Monday 17 October 2016

Refugee Protection; Pledges and Perilous Pathways


Between January and May of this year there were 2243 migrant deaths in the Mediterranean Sea as they attempted to reach Europe, an increase of 34% based on the same period in 2015. Despite these figures, state and media security discourse around the refugee crisis has mostly focused on EU borders and citizens and less so on the security of the people risking their lives on boats, the majority of whom are Syrian refugees. (Perkowski 2016) According to UNHCR, ‘At this rate 2016 will be the deadliest year on record in the Mediterranean sea.’
UNHCR is the organisation that has a legal obligation concerned with the protection of refugees including their ‘physical security’.  In 2015 it launched the ‘Special Mediterranean Initiative’ in response to the growing numbers of deaths.  In cooperation with EU member states, African and Middle Eastern states, the initiative proposes several actions including expanding ‘access to solutions’ through the creation of resettlement opportunities and other safe and legal avenues to Europe.  However states have moved ‘painfully slowly’ in fulfilling their commitments and have been accused of drawing back support in light of the ‘one in one out’ deal with Turkey.   The deal means that for every refugee (who has entered Europe illegally) in Greece that is returned to Turkey, Europe will resettle a Syrian refugee currently in Turkey who has not tried to enter Europe illegally, thus incentivising the use of legal avenues.  Critics are sceptical of both its legality and likelihood for success.
As Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan struggle to cope with the numbers of Syrian refugees even with EU funding, the preference of states to offer humanitarian aid far from their own borders as opposed to offering resettlement opportunities is highly apparent.  (Cuellar 2006) At the end of 2015 it was announced that Turkey alone will receive 3 billion euros from EU institutions and states to help 800,000 Syrian refugees within its borders but whether or not that will be enough to stem the flow of boats in the Mediterranean remains to be seen.  It won’t deter people trying to enter Europe via Italy’s shores from North Africa.
A small coalition of churches and NGOs in Italy has opted to directly intervene and create ‘humanitarian corridors’ to provide safe and legal passage to Syrian refugees via flights to Europe in a scheme that successfully piloted in February 2016 and is now being considered by governments such as Switzerland.  The project which also supports the integration of the refugees has been welcomed by the Italian government which has incurred none of the associated costs, raising questions about the responsibilities of states. 
Nicole Ostrand makes 3 recommendations regarding enhanced security for Syrian refugees beyond the neighbouring countries, all of which are focused on increasing opportunities for safe and legal movement.  They are largely in line with the UNHCR recommendations however there is an additional suggestion that refugees should be able to apply for protection through developed states embassies in the neighbouring countries. (Ostrand 2015)
However this seems unrealistic due to the lack of political will amongst European states, particularly in a time of rising xenophobia and the success of right-wing anti-immigration parties to resettle refugees.  (Hammerstad 2000) UNHCR efforts to reduce the numbers of refugees attempting to enter Europe via the Mediterranean and increase state resettlement quotas are limited due to its funding dependency from those very governments.  (Cuellar 2006)  Perhaps the Italian ‘Corridoi Umanitari’ initiative’s success derives from its non-governmental funding sources, a replication by the Swiss government may offer more insight.
In the meantime the desperation of refugees and migrants to reach Europe outweighs the fear of the perilous journey they must make to get there.

No comments:

Post a Comment