Are FBI & State Dept blacklisting Asian American and Muslim employees?

January 3, 2015
Wen Ho Lee, a Taiwanese American scientist wrongly accused by the federal government for espionage, in a case widely criticized as based largely on anti-Asian stereotypes.
Wen Ho Lee, a Taiwanese American scientist wrongly accused by the federal government for espionage, in a case widely criticized as based largely on anti-Asian stereotypes.

This is easily the most underreported story of institutionalized anti-Asian and anti-Muslim racism of 2014.

In the months following 9/11, the United States shifted many of its priorities towards counter-terrorism efforts targeting overseas groups and countries in much of Asia and the Middle East. With that new focus came news of broad recruiting efforts; recruits fluent in Asian and Middle Eastern languages became hot commodities for the intelligence community. Many federal agencies launched programs specifically aimed at attracting agents with foreign language capabilities. From a 2012 FBI report to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security:

The FBI’s Foreign Language Program has made great strides in its ability to meet the rising demand of language needs since September 11, 2001 and has built a sustained and robust program. The program has moved forward through specialized training, increased hiring, retention, technology, and collaboration. The FBI has invested in multiple strategies to increase its foreign language capabilities.

Following 9/11, the FBI launched a $1.5 million recruitment program that has reportedly significantly enhanced the language diversity of its incoming agents. For many Asian Americans, this new federal focus represented a welcome inroads to the FBI, the State Department, and other historically White federal agencies; by 2012, 4.2% of the FBI’s special agents were Asian American.

However, new reports are suggesting that simultaneous to the federal government’s focus on language diversity and non-White recruiting, secretive policies of racial profiling have subjected Asian American and Muslim American employees of the FBI and the State Department to profound, unreported discrimination.

Foreign service officer Andrew Ou was denied an overseas posting to Japan by the State Department. (Photo credit: Washington Post / Andrew Ou)
Foreign service officer Andrew Ou was denied an overseas posting to Japan by the State Department. (Photo credit: Washington Post / Andrew Ou)

News of a government-wide blacklisting policy targeting certain federal agents, particularly Asian Americans, was first reported by the Washington Post in 2013. That agency revealed that a series of post-9/11 “guidelines” have been used by the State Department to blacklist certain employees, particularly Asian Americans. Specifically, a White House memo required that federal agencies carefully screen employees for potential “foreign influence” prior to granting security clearance. The Washington Post reported that the State Department has interpreted this memo in a way that has left several Asian American employees suddenly precluded from serving in overseas tours, based largely on the fact that they have extended family living overseas.

60% of Asian Americans are first generation immigrants, with an additional 30% second generation.

The preclusion policy resulted in a culture of distrust towards Asian American employees, most of whom were treated as de facto security risks based on race or ethnicity, regardless of their job performance. Reports the Washington Post:

The greatest harm of the preclusion policy, besides losing the benefit the skills of native language speakers, may be how it projects an image of distrust. Several foreign service officers brought up the historical example of Japanese Americans being interned during World War II, as well as the persecution of Wen Ho Lee, the Los Alamos scientist who was wrongfully accused of leaking information to the Chinese. Asians are no strangers to the suspicion that they might be serving another master.

For example: When Kendrick Liu was applying to serve on the D.C.-based desk that deals with China and Mongolia, he says he was asked to submit information about relatives who were foreign-born U.S. citizens, and was ultimately denied the position on security grounds (Diplomatic Security had previously forced him to forego an assignment in Hong Kong as well).

“It seemed to me they were making distinctions between American citizens and American citizens who were’t born in the United States, which in my mind seemed odd,” Liu says.  “Because as I was taught to understand it, an American citizen is an American citizen, period.”

And then there’s Andrew Ou, a Korean-born officer who spent time on a fellowship program in Japan. Years after being told he couldn’t serve in Japan for security reasons, he requested his files under the Freedom of Information Act. They contained copious notes about work he’d done for a Japanese official, as well as a Japanese girlfriend. The preclusion was later reversed, but barely.

“I’m American, and this whole process challenged that concept,” Ou says. “I was surprised, I was angry, I was bitter.”

Today, the New York Times reports that such anti-Asian discrimination is not limited to the State Department; a similar preclusion policy has resulted in the blacklisting of Asian American and Muslim employees at the FBI.

Employees in the program — called the Post-Adjudication Risk Management plan, or PARM — face more frequent security interviews, polygraph tests, scrutiny of personal travel, and reviews of, in particular, electronic communications and files downloaded from databases.

Some of these employees, including Muslim and Asian personnel who have been hired to fill crucial intelligence and counterterrorism needs, say they are being penalized for possessing the very skills and background that got them hired. They are notified about their inclusion in the program and the extra security requirements, but are not told precisely why they have been placed in it and apparently have no appeal or way out short of severing all ties with family and friends abroad.

The Obama administration appears interested in making a history of setting superficial diversity priorities while simultaneously enacting policies that introduce or reinforce existing discrimination against non-Whites. Last month, the Obama administration announced heightened restrictions on certain federal policies of racial profiling, but failed to do anything to challenge some of the most common racial profiling faced by Americans: anti-“Brown people” scrutiny at the nation’s commercial airports and borders. Muslim and South Asian advocacy groups were understandably infuriated by the administration’s ongoing support for this unconstitutional and useless policy of discrimination and excessive scrutiny.

In the same vein, over ten years, the federal government has nominally advocated for fair hiring practices for federal employees, and has even actively recruited bilingual non-White special agents in the State Department and The FBI. In 2011, President Obama made history by issuing an Executive Order declaring workforce diversity in the federal government a major administrative priority. In it, the President stated:

Our Nation derives strength from the diversity of its population and from its commitment to equal opportunity for all.  We are at our best when we draw on the talents of all parts of our society, and our greatest accomplishments are achieved when diverse perspectives are brought to bear to overcome our greatest challenges.

…To realize more fully the goal of using the talents of all segments of society, the Federal Government must continue to challenge itself to enhance its ability to recruit, hire, promote, and retain a more diverse workforce.  Further, the Federal Government must create a culture that encourages collaboration, flexibility, and fairness to enable individuals to participate to their full potential.

Yet, the US government has simultaneously created a new blacklist for the Millennial era.

It has implemented a system of condoned discrimination that targets certain (non-White) employees as assumed security risks based predominantly on the Perpetual Foreigner stereotype that casts Asian Americans as innately untrustworthy, inscrutable and disloyal. Asian Americans, who are predominantly foreign-born or second generation entirely as a consequence of a history of exclusionary immigration laws only reversed in 1965, are being penalized by the FBI and State Department basically for being Asian American.

This is so fucking racist, and no one is really talking about it.

Seriously, how has this story not yet broken the internet?

  • disqus_uY4qdf1Xbx

    It’s a good thing we have progressive examples like China, South Korea, and Japan to show us racist Americans what true diversity in government looks like!

  • LOL@WesternValues

    Those countries never needed immigration.

    Whereas, nggers, wtbacks, and chnks, and other immigrants were brought into glorious Christian America to fill the employment gap.

    Tell me, how are the race riots going in America right now?

    Hands up, bro. Don’t shoot.
    I can’t breath.

    Hail hydra.

  • Myra Esoteric

    I’m a bit confused by your statement, because China has stricter diversity requirements than the US. They mandate, that predominantly-minority districts have a minority governor and >30% minority officials. If the same were applied in the US, the mayors of New York and Los Angeles would be required to be black or Hispanic.

    Affirmative action in colleges dates back to the 1940s. There are also government funded historically minority colleges that offer a free ride to historically oppressed people. Moreover, many people migrate to China especially Africans.

  • disqus_uY4qdf1Xbx

    Yes, China is known for fair and equal representation for all minorities within their government. Just ask the Hmong, Uighurs, Hui, Mongolians, Tibetans, Taiwanese, Hong Kongese, etc, etc, etc. I am sure anyone from these groups will testify that China is an ardent defender of human rights And I am sure that all the Africans, and Burmese, and Vietnamese that immigrate to China will have their own representatives in the Chinese government very soon.

    P.S. NYC is 45% white. That is the biggest racial group there.

  • MelaninManson

    Since when do people expect the federal government of the United States of America to take human resources advice from other nations? I’m not sure what the point of the above comment is outside of meaningless snark.

    There’s no excuse for the FBI and State Department’s treatment of Asian Americans within their ranks. No American citizen should be treated like a perpetual foreigner by the government they subsidize with their tax dollars. Such treatment is completely inconsistent with American values.

  • Myra Esoteric

    Except, Chinese minority government officials are actually overrepresented compared to non minorities, and one can also argue that African Americans are unjustly treated by the US police.

    “Minorities constitute 17% of officials in South China”

    https://digital.law.washington.edu/dspace…/7PacRimLPolyJ077.pdf

    BTW about NYC – doesn’t matter, it’s about whether it’s majority / minority, even if no ethnicity is in the majority. If NYC were in China it would be an either / or situation, the mayor would have to be either black or Hispanic.

  • disqus_uY4qdf1Xbx

    Yes, yes. Chinese government good. American government bad. America, we really are the worst….

  • Myra Esoteric

    I was rebutting your initial statement, not saying that any country is better than another.

  • LOL@WesternValues

    That’s where you are wrong. THOSE ARE American values. To exploit the weak and incite hate against minorities. search online for “american war criminals” and “america war monger” “american neo imperialism”

  • ScottD2k

    This “news article” produces absolutely NO evidence, blames whites, and fabricates. If you really have a problem with this imaginary problem, blame Obama he’s the “Chief Executive”.

  • The NYTines article provides detailed first person accounts from multiple unrelated sources, draws upon a known post-9/11 memo, and corroborates a similar program at the Stare Department reported on by the Washington Post. What else are you looking for?

  • What do policies in China have to do with the treatment of American state agents and recruits by their own federal government?

  • disqus_uY4qdf1Xbx

    That is wonderful that you know who you are! That must come in handy when strangers ask you what your name is. So special!

  • disqus_uY4qdf1Xbx

    As a reader of your blog, I too, like you, am convinced that the problem with America today is white people. We should look to superior Asian countries like China to show us what true progressive and diverse government looks like. Our white racist government just never seems to get anything right!

  • Myra Esoteric

    Not talking about identity here but correcting a lot of your statements. Minority groups, like Hui and Koreans have been overrepresented in the Chinese military and intelligence for hundreds of years.

  • Myra Esoteric

    They are not true American values but perverted ones

  • That is clearly neither the focus nor the central belief of this blog. Any further trolling along this line will warrant deletion of your comments and a ban.

  • ScottD2k

    Repeat: There is NO evidence it’s hearsay. There is good reason not to trust Asians and Asian-Americans. Cheating and corruption is endemic in much of China and the rest of Asia and the cultural norm for many is lying. In my opinion Wen Ho Lee was guilty. AGAIN, If you want to blame someone, Obama is the Chief Executive. Holder is the head of the Justice Department.

  • ScottD2k

    You are threatening people with censorship? That suits you. Delete my posts and go Eff yourself!

  • There is good reason not to trust Asians and Asian-Americans. Cheating and corruption is endemic in much of China and the rest of Asia and the cultural norm for many is lying.

    Nice stereotyping you got there, Scott.

  • You are threatening people with censorship? That suits you. Delete my posts and go Eff yourself!

    Trolling violates the comment policy of this site, which is basically a “terms of service” agreement for maintaining commenting privileges; ad hominem attacks are also a violation of this site’s policies.

    You can view the comment policy below, and the expectation is anyone who chooses to post on this site adheres to these basic guidelines. Since you have posted two ad hominem attacks in two separate threads, Scott, you have violated the comment policy of this site and have been banned.

    Sorry. Ciao.

Comment Policy

Before posting, please review the following guidelines:

  • No ad hominem attacks: A person's identity, personal history, or background is not up for debate. Talk about ideas, not people.
  • Be courteous: Respect everyone else in this space.
  • Present evidence: This space endeavours to encourage academic and rational debate around identity politics. Do your best to build an argument backed not just with your own ideas, but also with science.
  • Don't be pedantic: Listen to those debating you not just for places to attack, but also where you might learn and even change your own opinion. Repeatedly arguing the same point irrespective of presented counterfacts will now be considered a violation of this site's comment policy.
  • Respect the humanity of all groups: To elevate the quality of debate, this site will no longer tolerate (racial, cultural, gender, etc.) supremacist or inferiority lines of argumentation. There are other places on the internet where nationalist arguments can be expressed; this blog is not those places.
  • Don't be an asshole: If you think your behaviour would get you punched in the face outside of the internets, don't say it on the internets.
  • Don't abuse Disqus features: Don't upvote your own comments. Don't flag other people's comments without reasonable cause. Basically, don't try to game the system. You are not being slick.

Is your comment not approved, unpublished, or deleted? Here are some common reasons why:

  • Did you sign in? You are required to register an account with Disqus or one of your social media accounts in order to comment.
  • Did your comment get caught in the spam filter? Disqus is set to automatically detect and filter out spam comments. Sometimes, its algorithm gets over-zealous, particularly if you post multiple comments in rapid succession, if your comment contains keywords often associated with spam, and/or if your comment contains multiple links. If your comment has been erroneously caught in the spam filter, contact me and I will retrieve it.
  • Did a comment get flagged? Comments will be default be published but flagged comments will be temporarily removed from view until they are reviewed by me.
  • Did you not play nice? You may have gotten banned and a bunch of your comments may have been therefore deleted. Sorry.

I monitor all comment threads, and try to address comments requiring moderation within 24-48 hours. Comments that violate this comment policy may receive a warning and removal of offensive content; overt or repeat violations are subject to deletion and/or banning of comment authors without warning.

I reserve final decision over how this comment policy will be enforced.

Summary:

Play nice and don't be a jerk, and you'll do just fine.