Trump’s New Immigration Order Is a Repetition of Old Mistakes Under the Pretext of National Security – Rezazade

The decision of the Donald Trump administration to renew and expand the ban on entry to the US for citizens of 19 countries has provoked a sharp reaction from human rights activists, lawyers and international experts.

The first vice president of the Iranian opposition in Washington, international analyst Ali Reza Rezazade, called the new initiative “an old scenario disguised as increased security.”

“This is political revanchism, not a strategy. Instead of a systemic reform of migration policy, we see a return to selective isolation, which has already proven its ineffectiveness in 2017,” Rezazade emphasizes.

The new presidential order, which is due to come into force on June 9, completely bans entry for citizens of countries such as Afghanistan, Iran, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and Sudan, and partially for 7 more countries. The formal grounds are “high security risks” and “lack of effective mechanisms for document verification.”

However, according to Rezazade, the real goal of the decree is to mobilize the electorate on the eve of the election cycle: “Using fear of immigrants as a lever of political influence has become a typical tool for Trump. Unfortunately, instead of fighting the causes of migration, we are witnessing a fight against its victims.”

The expert draws special attention to the context: the decree was issued a few days after the attack in Colorado, which, according to federal services, was committed by an immigrant from Egypt. At the same time, Egypt is not on the list of restricted countries.

“This is a deliberate manipulation of society’s emotions. The illusion of a connection between an individual case and a global threat is created. This is not security policy, this is the policy of fear,” Rezazade emphasizes.

He also warns that legal risks are recurring: the decree, like the first version of the 2017 “Muslim Ban,” is likely to be challenged in the courts, and some of the provisions will be declared unconstitutional.

“The problem is not that the United States does not have the right to defend its borders. The problem is that such actions undermine confidence in America’s international leadership. The world sees in these decisions not consistency but chaos, not the desire for security but political gain,” Ali Reza Rezazade concluded.