The eight-point plan put out by former President Donald Trump to prevent terrorists from entering the country was centered on a mix of tighter immigration laws, more stringent screening protocols, and closer collaboration with international partners. He presented the concept in a speech immediately after the terrorist shootings in San Bernardino, California, in December 2015.
The following eight points made up the plan:
- Suspend immigration from terror-prone regions: This measure aimed to temporarily halt immigration from countries with a history of terrorism or known terrorist networks.
- Implement extreme vetting: This involved strengthening the vetting process for all immigrants and refugees entering the United States, including more thorough background checks and screenings for potential ties to extremist groups.
- Establish a database of foreign visitors: This database would track the entry and exit of all foreign visitors to the United States, allowing for better monitoring and identification of potential threats.
- Increase cooperation with allies: Trump emphasized the importance of working closely with allies in the Middle East and Europe to share intelligence and coordinate efforts to combat terrorism.
- Demand cooperation from countries: Trump proposed pressuring countries to cooperate with the United States in fighting terrorism, including sharing information and taking action against known or suspected terrorists.
- Deny entry to foreign nationals: This measure would deny entry to foreign nationals who support or have ties to terrorist organizations.
- Detain individuals: Trump suggested detaining individuals who pose a threat to national security, even if they are not charged with a crime.
- Protect American infrastructure: This involved enhancing security measures for critical infrastructure, such as airports, power plants, and transportation systems.
There is disagreement about how successful Trump’s eight-point strategy is. Proponents contend that the plan’s emphasis on tighter immigration regulations and more stringent screening practices decreased the likelihood that terrorists would infiltrate the country. Opponents argue that the proposal did nothing to address the underlying causes of terrorism and was too discriminatory and broad.
It is crucial to remember that there is no one solution that can completely remove the danger posed by the complex and varied threat of Islamist terrorism. To successfully prevent terrorism, a comprehensive strategy that takes into account both local and global elements is required.