There’s a strategy which both admits more refugees, something the Obama Administration appears to be committed to doing, and mitigates whatever risk they pose: give preferential treatment to the applications of the people we know the most about—the translators who’ve been working for us in Afghanistan and Iraq, in some cases for many years. The editors of the New York Times call for something very much like that:
As things stand, there are roughly 12,600 applicants with pending petitions and only about 2,500 visas the State Department is authorized to issue. That means that about 10,100 Afghans, who had every reason to believe their service to the United States would be rewarded with a safe haven, may be left behind.
The State Department and other government agencies involved in vetting applications administered the program poorly for years after it was established in 2009. Many applicants waited for several years to learn whether their cases were approved. Other applicants were rejected without being told why. Over the past couple of years, responding to an outcry from veterans and members of Congress, officials have begun to process cases more quickly. But the department expects to run out of visas to issue early next year.
[…]
Failing to keep our promise to Afghans who risked life and limb in the battlefield would add a shameful chapter to the mixed legacy of America’s longest war.
As Sam Clemens put it, “Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest.”
Indeed, we don’t need another Hmong situation here.