Should people who share a last name with someone suspected of terrorism be subjected to extra questioning when entering the United States? That’s a question that might strike close to home if your last name is Khan, a Muslim name that might be shared by some jihadists. But if the worst that results from such a practice is momentary inconvenience to an innocent visitor named Khan, then the vast majority of Americans, whose nation is still the target of a worldwide Islamist terrorist movement, will probably be inclined to tell the offended Khan that they are sorry for his inconvenience, wish him a pleasant stay, and then silently pray that if a real jihadist chooses to land at the same airport, officials will not be deterred by critics from asking him questions that might lead to foiling a terrorist atrocity.
That’s more or less what happened when one Shah Rukh Khan landed at Newark Liberty International Airport last Friday. Khan is a Bollywood star—a very big deal in his own country, but, alas for fans of Indian films, in New Jersey he was just another guy named Khan. Though his ordeal was quickly ended with a phone call to the Indian consulate, Khan is making a meal out of the incident. And indeed, Khan’s trying hour in Newark is being treated as an international incident of the first order, with U.S. ambassador to Delhi Timothy J. Roemer (a former Indiana congressman) genuflecting to the star, calling him a “global icon.”
There may be more to this, however, than just the normal “don’t you know who I am?” routine from a celebrity who may be not be as well known as he thinks he is. As it happens, Khan has been a frequent visitor to the United States lately. According to reports, he has been making a film about racial profiling in the United States; the working title of the movie is supposedly My Name Is Khan.
But as much as anyone who has been hassled, humiliated, or just had his time wasted at an airport by clueless security personnel might have some sympathy for Khan, the actor’s subsequent remarks in an interview with Indian television channel CNN-IBN (as reported by Agence France-Presse) about his experience reveal that he is a man with an agenda. Milking this minor mishap into a major kerfuffle raises his international profile and perhaps that of his film project.
Not content with raising the blood pressure of his loyal fan base, Khan is raising the stakes in this controversy. Complaining about the fact that his name “is common on their checklist,” Khan railed at America’s efforts to protect its citizens from terrorists who might share his name:
America needs to understand one small thing. That there are about 190-195 smaller countries and that makes the whole world. It’s not an isolated, parallel universe existence for this country. There is a whole world which makes all the good and bad that is happening. So if we are scared of violence and terrorism, all of us are responsible for it. It’s not that the world is and America is not.
That’s the sort of nonsense that might play well in third-world countries where resentment of America is the coin of the realm, but in the real universe, it’s important to note that America is not “responsible” for the violence and terrorism unleashed on the world by Islamists. Responsibility for it lies with the jihadists, who have not only targeted the United States but, as we learned last fall, also Mumbai, the home of the Indian film industry. Indians, of all people, ought to know the perils of living in a world with Islamist terrorists, many of whom are based next door in Pakistan.
Khan and others who complain about their treatment at airports may be angry about the minimal efforts we make to screen visitors since 9/11, but if critics of profiling believe that young males with Muslim names or affiliations should not be subjected to more scrutiny than little old ladies (and, in practice, it is far from clear that they are), then they are asking us to believe that the latter are just as likely to commit such crimes as the former.
So long as there is a real terror threat coming from Islamists, Mr. Khan, welcome visitor though he may be, ought to forget about advising Americans about security policies and stick to the Bollywood tradition of rescuing damsels in distress from a fate worse than death.
