Free Preview of Members-Only Content
To view the requested intelligence, you must be a Stratfor.com member.
By Fred Burton
Immigration to the United States has re-emerged as a hot topic and likely will remain so for the foreseeable future. Divides are deepening on both sides of the issue: Thousands of immigrants this week took to the streets or skipped work to protest proposed changes in U.S. immigration law, while groups opposed to illegal immigration, such as Minuteman Project, have begun private-citizen patrols along the U.S. border with Mexico, and even have built fences on private property in efforts to help the U.S. government improve border security.
For the time being, attention within the United States appears to be trained directly on the U.S.-Mexican border. Certainly, there are many concerns in that region that merit serious consideration -- including alien- and narcotics-smuggling, Latin American criminal syndicates, violence and the migration of criminal aliens. However, cross-border terrorist threats to the United States -- both historically and currently -- are of much greater concern thousands of miles to the north.
Last week, the U.S. State Department released the 2005 edition of its annual "Country Reports on Terrorism" document, and the chapter dealing with the Western Hemisphere provides some interesting insights when the entry on Canada is compared to that for Mexico. For example, the report states: "Terrorists have capitalized on liberal Canadian immigration and asylum policies to enjoy safe haven, raise funds, arrange logistical support, and plan terrorist attacks." There is nothing even vaguely resembling such an indictment in the section on Mexico, which notes: "The Mexican government worked closely with the United States on all aspects of counterterrorism security and prevention."
Certainly, Canada has a long history of harboring political dissidents from a number of different ethnic militant groups (perhaps as many as 50 organizations). This is an outgrowth of the liberal refugee policies and generous social welfare programs for which Canada is known around the world. In fact, the Canadian government receives some 20,000 to 30,000 applications for refugee status each year, and reportedly accepts more than half of the applicants. Many of these refugees arrive in Canada without documentation, or with forged or counterfeit documents, making it nearly impossible to verify a person's true identity. Prior to November 2001, none of these people were screened for criminal, terrorism or other concerns unless they requested permanent residency in Canada. After the 9/11 attacks, the policy was reformed: Canadian immigration officials are now free to deny asylum to suspected terrorists, and database checks are now run on all asylum applicants. But problems remain in dealing with undocumented arrivals or those whose identities cannot be found in government databases.
Though U.S. policies are identical for visitors or immigrants passing through either the northern or southern borders, they are much more stringently enforced -- with a denser concentration of border checkpoints and agents -- along the border with Mexico. In many places, it is possible to cross the Canadian border by walking, jogging, swimming or boating -- or entering through national parks, as has sometimes been the case with would-be terrorists.
A History of Plots
Refugees who have sought and received sanctuary in Canada have included members of ethnic militant groups, such as Algeria's Armed Islamic Group, various Palestinian factions (including Hamas), Hezbollah, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and Babbar Khalsa, a Sikh group. Many of these groups use Canada as a place of refuge, and most use it as a base for fundraising and political activity. However, some of those granted asylum have gone on to commit terrorist attacks.
Perhaps the most notorious of the cases (and certainly the most controversial) involving Canada were the twin bombings of Air India Flights 182 and 301, carried out by Babbar Khalsa in 1985. The bomb on Flight 182 exploded over the Atlantic Ocean and killed all 329 people aboard; the bomb placed on Flight 301 exploded on the ground at Narita Airport in Japan, killing two baggage handlers. There were several arrests in each case but only one man, Inderjit Singh Reyat, was ever convicted. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison on charges related to the Narita bombing in 1991; in 2001, he was charged and pleaded guilty to his role in the Flight 182 bombing, for which he received an additional five-year sentence. As part of the plea agreement, Reyat was expected to testify in the trial of two other Flight 182 suspects. However, he later claimed he could not remember anything, and the suspects were acquitted in March 2005.
The Canadian government was widely criticized for its handling of the case. There were allegations that the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) had conducted physical and electronic surveillance of group leaders prior to the attacks, and employed an informant who might have played a direct part in the attack. Later, following the acquittals of Sikh separatists Ripudaman Singh Malik and Ajaib Singh Bagri in the Flight 182 case, outrage from relatives of the victims prompted the government to establish a commission of inquiry -- exploring issues related to Canada's counterterrorism preparedness.
This step could have serious implications for Canadian policy, as the work of the 9/11 Commission did in the United States. However, the Canadian panel literally has only just begun; it commenced its work on May 1.
Threats to the United States
On several occasions, Canada has been a point of entry for people who posed specific threats to the United States.
| Stratfor Members, please log in at the top left hand corner |
