This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/19/theresa-may-refugees-welfare-migrant
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Theresa May isn’t interested in refugees’ welfare. She just wants fewer of them in Britain | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| New and more effective. That’s how Theresa May describes the migration policy she proposed to the world on Monday ahead of the UN general assembly . The prime minister wants to combat migration by helping more refugees to stay in the first country they reach; by distinguishing better between people fleeing war, and those fleeing poverty; and by giving countries more licence to protect their borders by force, or with a fence. Wrapped within this three-part plan is the implicit idea that it is better to enable developing countries than to offer sanctuary to the refugees stuck in them. | New and more effective. That’s how Theresa May describes the migration policy she proposed to the world on Monday ahead of the UN general assembly . The prime minister wants to combat migration by helping more refugees to stay in the first country they reach; by distinguishing better between people fleeing war, and those fleeing poverty; and by giving countries more licence to protect their borders by force, or with a fence. Wrapped within this three-part plan is the implicit idea that it is better to enable developing countries than to offer sanctuary to the refugees stuck in them. |
| In the global context, May’s comments are something of a sideshow; a British leader’s interventions in world affairs arguably matter less today than at any stage in the past few centuries. But it’s useful to examine May’s vision. | In the global context, May’s comments are something of a sideshow; a British leader’s interventions in world affairs arguably matter less today than at any stage in the past few centuries. But it’s useful to examine May’s vision. |
| In short: it is neither particularly effective, nor new. The first plank of her plan – the suggestion that more refugees should be encouraged to stay in the first country they reach – is not a new idea. This is the status quo – and the situation that is driving migration in the first place. | In short: it is neither particularly effective, nor new. The first plank of her plan – the suggestion that more refugees should be encouraged to stay in the first country they reach – is not a new idea. This is the status quo – and the situation that is driving migration in the first place. |
| Just look at the statistics. More than 86% of refugees live in the developing world, and the vast majority of them live in the first country they reach. Almost all of the refugees in Turkey, which has the world’s largest refugee population, have crossed the border from neighbouring Syria or Iraq. Lebanon hosts more refugees per capita and per square kilometre than any other; its 1.2 million Syrian refugees also came from next door. The Somalis at the world’s largest refugee camp in Kenya came from the next country along. The three million Afghans in Pakistan crossed just one border too. | Just look at the statistics. More than 86% of refugees live in the developing world, and the vast majority of them live in the first country they reach. Almost all of the refugees in Turkey, which has the world’s largest refugee population, have crossed the border from neighbouring Syria or Iraq. Lebanon hosts more refugees per capita and per square kilometre than any other; its 1.2 million Syrian refugees also came from next door. The Somalis at the world’s largest refugee camp in Kenya came from the next country along. The three million Afghans in Pakistan crossed just one border too. |
| So the problem is not that too few refugees are staying in neighbouring countries. It’s that too many are forced to do so. Since the west has refused to resettle meaningful numbers of refugees from the Middle East, or from Pakistan or east Africa, those refugees have been forced to choose between a life of limbo – in places where they do not have access to education, healthcare or work rights – or irregular migration to the west. And in 2015, a significant minority chose the latter, leading to what we have termed the European refugee crisis. | So the problem is not that too few refugees are staying in neighbouring countries. It’s that too many are forced to do so. Since the west has refused to resettle meaningful numbers of refugees from the Middle East, or from Pakistan or east Africa, those refugees have been forced to choose between a life of limbo – in places where they do not have access to education, healthcare or work rights – or irregular migration to the west. And in 2015, a significant minority chose the latter, leading to what we have termed the European refugee crisis. |
| If May wants a new and effective policy, then organised resettlement – and the provision of safe and legal routes – is one option available to her. Instead, Britain was at the heart of behind-the-scenes moves to take out a pledge to resettle 10% of the world’s refugees from a new treaty signed on Monday at the UN summit in New York. | If May wants a new and effective policy, then organised resettlement – and the provision of safe and legal routes – is one option available to her. Instead, Britain was at the heart of behind-the-scenes moves to take out a pledge to resettle 10% of the world’s refugees from a new treaty signed on Monday at the UN summit in New York. |
| What about the increased border protection May speaks of? It’s certainly not new. This has been the knee-jerk migration policy of choice in Europe over the past 15 years. It’s not very effective, with walls simply shifting migrants elsewhere, and often forces them into the hands of smugglers. Increased policing of the Canary islands’ maritime borders, and ever-higher fences between Morocco and Spain, proved meaningless once migration routes shifted through Libya. Greece and Bulgaria’s two fences along their respective Turkish borders saw migrants take new routes to the Greek islands. Hungary’s Serbian fence routed people west through Croatia. And while Macedonia’s fence along its Greek border has significantly reduced Balkan migration numbers this year, at least 25,000 people have still passed through the Balkans since the Macedonian fenceborder was sealed in March. | What about the increased border protection May speaks of? It’s certainly not new. This has been the knee-jerk migration policy of choice in Europe over the past 15 years. It’s not very effective, with walls simply shifting migrants elsewhere, and often forces them into the hands of smugglers. Increased policing of the Canary islands’ maritime borders, and ever-higher fences between Morocco and Spain, proved meaningless once migration routes shifted through Libya. Greece and Bulgaria’s two fences along their respective Turkish borders saw migrants take new routes to the Greek islands. Hungary’s Serbian fence routed people west through Croatia. And while Macedonia’s fence along its Greek border has significantly reduced Balkan migration numbers this year, at least 25,000 people have still passed through the Balkans since the Macedonian fenceborder was sealed in March. |
| What’s next on May’s shopping list? Differentiation between refugees and economic migrants. Taken at face value, this suggestion is at best misguided. One of the lessons I’ve learnt from reporting on migration in more than 20 countries is that the line between who’s fleeing poverty and who’s fleeing war is rarely clear-cut. How do you classify someone who left Senegal to find work in Libya, but then fled Libya to escape a war? What about a Syrian who reached Turkey from bombed-out Aleppo, and then left Turkey because he wasn’t allowed to work? | What’s next on May’s shopping list? Differentiation between refugees and economic migrants. Taken at face value, this suggestion is at best misguided. One of the lessons I’ve learnt from reporting on migration in more than 20 countries is that the line between who’s fleeing poverty and who’s fleeing war is rarely clear-cut. How do you classify someone who left Senegal to find work in Libya, but then fled Libya to escape a war? What about a Syrian who reached Turkey from bombed-out Aleppo, and then left Turkey because he wasn’t allowed to work? |
| May isn’t interested in such nuances. She isn’t after better definitions – she simply wants to change them so that fewer vulnerable people qualify for legal protection in Britain. Again, this isn’t new. Last year, the Home Office, which she ran, adopted highly controversial guidelines that made it far harder for Eritreans to qualify for asylum in Britain. This change in classification didn’t make things better – a few months later a UN committee accused the Eritrean government of committing widespread crimes against humanity against its own people. But it did reduce the number of people able to seek sanctuary in the UK. | May isn’t interested in such nuances. She isn’t after better definitions – she simply wants to change them so that fewer vulnerable people qualify for legal protection in Britain. Again, this isn’t new. Last year, the Home Office, which she ran, adopted highly controversial guidelines that made it far harder for Eritreans to qualify for asylum in Britain. This change in classification didn’t make things better – a few months later a UN committee accused the Eritrean government of committing widespread crimes against humanity against its own people. But it did reduce the number of people able to seek sanctuary in the UK. |
| Finally, there’s the implicit suggestion that investment in developing countries should be pursued at the expense of resettlement programmes. Development is indeed essential in the general sense, and in the long term it may reduce migration. But migration researchers have shown it is no silver bullet. As specialists such as Hein de Haas have explained: “Emigration initially goes up with levels of development, and only goes down once countries move into high development categories. It indicates that if poor countries become wealthier, emigration will increase.” | Finally, there’s the implicit suggestion that investment in developing countries should be pursued at the expense of resettlement programmes. Development is indeed essential in the general sense, and in the long term it may reduce migration. But migration researchers have shown it is no silver bullet. As specialists such as Hein de Haas have explained: “Emigration initially goes up with levels of development, and only goes down once countries move into high development categories. It indicates that if poor countries become wealthier, emigration will increase.” |
| The world certainly needs new and more effective means of addressing protracted refugee crises. But the ideas set out by Theresa May don’t fall in either category. | The world certainly needs new and more effective means of addressing protracted refugee crises. But the ideas set out by Theresa May don’t fall in either category. |