Chad, Venezuela, and North Korea were added to President Trump’s travel ban policy — but one of these things is not like the others. Despite the dramatic tension between Pyongyang and Washington, North Korea does not deserve to be banned.
Chad and Venezuela being added to the list makes sense. My colleague, Tom Rogan, makes a case as to why both of those countries need to be listed. Chad, though an ally, has a weak border with Libya that is “deeply vulnerable to infiltration” by terrorist cells. Venezuela, Rogan argues, was added in order to discourage the foreign government from ignoring the humanitarian crisis in its own borders.
I would add that in addition to any humanitarian reasons, there is also the threat of growing support for anti-American groups in Venezuela. According to an editorial from Foreign Policy, we should be particularly concerned about Venezuela’s “long history of collaboration with Iran,” and the narcos trade that “compromises the integrity of the U.S. financial system.”
The State Department justified the additions by citing a lack of transparency and communication that would be a detriment to vetting. A statement released from the State Department emphasized that foreign governments “that did not have adequate information-sharing practices” were given 50 days to reform their system, and that many of them “are now in compliance.”
“These limitations and restrictions are conditional,” the statement noted, “and these countries can, under this executive action, improve their information-sharing practice and receive relief from the limitations and restrictions.”
While many see the new countries as a way to distance the travel ban from being seen as a Muslim ban — and there is a debate to be had on that front — I would argue that, at least in terms of North Korea, it’s more about politics than security. Unlike the other two additions, North Korea does not have the same ties to radical terrorism cells.
Is communication between our two countries at an all-time low? Absolutely. But who does North Korea actually trust besides China and (maybe) Russia?
Most find it relatively easier — though nothing about fleeing that regime should be considered easy — to escape through China rather than South Korea, as Quartz explains. Although Russia, Japan, and South Korea would get a major influx as well.
Of the refugees brought to the United States, the number from North Korea is astronomically low. As of August 2015, there were only 186 North Korean refugees brought into the U.S. since 2006, according to the United Press International. The organization NK in USA, which rescues and resettles North Korean refugees, offers a slightly different set of data; they claim that since 2012 their organization has helped settle 100 refugees out of the 200 who have asylum status in the U.S. Either way, the number is well under the amount we have brought in from other countries included in the ban.
North Korea does not offer the same threat as Chad and Venezuela. As unstable as the regime is and as dangerous as the threats being made are, North Korean threats are on the state level. It is not North Korea’s style to utilize undercover insurgents, as terrorist cells do through the other countries on the list.
Trump adding North Korea to the list is meant to insult the regime. It is a symbolic action to further punish the aggressive developments North Korea has increasingly made in the past year. Even then, it doesn’t mean much. North Korea harshly punishes known as defectors from the regime.
Other than that message, this addition is effectively useless. There is no terroristic threat from North Korea. All it does is hinder the ability to aid North Korean refugees — who are on the same side as us.
Gabriella Muñoz is a commentary desk intern with the Washington Examiner and a student at Georgetown University.
