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 http://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2015/aug/04/refugee-nation-migration-jason-buzi

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Is creating a new nation for the world's refugees a good idea? Is creating a new nation for the world's refugees a good idea?
(about 1 hour later)
Two weeks ago real estate millionaire Jason Buzi launched his idea for a “Refuge Nation” in the global media. The basic premise is not new: to buy an under-populated area of land somewhere in the world and turn it into a territory for the world’s refugees to begin a new life. It combines the historic precedent of the origins of Buzi’s native Israel coupled with the visionary idealism of his Silicon Valley heritage. He argues that in a time of increasing need for refugee protection but declining political tolerance of refugees, radical solutions are needed.Two weeks ago real estate millionaire Jason Buzi launched his idea for a “Refuge Nation” in the global media. The basic premise is not new: to buy an under-populated area of land somewhere in the world and turn it into a territory for the world’s refugees to begin a new life. It combines the historic precedent of the origins of Buzi’s native Israel coupled with the visionary idealism of his Silicon Valley heritage. He argues that in a time of increasing need for refugee protection but declining political tolerance of refugees, radical solutions are needed.
What’s right with the idea?What’s right with the idea?
First, Buzi’s identification of the problem is spot on. We currently face a global displacement crisis. More people are displaced than at any time since the second world war. Of the 60 million displaced, nearly 20 million are refugees who have crossed an international border. Well over half of those are in so-called protracted refugee situations, having been in exile and often dependent on international assistance for more than five years. Long-term refugee encampment represents a tragic and unacceptable waste of humanity. Furthermore, with new crises like the Syria conflict, from which four million people have left the country as refugees, host countries like Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan lack the capacity to continue to host so many indefinitely. Meanwhile, the political willingness to continue to support growing numbers is declining from Australia to the Mediterranean to the Middle East.First, Buzi’s identification of the problem is spot on. We currently face a global displacement crisis. More people are displaced than at any time since the second world war. Of the 60 million displaced, nearly 20 million are refugees who have crossed an international border. Well over half of those are in so-called protracted refugee situations, having been in exile and often dependent on international assistance for more than five years. Long-term refugee encampment represents a tragic and unacceptable waste of humanity. Furthermore, with new crises like the Syria conflict, from which four million people have left the country as refugees, host countries like Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan lack the capacity to continue to host so many indefinitely. Meanwhile, the political willingness to continue to support growing numbers is declining from Australia to the Mediterranean to the Middle East.
Related: Innovation at Za’atari: how do refugees make tents and caravans into homes?Related: Innovation at Za’atari: how do refugees make tents and caravans into homes?
Secondly, we need innovative and creative solutions. At the heart of this must be a rethinking of the political geography of asylum. As Buzi implies, we have enough land and underdeveloped regions of the world. We need to be creative about how we think about territory; in a world of over seven billion, 20 million refugees is not that many. Second, we need innovative and creative solutions. At the heart of this must be a rethinking of the political geography of asylum. As Buzi implies, we have enough land and underdeveloped regions of the world. We need to be creative about how we think about territory; in a world of over seven billion, 20 million refugees is not that many.
Third, a key element of solutions to the crisis should be self-governance. Implicit in Buzi’s Refugee Nation idea is the notion that refugees could govern their own affairs. This recognition of the autonomy of refugee communities and their capacity to be economically and politically self-sufficient is long overdue. Too often, it has been assumed that refugees are dependent upon humanitarian assistance beyond the emergency phase of a crisis, when in practice they can exercise political and economic agency. Around the world, research has shown that under the right conditions, refugees are capable of building representative political structures as well as meaningfully engaging with markets.Third, a key element of solutions to the crisis should be self-governance. Implicit in Buzi’s Refugee Nation idea is the notion that refugees could govern their own affairs. This recognition of the autonomy of refugee communities and their capacity to be economically and politically self-sufficient is long overdue. Too often, it has been assumed that refugees are dependent upon humanitarian assistance beyond the emergency phase of a crisis, when in practice they can exercise political and economic agency. Around the world, research has shown that under the right conditions, refugees are capable of building representative political structures as well as meaningfully engaging with markets.
What’s wrong with the idea?What’s wrong with the idea?
There are a host of issues relating to identifying an appropriate territory and building a new multinational political community from scratch. The international community’s track record of artificial nation-building is not strong. However, setting aside the practical challenges, there are three major conceptual issues.There are a host of issues relating to identifying an appropriate territory and building a new multinational political community from scratch. The international community’s track record of artificial nation-building is not strong. However, setting aside the practical challenges, there are three major conceptual issues.
First, the proposal risks conflating refugees and stateless persons. Refugees are not stateless; they still have citizenship of their country of origin. The preferred solution for most is to return home when the situation changes. Of course, repatriation is a remote hope for many refugees but for some asylum is definitely temporary.First, the proposal risks conflating refugees and stateless persons. Refugees are not stateless; they still have citizenship of their country of origin. The preferred solution for most is to return home when the situation changes. Of course, repatriation is a remote hope for many refugees but for some asylum is definitely temporary.
Related: Lesvos: where holiday paradise and refugee crisis convergeRelated: Lesvos: where holiday paradise and refugee crisis converge
Second, the idea is premised upon exclusion rather than inclusion. It implies that refugees should not be integrated within existing political communities but confined to separate communities. In discussion on social media this has been likened to a leper colony. One of them most important challenges we face is to encourage states to temporarily integrate refugees, so sending a message of exclusion is potentially dangerous. Refugees have much to contribute economically, socially and culturally to host states, and the logic of exclusion risks reinforcing the idea of refugees as a burden. In our own research we have been able to highlight how given the right policies, refugees can make a positive economic contribution to host societies if the right policies are adopted.Second, the idea is premised upon exclusion rather than inclusion. It implies that refugees should not be integrated within existing political communities but confined to separate communities. In discussion on social media this has been likened to a leper colony. One of them most important challenges we face is to encourage states to temporarily integrate refugees, so sending a message of exclusion is potentially dangerous. Refugees have much to contribute economically, socially and culturally to host states, and the logic of exclusion risks reinforcing the idea of refugees as a burden. In our own research we have been able to highlight how given the right policies, refugees can make a positive economic contribution to host societies if the right policies are adopted.
Third, there is an important question about whether the Refugee Nation would be formed on the basis of coercion or consent. In a globalised world, given freedom of choice, people ultimately want to choose where they live, and are likely to seek to move to where their friends, family and greatest opportunities lie. It seems likely that in order to group people onto an artificially created territory one would either have to make it utopian to be attractive or risk encouraging other states to coerce refugees to go there. Examples of islands used to host refugees – Australia’s use of Nauru or the US’s previous use of Guantanamo for Haitian asylum seekers – are not auspicious, having led to significant human rights violations. To be workable, a Refugee Nation idea would need to be based on freedom of choice and the lure of opportunity. In contrast to past precedents such as the creation of Israel or Liberia, it is not obvious that “refugee” would be a sufficiently strong unifying identity to encourage disparate populations to live together.Third, there is an important question about whether the Refugee Nation would be formed on the basis of coercion or consent. In a globalised world, given freedom of choice, people ultimately want to choose where they live, and are likely to seek to move to where their friends, family and greatest opportunities lie. It seems likely that in order to group people onto an artificially created territory one would either have to make it utopian to be attractive or risk encouraging other states to coerce refugees to go there. Examples of islands used to host refugees – Australia’s use of Nauru or the US’s previous use of Guantanamo for Haitian asylum seekers – are not auspicious, having led to significant human rights violations. To be workable, a Refugee Nation idea would need to be based on freedom of choice and the lure of opportunity. In contrast to past precedents such as the creation of Israel or Liberia, it is not obvious that “refugee” would be a sufficiently strong unifying identity to encourage disparate populations to live together.
What’s next?What’s next?
The proposal for a Refugee Nation should not be totally dismissed. The idea is most usefully deployed as a metaphor for creative thinking about the political geography of asylum. Rather than actually seeking one single territory in the world to house the world’s refugees, Refugee Nation should offer a source of inspiration for ways in which we can collectively reimagine and reinvigorate asylum. These should work to offer autonomy and opportunity for refugees, based on innovative and non-traditional conceptions of territory. A range of models could support this.The proposal for a Refugee Nation should not be totally dismissed. The idea is most usefully deployed as a metaphor for creative thinking about the political geography of asylum. Rather than actually seeking one single territory in the world to house the world’s refugees, Refugee Nation should offer a source of inspiration for ways in which we can collectively reimagine and reinvigorate asylum. These should work to offer autonomy and opportunity for refugees, based on innovative and non-traditional conceptions of territory. A range of models could support this.
First, trusteeship offers a historical precedent. As Robin Cohen has highlighted, during the inter-war period the League of Nations managed territories in the collective interest, and such an idea might be used today to host and protect refugees. Cohen is right to suggest that internationally managed territories might offer creative ways to liberate refugee governance from restrictive host states.First, trusteeship offers a historical precedent. As Robin Cohen has highlighted, during the inter-war period the League of Nations managed territories in the collective interest, and such an idea might be used today to host and protect refugees. Cohen is right to suggest that internationally managed territories might offer creative ways to liberate refugee governance from restrictive host states.
Related: ‘In the spirit of the Kindertransport we want to extend a warm welcome to Syria’s refugees’Related: ‘In the spirit of the Kindertransport we want to extend a warm welcome to Syria’s refugees’
Second, zonal development provides a neglected and potentially interesting solution. There are historical precedents of refugees being located to underdeveloped border regions, often making a significant difference to long-term development. Such ideas could be revived. In Jordan, for instance, the King Hussein bin Talal Development Zone is a special economic zone just 15 minutes drive from the Za’atari refugee camp. It currently lacks two things: labour and investment. Yet, reconceived, it might offer an opportunity for refugees to have greater autonomy while contributing to the host economy’s national development strategy.Second, zonal development provides a neglected and potentially interesting solution. There are historical precedents of refugees being located to underdeveloped border regions, often making a significant difference to long-term development. Such ideas could be revived. In Jordan, for instance, the King Hussein bin Talal Development Zone is a special economic zone just 15 minutes drive from the Za’atari refugee camp. It currently lacks two things: labour and investment. Yet, reconceived, it might offer an opportunity for refugees to have greater autonomy while contributing to the host economy’s national development strategy.
Third, Paul Romer’s idea of charter cities offers a way of creating designed urban areas in which a particular community’s needs could be met. If refugee camps could be rethought with the opportunities of, say, a university campus or a functioning city, they might offer opportunities for human flourishing, built upon representation and self-governance, even on a temporary basis. Urban planning offers many insights into how to build vibrant, cosmopolitan cities, and yet too rarely are these lessons and insights applied to refugees settlements.Third, Paul Romer’s idea of charter cities offers a way of creating designed urban areas in which a particular community’s needs could be met. If refugee camps could be rethought with the opportunities of, say, a university campus or a functioning city, they might offer opportunities for human flourishing, built upon representation and self-governance, even on a temporary basis. Urban planning offers many insights into how to build vibrant, cosmopolitan cities, and yet too rarely are these lessons and insights applied to refugees settlements.
In my brief exchanges with Buzi, he has revealed himself to be open to criticism and dialogue, and eager to make a difference. Even if the current proposal is flawed, innovative and creative solutions to refugee challenges must be welcomed. Political leadership and imagination are certainly needed more than ever, and if Buzi’s ideas can trigger that his presence in this debate could offer a valuable intervention.In my brief exchanges with Buzi, he has revealed himself to be open to criticism and dialogue, and eager to make a difference. Even if the current proposal is flawed, innovative and creative solutions to refugee challenges must be welcomed. Political leadership and imagination are certainly needed more than ever, and if Buzi’s ideas can trigger that his presence in this debate could offer a valuable intervention.
Alexander Betts is professor of refugee and forced migration studies and director of the University of Oxford’s Refugee Studies Centre. Follow @alexander_betts on Twitter.Alexander Betts is professor of refugee and forced migration studies and director of the University of Oxford’s Refugee Studies Centre. Follow @alexander_betts on Twitter.
Join our community of development professionals and humanitarians. Follow@GuardianGDP on Twitter.Join our community of development professionals and humanitarians. Follow@GuardianGDP on Twitter.