kadıköy su kaçağı tespiti kadıköy su kaçak tamiri

HomeThe LatestGeraldo Backs Up Controversial Trump Statement

Geraldo Backs Up Controversial Trump Statement

Several years ago, President Donald Trump ignited a political firestorm after reports that he used the term “s**thole” while discussing Haiti and other troubled countries during an immigration meeting.

The reaction was immediate. Trump was condemned by Democrats, commentators and celebrities, while Haiti became the centerpiece of an argument over whether the president’s language was insulting an entire nation and its people.

Some celebrities went considerably further than simply objecting to Trump’s choice of words. Bill Maher and Conan O’Brien were among those who pushed back with variations on the message that Haiti was, in fact, “great.” The phrase even ended up on T-shirts.

Geraldo Rivera was another prominent Trump critic on the issue. He called on Trump to apologize for the reported remark.

Years later, however, the debate over Haiti has taken a strange turn.

The Trump administration has moved to end Temporary Protected Status for Haitians, and opponents of that decision have emphasized something that sounds remarkably familiar: Haiti is dangerous, unstable and deeply troubled, making it unsafe to send people back.

That presents an obvious tension.

If conditions in Haiti are so dire that returning Haitian nationals there is unacceptable, then the argument is no longer really over whether Haiti has severe problems. Both sides are acknowledging that it does. The dispute becomes whether those conditions justify continuing a supposedly temporary immigration protection in the United States.

And Haiti’s problems are difficult to minimize.

Port-au-Prince has endured extraordinary gang violence and political instability. The security situation became so dangerous that commercial aviation was disrupted after aircraft approaching or departing the Haitian capital were struck by gunfire. Armed gangs have controlled significant territory while Haiti has struggled to maintain functioning government institutions and basic security.

None of that makes Trump’s inflammatory language necessary, nor does describing conditions in Haiti amount to a judgment about every Haitian. But it does make the current political argument awkward for anyone who previously treated the suggestion that Haiti was in disastrous condition as beyond the pale.

Rivera and others can reasonably argue that Haitians who established lives in the United States should not be returned to a dangerous environment. But that argument should be made directly instead of pretending there is no contradiction with the earlier rhetoric.

There is also a more fundamental issue buried beneath the political sparring: the “T” in TPS stands for “temporary.”

Congress created Temporary Protected Status to allow eligible nationals of designated countries to remain in the United States when extraordinary conditions, such as armed conflict or natural disasters, make returning unsafe. It was not designed as an automatic grant of permanent residency.

Haiti first received TPS designation following the catastrophic 2010 earthquake. Subsequent disasters, political upheaval, economic deterioration and escalating gang violence repeatedly complicated attempts to end those protections.

That has produced the question Washington has avoided resolving for years: At what point does a temporary program stop being temporary?

Opponents of termination argue that the answer depends on conditions inside Haiti, not simply how much time has passed. The Trump administration’s position is that temporary protection cannot continue indefinitely merely because conditions remain difficult.

The neighboring Dominican Republic also complicates attempts to explain Haiti’s condition purely through geography. Both countries occupy the island of Hispaniola, yet they have followed sharply different economic, institutional and political paths. Those differences have deep historical and governmental causes that cannot be reduced simply to the racial composition of either population.

Ultimately, Trump’s old remark and the current TPS dispute are separate questions.

People can reasonably believe his language was crude while simultaneously acknowledging that Haiti faces catastrophic conditions. Likewise, acknowledging those conditions does not by itself settle whether Haitian nationals should continue receiving TPS.

But opponents of Trump’s decision cannot have the argument both ways. If Haiti’s instability is now the central reason that Haitians must remain in the United States, then the country’s dire condition is no longer seriously in dispute.

Source link

RELATED ARTICLES

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular