Getting to action on the global refugee crisis: Senator Omidvar
Tags
This article originally appeared in the September 19 edition of the Globe and Mail.
In the year since the tragic death of Alan Kurdi brought the plight of Syrian refugees to the world’s attention, we have seen an outpouring of public support. More than 30,000 Syrians have found new homes in Canada, over 10,000 of those through private sponsorship. Hundreds of thousands more have migrated to Europe. And yet, efforts of the global community do not come close to addressing the crisis.
Millions of Syrians still reside in temporary camps. They are not the only displaced group, as conflict, poverty and natural disasters in Africa and Central Asia have led to a record large movement of refugees and migrants worldwide. It is a humanitarian crisis of historic proportions compounded by a global governance model that is fundamentally broken. Our approach uses the same infrastructure for resettling European refugees of the Second World War.
On September 19, the United Nations convenes a summit on refugees and migrants in New York with the goal of coordinating an international response to the crisis. It is followed by a leaders’ summit on refugees on September 20, co-hosted by President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
It is an opportunity for leadership on resettlement and relief solutions. Asking the right questions is an important part of getting there.
First, what do we mean when we talk about “refugees”? As defined by law from the 1950s, people must be outside their home country before they count as refugees. This fails to take into account over 40 million internally displaced persons worldwide who are within national borders but cannot return home. This includes millions of Syrians, and millions more in Iraq, Colombia and sub-Saharan Africa. For them, the global community has no clear framework for action. Other migrants who are outside their home countries may similarly lack the refugee label but fit the profile of someone needing humanitarian resettlement. How should our new times inform new language, if not new law?
Many refugees are unable to return to their homes in the foreseeable future, if ever. But refugee camps are built on the assumption of near-term repatriation. They instead become enduring homes, many of which fail to enable dignified living. Even those that manage minimum conditions of security and health, like some well-run camps in Greece, can be unbearable places of limbo that squander the work and education potential of residents. How do we move towards a sustainable model of resettlement that enables long-term social and economic integration?
Hosts of the largest numbers of refugees are those closest to crises like Turkey, Lebanon, Pakistan, and Ethiopia. They pay political and financial costs. When already limited government resources are stretched even thinner, living conditions can get worse for both host communities and newcomers. How do countries like Canada, separated by luck of geography, share the protection responsibility that currently falls on neighbouring countries?
Other legal and administrative issues present their own challenges. Visa and airline policies induce refugees to forego safe commercial flights and instead risk dangerous boat crossings on the Mediterranean. Inconsistent policies and attitudes within Europe towards refugees have led to “asylum shopping.” People go where they can find welcome and opportunity: Mostly to Germany and Scandinavia. And restrictions on legal employment of migrants leave refugee communities economically isolated, and thus more vulnerable to traffickers and other exploitation. How do we enable safe, legal pathways to meet the mobility demand?
Policy barriers to integration persist despite what we know about investing in refugees. Research by economist Philippe Legrain shows that every 1 euro invested in welcoming refugees yields 3 euros in dividends. How do we enable refugees to be productive, contributing members of new communities upon arrival?
Against this backdrop of issues, UN Refugee Agency chief Filippo Grandi said, a “spirit of unity … badly needs to prevail.” Grandi is right when it comes to shared principles and action. But the world just as badly needs independent leadership from positive disruptors like Germany, which opened its doors to millions, and Canada, which gives its citizens a uniquely active role in resettlement through private sponsorship. What innovations from countries like Germany and Canada can be replicated by others? How can we enable new leaders and untested models to emerge?
Questions only take us so far. Summits are useful when they move us to question, but they are successful when they drive us to action.
Source: the Globe and Mail
This article originally appeared in the September 19 edition of the Globe and Mail.
In the year since the tragic death of Alan Kurdi brought the plight of Syrian refugees to the world’s attention, we have seen an outpouring of public support. More than 30,000 Syrians have found new homes in Canada, over 10,000 of those through private sponsorship. Hundreds of thousands more have migrated to Europe. And yet, efforts of the global community do not come close to addressing the crisis.
Millions of Syrians still reside in temporary camps. They are not the only displaced group, as conflict, poverty and natural disasters in Africa and Central Asia have led to a record large movement of refugees and migrants worldwide. It is a humanitarian crisis of historic proportions compounded by a global governance model that is fundamentally broken. Our approach uses the same infrastructure for resettling European refugees of the Second World War.
On September 19, the United Nations convenes a summit on refugees and migrants in New York with the goal of coordinating an international response to the crisis. It is followed by a leaders’ summit on refugees on September 20, co-hosted by President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
It is an opportunity for leadership on resettlement and relief solutions. Asking the right questions is an important part of getting there.
First, what do we mean when we talk about “refugees”? As defined by law from the 1950s, people must be outside their home country before they count as refugees. This fails to take into account over 40 million internally displaced persons worldwide who are within national borders but cannot return home. This includes millions of Syrians, and millions more in Iraq, Colombia and sub-Saharan Africa. For them, the global community has no clear framework for action. Other migrants who are outside their home countries may similarly lack the refugee label but fit the profile of someone needing humanitarian resettlement. How should our new times inform new language, if not new law?
Many refugees are unable to return to their homes in the foreseeable future, if ever. But refugee camps are built on the assumption of near-term repatriation. They instead become enduring homes, many of which fail to enable dignified living. Even those that manage minimum conditions of security and health, like some well-run camps in Greece, can be unbearable places of limbo that squander the work and education potential of residents. How do we move towards a sustainable model of resettlement that enables long-term social and economic integration?
Hosts of the largest numbers of refugees are those closest to crises like Turkey, Lebanon, Pakistan, and Ethiopia. They pay political and financial costs. When already limited government resources are stretched even thinner, living conditions can get worse for both host communities and newcomers. How do countries like Canada, separated by luck of geography, share the protection responsibility that currently falls on neighbouring countries?
Other legal and administrative issues present their own challenges. Visa and airline policies induce refugees to forego safe commercial flights and instead risk dangerous boat crossings on the Mediterranean. Inconsistent policies and attitudes within Europe towards refugees have led to “asylum shopping.” People go where they can find welcome and opportunity: Mostly to Germany and Scandinavia. And restrictions on legal employment of migrants leave refugee communities economically isolated, and thus more vulnerable to traffickers and other exploitation. How do we enable safe, legal pathways to meet the mobility demand?
Policy barriers to integration persist despite what we know about investing in refugees. Research by economist Philippe Legrain shows that every 1 euro invested in welcoming refugees yields 3 euros in dividends. How do we enable refugees to be productive, contributing members of new communities upon arrival?
Against this backdrop of issues, UN Refugee Agency chief Filippo Grandi said, a “spirit of unity … badly needs to prevail.” Grandi is right when it comes to shared principles and action. But the world just as badly needs independent leadership from positive disruptors like Germany, which opened its doors to millions, and Canada, which gives its citizens a uniquely active role in resettlement through private sponsorship. What innovations from countries like Germany and Canada can be replicated by others? How can we enable new leaders and untested models to emerge?
Questions only take us so far. Summits are useful when they move us to question, but they are successful when they drive us to action.
Source: the Globe and Mail