible factors include “a rejection of Western feminism, online contact with recruiters who offer marriage and adventure, peer or family influence, adherence to ISIL ideology, nativity and romantic optimism, and the chance to be part of something new, exciting and illicit.”

Huda Muthana, a college student in the United States, gave up a relatively safe, comfortable life within U.S borders and willingly ventured to war torn Syria to help fight a war. She had a life that many people, refugees, and immigrants can only dream of having. She gave it up because she was drawn to the ISIL cause. Studies and the media have been mostly focused on instances of ISIL kidnaping, raping and enslaving women. However, that has sidelined the ability to study why many women are willing to sacrifice an opportunity at a safe, pleasant life in favor of war. Some women are brain washed, but others exhibit very clear rationale behind their decision to join a terrorist group. The portrayal of ISIL women as victims of war is certainly significant, however, it is equally important to portray and study women who are active, willing participants.

Image Courtesty of NBC News

On February 14^th, a suicide bomb killed over forty Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel. The group responsible, Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), claimed responsibility. JeM is a militant organization based in Pakistan, who are fighting for the Muslim-majority of Kashmir to be part of Pakistan. The bomb struck a convoy of vehicles carrying 2,500 Indian security personnel on the Jammu-Srinagar National High way in southern Kashmir. Indian officials allege there is direct evidence that Pakistan was involved in coordinating the attack. Indian military officials blame Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of coordinating the attack. According to CNN, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said that India would take “all possible diplomatic steps” to “ensue complete isolation from the international community of Pakistan.”[1] One of the Indian efforts to downgrade diplomatic efforts includes revoking Pakistan’s Most Favored Nation status. Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded, claiming that the government condemns acts of violence, denying any association with the attack.

This attack is part of the broader, historical conflict between India and Pakistan. Since Indian independence in 1947, Kashmir has remained disputed territory between both countries. Separatist violence in the region has killed over 47,000 people. The Indian accusation of Pakistani influence in the attack risks further escalating tensions along the border. Pakistan demands proof or evidence of the accusations, which have not been presented thus far by Indian officials.[2]

A diplomatic solution to the rising tensions between India and Pakistan is integral to mitigate spiraling tensions. Indian and Pakistan have previously fought two wars, and another limited conflict could risk nuclear conflict as both countries posses nuclear weapons. However, political relations between Pakistan and Indian have been stalled for over three years. Previous peace attempts have failed, as days after Mr. Modi, the Prime Minister of India, and Mr. Sharif, the previous Prime Minter of Pakistan, met to intimate peace agreements, six soldiers were killed in an attack on an Indian air force base on Pathankot.[3] Even under new leadership with Imran Khan, the new Prime Minister of Pakistan, peace initiatives remain gridlocked.

An important step in deescalating tensions is to improve bilateral relations and communications. Both countries should rely on diplomatic channels rather than military confrontation. So far India has relied solely on retaliation through economic and diplomatic means, including recalling their top diplomats. But these actions could further provoke Pakistan, especially following their promise to retaliate to any Indian attacks or confrontations. Additionally, further investigation into the JeM attack should be done by both countries to determine if there is any evidentiary basis for ISI’s role in the attack. Until evidence is presented on the support for and cause of the recent attack, claims by Indian authorities of Pakistani involvement risk ratcheting up hostilities.

[1] Kashmir attack: India says Pakistan had ‘direct hand’ in deadly convoy strike (2019, February 15^th) Retrieved February 19^th from https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/15/asia/kashmir-attack-india-pakistan-intl/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F.

[2] India demands Pakistan take ‘credible action’ over Kashmir attack (2019, February 19^th). Retrieved February 19^th from https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/02/india-allegations-pakistan-evidence-khan-190219082756101.html.

[3] Pulwama attack: What are Modi’s options? (2019, February 19^th). Retrieved February 19^th from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-47278145.