The UN Security Council recently passed a resolution against the travel of “foreign terrorist fighters.” In the face of ISIS, the horrifying terror group that is also recruiting men from the West, something needs to be done about this problem, no question about that. Yet the phrasing of the resolution made me nervous: Can rulings like against the movement of man and money be implemented without increasing racial profiling? Without furthing undue discrimination of muslim people? Without a further increase in overly broad surveillance, both offline and online? Preventive travel restrictions for innocent men and women, caught in a wide net with intransparent rules? The reactions to threats, from 9/11 to today, Patriot Act etc., are the basis of my nervousness.
Here in Germany, the civil liberty issues are already arising. The government is seriously considering stamping identity cards with some sort of “jihadist marker.” This raises a few issues, both on principle and practical grounds. For once, I never would’ve thought to read about a German government stamping the passports of a certain group of citizens. Please note, I don’t want to compare actual terrorists to historically persecuted groups of German citizens. Yet the question is – how will this group of “jihadists” be defined? Who defines it? How “fail proof” can a database like this be? Do only individuals with a respective criminal record get this mark? Suspects, too? People merely belonging to suspected communities? Also, why stamp the physical object, when there are databases at the fingertips of border and law enforcement officers? On a practical note, why should the “jihadists” come and have their cards stamped when they are actually determined to go underground/to Iraq to fight with a terror group? This program has to backfire, it’s already flawed by design.
Thoughts?