Passing through airport screening can be time-consuming for any business traveler. However, Nafees Syed, a lawyer and writer in New York, has additional obstacles.
“I have to go an extra hour earlier than anybody else, because it’s not random checking,” Syed said.
A Muslim American, Syed wears a hijab.
Illustration: Louise Ting
More often than not, she is pulled aside at security check-in for secondary screenings and pat-downs, with examiners feeling her head through the hijab, she said.
Syed, along with many of her Muslim American friends and Muslim rights advocates, is all too familiar with what many refer to as the stigma of traveling while Muslim.
Of course, there are various ways that Muslims might draw unwanted attention from gate agents and security officials at airports, such as when a Middle Eastern or other foreign-sounding name might result in a comparison against no-fly lists.
However, for followers of Islam who signal their identity through the way they dress, their clothing can sometimes feel like a red flag.
Being a business executive or a professional like Syed — a Yale Law School graduate and commercial litigator in prestigious law firm Boies, Schiller & Flexner — does not necessarily exempt Muslim-American travelers from the sort of scrutiny they say has become more common in recent years as a result of terrorist incidents and anti-Muslim political rhetoric.
Syed said that when traveling with non-Muslim colleagues, she avoids passing through security alongside them.
“I don’t want them to see the humiliation I am going to go through,” she said.
Syed said she has not applied for the US Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) PreCheck program, which can streamline security clearance for some travelers, after she asked around among other Muslim-Americans.
“Word on the Muslim street is that if you’re Muslim, it’s either really hard to get that or it doesn’t necessarily help anyway,” she said.
PROBLEMATIC CLOTHING
Officials of the administration, which conducts airport screenings, say the extra scrutiny is not a matter of focusing on religious groups, but can be necessary because scanners can have trouble getting clear images under some types of clothing.
“Persons wearing head coverings, loose fitting or bulky garments may undergo additional security screening, which may include a pat-down,” administration spokesman Mike England said in an e-mail interview. “A pat-down will be conducted by a TSA officer of the same gender.”
If an alarm cannot be resolved through a pat-down, the passenger might be asked to remove the head covering in a private screening area, he said.
However, many Muslim Americans contend that, too often, they are simply targets.
“Unfortunately, the global terror network created racial profiling against Muslims,” said Hilal Elver, a professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara and author of The Headscarf Controversy: Secularism and Freedom of Religion.
Elver said in an e-mail that airport screening can place a special burden on Muslim women whose religious beliefs dictate that they cover their heads or even more of their bodies.
Syed said her faith required her to cover her head in public.
However, she said some of her Muslim friends avoid traveling with religious or cultural clothing and will even “deliberately wear college shirts or something like that to kind of mitigate the potential discrimination.”
There are no reliable statistics on whether Americans who are Muslim, or might appear to be, are being subjected to increasingly strict scrutiny by airport security officials.
Various human-rights groups have flagged it as an issue of increasing concern, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Muslim Advocates, the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
“It is a right for all of us as Americans to travel freely,” said Brenda Abdelall, an official with Muslim Advocates, a national legal defense group based in Oakland, California. “For individuals to have to modify behavior, or be concerned before they are traveling about what they may wear or what they may say is problematic.”
Daayiee Abdullah, an African-American man who is president of the Mecca Institute, an online Muslim seminary in Washington, said he reserved the right to wear cultural clothing such as a thobe — a long robe — or skullcap while traveling, even though he realizes it might mean heightened scrutiny at airports. He is also an openly gay imam.
“I get the trifecta,” Abdullah said. “You just never know what the issue is — race, religion, sexual orientation.”
Still, he advises those who feel they are being targeted to “act calmly and go through.”
“The shortest distance to the other side is to cooperate,” he said.
Some travel hubs, including Detroit Metropolitan Airport, have noticeable numbers of Muslim women with headscarfs working at security checkpoints.
Asha Noor, an official with Take on Hate, a Muslim-rights advocacy group in Dearborn, Michigan, compared the situation with police departments hiring African-American officers while ignoring systemic bias.
“Just because there might be a few more Muslims or Arab-Americans working at the Detroit airport doesn’t change the culture of suspicion,” said Noor, who covers her hair.
Corey Saylor directs the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ Department to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia. He acknowledges that not all TSA scrutiny can be attributed to racial profiling.
“We do see women getting secondary screenings frequently,” Saylor said. “But it is very hard in all honesty to say if it is the headscarf that is triggering that, or the fact that the headscarf is loose.”
NOT JUST MUSLIMS
Muslims are not the only religious group who might be subjected to extra screenings at airports because of what they wear. Sikhs, who cover their heads — typically with a turban for men or a long scarf for women — also often draw extra scrutiny.
“For Sikh-Americans, humiliation is a prerequisite to air travel. We are pulled aside and profiled simply because of the way we look,” said Arjun Singh Sethi, director of law and policy for the Sikh Coalition, a national group founded in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, when some Sikhs were violently attacked.
“The turban is a sacred article of faith and stands for justice and equality,” Sethi said. “Observant Sikh-Americans are mandated to wear it and should not be forced to remove it every time they travel.”
England said the agency was intent on becoming more culturally sensitive.
“TSA partners with organizations representing multicultural communities to gather input, facilitate mutual understanding and exchange information,” he said.
For many Muslim Americans, that understanding is coming too slowly.
Raed Jarrar, an Iraqi-born US citizen, is government relations manager for human rights organization American Friends Service Committee.
Jarrar won a US$240,000 settlement in 2009 from airline JetBlue over an incident a few years earlier. He had been stopped from boarding a flight while wearing a T-shirt with the phrase: “We Will Not Be Silent” in Arabic and English, the slogan of an anti-war group.
JetBlue workers said the T-shirt frightened passengers, and let him board the plane only after he put on an “I Love NY” heart logo shirt they gave him.
“I took a stand against it, because I felt that the assumptions behind asking me to take off the T-shirt are the same assumptions that lead to killing Arabs and Muslims daily without thinking of them as equivalent human beings,” he said.
Jarrar said he viewed the situation for Muslims and Arabs traveling through airports and other public accommodations as part of a continual evolution that various ethnic groups in the US have undergone, “whether it is Japanese-Americans, or Chinese-Americans, or Italians, or even Irish-Americans at one stage.”
“Discussing this issue now,” for Muslim-Americans, he said, “is one of the very important steps towards focusing it as a nation and trying to deal with it, and put it to rest.”
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath