A disturbing fault line is at the heart of global politics
today. Our world is more interconnected than ever before, and yet the
mechanisms and means for managing globalization seem less adequate to the
challenges. The result is predictable: a backlash against global engagement
born of frustration, fatigue, and fear.
Introduction;
By the end of 2019, 70.8 million individuals had been
forcibly displaced by conflict or violence, and the number of refugees globally
rose to 25.9 million in 2018, up from 25.4 million in 2017, and setting a new
record, according to newly released UNHCR report and World Bank
estimates. The number of people seeking international protection outside of
their country of origin has increased 70% since 2011.
More than half of the world’s refugees came from three
countries: Syria (5.5 million), Afghanistan (2.5 million), and South Sudan (2.3
million). And most refugees—84% of the ones under UNHCR’s mandate—remain
in low- and middle-income countries, close to conflict, The number
of refugees from Syria, South Sudan, and Myanmar has increased rapidly over the
last couple of years.
This crisis, however, is much deeper than sheer numbers or
unimaginable human suffering. It is:
·
a crisis of the post-World War II paradigm
underpinning our refugee structures, which has been unable to cope with
globalization’s complexities and is now struggling for relevance
·
a crisis of the conflicting narratives for some
of the greatest social challenges exemplified by national and international
responses to refugees: from issues of human rights, xenophobia, sexism and
economic protectionism, to terrorism and climate change
·
a crisis of the lack of easy solutions to the
main root cause of mass migration — growing and radical global inequality that
includes the absence of civil order, physical safety and social and cultural
structures necessary for people to live a dignified, fulfilling life, made ever
more widely known through digital media of a hyper-connected world.
So what are some of the fears that are stirred up by
refugees? Are they justified? What do they lead to?
The economic
argument:
A widespread, but unfounded, fear is that an influx of
refugees will drive up competition for work, push down wages, or drain the
public coffers — a notion that feeds a rising global appetite for economic
protectionism. The IMF has estimated that in the short term, the macroeconomic
effect from the refugee surge is likely to be a growth in GDP of 0.1% for the
EU as a whole and short-term cost to the EU will be 0.19% of GDP to public
expenditure. We are talking about fractions of 1% net cost.
Australians know the economic dead-end folly of
protectionism. In 1890, Australia was the richest country in the world when it
chose to protect that success with quotas, tariffs, and regulations — a
misadventure that dropped it to 20th and took decades to reverse. False emotive
perceptions must not drive the economic trajectory of our countries.
The refugee crisis is also fueling the rise of racism,
xenophobia and Islamophobia. The attempted US travel bans have been
characterized as a response to a ‘phantom menace’, given that the chance that
an American is killed by a refugee terrorist is one in 3.6 billion per year.
Yet inciting Islamophobia plays into the ISIS recruitment strategy: the more a
group can be seen to hate Islam, the more certain Muslims are likely to accept
that their future is in joining, not rejecting, the Caliphate. Pointing the
Islamophobic or xenophobic finger at refugees and immigrants exacerbates the
conditions leading to radicalization and will backfire when preventing the
rising phenomenon of homegrown terrorists.
At the same time it is unhelpful and unfair to lump all
concerns raised about certain behaviours or belief systems of refugees and
immigrants onto the racist pile. There is a pervasive tension between “freedom
of speech” and offensive, discriminatory or racist talk. Expressions of
“culturally-correlated irritations” could be more productively engaged with
scientifically, examining whether or not they really pose any threat to
existing societal values. Concurrently, host countries should be able to have
open debates and evidence-based policies as to how to uphold the cultural and
societal norms that attracted refugees in the first place, with a focus on
promoting societal cooperation and peace..
One particular societal value — that of gender equality — is
worth specific mention. #ValerieHudson, co-author of the 2012 book #SexandWorldPeace,
demonstrated through empirical evidence how “the very best predictor of a
state’s peacefulness is not its level of wealth, its level of democracy, or its
ethno-religious identity … it is how well its women are treated”. As we
incorporate refugees and immigrants in the evolution of our multicultural
societies, a core objective must be the empowerment of women.
‘Real refugees’ vs
‘economic migrants’:
At the heart of the breakdown of our existing refugee
processes is a lack of solution for the fundamental dichotomy of the modern
migration narrative — how do you determine whether someone is a ‘real refugee’
in distress, or a ‘fake refugee’ pursuing economic advancement not available at
home? Yet this is a false dichotomy.
This breakdown is, I believe, symptomatic of an ever-rising
key tension between two deeply held values in our existing liberal world order:
human rights and the existence of sovereign nations. In the aftermath of World
War II, Western policymakers set out to build a global system that would
prevent a repeat of the disastrous failures of international diplomacy during
the interwar period. They concluded that achieving both economic
development and world peace needed free markets, human rights, the
rule of law, and elected governments held accountable by independent
judiciaries, free press and vibrant civil societies. The main institutions
created as part of this post-war liberal order — the UN, NATO, WTO, IMF, World
Bank and the G-20 — together have influenced almost every aspect of the modern
world but now are under attack by countervailing forces.
Rising domestic hostility towards refugees and immigrants is
fuelling resentment towards supranational authorities and their ‘irritating
meddling’ in the ability of sovereign nations to deal with refugees and migrants
as they see fit. Emphasis on the tension between individual rights to seek
asylum and self-governance by sovereign nations as seen through the lens of the
refugee crisis is, therefore, self-serving in the current political climate.
By constantly challenging the legitimacy of refugee claims,
governments can delay and stall meeting their international obligations,
creating the possibility of by-passing them altogether. Increasingly,
governments see political advantage in being hard on refugees as citizens
priorize their own interests over any moral imperative to help needy foreigners
and reward their governments for standing up to supranational authorities.
Our world order’s legitimacy is undermined when leaders
consistently seem to interpret the rules as they see fit, ignoring key norms.
Using the refugee crisis to delegitimize our global authorities and historical
agreements slowly but surely chips away at the foundations of our post-war
prosperity, democracy and peace. While the current world order is by no means
perfect, it is all that we have in terms of fora and structures for
international
negotiations and accountability and we strike it down, consciously or
unknowingly, at our peril.
The perverse triad —
oil, instability, refugees:
The final, most fundamental, reason we must care about the
refugee crisis is its relationship with oil. A perverse triad links refugees
and oil: our dependency on it produces both political and environmental
instability which generates refugees, and terrorist groups sell oil to fund
conflicts which generate yet more refugees.
ISIS, which controls many oil fields in Syria, see oil as
critical for financing its vision of an Islamic state. In Syria today, ISIS
produces an estimated 40,000 barrels per day, earning about $1.5 million per
day. They sell their oil at the wellhead to traders as well as to the Syrian
rebels fighting them. Local hospitals, shops, farming and industrial machines
are fuelled by ISIS oil. This has created a central dilemma in the
international coalition’s fight against ISIS: how to bring down the Caliphate
without fundamentally disrupting the life of the estimated 10 million civilians
in areas under ISIS control?
Not only do conflicts over oil directly generate refugees,
the climate change caused by burning oil will be a “threat multiplier” in
creating resource conflicts and mass refugee populations fleeing droughts,
firestorms, heatwaves, floods and desertification.
Exemplifying our
greatest challenges:
In conclusion, then, we must care about the global
refugee crisis because it exemplifies some of the greatest challenges facing
our global institutions and liberal world order today.
·
A root cause is growing global inequity fuelled
by our addiction to oil. Remedies lie in global human development efforts, especially
in educating and empowering women, and a definitive transition to a sustainable
energy paradigm.
·
Concurrently, we need to reject use of the
refugee crisis as pernicious justification for economic protectionism, racism
and Islamophobia, as well as the toxic undermining of our supranational
authorities.
·
If we do want to restructure our current world
order, we must do this conscientiously, with thought and consideration for the
hierarchy of moral and social priorities we are willing to live by.
As #HannahArendt wrote, “The manifestation of the wind of
thought is not knowledge but the ability to tell right from wrong, beautiful
from ugly. …Thinking gives people the strength to prevent catastrophes in these
rare moments when the chips are down”. It is now critical that wherever we come
from, we both care and think deeply about our attitudes and policies towards
refugees.
Furthermore, even though
we live in an era where more walls are going up between nations, but its evidence
that this does not stop migration. And the evidence for the economic benefits
for open borders is unambiguous. According to some estimates, opening the
world’s borders could increase global GDP by US$100 trillion. We just need to
take a bold step and give refugees a right already enjoyed by some – the right
to move.
Finally, we must find
ways to lower the number of displaced people worldwide, by preventing and
solving the conflicts that drive them from their homes. We must try to rally
people and nations to act together based on common interests and universal
aspirations for security, dignity and equality: understanding that this does
not come at the expense of our safety and economic well-being at home, but is
an essential requirement when facing problems of international dimensions. #GlobalCrisis #Refugees #HumanRights #Humanity #StandWithRefugees
No comments:
Post a Comment