THE REFUGEES’ MESS
In 2014 and 2015, most European countries have been
struggling with the problems of refugees and immigration. The sheer dimension
of the phenomenon (hundreds of thousands of persons, going on to the millions)
and the short time-span over which it has developed, have caused huge
humanitarian, economic, logistic, social, political and security problems.
The main routes to get from Africa and Asia into Europe.
Let us try to approach this highly sensitive issue
trying to avoid the emotion-laden, politically-correct
speech.
THE ORIGINS: The refugee component
of the problem derives from war and persecution and is, to a great extent,
caused by the Syria Civil War. Four out of every five refugees nowadays are
Syrian. Then, there are the wars in Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan and the
conflicts and persecutions in countries like Libya, Somalia, Eritrea, or the
Sudans.
The evolution, resilience and lack of optimistic
prospects for any of these situations DOES NOT point to any short-term
satisfactory resolution, which means that each of them is going to continue “to produce” refugees.
The refugee surge has raised issues and problems of
different natures:
HUMANITARIAN: This is the most dramatic feature of the crisis. Over
4 years of relentless war in Syria, have resulted in millions of refugees
spilling out of her borders, plus about 8 million internally displaced. Three
of Syria’s neighbours have obviously received by far the largest share of these
refugees: Turkey – 2.5 million; Lebanon – 1 million; Jordan – 600.000. For
equally obvious reasons, the other two neighbours (Israel and Iraq) do not
count. Then, there are over a million (and counting) refugees pouring into
Europe. These refugees deserve care,
attention and respect.
ECONOMIC: The economic issues are pretty straightforward. This mass dislocation places a heavy burden on the frontline states
(Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon) and on the countries of refugee entrance in
Europe, mostly Italy and Greece. And there is only so much that each can bear,
especially in economically vulnerable ones like Lebanon, Jordan and Greece.
LOGISTICS: No country was
prepared to handle this flood of refugees. The overwhelming numbers strain
the states’ services, hurt the refugees and cause tension and stress which, in
turn, tends to aggravate the situation.
SOCIAL & POLITICAL: Chancellor Angela Merkel, in a fit of emotion,
announced an open-door policy towards Syrian refugees. This apparently thoughtless outburst led to a renewed wave of people
trying to get to Germany and caused a domino effect that placed further stress
on countries such as Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary, Croatia and Austria, some
of which chastised the Chancellor for enticing more people to come to Europe.
The domino effect found its way back to Germany, where not too few considered
Merkel’s move hasty, extemporaneous and even reckless. Among these, were
officials of Merkel’s own party and in Bavaria’s CSU. Not surprisingly, soon
after, Germany started to backpedal on the open-door proclamation.
Instead, Germany
decided that her generosity had to be shared by her neighbours and, in typical
last decade authoritarian fashion, threatened the Visegrad Group (Hungary,
Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia) and Romania with punitive measures if they did not take more refugees. This
bullying culminated in a majority vote in the European Council to impose quotas
on member states.
Besides the Diktat
trend that is increasingly Berlin’s modus operandi, there are some questions
that beg clear answers:
* Why should countries have to contribute to Germany’s
largesse?
* How will refugees feel about having to settle in
countries that are reluctant to receive them?
* How will countries that are reluctant to receive a
bigger number of refugees, will actually receive them? And how will their
populations react?
* How will the increasingly large number of “false”
Syrians from the Middle east, South Asia and North Africa be spotted, handled
and eventually deported?
* How will the “free-riders” from the Balkans be processed?
* How will the security issue be handled, given that
there is the real possibility (it is already most likely a fact) of there being
members of terrorists organisations embedded in the refugee flux?
* How will the feelings, sensitivities and opinions of
local and national communities be taken into account without labelling everyone
as racist, fascist, or xenophobic, because most actually are not.
Finally, there are questions that should be asked
about the refugees themselves.
If you are a refugee from a war zone, running from the
danger of you or your family being killed, you do not get to be too choosy
about where you end up. If you escape Syria and settle in Turkey, in Lebanon,
or in Jordan, you are safe from violence and the war.
Ok, the conditions are prickly. So you try to get to
Europe. However, once in Europe, Greece is not good for you. Neither is Serbia.
Nor Hungary. Not even Italy. No, you have to go to Germany or Sweden. The way I see it, this is not fleeing from
war anymore. You are becoming less of a refugee and more of an immigrant.
Nothing wrong with that. It’s just that changing condition and motivation, so
changes your status quo, too.
It is time to stop having a one-dimensional view of
the refugees (true or fake), of the Europeans who want more or less refugees
and/or immigrants. It is also time to stop bullying and demonising states and
people because they think differently.
It is also about time to look deeper to what people
are saying and doing. For instance, the Swedish Justice Minister, Morgan
Johansson attacked Prime Minister David Cameron on the immigration issue saying
he was “playing politics” and that Sweden granted many more asylum applications
that the United Kingdom. Unfortunately for Mr. Johansson, there are figures
that show that non-European foreigners in Sweden do not dwell that well: whereas the unemployment rate for Swedes is
at 7%, for non-Europeans is a staggering 28%! On the other hand, in the UK the
unemployment rate for Brits is 6% and for non-Europeans is 8%. So much for the evil British and the pristine Swedish.
The “producers” of refugees (the likes of Syria, Iraq,
Eritrea, etc) are “producing” masses of refugees. The “consumers”/recipients of
refugees are being overwhelmed by more refugees than they can or are willing to
take.
So, what is the way out?
Unfortunately, there really isn’t one.
THE REFUGEE “PRODUCERS”: the Middle East Wars raging on are complex,
multifaceted, entrenched, that feed on ethnic and sectarian fear and hatred and
which are compounded by the involvement of multiple foreign actors with their
own agendas. This means that the best solution which would be to deal with the
problem at the source is not an option in the foreseeable future.
THE NEIGHBOURS: The countries neighbouring the conflicts are split
into two groups: the ones that have not taken a significant number of refugees
(like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, or the Gulf States) do not give any sign of
overture to change their stance. The ones that have borne the brunt of the
effort have a limited economic, logistical and even political capability to
keep on receiving refugees. So, with the will not on one hand and the cannot
on the other, it is not realistic to expect that the Middle East can provide
much more in terms of refugee relief.
THE EUROPEAN REFUGEE “CONSUMERS”: This is where the attention is focused on. To be realistic, neither the take-every-refugee crowd, nor the no-entry sympathisers are tuned to
reality.
It is neither feasible nor fair to just kick every
would-be refugee out. It is neither feasible nor acceptable to many, to flood
small communities with a wave of refugees. You cannot look the other way and
pretend nothing is happening in Syria, but you cannot force refugees into
places where they are clearly not welcome. You do not want people to linger
indefinitely in refugee camps, but you do not want people to be attacked or
rejected by locals who do not want to change their ancestral modus vivendi. You
have a moral duty to help people in terrible distress and you have a moral and
political duty to respect your fellow citizens and electors.
There needs to be good sense and balance approaching
these issues. We do not live in an ideal world. Between receiving millions of
people and kicking them all out, there are a million other alternatives. Each
European country should find its point of equilibrium that mitigates the
refugee problem and accommodates its population’s sensitivities. Diktats from
Berlin or Brussels will only serve to increase feelings of revolt, resentment
and rejection. That is to no one’s benefit.
