Across the globe, no society is safe from terrorism. This scourge has forced many governments to take inappropriate and excessive security measures. Unfortunately, these steps are proving counterproductive, causing increased fear among people, and restricting their movement.

The Obama Administration also showed a lack of good judgment when it announced that it would subject travelers from 14 countries to excessive scrutiny and security checks at U.S. airports. The decision came following Nigerian national Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's attempt to blow-up a Northwest airliner on Christmas Eve last year. Under the new rules, passengers traveling from designated countries, including Pakistan, will undergo special security checks and pat-down searches at U.S. airports. Their luggage will also be screened through special scanners installed in 19 international airports.

Despite all its good intent, the Administration is unlikely to get positive results from its thoughtless reaction. Pat-down searches and special screening on the basis of nationality is the worst form of profiling. It may not help much in reducing the threat of terrorism but it will certainly increase anti-American sentiments in the countries affected by the decision.

U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke said, during a recent meeting with Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari in Lahore, Pakistan, that the Obama Administration will review the new policy towards travelers from Pakistan. Holbrooke told the media after the meeting that enhanced screening of passengers at U.S. airports had become necessary in the face of the increasing threat of terrorism. According to him, a top National Security Council official had assured him that he would personally look into the issue of special screening among Pakistanis. Hopefully, Holbrooke's pleading will find ears in Washington. And hopefully, President Obama will not be further provoked by critics like Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman (I-CT), who have been criticizing his strategy for making America safe.

Facing harsh criticism from the hawks, even several progressives and liberals in the Administration have pressed for the revival of harsher security measures from the past. The President must not pay attention to these calls for restricting civil liberties and for military intervention in Yemen.

The Abdulmutallab case raises questions about the success of President Obama's strategy to defeat terrorism. There is enough evidence to prove that U.S. military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are giving birth to new threats of terrorism. Reasons for growing trends of extremism amongst Muslims include these wars and the spilling of Muslim blood in their own lands, especially at the hands of U.S. and British forces.

The bombing attempt also proved, once again, that terrorism cannot be defeated through just military means. Rather, the United States can be better secured through good intelligence, policing and appropriate security measures. Muslims themselves are at the forefront in the fight against terrorism. We have seen this in the cases of five Virginia youth whose families played a role in their arrest in Pakistan (where they wanted to receive military training at an extremist training camp) and of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, whose father forewarned the U.S. embassy in Nigeria about his son's activities.

Reaction to Abdulmutallab's actions must not lead America to open a new war front in Yemen; it would be a mistake. Instead, Washington should focus on efforts to end the wars. The Administration also needs to take steps to better integrate people within its borders from different religions, races and backgrounds into American society. This strategy, far less costly than fighting a war, can make America safe in the long run.