I recently came across this article on the Washington Post, about how the Mahmood family, a British-Muslim family, was barred from going to the US to visit Disneyland, supposedly by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). And while it was not explicitly stated in the article, but a relatively safe assumption to make (and something that seems to be inferred by the article itself ) as to why the DHS would bar a family from entering the States is because they see them as a security threat, most probably relating to ISIS. The article then elaborates that the family feels that they are being wrongfully targeted because they are a Muslim family, and goes on to explain their plight.
Now I’m not going to render judgement on whether or not there is any credibility to their claims of being wrongfully targeted, or if they are actually a security threat to the US. But this situation has shown how potentially cunning and dangerous ISIS’ propaganda machine can actually be. ISIS, through their recent activities (or at least “claimed” activities), has essentially put the United States into a no-win situation when it comes to how they deal with situations like the Mahmood family.
Now let’s look at this situation like a game-theory matrix. Where you have two variables, with two possible outcomes each. The first variable is (1) If Mahmood’s family (or any other family for that matter) is/is not a group of ISIS operatives with nefarious plans. The second variable is (2) if the US border authorities allow/block the Mahmood family’s entry into the US.
Now because we have two variables, with two possible states for each variable, this gives us 4 possible outcomes (2x2=4), they can be elaborated as:
Situation 1: Family are NOT terrorists, US Border does NOTHING (i.e. let them through)
Situation 2: Family are NOT terrorists, US Border DENIES ACCESS to the US
Situation 3: Family ARE terrorists, US Border does NOTHING
Situation 4: Family ARE terrorists, US Border DENIES ACCESS
From the 4 possible situations above, obviously Situation 3 is the one you want to avoid the most, since that is the one that will most likely result in a terrorist attack. Whereas Situation 1 and 4 is the most preferred, since nothing bad happens, or at least you prevent it from happening. The problem is though that we live in a world of imperfect information, no one can possibly know everything. The US Border Authority can’t, with a 100% accuracy, tell who is a terrorist or who isn’t, especially when you deal with a militia-type guerrilla tactics group such as ISIS.
One of the few things we can safely infer about ISIS’ goals though is that probably their major goals include (1) demonizing and isolating the US, and (2) bombing it where possible, inflicting casualties and spreading fear. Taking those two goals, and putting it into the context of this situation with the Mahmood family, presents a very scary win-win situation for ISIS.
Now let’s go back to the game-theory matrix. Where we have 4 possible outcomes:
Situation 1: Family are NOT terrorists, US Border does NOTHING (i.e. let them through)
Situation 2: Family are NOT terrorists, US Border DENIES ACCESS to the US
Situation 3: Family ARE terrorists, US Border does NOTHING
Situation 4: Family ARE terrorists, US Border DENIES ACCESS
Now let’s make an assumption that family of ISIS operatives intent on bombing the US wanted to take a trip to the US from the UK. This group definitely does have malicious intent, but the border authorities don’t know that. In the current environment, regardless of what the US border authority does, the US loses in some way.
Obviously, if the terrorist family is not identified as terrorists, and are allowed entry into the US (Situation 3), they can enact their plan to cause heavy casualties on US soil. Definitely a bad outcome for the US.
However, if the terrorist family is identified as a possible threat and are denied access to the US (Situation 4), they could just as easily claim it to be because of an increasingly Islamaphobic US Border Control, and gain significant airtime to further demonize and isolate the US (much like what is happening right now with that Washington Post article). Of course unless there is solid proof of malicious intent (which is probably few and far in between).
The situation is further complicated by the anti-Muslim rhetoric that presidential candidates like Mr. Donald Trump are pushing, which just adds more fuel to the fire, and speculation that America is becoming more anti-Muslim.
What scares be is that this is probably ISIS’ propaganda plan on how they can weaken the US, and they don’t even have to exert that much effort. All they need to do is send some agents to the US, if they don’t get caught, great they can do some bombing. But if they do? Just cry foul play and let the western media do it’s thing, it’s a no-win situation for the US, and a win-win for ISIS. It’s a classic case of using your opponent’s strength against them. And coming from an organization that has no qualms about killing people en masse? It’s terrifying.
