If this is such a good idea why not implement passport controls at the borders of U.S. states? Travelers between Alabama and Florida, for example, could queue up to be screened by state national guard forces. It might take all of 48 hours for American to realize why Europeans like the Schengen arrangement.
6
The Schengen agreement on open borders has been a failure from the start. Not only is it a real danger as regards terrorism, it is a proven facilitator of criminals moving between countries. In Norway, a country of five million people at the fringe of Europe, 29 percent of prison inmates in 2013 were foreign nationals, according to statistics. It is a huge problem and a major burden for our police force.
9
I believe the author's proposal is a short term solution to a long-term problem. The majority of those involved in the attacks in Paris are EU passport-holders, thus making his proposal ineffective in this circumstance, beyond perhaps making the coordinations of the attacks more difficult.
A longer term solution would be to spend the money that would go to passport/border controls on education and combating radicalization at home. At risk of ad hominem, I am also skeptical of the author's motives in tighter border controls as he is the owner of a security consultancy that sells RKN Pass - which "can be used by government agencies and also by airlines, banks, hotels and multi-national corporations to screen passports and identity documents to determine if they are fake or fraudulent." A tighter security apparatus would could prove lucrative for his company.
I believe the author's proposal is a short-term "feel good" solution, to a deep rooted problem that requires better education and de-radicalization.
A longer term solution would be to spend the money that would go to passport/border controls on education and combating radicalization at home. At risk of ad hominem, I am also skeptical of the author's motives in tighter border controls as he is the owner of a security consultancy that sells RKN Pass - which "can be used by government agencies and also by airlines, banks, hotels and multi-national corporations to screen passports and identity documents to determine if they are fake or fraudulent." A tighter security apparatus would could prove lucrative for his company.
I believe the author's proposal is a short-term "feel good" solution, to a deep rooted problem that requires better education and de-radicalization.
5
In today's world, it's inconceivable that nation states would have no passport requirements or controls of any kind concerning those entering their countries. While any control will be imperfect, there must be some common sense applied to this issue. A country must do its best to know the identities of people crossing its border--this is far easier to do now, with computers, than ever before. I'm not claiming it will be "perfect" but it's a reasonable way to go.
9
Before we turned our gaze to issues of a borderless Europe and terrorism - in 2013 NPR reported that over 23,000 people were victims of human trafficking in Europe. Women and children were the main victims. The Schengen agreement is a gift to organized crime and terrorists alike. Having travelled through Europe prior to the agreement, I never found it onerous.
The reasons to re-establish borders and to have regular controlled boarder checks has been in need for quite awhile. Hopefully Europe will now see that.
The reasons to re-establish borders and to have regular controlled boarder checks has been in need for quite awhile. Hopefully Europe will now see that.
3
The problem here is not so much what happens outside the borders, but what happens within. As a previous commenter has noted, seven of the eight attackers had valid European passports. When Holland declared after the attack that France had closed its borders it was about as meaningful as if he had said "round up the usual suspects!" In fact, one of the actual attackers was then stopped at the border, questioned, and allowed to proceed. If Europe now gives up the freedom of movement it has fought so hard for, the terrorists will have succeeded in damaging the entire community's values for a dubious tactical gain.
As I read the profiles of these terrorists, and those who proceeded them in Paris, Madrid, etc., their murderous rampage stemmed not from any particular religious fervor (though that certainly provides cover), but rather from their complete alienation WITHIN European society. Yes, Europe as a whole needs better border control, but it also needs to do a much better job integrating moslems already within its own borders. The problem is particularly acute in France.
As I read the profiles of these terrorists, and those who proceeded them in Paris, Madrid, etc., their murderous rampage stemmed not from any particular religious fervor (though that certainly provides cover), but rather from their complete alienation WITHIN European society. Yes, Europe as a whole needs better border control, but it also needs to do a much better job integrating moslems already within its own borders. The problem is particularly acute in France.
2
Speaking of border control; with all the hysteria (primarily coming from the GOP) people should start demanding the same scrutiny they want for the refugees to be applied for tourist visas to the US. Evidently the majority of the paris terrorist were belgium or french citizens; what's to stop one from over come to the US using a regular tourist visa? This should go over well with the business owners.
7
The Schengen Zone was a noble idea whose unintended consequences have gone from bothersome to unbearable. Before November 13, criminal organizations could and did move about freely within the EU, while local police forces, necessarily with more limited reach, did their best to cope. Burglary rings with foreign bases were making life difficult in France for years prior to last Friday. Low-cost labor from Eastern Europe can, similarly, move into certain sectors, such as construction, and put local workers in Western Europe out of a job. Now we finally see how easily ISIS operatives can move quickly through the continent unhindered and wreak terrible results. A return to stricter internal border controls is the only answer.
danschorr.blogspot.com
danschorr.blogspot.com
5
Perhaps we should set up crossing points between states in the US.
Border checks are no hindrance to terrorists. The 911 thugs entered the United States legally. The British underground bombers were British. The Paris attackers would have been admitted legally, after all they were mainly French. The "mastermind" would have entered by some nefarious means or not at all. If Noble represents the quality of thought in Interpol then there is no hope for any of us. This article is a waste of time and possibly paper.
Border checks are no hindrance to terrorists. The 911 thugs entered the United States legally. The British underground bombers were British. The Paris attackers would have been admitted legally, after all they were mainly French. The "mastermind" would have entered by some nefarious means or not at all. If Noble represents the quality of thought in Interpol then there is no hope for any of us. This article is a waste of time and possibly paper.
3
Sounds like a good proposal.
On the other hand, the terrorists were French citizens, killing in Paris
On the other hand, the terrorists were French citizens, killing in Paris
1
So far there is zero credible evidence indicating that any of the Paris attackers entered Europe recently. This stark fact exposes Noble's piece for what it is; an exercise in fear mongering.
4
Would we, in the U.S. consider inter-state border ID border controls? I am sure it would reduce many of the ills that go on in the U.S. The ideal of Shengen is to promote thriving between the European countries' population, exchange of ideas and commerce. Yes, Europe's outside borders should be strenghtened, and this should be as a contribution from all EU nations. The knee jerk reaction like the one of closing borders is just the water on the mill of the extremists... and killing of the idea, and the dream. It is well understood that Shengen helped to lower adverse perceptions that the European nations once held of each other. This is a monumental achievement of civilization. That this makes the cops' life harder - oh well - the cops are paid well in EU.
1
Interesting how two themes are handled. If we have another nut case go on a rampage and shoot up a public place, there are numerous calls to immediately pass new laws, to even confiscate guns, stop them from being so accessible, limiting ammunition sales, etc. - all now, not later - apparently on the theory that anyone with a gun is a danger, now or potentially so in the future. There is little hue and cry in these pages of "jumping to conclusions" or about painting all gun owners with the same brush as the killers.
Switch to this scenario and even with evidence of terrorists being hidden within the hordes of legitimate refugees - and from the terrorists' perspective what an ideal modus operandi - and suddenly restraint is the demand of the day, with outrage that a few bad actors are being used to taint all others and any action is rash, unfair, and all the rest.
Switch to this scenario and even with evidence of terrorists being hidden within the hordes of legitimate refugees - and from the terrorists' perspective what an ideal modus operandi - and suddenly restraint is the demand of the day, with outrage that a few bad actors are being used to taint all others and any action is rash, unfair, and all the rest.
3
Asl long as there are people who are willing to die in order to kill a bunch of random people, safety measures are not going to be effective. Even schizophrenics seem to be able to manage to do it.
2
Apparently the U.S has over 11 MILLION illegal immigrants within its borders, suggesting that the vetting of passports and border controls are still unable to stop millions of people entering the U.S, whether it be for economic relief or ....who knows?
I'm not sure the U.S has anything to teach Europe in this area and on this subject.
I'm not sure the U.S has anything to teach Europe in this area and on this subject.
5
I have never been a proponent of the Schengen Agreement. Nor have I ever been keen on the Euro. I saw them both as a big mistake, and precursor to socio-economic disaster. Being half-German, I say this as someone who has spent time between both countries and continents. The main difference between Europe and the U.S. is obvious. Europe is not ONE country. So attempting to unite it by one single currency, and no border controls was if anything, a pipe dream. There were serious problems with Schengen well before the refugee/migrant/terrorist situation we are facing today. Like most plans of this stature and intent, it looked good on paper. It should have stayed there.
7
Intelligent, well written, & well thought out Op-Ed piece. How refreshing. Thank you and thank you.
3
For as educated as one assumes NYT readers are as a lot, it's still amazing to see the number of commenters who seem to think that free travel within the US is the same as free travel within the EU, or who compare the idea of this editorial to some sort of Soviet style control.
The 50 states are part of one sovereign nation, and passing from one to another does not need identity checks. If you go from Paris to Normandy within France the same applies, for you're traveling from one department (their equivalent to our states) to another but are still within French borders. France, Germany, Italy, etc. however are separate sovereign nations within Europe and the only reason they don't currently require such checks is merely by virtue of a treaty. But you are still crossing from one nation into another, just as if we go to Canada or Mexico our identities are examined by those nations.
Aside from losing control of who enters their country, all the EU members under the current free passage system are only as safe as the weakest European nation who may have done a poor job of vetting the identity of a foreign national. Once they're in, they have essentially unfettered access to all the other member countries. Under the current global threat that makes absolutely no sense.
The 50 states are part of one sovereign nation, and passing from one to another does not need identity checks. If you go from Paris to Normandy within France the same applies, for you're traveling from one department (their equivalent to our states) to another but are still within French borders. France, Germany, Italy, etc. however are separate sovereign nations within Europe and the only reason they don't currently require such checks is merely by virtue of a treaty. But you are still crossing from one nation into another, just as if we go to Canada or Mexico our identities are examined by those nations.
Aside from losing control of who enters their country, all the EU members under the current free passage system are only as safe as the weakest European nation who may have done a poor job of vetting the identity of a foreign national. Once they're in, they have essentially unfettered access to all the other member countries. Under the current global threat that makes absolutely no sense.
6
You clearly have no idea what the EU is about. It isn't just free movement of people it is free movement of goods and free movement of labor. There is a body of governing law that is European. Get informed.
2
Passport control at every European border would be a terrible step backwards from European integration--just what the terrorists and right-wing parties want. Much better is to strengthen controls for the first entry into the Schengen countries for everyone--that means EU citizens as well as those from non-EU nations.
2
Terrorists win if they force you to change your way of life.
It makes no more sense to 'close the borders' than suggesting we institute border checks between, say, Connecticut and New York. Just like the USA, European countries have good perimeter security: if you are coming from the outside without an EU passport you get the same checks as one does coming here.
Yes, many airports have automated systems for scanning travel documents, but so do we. You can't just scan any old id. Sheesh.
And what's with all these Red state's rejecting refugees? I thought they were all big time Christians. Where ere they when the parable of the Good Samaritan was told?
It makes no more sense to 'close the borders' than suggesting we institute border checks between, say, Connecticut and New York. Just like the USA, European countries have good perimeter security: if you are coming from the outside without an EU passport you get the same checks as one does coming here.
Yes, many airports have automated systems for scanning travel documents, but so do we. You can't just scan any old id. Sheesh.
And what's with all these Red state's rejecting refugees? I thought they were all big time Christians. Where ere they when the parable of the Good Samaritan was told?
2
With all due respect, the line, oft repeated especially post-9/11, of "Terrorists win if they force you to change your way of life." just doesn't jibe with reality.
On a fundamental level I get what you're saying, but adapting to a real threat is not a de facto victory for terrorists, but in many cases a prudent, albeit perhaps unfortunate necessity demanded by circumstances. Because I have locks and an alarm system on my home does not mean that burglars or robbers have won anything since I can no longer just go off and leave the front door unsecured. So long as the threat of terrorism is as high and real as it is, to do nothing just to avoid giving the bad guys the impression of some sort of victory is really just burying ones head in the sand.
On a fundamental level I get what you're saying, but adapting to a real threat is not a de facto victory for terrorists, but in many cases a prudent, albeit perhaps unfortunate necessity demanded by circumstances. Because I have locks and an alarm system on my home does not mean that burglars or robbers have won anything since I can no longer just go off and leave the front door unsecured. So long as the threat of terrorism is as high and real as it is, to do nothing just to avoid giving the bad guys the impression of some sort of victory is really just burying ones head in the sand.
5
I understand the concern about forged passports, but why couldn't the screening you describe take place once and thoroughly (as in UK) at European borders? The UK screens at its borders -- it doesn't screen people going from London to Manchester. So, too, with Europe -- if there is effective screening at every border, why isn't that enough? Would the next step be screening people for interior travel within countries? And, why cite the assassination of the Serbian Prime Minister in Belgrade -- Serbia is outside the EU and presumably has border controls? There are plenty of other issues that could and should be addressed -- more effective integration of European Muslim communities, many of which have been rooted in Europe for generations now; the apparent role of Belgium as a center for an illegal arms trade; closer and targeted surveillance with more tools for police action, like deportation and expulsion, for those individuals and cells that have been on watch lists for years; a reassessment of practices in the prison systems which seem to be serving as the biggest schools of terrorism of all. Combinations of tougher and tighter security (traditionally favored on the right) and broader social policies (traditionally favored on the left) could be effectively combined without undermining the basic pillars of the European project (like open borders) and of European values (like free expression, privacy and tolerance).
2
It does seem like more could be done to vet and validate people as they enter the EU and Schengen agreement countries and this should certainly be beefed up. If, as the writer suggests, there is a veritable rash of people gaining entry with forged or stolen passports that would be head scratchingly poor border control.
That said, the idea that the Schengen agreement should essentially be scrapped seems somewhere between rash and ludicrous. It, and a shared currency, are essentially THE underpinnings of the Eurozone. This would hobble what is effectively the largest economy in the world. Talk about the terrorists winning.
If the US had check points at every state border, it would have many positive effects. It would likely result in capture of many fugitives. It would largely halt the movement of illegal guns and drugs. But at what price?
That said, the idea that the Schengen agreement should essentially be scrapped seems somewhere between rash and ludicrous. It, and a shared currency, are essentially THE underpinnings of the Eurozone. This would hobble what is effectively the largest economy in the world. Talk about the terrorists winning.
If the US had check points at every state border, it would have many positive effects. It would likely result in capture of many fugitives. It would largely halt the movement of illegal guns and drugs. But at what price?
3
Typical American response to any threat. Close the borders, buy your guns, hide the children! Give me a break! Europe is not irrational the way America is when it comes to security theater. How many weapons and drugs are smuggled past your heavily-fortified borders and customs offices? TSA and Homeland Security and US Customs are jokes that act tough and wave an assault-rifle in the face of a pregnant woman or a wheelchair-bound grandma and call it safety. Europe has successfully managed its passport-free borders for decades, and there is no indication that terrorists were enabled by its liberal policies.
1
If mr noble's prescription for closing borders in Europe is a great idea, how long before the umpteen republican presidential candidates propose that each of our 50 states institute the same border controls? Will Trump be the first?
2
And, why stop with states? Why not counties, gated communities, malls? We don't need more borders, just effectively enforced ones.
2
Mr Noble was replaced. Good. Now it confirms that this change at Interpol was overdue. He fits into a crop like CIA-Brennan, who also spend wonderful times living in a free continent and are now deeply pained back at home. Besides lies, innuendos and misrepresentations they have little to offer. A GAO-Report tought all of us otherwise and in a "most egregious" US Passport test-case, investigator used the Social Security number of a man who died in 1965 to obtain a Social Security card. In another case, he used the Social Security number of a 5-year-old child and obtained a passport, even though his counterfeit documents and application indicated he was 53 years old. Also, the CIA routinely counterfeits US Passports, SS# and fake ID's (Milan Prosecutors have a 5+ meter long filing cabinet of United States official identity frauds). Besides INTERPOL's database has major flaws, exposed again last month, when an Austrian Passport was "flagged" at Frankfurt airport ENTRY from outside Schengen, because a Swedish-Krona-Bank Note, stolen from a bankrobbery, had "some" digits matching in Interpol's base. The Border Policiers gave a simple explanantion: The system is "insane" in "that we cant even report/correct such obvious blunders". And, returning to the subject, most "Terror" agents appear to have genuine, bonafide Belgium and French ID documents, no "database" could catch, unless the lucky number matched some far-fatched string by chance.
This article makes an excellent point, about catching fake passport, but checking against the Interpol database would have another big advantage: It would catch suspected or known terrorists returning, say, from Syria provided they had been flagged before. With this, all but one of the known Paris islamoterrorists would have been caught before they returned to Europe, as would their now-dead mastermind.
2
Fear, fear, and more fear. You "terrorism changes everything" people must all stink, because your afraid to take a shower because you may slip on the soap. Do you all walk because you are afraid of car accidents?
Why do so many people want to empower lunatics that cut people's heads to make public policy?
If "they hate us because we are free" then we should become less free to make them happy?
Panic drove the most powerful country in history to invade Iraq, which gave the terrorists new recruits, and a power vacuum to operate from. Meanwhile it cost us 45,000 dead and wounded soldiers, $3 trillion, and a lot of lost credibility.
Do not act out of fear. Take a deep breath. Accept that life is dangerous. And go about your business.
Why do so many people want to empower lunatics that cut people's heads to make public policy?
If "they hate us because we are free" then we should become less free to make them happy?
Panic drove the most powerful country in history to invade Iraq, which gave the terrorists new recruits, and a power vacuum to operate from. Meanwhile it cost us 45,000 dead and wounded soldiers, $3 trillion, and a lot of lost credibility.
Do not act out of fear. Take a deep breath. Accept that life is dangerous. And go about your business.
1
Passport-free zones can work only if the various participant countries have strict border controls on all entry points into the zone, and the law enforcement and border control services work seamlessly as one. This happens in single countries, however large, including the U.S., but EU currently doesn't have it. Its passport-free zone is only as strong as its weakest link, whether the Greek Islands, Sicily or elsewhere.
3
I have an EU passport (apart from my US passport) and I totally agree. That's why we can't have nice things. Time to close those borders up.
2
Of course all of this denies the clear information that a majority of those actually enacting these atrocities are native born citizens, 1st or 2nd generation youth who have been marginalized by their own countrymen and are looking for someone to believe in them. ISIS gives them this and the youth in turn are happy to "prove" themselves as worthy of their newfound belonging.
If we really wanted to mitigate the spread of these kinds of attacks we would have started providing a purpose and sense of belonging for these youth 10 years ago when they were still young. It is not too late, but we need to work on our own communities, not blame refugees who had nothing to do with this.
If we really wanted to mitigate the spread of these kinds of attacks we would have started providing a purpose and sense of belonging for these youth 10 years ago when they were still young. It is not too late, but we need to work on our own communities, not blame refugees who had nothing to do with this.
1
I'm a dual USA Euro citizen, with 2 passports, currently living in Paris. I grew up in the USA. In Europe I always keep both passports on me, but use my Euro one for Schengen travel. My passport is rarely studied with any careful consideration, sometimes barely opened (and it's a Greek passport, not even French), and that's only upon returning from international flights. I can board Schengen flights, with an e-ticket on my iPhone, without having my identity checked even once. When I return home to the states, I use my USA passport, wait in long lines and am subject to a round of questioning regardless (I know, not as much as foreigners). Traveling between Euro countries and travelling between American states is similar, and then not at all. Closing borders seems to be a step backwards, but not bothering to look at Euro passports clearly isn't working either. After being 300 meters from the attacks at the Bataclan, I'd appreciate something being done to tighten security. Terrorists will continue to do what they do, fine (really?the US seems pretty safe). But there must be a better way than the current system. I hope cool heads prevail in creating one.
The problem with the EU is that it is united and it is not. This "job half way done" system is failing in all sorts of arenas from monetary to safety. I'm not sure how many more wake up calls are needed before they get serious about fixing it. For now, I'd just like the constant police sirens to stop wailing every 15 minutes.
The problem with the EU is that it is united and it is not. This "job half way done" system is failing in all sorts of arenas from monetary to safety. I'm not sure how many more wake up calls are needed before they get serious about fixing it. For now, I'd just like the constant police sirens to stop wailing every 15 minutes.
12
I disagree with the idea that the Schengen agreement should be cancelled. This is not a question of the open border arrangement between 26 countries, it is a question of proper passport checking at the entry points to the Schengen zone. In the US, we have an open border arrangement between 50 countries (which we call "states" here), and nobody is arguing we should suspend that arrangement facing the terrorist threat. Still we lead the world in passport screening. Maybe EU should put Serbian cops on its borders? As a teenager growing up in former Yugoslavia, I always hated them. Because they were so zealous at doing their job.
1
Closing or policing borders in the Schengen Area would have an effect similar to closing or policing borders between states in the US. It would cause huge economic damage with little security benefit. Imagine having to stop and show your passport every time you crossed from New York to New Jersey.
This guy is the poster boy for why we should not allow any of these migrants in.
How many times have we heard of families with children who leave the Middle East to settle in the West where the kids grow up, get on the Internet, and become "radicalized"? Jihadi John ring a bell?
How many times have we heard of families with children who leave the Middle East to settle in the West where the kids grow up, get on the Internet, and become "radicalized"? Jihadi John ring a bell?
2
I see conservatives both here and in Europe using the tragedy in Paris to advance ideas that would not have stopped what happened in Paris.
In this article the author is basically asking to end the Schengen agreement despite the fact that of the 8 or 9 attackers, only one of them had a foreign passport. The others were either citizens of France or Belgium and would have freely moved within the country regardless.
I see others asking for back doors in the encryption that we use in our phones and computers. Yet the terrorists that attacked Paris communicated by unencrypted SMS, text messages.
Now there is a whole cadre of people that want to send young Americans back to the dessert to destroy ISIS. Again, the people who carried out the attack grew up in the West, went to Western schools, and then became radicalized. You're not going to solve this problem by having young Americans die in the dessert.
In this article the author is basically asking to end the Schengen agreement despite the fact that of the 8 or 9 attackers, only one of them had a foreign passport. The others were either citizens of France or Belgium and would have freely moved within the country regardless.
I see others asking for back doors in the encryption that we use in our phones and computers. Yet the terrorists that attacked Paris communicated by unencrypted SMS, text messages.
Now there is a whole cadre of people that want to send young Americans back to the dessert to destroy ISIS. Again, the people who carried out the attack grew up in the West, went to Western schools, and then became radicalized. You're not going to solve this problem by having young Americans die in the dessert.
Yes and we smoothed close all the borders between States in the U.S. also, because there's not enough traffic yet.
What a great idea! It is remarkable that a person who held such a high poisition in an international organization could make such a suggestion. I suppose that Mr. Noble would like to see the U.S. introduce passport checks between New York and New Jersey. Germany can go back to checking passports between all the dozens of minor principalities before unification in 1871. Maybe we can even return to the Soviet practice of restricting access to certain cities and regions. Of course, if we just wall off all of our communities, we won't need Interpol any more.
1
New York and New Jersey are part of the same country. Germany and Latvia are not. An equivalency between New Yorkers and New Jerseyans, and, say, Latvians and Germans, or Britons and Romanians, is absurd.
4
No passport is required for travel between United States states. YOu can go from Maine to Alaska without a passport. The nickel dime terrorist attacks are not the most effective or most efficient means for resolving the problem, and the costs of Europe going back to pre-1914 are huge. Let's not let the terrorist tail wag the European dog.
Who says burying one's head in the sand never works?
"Al Qaeda and Taliban were 'modified' since 9/11, the bad guys are now the ISIS ...."
I wonder whether any ISIS members used to be Al Qaeda members. As for the Taliban, aren't those the guys who (1) practically eradicated poppy production in Afghanistan for the one year (2001) when they controlled the government; and (2) are poised to retake control of the Afghan government sometime very soon, whether we leave or not?
"Al Qaeda and Taliban were 'modified' since 9/11, the bad guys are now the ISIS ...."
I wonder whether any ISIS members used to be Al Qaeda members. As for the Taliban, aren't those the guys who (1) practically eradicated poppy production in Afghanistan for the one year (2001) when they controlled the government; and (2) are poised to retake control of the Afghan government sometime very soon, whether we leave or not?
1
As far as I know, all of the attackers and accomplices had valid passports from European countries, had lived in those countries for quite some time, and some appear to have traveled to Syria to fight with ISIS. Unless their names went onto a watch list for going to Syria, how would passport checks at borders between European countries have stopped their movement?
And if not on an Interpol watch list, what would have stopped them from hopping on a flight to New York and telling American passport control that they were coming here on Holiday? What would stop them from applying for a student visa? I have 3 Saudis, 2 Egyptians and 1 Iraqi in my graduate program now. Vetting of these students is minima--we do make a phone interview with theml.
The whole Syrian refugee foofraw is a red herring. Show me a governor making solemn pronouncements about keeping them out and I will show you a political hack with a cranium filled with nature's frenzied effort to maintain a vacuum.
And if not on an Interpol watch list, what would have stopped them from hopping on a flight to New York and telling American passport control that they were coming here on Holiday? What would stop them from applying for a student visa? I have 3 Saudis, 2 Egyptians and 1 Iraqi in my graduate program now. Vetting of these students is minima--we do make a phone interview with theml.
The whole Syrian refugee foofraw is a red herring. Show me a governor making solemn pronouncements about keeping them out and I will show you a political hack with a cranium filled with nature's frenzied effort to maintain a vacuum.
1
One can understand Obama's petulance at this week's press conference when one reads comments like this one:
"...we to need to implement a thorough vetting process for anyone wishing to emigrate to [the US. We should be sure that] prospective immigrants support the values inherent in a western society....do we really want more immigrants who literally refuse to accept free speech, the equality of the sexes, gay marriage for others, and religious toleration."
Suppose the French and Belgium terrorists had been asked at some border crossing whether they accepted free speech, gay marriage, and religious toleration – and whether in general they supported the "values inherent in a western society?" What do you suppose their answers would have been?
And, by the way, do you suppose the irony of those questions would be lost on them? Nobody who's already here, after all, has to declare whether he's in favor of free speech, gay marriage, and religious toleration, and he gets to stay even if he strongly opposes all three.
"...we to need to implement a thorough vetting process for anyone wishing to emigrate to [the US. We should be sure that] prospective immigrants support the values inherent in a western society....do we really want more immigrants who literally refuse to accept free speech, the equality of the sexes, gay marriage for others, and religious toleration."
Suppose the French and Belgium terrorists had been asked at some border crossing whether they accepted free speech, gay marriage, and religious toleration – and whether in general they supported the "values inherent in a western society?" What do you suppose their answers would have been?
And, by the way, do you suppose the irony of those questions would be lost on them? Nobody who's already here, after all, has to declare whether he's in favor of free speech, gay marriage, and religious toleration, and he gets to stay even if he strongly opposes all three.
1
A very harsh, but an effective, measure of defense would be (1) a stop of all flights to and from countries that are soft on terrorists and (2) no entry to people holding the passports of such countries, as well as of those that breed terrorism.
3
Sounds like a great idea to me.
1
What is the matter with free-movement within the Schengen zone is that the countries involved have not substituted a Schengen zone passport to replace their national passports. They have not done so because they are very jealous of the "sovereignty" rights. However, one stop which might at least decrease the frequency of border checks, would be for the countries involved to create a pan-Schengen immigration agency which would staff (using each countries nationals) and coordinate passports inspection at all points of entry in the Schengen zone. The overall costs of such an agency should be paid by the Schengen member countries on the basis of population. Thus, countries such as Germany would contribute more to financing the system than, say, Greece, Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia or Hungary. Is such cooperation too much to hope for?
4
Terrorists are clearly taking advantage of the open borders all throughout Europe. Sadly, the events in Paris should force European nations to rethink their open doors policies because it's literally an engraved invitation for evil people to do evil things in the name of a warped religious philosophy. Take down the welcome sign shingle and demand all visitors to have a passport. It's as simple as that.
9
No they are not. The odds of dying from a European dying from a terrorist attack are astronomical. However, the odds of reading about it in the news is very high. So this creates a huge gulf between what is publicized and what is reality. The truth is you are more likely to die of a meteorite.
Terrorism is real and countries have the duty to protect their citizens. We can protect ourselves from terrorists and meteorites. It's not a quid pro quo.
1
This is frankly offensive nonsense, exactly the kind of thoughtless solution proposed after every incident that taps deep fear and resentment of "The Other," wherever and whenever one occurs. It is of a piece with the governors rushing to declare that they, somehow, will not accept Syrian refugees into their states. What's next, border checks between the states so that Syrians welcomed into some states cannot travel to those refusing their immigration? We'll be needing internal passports then, since otherwise who can tell, by skin color and accent alone, who is really "The Other" and who is not. If the EU has problems with foreign terrorists entering its passport-free zone, the place to stop them is at the EU border, not by once again erecting internal barriers and old nationalisms to separate citizens of Europe.
6
"The Newer (but not improved) Colossus". Give me your bigoted, your xenophobic, your racist yearning to exclude those in need. We, too, have a welcome sign, and it was a gift from the people of France. Let's hope we can once again be true to its spirit.
4
Free countries are for those with the guts to protect them.
2
It is an age old problem, the protection of individual liberties against the collective right to security. William Blackstone's precept,” it is better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted..." A statement that is a corner stone to all democracies. As such, Western democracies are main targets for radical Islamist's; they are innocent until proven guilty; test the legal boundaries of civil liberties and pursue their perceived right to cause harm and chaos in civil societies. In airports and in federal facilities, individuals are screened and frisked; all in the name of protection of the collective right to security. But to some this minor intrusion on individual rights is unacceptable and feel violated. Because terror will be a present and clear danger in everyday life, certain rights and liberties will be circumvented and become the new norm that too much freedom may hinder the pursuit of terrorists and provide a breeding ground for future attacks.
2
We need to go one step further and implement a planetary ID system. If we do not, the Jihadists win.
2
If you institute a planetary id system then the global corporate totalitarian surveillance state will win. And that scares me a lot more than some suicide bombers.
How so? These so called 'passports' lack conformity. Humans still manage to kill other humans over imaginary issues.
What happens to those caught trying to enter countries with faked or stolen passports? Along with more serious screening, there should be serious penalties for this crime... let's say a minimum of 10 years without parole. Over time such a policy could become a real deterrent.
Dan Kravitz
Dan Kravitz
11
Let me tell you, they get a slap on the wrist; nothing more. Germany - where I live at present - has close to 300,000 unregistered "refugees" who have simply gone underground. The fecklessness of the government is mind-boggling, and up until now, anyone calling for stricter controls has been branded a right-wing populist or worse. Since living here I realise how skewed perceptions about other countries can be. Most American equate these people with illegal Hispanics who come to work. Here, according to official sources, over 90% are completely unqualified for the EU labor market. This means they are completely supported by the taxpayer who pays for food, shelter, clothing, schooling and healthcare.
3
That's not a bad idea but we're also going to have to crack down on the warped, anti-modern belief systems of the ones who are already there (misogyny, sadism, militarism, fear of wetness, etc.). We should seriously consider prison sentences for the armchair fascist propagandists and other so-called moderate Europeans who refuse to condemn the extremist minority in their Volksgemeinschaft.
2
Indeed, Europe accepts tens of thousands of asylum seekers who have burned off their fingerprints. What motive could there possibly be other than to deceive? Are these the kind of people who the West should welcome?
1
"The Euro "passport-free zone" is great for travel and commerce but terrible for detecting terrorists. ... the EU must get serious about passport checks."
No question that tighter border security -- long lines, unsmiling guards, impertinent questions, screened emails and text messages -- would make a difference. But not much. Maybe the next "mastermind" would have to do his "masterminding" by telephone from the Middle East rather than by telephone from a nearby suburb. And maybe he'd have to come up with some clever codes -- perhaps "The little bird seems ready to fly" rather than "We're leaving in 15 minutes to bomb that concert," but aren't those pretty minor inconveniences? In the meantime, every law-abiding citizen will be required to stand in long lines and answer impertinent questions posed by grumpy border guards.
We might as well face reality here: It's time for the US to stop trying to topple foreign governments. It's gotten so absurd in Syria that we're actually on the same side as the bad guys -- ISIS -- in opposing the current leader. We're learning the hard way that the enemy of one's enemy isn't always one's friend.
Maybe we'd be wiser just to stay out of these Middle Eastern messes, rather than continuing to pretend we can meddle to our heart's content with no downside.
No question that tighter border security -- long lines, unsmiling guards, impertinent questions, screened emails and text messages -- would make a difference. But not much. Maybe the next "mastermind" would have to do his "masterminding" by telephone from the Middle East rather than by telephone from a nearby suburb. And maybe he'd have to come up with some clever codes -- perhaps "The little bird seems ready to fly" rather than "We're leaving in 15 minutes to bomb that concert," but aren't those pretty minor inconveniences? In the meantime, every law-abiding citizen will be required to stand in long lines and answer impertinent questions posed by grumpy border guards.
We might as well face reality here: It's time for the US to stop trying to topple foreign governments. It's gotten so absurd in Syria that we're actually on the same side as the bad guys -- ISIS -- in opposing the current leader. We're learning the hard way that the enemy of one's enemy isn't always one's friend.
Maybe we'd be wiser just to stay out of these Middle Eastern messes, rather than continuing to pretend we can meddle to our heart's content with no downside.
6
A few other signs could be more appropriate to see: these are>
1. To find out legal mechanism to indict the home grown terrorists.
2. Home grown terrorism should be considered as a war crime and could be sent to the Hague for trial
3.To find out mechanism to nullify their host nations residency permit and sent them back to their country of origin.
4.on a softer plane resources could be utilised to deradicalize the home grown terrorists or would be terrorists ( this strategy is not working in Sweden, didn't work in France)
These steps should be taken in tanden with scraping the Schengen agreement.
Finally the west should prepare to accept three million refugees from the Islamic world until 2017. Whether this means invitation to many more would be home grown terrorists is a matter for the EU leaders to decide. Meanwhile, I am seriously trying to flee from the failed EU to north America. I feel much safer there, psychologically.
1. To find out legal mechanism to indict the home grown terrorists.
2. Home grown terrorism should be considered as a war crime and could be sent to the Hague for trial
3.To find out mechanism to nullify their host nations residency permit and sent them back to their country of origin.
4.on a softer plane resources could be utilised to deradicalize the home grown terrorists or would be terrorists ( this strategy is not working in Sweden, didn't work in France)
These steps should be taken in tanden with scraping the Schengen agreement.
Finally the west should prepare to accept three million refugees from the Islamic world until 2017. Whether this means invitation to many more would be home grown terrorists is a matter for the EU leaders to decide. Meanwhile, I am seriously trying to flee from the failed EU to north America. I feel much safer there, psychologically.
3
Mass random shootings in USA. Movie theaters, schools, streets, college campuses, etc. people allowed to carry guns into bars and almost anywhere else. Try living with that!
1
Lol we have a mass shooting every week. You really think you're safer in the US?
The US is far larger than Western Europe and has "open borders" between the various states. Gun running, non-taxed cigarettes, illegal immigration, and drug importation are more of a problem because of this. There are writeoffs between ease of movement and entry control.
2
The USA is a single country; you can't really compare Schengen with free travel throughout the States.
3
Recently on a trip to France my passport was scanned entering and leaving the country It was checked when renting my hotel rooms in multiple countries. It was also scanned entering the United States. There is a huge black market in false documents, as the fake Syrian passport in the atrocity in Paris shows. Simply showing a document, real or false, will not guarantee that anyone with evil intent is stopped. The author's solution will not solve any problem.
Oh it will represent a start to solving the problem. As for that black market in Syrian passports and IDs - well, you can thank Angela Merkel for that. She opened the gates. For ever action, there is a consequence and a reaction. They are doing a terrible job vetting the migrants, who are almost all from the ME. It is beyond reason that IS, which may be crazy but isn't stupid, didn't embed more than a few operatives in the floods that Merkel opened the gates to without a second thought.
Check out her poll ratings these days.
Check out her poll ratings these days.
The President willfully neglected an opportunity to lead and to solve this before it became a problem. We should have worked with our allies to establish safe zones in or near Syria, helped the refugees there and worked with them to take back their freedom. Instead, the President's willful neglect led to a massive refugee flow that allowed the terrorists a means to attack Europe. The President is clearly to blame for what is happening, he did not pull the trigger, but he allowed the conditions to be created and he continues to neglect his duty to lead.
4
I think the Schengen zone should be suspended 'till further notice'. Major powers are trying to destroy ISIS militarily and while they are doing it, the traditional European borders should be restored.
Al Qaeda and Taliban were 'modified' since 9/11, the bad guys are now the ISIS with their arrogant online publications.
The recent top European policeman is right and, I think, major European governments agree with him after 'PARIS 2015'.
Al Qaeda and Taliban were 'modified' since 9/11, the bad guys are now the ISIS with their arrogant online publications.
The recent top European policeman is right and, I think, major European governments agree with him after 'PARIS 2015'.
4
I have said this to my husband two month ago! A no brainer and very naive decision by Mrs Merkel and I think this will be her last time to be chancellor !
9
Your word in God's ear, but most alternatives are worse: Greens, Left, SPD...In 2005 lots of Germans voted for her because she said that multiculturalism had failed (true), and now she has made a complete about-face.
The only way Europe or the US can truly fight ISIS, is to stop funding and sending weapons to ISIS enablers, like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, etc. and those who help the so-called 'Syrian rebels/opposition', which is nothing of the sort. Since the outset of this saga, the US, France and others have been focused on regime change in Syria, and have been blatantly funding groups well known to be linked to al-Qaeda. Right now, another $400 million is going to them in the newest Pentagon budget. So, our tax dollars are actually being used to fuel this fire. The 'Syrian opposition' is made up of Libyan, Yemeni, Afghan and other notorious jihadis...all recruited by the Saudis to do the dirty work in Syria. Syrians would never destroy their own country like this...never. So, the only way to stop ISIS is to cut all funding to those who support them. Sadly, we're part of the problem, not the solution, and so are the Europeans who have cooperated with the US in this endeavor.
7
Considering all these non-documented immigrants from Syria entering Europe, what Ms. Merkel in Germany has instigated here is beyond reasoning. She must go.
10
As mentioned by James Moffet before me, the vast majority of the attackers are French citizens, a few are Belgian citizens (including the mastermind), and only one came from outside EU.
Unfortunately, the enemies of our nation(s) belong to our nation(s), they come from inside, they do not come from abroad. And they are recruited mostly through social networks. Europe's open-border policy has nothing to do with it.
To me, this editorial provides only a very shallow analysis of the situation.
Unfortunately, the enemies of our nation(s) belong to our nation(s), they come from inside, they do not come from abroad. And they are recruited mostly through social networks. Europe's open-border policy has nothing to do with it.
To me, this editorial provides only a very shallow analysis of the situation.
1
Yes. Abdelhamid Abaaoud and Hadfi Bilal are such stereotypically French/Belgian names.
I'm sure that Europe's policy of inviting in many people with a very different religion, culture and history of political grievances will continue to work wonders.
I'm sure that Europe's policy of inviting in many people with a very different religion, culture and history of political grievances will continue to work wonders.
1
As an American living in Europe, I love that the Shengen Agreement made Europe more like the US. As things stand, I can hop in my car and drive through the 26 Shengen countries without ever pulling out my passport. Now imagine yourself driving from New York to Chicago and having to go through passport control at every state border. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois (take the long way around New Jersey to avoid that border crossing). It would add 12 hours to a 12 hour trip. By all means upgrade security to the max at the Shengen gateways, but once inside, don't restrict freedom of travel any more than it is in the States.
32
There is little European solidarity in a real crisis as evidenced by the Greek bailout and the present tsunami of "refugees". Most European countries still identify primarily as French, Spanish, Polish, etc. they should have stuck with the old common market, which functioned well. The EU is an inflated bureaucracy run by incompetents with fat sinecures.
1
Oh we're all so glad travel is so much more convenient for you!
Talk to you when the next attack occurs, which it will, and probably fairly soon, thanks to Mrs Merkel.
Talk to you when the next attack occurs, which it will, and probably fairly soon, thanks to Mrs Merkel.
1
And don't forget, we're not just talking about individual travellers. Commercial goods and all truck drivers would get stopped and slowed down too. This is a big ask.
1
"none of those countries systematically screened passports or verified the identities of those crossing borders (within Europe)... This is like hanging a sign welcoming terrorists to Europe."
This op-ed is completely unpersuasive. It states that borders between European countries should be closed and monitored, but only cites problems of terrorists coming into Europe from non EU countries. Sure more border controls would mean increased scrutiny of travel documents overall, but the author needs to explain why increased resources (and scrutiny) aren't better used when/where non EU travelers are entering the EU as opposed to between EU borders.
This op-ed is completely unpersuasive. It states that borders between European countries should be closed and monitored, but only cites problems of terrorists coming into Europe from non EU countries. Sure more border controls would mean increased scrutiny of travel documents overall, but the author needs to explain why increased resources (and scrutiny) aren't better used when/where non EU travelers are entering the EU as opposed to between EU borders.
1
A commenter complains:
"I recently traveled to Belgium and entered the country at a Brussels airport with my US passport. I had to stand on line with all the non-Europeans ... To my left I noticed the Europeans zipping right through."
It's even easier than THAT. The last time I crossed between Germany and France, for example, I did so at 70 miles per hour, in the privacy of my rental car.
Tighter borders, longer lines, unsmiling guards, etc. -- all that would help. But not all that much. Like it or not, the terrorists have the edge here, and they'll get in one way or another. The only real solution is to start minding our own business.
Syria has changed since 2011. Then, the choice appeared to be:
Assad v. no Assad
Now the choice appears to be:
Assad or ISIS
Would you make the same choice today that you'd have made in 2011?
"I recently traveled to Belgium and entered the country at a Brussels airport with my US passport. I had to stand on line with all the non-Europeans ... To my left I noticed the Europeans zipping right through."
It's even easier than THAT. The last time I crossed between Germany and France, for example, I did so at 70 miles per hour, in the privacy of my rental car.
Tighter borders, longer lines, unsmiling guards, etc. -- all that would help. But not all that much. Like it or not, the terrorists have the edge here, and they'll get in one way or another. The only real solution is to start minding our own business.
Syria has changed since 2011. Then, the choice appeared to be:
Assad v. no Assad
Now the choice appears to be:
Assad or ISIS
Would you make the same choice today that you'd have made in 2011?
3
It was crazy to keep insisting that Assad must go. He has to be part of the solution because whatever comes after him will be worse, or do we never learn? The Saudis aren't beacons of human rights, but we have no problem being "friends" with them!
3
After te attacks I wondered what the terrorist tried to achieve. Certainly they did not want to be president of France. But what then? And then it dawned on me. They wanted to take our Western values of openness, hospitality and courage. They have won. Their regime rules ours now!
Really? But look at who would be ruling our borders in this revised situation. People with Western values, or ISIS? Do you actually believe there's no difference?
4
In 1985, no one would imagine the creation of an ISIS. By 1995, the Brits knew it was not in their best interest to be included in open door policy of their continental neighbors.
People who feel isolated from society, who are treated differently eventually rebel. Throughout history this is true. If Europeans want to enact restrictive policies about immigration from Muslim nations so be it but they must make changes with their current population living in their countries.
If the US treated our Muslim population as second class citizens we would see attacks in our cities by now.
People who feel isolated from society, who are treated differently eventually rebel. Throughout history this is true. If Europeans want to enact restrictive policies about immigration from Muslim nations so be it but they must make changes with their current population living in their countries.
If the US treated our Muslim population as second class citizens we would see attacks in our cities by now.
It isn't easy to be accepted as an immigrant to the US. Europe lets everyone in without demanding anything in return. Most people who want to work and achieve go to the US, Canada and Australia. Those who want to immigrate into the welfare system come to Europe.
1
Why not ask Mr Cheney and Mr Rumsfield how to respond to Syrian crisis? They can cook up something, send 100000 troops and create another democratic state in the Middle East
2
What your asking is for people to be sensible, impossible given the political correctness of Europe. So, who in the European Union will lead?
8
Hopefully, Europe will wake up this time. Things wil sadly get worse before they get better, but Europe does not need to be passive in the face of threats of mass murder by Islamic terrorists. With the Charlie Hebdo and Hypercacher murders, perhaps French authorities thought that people were "safe" becuase somehow the Charlie Hebdo journalists "deserved" what they got for having mocked Islam, and Jews being Jews, they somehow deserved their fate as well.
This time, it involved mostly French people out in Paris for a good time, and the French authorities would have a problem in holding this group somehow "responsible" for their fate. These are dangerous times and some real changes are needed and needed fast.
This time, it involved mostly French people out in Paris for a good time, and the French authorities would have a problem in holding this group somehow "responsible" for their fate. These are dangerous times and some real changes are needed and needed fast.
3
All times are dangerous. Terrorists win when you let them terrorize you, when you're decisions are based on there actions. Get a grip.
"Stringent, truly universal background checks work, whether applied to foreign nationals trying to enter our country or American citizens trying to buy a gun."
An absurd statement.
The most stringent of background checks wouldn't have screened out the mother of the Newtown, CT killers. He used her guns, remember?
Perhaps a handful of the 19 9/11 hijackers would have been screened out, but the planners would just have sent some replacements with cleaner records.
Many readers just refuse to admit what's obvious to the terrorists, and to me: If you want to blow up a bomb in some Western city, and are willing to die if necessary to accomplish that, you'll find a way. Your targets can posture and beat their chests all the way, but harsh reality is that they'll eventually do what you want them to do.
If who-controls-Syria mattered more to the American people, or to the European people, maybe we'd be willing to "tough it out" – sacrifice a few hundred of our innocent countrymen (maybe even ourselves) to fight for our position in the who-controls-Syria battle. But the reality is we don't really care all that much who controls Syria. Assad may not be the best possible ruler there, but he doesn't bother us or our allies. And look what happens whenever we stick our noses in where our interests don't call for that: Iraq, Libya, Egypt – and probably several other places where our stumble-bum interventions just haven't made the front pages yet.
An absurd statement.
The most stringent of background checks wouldn't have screened out the mother of the Newtown, CT killers. He used her guns, remember?
Perhaps a handful of the 19 9/11 hijackers would have been screened out, but the planners would just have sent some replacements with cleaner records.
Many readers just refuse to admit what's obvious to the terrorists, and to me: If you want to blow up a bomb in some Western city, and are willing to die if necessary to accomplish that, you'll find a way. Your targets can posture and beat their chests all the way, but harsh reality is that they'll eventually do what you want them to do.
If who-controls-Syria mattered more to the American people, or to the European people, maybe we'd be willing to "tough it out" – sacrifice a few hundred of our innocent countrymen (maybe even ourselves) to fight for our position in the who-controls-Syria battle. But the reality is we don't really care all that much who controls Syria. Assad may not be the best possible ruler there, but he doesn't bother us or our allies. And look what happens whenever we stick our noses in where our interests don't call for that: Iraq, Libya, Egypt – and probably several other places where our stumble-bum interventions just haven't made the front pages yet.
1
People completely lose their minds when this sort of thing happens.
129 people were killed in an appalling tragedy in France
~ 630 die by firearms *every week* in the US in an average year
~ 100,000 people die in the US each year because dr's don't wash their hands properly
Keep some perspective when coming up with solutions
129 people were killed in an appalling tragedy in France
~ 630 die by firearms *every week* in the US in an average year
~ 100,000 people die in the US each year because dr's don't wash their hands properly
Keep some perspective when coming up with solutions
2
I wish Neville Chamberlain had a little less perspective in evaluating the threat posed by Nazi Germany in September, 1938. The world could have used an alarmist like Winston Churchill just then.
2
I'm all for "keeping some perspective," but I'm not sure you advance that cause to spout nonsense like this:
"100,000 people die in the US each year because dr's don't wash their hands properly."
"100,000 people die in the US each year because dr's don't wash their hands properly."
3
>I'm all for "keeping some perspective," but I'm not sure you advance that cause to spout nonsense like this....
I'm not sure what qualifies you to declare that as nonsense. Search for "Joint Commission Hand Hygiene" in a search engine...
I'm not sure what qualifies you to declare that as nonsense. Search for "Joint Commission Hand Hygiene" in a search engine...
We hear a lot about Syrian refugees, but almost all of the jihadis involved in the Paris attacks were French or Belgian citizens. Some of them were already on security watch lists. They are exactly the people who would be stopped if reasonable controls were placed on crossing European borders. At the least, they'd be confined to engaging in terrorism in their own countries.
In so far as the U.S. is concerned, we to need to implement a thorough vetting process for anyone wishing to emigrate to this country. Part of the vetting ought to be whether these prospective immigrants support the values inherent in a western society. It may not be politically correct to say so, but do we really want more immigrants who literally refuse to accept free speech, the equality of the sexes, gay marriage for others, and religious toleration. We already have enough of those folks. Some might say we already have too many.
In so far as the U.S. is concerned, we to need to implement a thorough vetting process for anyone wishing to emigrate to this country. Part of the vetting ought to be whether these prospective immigrants support the values inherent in a western society. It may not be politically correct to say so, but do we really want more immigrants who literally refuse to accept free speech, the equality of the sexes, gay marriage for others, and religious toleration. We already have enough of those folks. Some might say we already have too many.
8
In USA there are not border checks between states. Why should there be in Europe? I know there in Europe there are no states, rather different countries, but the goal is to become a united Europe. Closing the borders among the countries and implementing tighter controls is not going to help. Tighten the border checks in countries close to other continents to prevent the terrorists. Also, concerning the Syrian refugees, it seems unlikely that a terrorist would risk his life on a boat that could sink at any moment in order to get across to Europe and then execute his plan. Too much risk involved.
Illegals with Latin American nationality do not seem to pose a terrorist threat to the U.S. But why aren't we focusing on student and tourist visa over-stayers from Islamic countries? I believe that was the profile of most of the 9/11 actors. It would seem a good place for I.C.E. and the U.S. marshals to do some sweeps. Even if they didn't disrupt a terrorist plot they would rid the country of people who shouldn't be here and send a message overseas that violating U.S. immigration laws has consequences. It would also provide an opportunity to question these visa violators in police custody before they are unceremoniously shipped back.
6
I wonder whether this counterfeiter has other customers we haven't heard about:
"One of the terrorists in Paris may have used a fake Syrian passport to enter Greece to claim asylum. Serbian authorities subsequently arrested a man whose passport contained details identical to the one found at the scene of the Paris attacks, suggesting that both passports were produced by the same counterfeiter."
Do you suppose this counterfeiter stays in business without many satisfied customers? We may have figured out (too late) that he produces multiple fake passports (what a surprise, eh?), but so what? We here in the US are banking on the oceans that separate us from the rest of the world, "luxuries" the Europeans don't have.
And that may work. After all, 9/11 happened somewhere else, right?
"One of the terrorists in Paris may have used a fake Syrian passport to enter Greece to claim asylum. Serbian authorities subsequently arrested a man whose passport contained details identical to the one found at the scene of the Paris attacks, suggesting that both passports were produced by the same counterfeiter."
Do you suppose this counterfeiter stays in business without many satisfied customers? We may have figured out (too late) that he produces multiple fake passports (what a surprise, eh?), but so what? We here in the US are banking on the oceans that separate us from the rest of the world, "luxuries" the Europeans don't have.
And that may work. After all, 9/11 happened somewhere else, right?
3
For most of our lives we were asked to show passports when crossing national borders, and we never felt that was an "invasion of privacy." Perhaps the very act of requiring an identity check at each border would be a deterrent to at least some potential criminals. Note the experience in the U K.
4
PBS NewsHour had interviews with French businessmen who travel back and forth to Belgium and other Schengen Zone countries each week for their work -- they were in the train station. These guys seemed resigned to the fact that they might need to sacrifice some freedom of movement between countries in this new climate. Who knows if that will actually happen, but certainly, the freedom of movement for businesspeople, goods, tourists, etc. also allows criminals, arms and other dangerous entities to move freely too. It's a scary world.
2
The problem is not the lack of internal border checks, which has been a boon for legitimate trade and travel within Europe, but insufficient attention to the external border of the Schengen Zone. Greece is the only Schengen member that borders the Middle East, and has been the pathway for the majority of recent Syrian and Afghan migrants. But Greece is broke and hopelessly unable to cope with this human tide. The other Schengen members have provided laughably little help. If Europe wants to keep its open borders, and it should, it needs to shore up the countries on its fringe.
5
"The United States is safer as a result [of its rigorous passport screening]."
I have a nasty feeling we'll soon find out whether that's true. I'm pretty sure I know the answer – we're not – but we're going to find that out the hard way.
Russia has the right idea here: Draw a line in the sand and tell ISIS and everybody else to stay east of that line. That strategy will work. ISIS will "test" Assad/Russia but eventually will find it easier to look elsewhere for enemies – the Kurds, Iraq, Turkey, maybe Jordan, eventually Israel – and Russia will leave those new problems for others to deal with.
Our strategy won't work, because of its "Assad must go" insistence (which, by the way, hasn't changed, judging from other op-ed pieces published lately by the Times). I'll wager that the vast majority of Syrians would opt for stability even if Assad stays. Ever notice that we never ask them?
Syrians won't leave Syria if it becomes stable – who would go through that suffering if they didn't have to? Western countries don't want them. Does that combination argue for:
1. Ending the war in Syria even if Assad ends up in power?
OR
2. Ending the war in Syria only if Assad leaves, and continuing the Syrian war if he does not?
We've chosen Door #2. Russia has chosen Door #1. True enough, Door #1 promotes Russia's own selfish interests. But it's also best for the Syrian people (and for Western countries who aren't eager to accept Syrian refugees). Door #2 is just continued US meddling.
I have a nasty feeling we'll soon find out whether that's true. I'm pretty sure I know the answer – we're not – but we're going to find that out the hard way.
Russia has the right idea here: Draw a line in the sand and tell ISIS and everybody else to stay east of that line. That strategy will work. ISIS will "test" Assad/Russia but eventually will find it easier to look elsewhere for enemies – the Kurds, Iraq, Turkey, maybe Jordan, eventually Israel – and Russia will leave those new problems for others to deal with.
Our strategy won't work, because of its "Assad must go" insistence (which, by the way, hasn't changed, judging from other op-ed pieces published lately by the Times). I'll wager that the vast majority of Syrians would opt for stability even if Assad stays. Ever notice that we never ask them?
Syrians won't leave Syria if it becomes stable – who would go through that suffering if they didn't have to? Western countries don't want them. Does that combination argue for:
1. Ending the war in Syria even if Assad ends up in power?
OR
2. Ending the war in Syria only if Assad leaves, and continuing the Syrian war if he does not?
We've chosen Door #2. Russia has chosen Door #1. True enough, Door #1 promotes Russia's own selfish interests. But it's also best for the Syrian people (and for Western countries who aren't eager to accept Syrian refugees). Door #2 is just continued US meddling.
3
The Euro "passport-free zone" is great for travel and commerce but terrible for detecting terrorists. Given the very real threat from ISIS and the number of potential murderers living among the Europeans, the EU must get serious about passport checks. Screening against Interpol's database sounds like a critical step.
4
You can - of course - enter Europe as a Saudi tourist on a plane or fly in from Jordania, Egypt - even Turkey. You can bribe your way in or just cross legally easily via the Balkans driving in a van. Also, you can fly to Canada or take a trip on a tourist liner and walk across the border to the US. You can get to Mexico and cross in from there. Why do you think that terrorists let the registered Syrian passport lying around? Because ISIS needs the Europeans/the West to stop showing compassion, feeding their kids, being kind! We are, after all, Satan to them. I mean seriously, think! Why would you plan an attack, then take a 6 weeks walk from Syria to Europe, meet people along the way who will tell you what they went through, weakening your resolve, then get the weapons and bombs (another week)... I am not saying they shouldn't register people at the borders but the main problem is how to put them up! We cannot partially integrate, i.e. house, feed and educate the children of 500000 Syrians in Europe within a couple of months without building a new city. People don't like having suddenly a ton of brown faces whose language they don't understand around. It's enough to frighten anyone and it's bad business. Why don't they start building a city for refugees already? I cannot, by the life of me, fathom why intelligent people would write these kinds of pieces if they aren't working for ISIS.
Resurrecting internal borders is not at all what is needed in a Union, to the contrary there would have to be less internal borders for better surveillance inside. However Europe needs to establish much more solid border controls vs non the adjacent non EU countries like Turkey.
The author conflates two very different issues: open borders within the EU, and a lack of stringent checks for people entering from outside the EU. Controlling terrorism by suspending Schengen is like trying to solve the US's illegal immigration problem by instituting ID checks for cars driving between Kansas and Missouri. The author implies that it would be easier to institute intra-EU border checks rather than "screen[ing] systematically at every single entry point" to the EU, but this is nonsense-- there are many, many more internal "border crossings" in the EU that would require checking than there are external crossings.
Since there's a moderate rebel Syrian army that's supported somewhat by the US and others, why are men of fighting age being accepted as refugees? Shouldn't they be staying put and fighting for their own country? Also, the Syrian refugees should be placed in humane camps along the lines of the DP camps set up by the Allies after WWII. There, the DP's were vetted while awaiting contacts from relatives who had to vouch for them financially and otherwise before they were allowed to resettle elsewhere. In some cases, even survivors of concentration camps had to wait for years before they found a country that would take them in. So why the rush this time around? Train the young men and send them back to fight for their country and treat the other refugees with kindness and care while educating them in the ways of democracy as they hopefully await a return to their homeland.
1
There are no moderates in that region. Historically, as soon as one group won, they became just as murderously oppressive as their predecessors. The near East is not Europe or America; their thinking is diametrically opposed to what we consider normal. Ask anyone who has lived in the region for a while.
Is it any surprise that the former director of Interpol (and founder of security firm RKN Global) wants a world filled with more borders, security personnel, and surveillance? Events such as those in Paris simultaneously fuel his paranoid worldview and suit his business interests. Returning to a pre-Schengen Europe would do almost nothing to prevent these kinds of attacks, as others here have noted, while costing the continent billions of Euros and bringing an abrupt end to a noble and historic project of integration and open borders. What's good for RKN Global is not good for Europe, and the situation would have to get far worse before Europeans should consider returning to Cold War borders and a Cold War mindset. Let's not throw in the towel yet.
1
For those readers claiming the terrorists who attacked Paris were Europeans with valid passports – Please remember that they were first or second generation immigrants who never integrated with their surrounding society or accepted the European values of tolerance and freedom.
That is in fact a massive part of the problem: we cannot possibly ‘screen’ which refugees will be loyal to France and to the ideals held by the West, before they are loyal to a version of intolerant Islam.
Unfortunately we cannot possibly screen those who will integrate from those who may become radicals.
But my main concern for Europe, in terms of the influx of refugees is actually not terrorism – it is the kind of violence and oppression brought by a culture where that is the standard.
Two weeks ago a Syrian refugee father in Germany killed his own daughter because she had been gang raped back home – therefore she was considered ‘unclean’.
There have been at least three gang rapes in Germany this year involving refugees and a rape of a 13 year old girl in a refugee center.
Where is your coverage on these cultural values being brought in to the West?
We must have a much more honest conversation about the misogyny, homophobia and religious intolerance in Islam – before you accuse everyone who makes these relevant questions on being prejudiced monsters.
That is in fact a massive part of the problem: we cannot possibly ‘screen’ which refugees will be loyal to France and to the ideals held by the West, before they are loyal to a version of intolerant Islam.
Unfortunately we cannot possibly screen those who will integrate from those who may become radicals.
But my main concern for Europe, in terms of the influx of refugees is actually not terrorism – it is the kind of violence and oppression brought by a culture where that is the standard.
Two weeks ago a Syrian refugee father in Germany killed his own daughter because she had been gang raped back home – therefore she was considered ‘unclean’.
There have been at least three gang rapes in Germany this year involving refugees and a rape of a 13 year old girl in a refugee center.
Where is your coverage on these cultural values being brought in to the West?
We must have a much more honest conversation about the misogyny, homophobia and religious intolerance in Islam – before you accuse everyone who makes these relevant questions on being prejudiced monsters.
6
I have a computer chip in my credit card. Would it help if passports had the same?
Hi Reader - such a great idea.
Meaning - perhaps our passports could hold a lot more information regarding our profiles than it currently does.
This would probably mean a massive overlapping work where immigration would share more info w FBI and other security agencies. It also means giving up privacy and personal freedom - which is something that unfortunately we need to compromise for the sake of security.
Considering that now France is afraid of a chemical weapon attack it is not a bad thought at all!
Meaning - perhaps our passports could hold a lot more information regarding our profiles than it currently does.
This would probably mean a massive overlapping work where immigration would share more info w FBI and other security agencies. It also means giving up privacy and personal freedom - which is something that unfortunately we need to compromise for the sake of security.
Considering that now France is afraid of a chemical weapon attack it is not a bad thought at all!
The Schengen agreement would work fine if Europe had better border controls at the borders between signatories and non-signatories of Schengen plus a common anti-terrorist surveillance. The GOP governors seem to be advocating passport controls between states, how is that different than reneging Schengen in Europe? The problem in Europe is that it does not have an ocean between it and the Middle East and thus for Schengen to work it needs tighter border control.
The premise of the argument favored by this opinion piece is defeated by the author's own point that jihadi terrorists are in fact using (forged) passports. If Europe was indeed derelict in border control than no one would need to forge a passport to enter. It seems to me that the combined resources of the member nations would be better spent improving passport checks at the frontier borders where fraudulent visa and passport detection is needed most. Checking the border between France and Germany would be a waste... at that point anyone with ill intent is already in the heart of Europe.
"Until passports are screened systematically at every single entry point, the 26 Schengen countries must suspend their open border arrangement and close s this passport-free travel zone throughout Europe".
It's absurd to suggest controls between the 26 Schengen countries. Not one country has the capacity to do so. Take the border between Switzerland and France for example, with hundreds of thousands of crossings daily, there would be a traffic jam from one end of the country to the other. And then you'd have to build walls around every country since everything is open. When I hike in the Jura region, I never know if I'm in France or Switzerland, there's no marker or fence or guards or anything and that's the case throughout Europe.
think before you just write any nonsense.
It's absurd to suggest controls between the 26 Schengen countries. Not one country has the capacity to do so. Take the border between Switzerland and France for example, with hundreds of thousands of crossings daily, there would be a traffic jam from one end of the country to the other. And then you'd have to build walls around every country since everything is open. When I hike in the Jura region, I never know if I'm in France or Switzerland, there's no marker or fence or guards or anything and that's the case throughout Europe.
think before you just write any nonsense.
Key to reigning in this threat is to put pressure on Turkey. The enable and support Daesh, while profiting from looted antiquities and oil. They attack the Kurds and ironically call them terrorists. They are asking for visa free travel to the European Union. What could go wrong?
3
Unlike Mr. Noble, many Europeans recall that Interpol delivered the greatest level of internal security in Europe in the period 1940 to 1942 under the Presidency of one Reinhard Heydrich. He may recall that achieving that level of internal order necessitated some "sacrifices" on the part of the peoples of this continent.
Europe has removed borders because it believes that if its peoples interact more they will understand each other better and if they understand each other better they will be less likely to fall into conflict with one another. Insular people are more likely to fall prey to nationalism - historically the curse of Europe.
Freedom is dangerous. People need to remember this (the men who won your country's freedom surely knew it). Only slaves are truly safe.
Europe has removed borders because it believes that if its peoples interact more they will understand each other better and if they understand each other better they will be less likely to fall into conflict with one another. Insular people are more likely to fall prey to nationalism - historically the curse of Europe.
Freedom is dangerous. People need to remember this (the men who won your country's freedom surely knew it). Only slaves are truly safe.
1
This idea is certifiably crazy. We drove from Amsterdam to Paris last June. I could not imagine how long it would have taken, or the costs involved if every truck, car and bus on the highway was stopped at the Belgium and French borders so everyone could be screened. It would be like stopping every car, bus and truck going from Florida to Virginia at the Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia borders. Europe need to strengthen border controls at the borders of Europe, but to end the Schengen agreement would cause an economic and social disaster.
The US is one country, the EU is not. The more accurate comparison is between US and Canada. Used to be able to cross between US and Canada with only a driver's license. Since passport requirements were implemented in recent years, the worst delays are maybe half an hour to 45 minutes - and that's at the busier crossings, such as I-5, by Detroit and at Niagara Falls. I've driven into Canada from Maine and from rural Washington state with only a two-three minute delay. Passport controls are easy and can be done efficiently and effectively.
3
By this logic, passport-free travel between individual US States is "effectively an international passport-free zone for terrorists to execute attacks" as well.
You still need proper passport accreditation to get into the Schengen Zone, just as you do any US Border crossing.
You still need proper passport accreditation to get into the Schengen Zone, just as you do any US Border crossing.
1
As so many commenters keep pointing out, the United States of America is ONE single country> The European Union is NOT, and the Schengen zone includes four non-EU countries as well. Different things folks, different things.
1
If one is stupid enough to leave and fight for a country that has given them nothing but grief and misery through religion, then your choice is made and you have given up citizenship of the country that gave you life, opportunity and a standard of living unrivaled in the country you were born into. Can anyone imagine fighting for jihadists in Syria when one is fortunate enough to live in the country of beauty and intellect, France, who has given the world so much. I say, we shouldn't want people who don't appreciate the beauty of France, The United States or any other Western country, each who has contributed to the betterment of mankind. Humanitarian or not, once here most adhere to the same practices of their home country, a place they truthfully should despise. We need to quickly rethink our obligations. When I see a woman on the streets of New York wearing a burque, I wonder, but I thought we were against the oppression of women? So, we fight for her right to be oppressed? The entire debacle is insanity. Religious garb is nothing more than symbolic oppression. I want nothing to do with people like this. Their loyalties lie with their faith, not with the human race.
3
This doesn't make any sense at all.
The exact same argument would say that every state in the United States should establish checkpoints at every state border crossing and require passports for crossing state lines. This would cause enormous damage to the US economy, and enormous inconvenience to US citizens. And there is no reason to think that such a draconian measure would reduce the risk of terrorist attacks (not to mention the risk of demented non-islamic individuals murdering people with assault rifles in schools).
The exact same argument would say that every state in the United States should establish checkpoints at every state border crossing and require passports for crossing state lines. This would cause enormous damage to the US economy, and enormous inconvenience to US citizens. And there is no reason to think that such a draconian measure would reduce the risk of terrorist attacks (not to mention the risk of demented non-islamic individuals murdering people with assault rifles in schools).
One of the reasons Euros enacted their open-border policy was to make of the Community a group that interact as easily as do the individual states within the U.S. They did this largely to facilitate commerce and the feeling that despite the fact that one might be French, another German and yet another Italian or Spanish, nations with histories of despising one another and with little in common other than the fact that they’re neighbors … they should PRETEND to like and respect one another.
The wonks these days are laying the blame for Paris at least in part on Europe’s open borders. The problem isn’t directly their open borders, it’s that they can’t afford to protect themselves the way we do, and even if they could they have no consistent central mechanism to do so. Different countries have widely divergent standards of security, and even the ability to fund aggressive scrutiny of suspicious sorts; so, bad guys can target the most lax countries for penetration, confident that they can move pretty freely thereafter anywhere else in the Community.
You don’t solve that by closing your borders. You solve it by doing more than pretending you’re a community, by forming a federal security and policing agency that standardizes quality of scrutiny across member states, and that funds this agency in a manner appropriate to real needs.
The wonks these days are laying the blame for Paris at least in part on Europe’s open borders. The problem isn’t directly their open borders, it’s that they can’t afford to protect themselves the way we do, and even if they could they have no consistent central mechanism to do so. Different countries have widely divergent standards of security, and even the ability to fund aggressive scrutiny of suspicious sorts; so, bad guys can target the most lax countries for penetration, confident that they can move pretty freely thereafter anywhere else in the Community.
You don’t solve that by closing your borders. You solve it by doing more than pretending you’re a community, by forming a federal security and policing agency that standardizes quality of scrutiny across member states, and that funds this agency in a manner appropriate to real needs.
Frankly, this is such an obvious proposition that a school kid surely understands that border free concept is a Utopia only in the torrent world. Problem is neither the US liberals nor the European liberals understand this. That's why my comments that started months weeks ago favoring the idea sealing borders were not paid attention ans were not published neither in the Swedish news paper not in the NYT.
Many more home grown terrorists are in the offing and the wet would continue to pay a heavy price unless a serious political decision is taken about not only sealing the borders by scraping he Schengen treaty but also by nullifying the citizenships of known home grown IS sympathisers in the US and in EU including my country Sweden.
Many more home grown terrorists are in the offing and the wet would continue to pay a heavy price unless a serious political decision is taken about not only sealing the borders by scraping he Schengen treaty but also by nullifying the citizenships of known home grown IS sympathisers in the US and in EU including my country Sweden.
The republicans have been merciless attacking Obama for causing the Paris bombing because I guess they didn't know that president Obama is president of the US only, Fracoise Hollande is president of France. No doubt that the open borders in Europe contributes to open flow of terrorists and even if 1% of 1% of the Muslims in France are terrorist, they are enough to cause massive disruptions in the society like these terrorists did. And where are the other democrats to defend Obama and to counter republican attacks. Where is Chuck Schumer, where is even Corey Booker, where is Kirsten Gillebrand, senators from NY and NJ. The democrats will continue to loose State Houses, governorships, senate and house seats because of lackluster support of their own policies. They have successfully allowed the republicans to blame a terrorist attack in France on the president of the United States.
To seek "safety", let us all close our doors to each other.
Of course, life won't be worth much then, but we will be "safe".
Of course, life won't be worth much then, but we will be "safe".
Do you lock your doors or leave them open for anyone to enter?
To JohnB
re:guilt of European elite
"European elites must reconsider the wisdom of atoning for Colonialism and the Holocaust."
the European elites is rife with anti-Semites who would like to see the disappearance of all Jews. while it is ok in their eyes to be anti-Israel it is still politically incorrect to wish publicly for the demise of European Jewry/ mass immigration of European Jews from the continent. they figure that the best way to accomplish this goal is to import Muslims from the Middle East to do the dirty work to accomplish their goal.
re:guilt of European elite
"European elites must reconsider the wisdom of atoning for Colonialism and the Holocaust."
the European elites is rife with anti-Semites who would like to see the disappearance of all Jews. while it is ok in their eyes to be anti-Israel it is still politically incorrect to wish publicly for the demise of European Jewry/ mass immigration of European Jews from the continent. they figure that the best way to accomplish this goal is to import Muslims from the Middle East to do the dirty work to accomplish their goal.
4
By this logic, surely the United States should implement border controls between all 50 states? The reason why Europe is in no rush to do something similar should be fairly obvious when you apply the same logic to the US or the German Bundesländer.
Like the United States, the EU has a problem at the perimeter. The solution to that problem is probably not to put up road blocks between every constituent state given the benefits to not having a border
Like the United States, the EU has a problem at the perimeter. The solution to that problem is probably not to put up road blocks between every constituent state given the benefits to not having a border
Surveillance is the key the prevent to this problems, but it is also degrades the freedom.
As you see there never be an easy solution.
As you see there never be an easy solution.
1
Europe is not the United States and I doubt, because there has been such horrendous historic warfare across the land, that they can ever be truly united except for commercial agreements. Yes, they should reinstate border checks and check inter-country train, plane and ship passengers more thoroughly. Perhaps passports should be updated to include personal identifiers, like eye recognition, to prevent use by thieves as well.
1
Controlling a nations border is one of the first priorities of any government. The head of Interpol is making a good suggestion. That might actually increase the number of false passports confiscated and the apprehension of other terrorists or even just criminals.
Honduras yesterday took into custody 4 or 5 Syrians who were trying to sneak into the United States by crossing our southern borders which still seem to be penetrated by illegals. But as with the left here and in Europe that doesn't matter at all the new buzz word for the left is "open borders" and "one world". I don't see that working out too well for anyone, European, American or even the ME. It's a win win for those who want to destroy the West.
Control of borders are part of the strategy to defeat radical Islam.
Honduras yesterday took into custody 4 or 5 Syrians who were trying to sneak into the United States by crossing our southern borders which still seem to be penetrated by illegals. But as with the left here and in Europe that doesn't matter at all the new buzz word for the left is "open borders" and "one world". I don't see that working out too well for anyone, European, American or even the ME. It's a win win for those who want to destroy the West.
Control of borders are part of the strategy to defeat radical Islam.
10
Rob-- our mass illegal immigration began with our amnesty act-- passed by Reagan-- which was a huge welcome mat to all comers from the south. They came for jobs-- which largely GOP/chamber of commerce types-- were happy to take away from Americans and hand over to illegals. No, I am not talking about picking lettuce, which I acknowledge no American will do. I am talking janitorial service, construction, food processing, etc. Our problem is surely not limited to the left and democrats. And you know it.
1
The simple fact of observation of the position of the various commentators ranging from 'it's about time' to 'it would be the worst thing one can do' shows how little we know about the real impact of doing what the author suggests.
For those European states to operate as one larger country puts them on footing with the United States, albeit with different challenges.
Before we decide what is the right thing, perhaps more facts, experience and realizing that agreed upon rules from three decades ago just don't fit today's global situation can be considered to minimize future attacks.
For those European states to operate as one larger country puts them on footing with the United States, albeit with different challenges.
Before we decide what is the right thing, perhaps more facts, experience and realizing that agreed upon rules from three decades ago just don't fit today's global situation can be considered to minimize future attacks.
It is important to distinguish between (a) the need for Europe to tighten controls over people entering the continent and (b) the question whether, within Europe, border controls should be reinstituted.
Mr. Noble correctly points out that the US has increased the scrutiny it gives to people entering the country, and that we are apparently safer as a result. I do not hear him to urge that the 50 states should institute border checks on state lines, which would be unconstitutional and politically unacceptable. But it is not clear to me whether Europe should do the equivalent -- and pay an immense cost to the economic, social and political benefits it has obtained from integration.
I would first explore a continent-wide tightening of security; closing the national borders within Europe would be a huge step backwards.
Mr. Noble correctly points out that the US has increased the scrutiny it gives to people entering the country, and that we are apparently safer as a result. I do not hear him to urge that the 50 states should institute border checks on state lines, which would be unconstitutional and politically unacceptable. But it is not clear to me whether Europe should do the equivalent -- and pay an immense cost to the economic, social and political benefits it has obtained from integration.
I would first explore a continent-wide tightening of security; closing the national borders within Europe would be a huge step backwards.
32
Those making comparisons between the Schengen zone and large pan-continental nations such as the US are drawing a false analogy.
The US has a single federal government with federal internal & external security and intelligence agencies as well as federally operated armed forces. At a lower level it also integrated systems of state, county and local government & policing that stretch across and connect the entire nation.
Europe has none of this. It has the border controls of a single nation but the structures of multiple. This is the exact same issue that drove the euro-zone fiscal crisis. The trappings of union are in place but very little of the substantive authority & resources ( in short because the voters do not want full union but politicians, and more importantly, career building civil servants ,seeking powerful jobs in the EU, do).
Outside of the tiny % of the population of Europe that reside within 30 minutes of internal borders ( and often game the tax & benefits systems as a result) passport & residency control would do nothing to endanger internal market trade, freedom of movement for employment or fiscal union, so why not?
The US has a single federal government with federal internal & external security and intelligence agencies as well as federally operated armed forces. At a lower level it also integrated systems of state, county and local government & policing that stretch across and connect the entire nation.
Europe has none of this. It has the border controls of a single nation but the structures of multiple. This is the exact same issue that drove the euro-zone fiscal crisis. The trappings of union are in place but very little of the substantive authority & resources ( in short because the voters do not want full union but politicians, and more importantly, career building civil servants ,seeking powerful jobs in the EU, do).
Outside of the tiny % of the population of Europe that reside within 30 minutes of internal borders ( and often game the tax & benefits systems as a result) passport & residency control would do nothing to endanger internal market trade, freedom of movement for employment or fiscal union, so why not?
5
Stringent, truly universal background checks work, whether applied to foreign nationals trying to enter our country or American citizens trying to buy a gun.
30
You can't have Universal Background Checks without registration. registration is anti-Constitutional.
Freedom is dangerous.
Freedom is dangerous.
1
Having open borders is part of a larger freer continent doing away with the old war-causing rivalries. Closing them now not only would tend to reconstitute some of the old blocks, it would actually give terrorists a major victory by having reduced Europeans' freedoms.
13
Simply wrong and dangerous.
1
Making it more difficult for terrorists to enter and move about Europe is not a victory for terrorists.
2
Nonsense - we aren't talking about "freedom" but convenience. The EU superstate with no borders had clearly not done away with violence and difference, just changed one for another. The EU couldn't even come to agreement on the migrant quotas and are doing their best not to fulfill a grudging agreement shoved down their throats by Germany, which is really running Europe, an irony not lost on many. The rivalries still exist, and no one seriously expects Germany to wake up one day and invade Poland in a quest for world domination. It's got Europe by the short hairs, anyway. Look what Merkel just did with the migrant crisis - the migrants don't even want to go anywhere but Sweden, Germany, and the UK, and the UK has been too savvy to let them all in the way Sweden and Germany are doing. Sweden is having to borrow money to pay for its migrant crisis, thanks to Germany. That's all the EU and its open borders have done.
Just ask the working-class in England's industrial north how they feel about the influx of low-wage workers from Eastern Europe on their wages, and the outflux of benefits back into Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Bulgaria, while people with ancient roots in towns and cities see them overwhelmed by foreign cultures.
It was never anything but smoke and mirrors.
Just ask the working-class in England's industrial north how they feel about the influx of low-wage workers from Eastern Europe on their wages, and the outflux of benefits back into Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Bulgaria, while people with ancient roots in towns and cities see them overwhelmed by foreign cultures.
It was never anything but smoke and mirrors.
6
The article completely denotes why we cannot let the masses enter the U.S. during this extremely volatile, emotional time. People do not trust the Obama administration nor do they feel safe with the current climate of terrorism.
35
Let's see: we check people's identities and backgrounds in extensive detail before they are allowed into the United States. The process takes at least eighteen months. You really have to have a serious case of Obama Derangement Syndrome to compare that to the process of checking passports that the EU uses where people are immediately allowed in. The fact that you don't "trust" Obama says far more about you than it says about Obama.
7
It sure does with the exception of the part where the author actually uses the United States to make the exact opposite claim that you have:
"In 2007, the United States began vetting identification documents and today leads the world in passport screening, with over 300 million checks annually against Interpol’s database, which has flagged thousands of invalid documents.
The United States is safer as a result."
I know reconciling the argument against the evidence is difficult but please do try and follow.
"In 2007, the United States began vetting identification documents and today leads the world in passport screening, with over 300 million checks annually against Interpol’s database, which has flagged thousands of invalid documents.
The United States is safer as a result."
I know reconciling the argument against the evidence is difficult but please do try and follow.
2
The elephant in the room is the absolute lack of trust people have in this Administration. All its claims need to be carefully vetted.
It has promoted a false narrative about successes in the Middle East, and the president has quite visibly been wrong a number of times. In addition, it has a penchant for loosening immigration restrictions.
Altogether, these make anything from this White House suspect, especially after Administration members have expressed reservations about our vetting process.
It has promoted a false narrative about successes in the Middle East, and the president has quite visibly been wrong a number of times. In addition, it has a penchant for loosening immigration restrictions.
Altogether, these make anything from this White House suspect, especially after Administration members have expressed reservations about our vetting process.
2
Does the author realize that the Schengen zone is a smaller territory than the United States? Last time I looked there was no passport control between North and South Dakota.
Besides, most of the Paris terrorists had valid passports from Belgium or France. How exactly would a passport control have prevented them from traveling between these two countries?
For someone who worked for Interpol this piece is remarkably devoid of facts.
Besides, most of the Paris terrorists had valid passports from Belgium or France. How exactly would a passport control have prevented them from traveling between these two countries?
For someone who worked for Interpol this piece is remarkably devoid of facts.
49
The author is the Secretary General of Interpol. I think he has some expertise in this area.
63
That is precisely what makes this piece so puzzling. If you have a valid passport, if you are a citizen of an EU country (as most Paris terrorists were) then none of this will work. If, however, you are already under police surveillance, the police can keep track without the border control. Even before Schengen there was very little in terms of passport control at the border, if you cross it by car. To submit 500 million people to massive controls every time they go, say, from the Netherlands to Germany (and many people do this on a daily base) will work only in police fantasyland, but it is politically dead on arrival. The European Union is, for many purposes, acting like a unified country. Just like the United States is.
2
In fact, some of these jihadis were already on watch lists. The Belgians, for example, are "mystified" why their citizens who were involved had not already been picked up. The fact is that if the EU had border controls at least some of these people would likely have been prevented from crossing borders. That would, of course, left the French jihadis alone. But it is too late to go back in time and revisit the wisdom of letting hundreds of thousands of residents of former French colonies emigrate to France and then pretty much allow them to languish without adequate efforts to integrate them into French society.
1
Mr. Noble is being practical and is correct in his analysis of the weak points in travel within Europe.
But let's also call out Mr. Juncker as one of the prime architects of this failed policy, not only of open borders, but of the "welcome" of illegal immigrants (all claiming they are refugees). Greece and Italy have been dealing with illegal immigration for YEARS, Jordan and Turkey and the UN have been asking for YEARS, for financial and other assistance to deal with people leaving the Middle East and Africa for Europe, and Germany, as a key and influential member of the EU did not prioritize this issue.
Now, after Germany has "invited" the horde to invade Europe, and the other nations are NOT going along with their strong-arming, they are starting to see reality. They have a security, financial and cultural problem on their hands and no one is going to help them out of the hole they've dug for themselves.
Ending the open borders is only the first step. Germany has lost influence and prestige in the EU. The more they try to force their will upon other nations, they will be resisted if it is not in the best interests of the other nations. Greece was destroyed to "teach it a lesson," but that involved money. Destroying a country's identity will be resisted much more strongly.
The Euro currency may not survive long-term as nations around the EU are rejecting austerity. And in the future, the EU may survive only as a trade agreement, with Germany and Sweden isolated
But let's also call out Mr. Juncker as one of the prime architects of this failed policy, not only of open borders, but of the "welcome" of illegal immigrants (all claiming they are refugees). Greece and Italy have been dealing with illegal immigration for YEARS, Jordan and Turkey and the UN have been asking for YEARS, for financial and other assistance to deal with people leaving the Middle East and Africa for Europe, and Germany, as a key and influential member of the EU did not prioritize this issue.
Now, after Germany has "invited" the horde to invade Europe, and the other nations are NOT going along with their strong-arming, they are starting to see reality. They have a security, financial and cultural problem on their hands and no one is going to help them out of the hole they've dug for themselves.
Ending the open borders is only the first step. Germany has lost influence and prestige in the EU. The more they try to force their will upon other nations, they will be resisted if it is not in the best interests of the other nations. Greece was destroyed to "teach it a lesson," but that involved money. Destroying a country's identity will be resisted much more strongly.
The Euro currency may not survive long-term as nations around the EU are rejecting austerity. And in the future, the EU may survive only as a trade agreement, with Germany and Sweden isolated
90
Reinstating border checks as a short term measure is a no-brainer. But long term, European elites must reconsider the wisdom of atoning for Colonialism and the Holocaust by encouraging the colonization of Europe by foreigners from incompatible cultures. Otherwise there is no way to avoid importing all the world's troubles.
154
My understanding is that many, if not all of the terrorists in recent attacks were European born nationals *with* EU passports. No importing of trouble was required and your solution would not have solved the actual problem
1
That will never happen! Those from other cultures who wish to emigrate to Europe must, for their own good, join the mainstream culture in manner, dress, language and attitude. Rejection of or resistance to cultural assimilation too easily can lead to an additional holocaust that need not be. That does not mean that immigrants cannot retain the essentials of their religions. There is nothing incompatible between the essence of the five pillars of Islam and a European cultural identity. It is manner of expression rather than essence that needs re-thinking.
4
But they did not identify with Europe; there's the crux.
Open borders in Europe are a real and present danger. Passport-free travel zones are the way that Jihadi terrorists can find their way to safe havens in European countries - of which they may well carry legitimate passports as terrorists are born and bred in European countries as well as in the Middle East. Daesh will have its way till it burns out, the way the totalitarian Axis in WWII was soundly defeated at the cost of millions of dead by the Allies.
23
Absolutely! And we should also institute border controls at the Florida border!
1
Would the writer recommend that the States of the USA suspend free movement of American Citizens across and through their borders? If not, then it makes no sense for the EU to do so.
54
The US has a Federal Government. The EU does not. Now you get it?
57
Do you not understand that the EU is NOT a country but a group of countries who have made some agreements to share? It's not the same as going from CT to KS!!!
7
The last 40 years or so of European policy has been to ultimately create something like a federal government. Suspending the Schengen agreements would be an enormous step backwards. In fact, the blow would be so severe I suspect Mr. Noble's motives have less to do with security than with hostility to the idea of a 'United Europe.'
Mr. Noble may have been the secretary general of Interpol from 2000 to 2014 but the question may be who is he hanging around with now?
Mr. Noble may have been the secretary general of Interpol from 2000 to 2014 but the question may be who is he hanging around with now?
1
"Ronald K. Noble was secretary general of Interpol from 2000 to 2014." When you're a hammer all probelms look like nails.
Europe already has passport screening at the point of entry. Maybe the solution is to make this more effective, rather than scrapping Shengen which would be like imposing identity checks when moving from one state of the US to another.
Arguably having passport controls at national borders could increase security, but why stop there? Why not at provincial borders within each country? Each municipality? Why not just stop people randomly in the street and ask to see their papers?
Anyhow this is kind of a moot point as it seems that nearly all the Paris attackers had valid European passports anyhow.
Europe already has passport screening at the point of entry. Maybe the solution is to make this more effective, rather than scrapping Shengen which would be like imposing identity checks when moving from one state of the US to another.
Arguably having passport controls at national borders could increase security, but why stop there? Why not at provincial borders within each country? Each municipality? Why not just stop people randomly in the street and ask to see their papers?
Anyhow this is kind of a moot point as it seems that nearly all the Paris attackers had valid European passports anyhow.
23
You state that having passport controls at national borders could increase security. So why not for now implement them. Or do you have and acceptable death rate by terrorists as the price for the important symbolic "open borders" policy? Is it 10 innocent people a year, 100, or 1000? Because we really need to have open borders so anyone including criminals and terrorists can carry on their schemes with less possibility of being caught.
It isn't infringing on anyone's rights to have them show their passports when entering another country. It was an agreement not a Constitutional right. Agreements are changed or discarded all the time.
It isn't infringing on anyone's rights to have them show their passports when entering another country. It was an agreement not a Constitutional right. Agreements are changed or discarded all the time.
4
You're one of the few commenters who seems to grasp the significance of external borders versus internal borders. The Schengen rules can be kept while instituting stronger external border checks.
No, Europe does not have passport screening at point of entry if you are coming from another Schengen country. You can travel as freely from Amsterdam to Berlin as you would from New York to Boston. That applies to planes, trains, busses, and cars.
The Paris bombers had criminal records--their passports would have been flagged.
The Paris bombers had criminal records--their passports would have been flagged.
1
At last a sensible column on this subject from the NYT. Thank you.
95
As Europe "slouches toward" unity, the lack of a strong political union, not only exposes economic differences, but poses serious security concerns. Europe finds itself in a strange internal alliance, perhaps not as weak as the US under the Articles, but certainly not as unified as the States under the Constitution. This long slow crawl to unity, where borders are open to foster economic growth, has created a security nightmare. Europe must make a choice; build a stronger political union quickly to enforce entry into the entire free access zone or divest power back to the members states for them to control their own borders. The incompleteness of the union is exposed by security issues that far outweigh any economic advantages derived from open borders.
13
As long as there remain open borders why would aspiring terrorists not take advantage of this invitation to move freely about ? It seems madness to me that France would even allow virtually anyone beyond humanitarian workers to travel to Syria and back. No one would argue for a police state but something more rational might prevent the wholesale slaughter of innocent people.
18
I agree that passports need to be screened so that those that are suspect can be flagged on the spot in real time. But would screening catch those "real fakes", rather than those that are stolen or lost? After all, at least 8 copies of "that Syrian passport" are in existence right now... are we able to catch other passports like those?
3
No need or ability to start checking passports at every border. This would be like the United States giving each of its 50 states the responsibility of checking identity of those crossing state borders. With thousands of crossings -- roads, bridges, railroads, airports -- doing border checks at each EU country would cost billions and destroy the essence of a common market. And it wouldn't stop fake passports; they would just have to be better fakes.
9
Presumably, people know that, unlike the US, Europe is not a country.
1
As shocking as the Paris attack was, this was the act of 7 or 8 individuals. This is not like trying to move an army division into a country. I will remind the author that 15 perfectly legal individuals brought off the 9/11 attacks. Terrorism is a low cost, low manpower type of warfare. It is spectacular in it's apparent impact but in reality, it is effective only in instilling unreasonable fear.
In the US, we have about as many gun killings per week as the terrorists achieved in Paris. We kill about that many every day on the roads. I have heard no calls for improved screening of drivers to remove those unsuited for the task and whom put us all at risk. Hidden in this call for border control is plain ol' xenophobia. Arab=Muslim=terrorist. Home grown terrorists don't need passports. They don't need to visit Syria.
Eric Robert Rudolph didn't go to Syria when he decided to bomb the Olympics in Atlanta. Timothy McVeigh wasn't Muslim and was a home grown mass killer. Wade Michael Page was a white supremacist who shot up a Sikh temple. My point is that immigration poses no special level of risk for the population as a whole. We have plenty of potential terrorists right here at home. The same is true in Europe as well.
In the US, we have about as many gun killings per week as the terrorists achieved in Paris. We kill about that many every day on the roads. I have heard no calls for improved screening of drivers to remove those unsuited for the task and whom put us all at risk. Hidden in this call for border control is plain ol' xenophobia. Arab=Muslim=terrorist. Home grown terrorists don't need passports. They don't need to visit Syria.
Eric Robert Rudolph didn't go to Syria when he decided to bomb the Olympics in Atlanta. Timothy McVeigh wasn't Muslim and was a home grown mass killer. Wade Michael Page was a white supremacist who shot up a Sikh temple. My point is that immigration poses no special level of risk for the population as a whole. We have plenty of potential terrorists right here at home. The same is true in Europe as well.
131
"In the US, we have about as many gun killings per week as the terrorists achieved in Paris"....Actually on average, every day more than 80 Americans are killed by firearms.
4
If you have 800, 000 mostly young men of Middle Eastern descent enter EU in one year (I shudder to think what is coming next year with all the EU bickering, inefficiency and no meaningful action to secure Greek and other borders), how many do you think will become disaffected Muslim youth in Europe? And their descendants? We have seen what 8 people can do in one evening…
More importantly, we have seen how these people do not integrate. As a woman, I loathe what I have seen in France. These parallel societies do not belong in Europe. Europe, please show some self-preservation.
More importantly, we have seen how these people do not integrate. As a woman, I loathe what I have seen in France. These parallel societies do not belong in Europe. Europe, please show some self-preservation.
1
Very well said!
1
Im an American, and I flew nonstop Philadelphia to Venice a couple of months ago. No one asked for me anything when I left the plane. I went to pick up my bags, just like it was a US domestic flight.
8
You must have gone through immigration control in Venice, as that was your first point of entry into the Schengen zone. In all my trips to Europe, I've had to go through passport control when I first entered a Schengen country.
2
Agree.......flew through Amsterdam a couple of years ago and picked up my bags and I never showed a passport...... Often flying through Amsterdam to Nurnberg or other smaller cities one finds that the passport is never checked. Maybe they look at me and figure I am just one more middle aged American.....not a threat.
1
Every time our rights are curtailed, the terrorists win. If they want mayhem, they will get mayhem, no matter how much you "imprison" all of the rest of us with your plan. After spending billions and making flying a horrible experience, in the U.S. 95% of banned things made it past TSA in a recent test. Terrorists win again.
12
Of course if everyone is screened properly coming into the Schengen block then it works; the problem is that they are not (often now I just pass through a machine entering the bloc from Ireland, which is not a member). But open borders has been one of the greatest accomplishments of postwar Europe. Closing the French border on Friday night did not result in catching the terrorist who was stopped on his way into Belgium after all! But it did delay thousands who had absolutely nothing to do with the attack.
3
This seems like a no=brainer and I'm surprised it's only being recommended now. As the author states, the sooner the better.
The ease with which terrorists roam around on false documents is not only alarming, it's ludicrous. I know nobody likes long lines and extra paper work, but look at the price Europe has paid for the convenience of shorter wait times. And I certainly agree that one central screening list--Interpol--would greatly help the ferreting out of false passports. It certainly does in the US, when we hear of thugs with false Greek passports trying to get over here via Honduras.
I hope Europe comes to its senses and makes the change yesterday. You can't keep borders closed indefinitely, but you can make them indefinitely safer by using the same methods the US and Canada do: check every single passport.
The ease with which terrorists roam around on false documents is not only alarming, it's ludicrous. I know nobody likes long lines and extra paper work, but look at the price Europe has paid for the convenience of shorter wait times. And I certainly agree that one central screening list--Interpol--would greatly help the ferreting out of false passports. It certainly does in the US, when we hear of thugs with false Greek passports trying to get over here via Honduras.
I hope Europe comes to its senses and makes the change yesterday. You can't keep borders closed indefinitely, but you can make them indefinitely safer by using the same methods the US and Canada do: check every single passport.
79
Border control require more than checking passports. It requires stopping and detaining those without identification instead of waving them through. Our southern border is porous, if not a sieve. But for the Atlantic ocean's insulation, the US would have the same problem as Europe right now.
1
In my experience "no-brainers" are suggested by people who don't use their own brains.
2
It's not that I totally disagree with this assessment but it's a little strange coming from a US citizen where we can all cross from state to state without any passports. Careful screening of people entering the Schengen zone from outside of it, absolutely, but if Europe is trying to become one unified body, I'm not so sure that they need to stop everyone going from one country to another.
10
Europe is not a 'country'.
2
How sensible.
But what about the lines? Stuck in a slow moving line for hours can make me cave in to human comfort and beg for a more expedient but less protective system.
Solve the long waits at borders and these very reasonable suggestions by the former secretary general of Interpol should be immediately adopted.
But what about the lines? Stuck in a slow moving line for hours can make me cave in to human comfort and beg for a more expedient but less protective system.
Solve the long waits at borders and these very reasonable suggestions by the former secretary general of Interpol should be immediately adopted.
2
Mr. Noble's claim that "none of those [Schengen] countries systematically screened passports or verified the identities of those crossing borders by land or at seaports or airports" is misleading. My passport is always scanned when I enter the Schengen zone. I agree with him that a suspension of the Schengen arrangement may be necessary, but it is in my experience erroneous to claim that passports are not checked when one enters the Schengen zone.
5
Even before Schengen, you could cross the borders between France and its neighbors on dozens of small roads without meeting any custom barriers, by foot it was even easier (think of the US-Canadian border). Since Schengen the physical infrastructure (custom houses) and the personnel does not exist anymore. You could control airports and maybe the biggest international trains (think of the tens of thousands of people who commute daily between France and Geneva or between France and Luxembourg). “Reestablishing the borders “is a favorite slogan of le Pen and the extreme right, but it is as devoid of sense that the promises of Trump concerning Mexico.
12
American finger wagging at Europe on the refugee crisis, such as seen in this column, is popular. And it borders on hypocrisy. The US stirred the boiling pot of revolt in Syria in 2011 by openly encouraging the uprising against Assad, which predictably led many Syrians to take up arms. Then when all hell broke loose we washed our hands and walked away. Not our problem we said. Now we dare to lecture the Europeans about the millions of Syrians fleeing the carnage we helped to start? Our credibility as a reliable foreign partner has already taken many hits during recent years. This doesn't help.
68
Perhaps fingers are being wagged, but they are non-American digits as the author came from Interpol.
1
I agree with this editorial completely. Open borders or Schengen must be suspended for the time being, until the threat of terrorism is diminished. It's sad but what is even sadder is the loss of life that is demonstrably a direct result of a lack of scrutiny at the borders. If ISIS is ramped up to commit atrocities, then too, Europe must ramp up to prevent them. Passport screening seems like common sense.
68
The American administration will not act against Muslim terrorism because the American administration holds that Muslim terrorism does not exist. When US. Major Hassan killed 13 American soldiers in Fort Hood, Texas, while wearing Muslim garb and chanting "Allahu Akbar," the administration labeled his actions workplace violence.
Ain't no Muslim terrorism here.
Ain't no Muslim terrorism here.
25
I find the idea of a so called protected border a nice fairytale for frightened people in need of rescue.
Let us look at some of those borders like for example the US Mexican border.
Is there really someone who thinks that this has stopped immigration?
Or what to think of the best defended border of all, that of Melilla ?
The little city is flooded whit refuges !!
Defending the internal borders of Europe and this dividing the resources is silly.
It is better to create a FBI like organization in combination met State of emergency laws targeting Jihadish. I agree about the fact that decisive action is needed. But Europe has to unite en not divide. We will not win this war by sitting scared on own little hill.
Let us look at some of those borders like for example the US Mexican border.
Is there really someone who thinks that this has stopped immigration?
Or what to think of the best defended border of all, that of Melilla ?
The little city is flooded whit refuges !!
Defending the internal borders of Europe and this dividing the resources is silly.
It is better to create a FBI like organization in combination met State of emergency laws targeting Jihadish. I agree about the fact that decisive action is needed. But Europe has to unite en not divide. We will not win this war by sitting scared on own little hill.
7
I do completely agree on this one! Closing borders might indeed help the work of the agencies in charge of border control and limit the immigration but that's no match compared to all the benefits we could loose.
I have no specific figures to support my argument. Nothing actually but a dream that one day Europe will stand as one just like the US.
I fully agree with Brad on the fact that these horrible attacks should appear as the evident reason to act on a further unification of the Zone with agencies and why not a Federal Government at least capable of monitoring and manage crisis that the one that occurred on this bloody Friday.
I have no specific figures to support my argument. Nothing actually but a dream that one day Europe will stand as one just like the US.
I fully agree with Brad on the fact that these horrible attacks should appear as the evident reason to act on a further unification of the Zone with agencies and why not a Federal Government at least capable of monitoring and manage crisis that the one that occurred on this bloody Friday.
1
At this moment there is a lot of fear in Europe and this triggers the fight or flight reflex. What we see now, helaas, propagated by small town politicians is the flight reflex. They advise us to pull up the blanket )close our borders) and hope that the burglar goes away. This is a short sighted and totally non productive way of adressing the problem. Instead of hiding under the blanket we should create strong European borders and strong organizations to fight the enemy within. Legislation that works can only be made on a European level. )crossing those borders).
This doesn't mean that there is no task for national governments and police organization but without coordination on a European level it is a nearly impossible quest. And let us not forget, the terrorists are real Europeans citizens when it comes down to crossing borders. So let us spend our resources on fighting them and not on illusions.
This doesn't mean that there is no task for national governments and police organization but without coordination on a European level it is a nearly impossible quest. And let us not forget, the terrorists are real Europeans citizens when it comes down to crossing borders. So let us spend our resources on fighting them and not on illusions.
1
You are exactly right. Moreover, there is no way the EU should agree to Turkey's demands to become part of the passport-free zone, given how readily Turkey seems to allow travel back and forth from Syria. Here's one thing I don't understand: apparently one of the Paris attackers was prevented from going to Syria and was supposed to be under judicial oversight. So he stayed in Europe where he killed dozens. Why keep these young men in Europe? Let them go to Syria and fight and be killed there. But anyone who chooses to go to Syria these days without a specific, authorized, vetted mission (such as government work, or work with a known NGO) should not be allowed to return. Period. If they choose jihad over their European homes, so be it. Let that decision be permanent.
29
Turkey is trying to join EU, not the Schengen zone.
2
It's a little too late to be closing borders, now that hundreds of thousands or even millions of refugees are all over Europe, except Switzerland. The Swiss aren't Europe and have never started wars or colonized so historically aren't a target for retribution.
The German's sense of guilt for killing millions of innocent people; the French, Belgian, and British guilt for horrible behavior toward Muslim colonies has literally brought the problem home. I'm sure that the vast majority of refugees are fine people, but it doesn't take but a handful of disgruntled, alien monsters to wreck havoc.
The German's sense of guilt for killing millions of innocent people; the French, Belgian, and British guilt for horrible behavior toward Muslim colonies has literally brought the problem home. I'm sure that the vast majority of refugees are fine people, but it doesn't take but a handful of disgruntled, alien monsters to wreck havoc.
20
Belgium has been a country since 1830, and had colonies in Congo and Rwanda and Burundi, all of which are predominantly Christian. We might as well get our facts straight.
1
Muslims fleeing oppressive regimes in their respective homelands, are different from many other immigrants throughout time. Their countries never had a capitalist or socialist systems in place that allowed them to experience any tangible benefits of voting, earning money, getting along with others even if it begins in business. Instead they are people who have been controlled and manipulated by their very leaders through clannish law and religion. They lack the concept of loyalty to country. Country is religion, not land and way of life. It certainly isn't culture in the artistic sense. Much of what defines Western pride and love of country stems from this alternate, free, liberte, brand of worship and appreciation. Devout Muslims lack this sensibility, which is why assimilation feels like an attack on them, because their singular identity is religion. To give up the only trait of one's identity feels threatening. Demanding their religion be accommodated seems natural to them. They are inexperienced in the concept of a democracy. I am generalizing obviously, but it's an accurate one. This however debunks the argument that people make when they compare other groups who have in the past been immigrants. None of us, certainly not I want to see anyone mistreated, but It's simply not the same. We may not like the situation we are in, but we must face it and act upon with as much fairness as possible, yet protecting our people and way of life should come first.
43
You make an absolutely critical point and one that should be widely recognized and discussed.
Thank you - generalized, but very well said.
1
All of that is totally made up with no basis whatsoever. Once upon a time Catholicism was similarly smeared being somehow fundamentally different and opposed to the American way of life. People openly worried that Italian and Irish American immigrants would be loyal to the Pope over the US Government. That turned out to be a pile of horsefeathers.
We don't have to construct bogus analyses of the Muslim psyche, we can just look at our own neighbors. There are millions of Muslim Americans now. Just like everybody else they have mostly been productive, peace-loving, democracy loving members of society.
We don't have to construct bogus analyses of the Muslim psyche, we can just look at our own neighbors. There are millions of Muslim Americans now. Just like everybody else they have mostly been productive, peace-loving, democracy loving members of society.
2
Duh. I can't believe this. As someone living in the Americas I had been ignorant (sounds redundant, I know) about lack of European controls. Thank you for trying to help make the world safer, Mr. Noble. Again, thank you for your input.
8
To suggest that the Schengen states, which in population and area roughly resemble the United States, re-introduce border controls is like suggesting that for the single States in the US. Yes, one would catch undeocumented immigrants. But it is an anachronistic, anti-thematic concept in a globalised world. Ms. Merkel has understood well that unless 8 foot fences and armed border patrols with a license to kill are installed, closed borders only become obstacles for the honest. No determined terrorist can be prevented from changing location within Europe, unless we turn into the old GDR or North Korea.
8
Good luck with that.
1
There is a huge difference between even the concept of open borders and happily welcoming 150,000 young males with no means of supporting themselves.
4
Mr. Noble is absolutely right that passports need to be screened. For Europe, it is particularly important that this screening take place at the points where migrants are entering, such as Greece, Italy, Spain, Macedonia and Albania, plus at international airports throughout Europe.
As for the general problem of terrorism, one of the root causes is over-population, and this is made worse by migrations, which act as a relief valve for the over-populated countries. These countries should address their over-population instead of sending their people to other nations.
As for the general problem of terrorism, one of the root causes is over-population, and this is made worse by migrations, which act as a relief valve for the over-populated countries. These countries should address their over-population instead of sending their people to other nations.
46
We require NO passport when crossing state borders in the United States. The European Union is striving to emulate the free movement and trade that we enjoy in America. We have two oceans separating us from the populations of Europe, Asia, Africa. Europe has a land connection and water connections traversed by small boats, so we have an advantage.
Terrorism is a means for terrorists to wage war against much more powerful nations. Terrorism relies on the demagogues in nations that they seek to terrorize to stir up disproportionate irrational responses that weaken and even defeat great powers. There are many demagogues at work right now. Responsible leaders will ignore them or identify them for providing "aid and comfort to the enemy".
Terrorism is a means for terrorists to wage war against much more powerful nations. Terrorism relies on the demagogues in nations that they seek to terrorize to stir up disproportionate irrational responses that weaken and even defeat great powers. There are many demagogues at work right now. Responsible leaders will ignore them or identify them for providing "aid and comfort to the enemy".
10
Good thinking. But why don't you propose that all 50 U.S. states institute border controls and vetting identification documents on their borders? That will not only make us all safer, but will also create loads of new jobs and new business opportunities selling tchotchkes to people waiting in their cars for hours to return to New Jersey.
14
Seven of eight attackers, the mastermind, and potentially scores of accomplices (including the one who blew herself up) were Europeans with valid passports. Is the author suggesting that had the one individual with a fake Syrian passport (who authorities now suspect may have a valid European passport as well) been excluded, the attacks would have been somehow mitigated? The odds of this seem vanishingly small. It seems more likely that the fake passport was used to bait those who would give these criminals the terror and division they desperately crave.
Border controls won't prevent a country's own citizens being radicalized by what they see, hear, read and feel at home.
Border controls won't prevent a country's own citizens being radicalized by what they see, hear, read and feel at home.
111
But maybe if there had been more restrictions on immigration into Europe and the UK 30 years ago, Europe and the UK would have fewer problems now?
26
Agreed. Mr. Noble makes some valid points about the risks inherent in Europe's system of open borders, but seems to be ignoring the known facts of this particular case to push for his agenda. That hardly seems like the actions of a responsible law enforcement official.
2
France was unaware that one of the French terrorists had even returned from Syria. That is a huge problem. He obviously didn't fly in, and non airport border controls would have required him to be registered as having return from a terrorist hotspot. Obama tells us we are at war, so anyone who is not wth a registered charity and returns from Syria should be arrested.
This article is inane. The perpetrators of the Paris attacks last week, the Charlie Hebdo massacre in January, and those in Belgian and Norwegian Jewish centers were carried out by bonafide European (mostly French & Belgian) passport holders of middle eastern origin. These guys don't need visas and would not have been stopped had Schengen not been in force.
It would be nice if thin veiled anti-immigrant and anti-refugee apologists had any rational response that made any sense but instead they spew ones which clamp down on civil liberties, condone military conflict, and fail in their primary purpose.
Maybe we should intern all Arab-Americans as we did Japanese Americans during world war II ? or Maybe we should turn away ships loaded with Jews escaping Nazis in 1939 ? Tell us how you really feel !
It would be nice if thin veiled anti-immigrant and anti-refugee apologists had any rational response that made any sense but instead they spew ones which clamp down on civil liberties, condone military conflict, and fail in their primary purpose.
Maybe we should intern all Arab-Americans as we did Japanese Americans during world war II ? or Maybe we should turn away ships loaded with Jews escaping Nazis in 1939 ? Tell us how you really feel !
42
Mr. Noble unfortunately has a good point. In an ideal world without international terrorism, human trafficking, and gun and drug smuggling operations the Schengen system makes sense and helps simplify travel within the zone. However, we live in a world where there are certain people trying to take advantage of what they perceive as a weakness. Introducing passport control like in most countries of the world would bring a larger bureaucratic cost and slower travel, but increase security. It is unfortunate that such horrible acts make us go back to more restricted travel, but the reality of the world demands we make tough decisions.
18
Sorry Jack, but this is all "security theater" at its best. Today they released a report that showed that a test of TSA showed that 95% of banned items got through. Do you really think these measures will make you safer, or do you thnk that the terrorist roll with laughter as the masses cower in fear? Terrorists win when this happens.
1
I recently traveled to Belgium and entered the country at a Brussels airport with my US passport. I had to stand on line with all the non-Europeans (or all those not part of the 26 nation parties to the Schengen agreement) and at passport control I was asked the usual types of questions and particularly what I was doing in Belgium and to where in Belgium I was traveling. The officer also looked at me, matching what he saw to my picture in the passport. The usual precautions. This is what US citizens also go through today returning to the US, after scanning in their passports.
To my left I noticed the Europeans zipping right through. They had to scan some type of identification, if my memory serves me it could be an ID card or driver's license or also a passport and the gates opened up. I did not see a passport control agent or policeman near the line. I did see that line move at a very rapid pace. Any type of ID would have got one through, and that includes a stolen one since nobody was checking pictures.
It would seem that Mr. Noble has a point. Individual countries might institute some type of biometric passport or ID system for their own citizens, but it is hard to imagine how that would work for 26 countries. The open border agreement should be cancelled.
To my left I noticed the Europeans zipping right through. They had to scan some type of identification, if my memory serves me it could be an ID card or driver's license or also a passport and the gates opened up. I did not see a passport control agent or policeman near the line. I did see that line move at a very rapid pace. Any type of ID would have got one through, and that includes a stolen one since nobody was checking pictures.
It would seem that Mr. Noble has a point. Individual countries might institute some type of biometric passport or ID system for their own citizens, but it is hard to imagine how that would work for 26 countries. The open border agreement should be cancelled.
142
So, why don't we do that in the U.S., border controls between each of the states. That should keep us all safe from all the guns readily available in certain states.
5
europe commited cultural sucide, now its beyond repair, millions of unemployed young adults sitting idle, what will be the outcome ??
I live in Belgium. European Union is a reality for us. We cross borders between Shengen countries like Americans cross city limits. If there must be more identity controls, it definitely makes no sense to do those at the borders between EU countries.
3
I lived in Sweden 1988-1996 and have Swedish citizenship, and I voted in favor of bringing Sweden into the EU. I celebrated with my friends the day Schengen went into effect. It brought definitive closure to WWII. It brought together many of the world's most civilized nations in a collective of openness, tolerance, and enlightenment.
It breaks my heart to see these stupid thugs exercise power over us. The end of Schengen is, symbolically, a devastating blow to European integration and the ideology of Western civilization – a far more appealing and admirable vision than the bankrupt ideology of the pathetic terrorists.