We & the unsolvable asylum crisis

We & the unsolvable asylum crisis

By Malik Sitez

The first part

  1. Review on factors of crisis

After the end of the Cold War, this is the second time that Europe saw the refugee crisis. The first time after breakup of federal Yugoslavia and its aftermath that caused the Civil War (the early nineties of last century) in this vast territory, and hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers went to Europe Union. At that time, social democracy movements in European Union had extensive authority and conservative nationalist parties were not powerful enough. On the other hand, Europeans needed preparations to resolve the crisis in the aftermath of the Cold War. The other thing that facilitate the resolution of this crisis was that the refugees came from the geography of Europe and European Union as coordinating body felt responsible for resolving the crisis. At that time, European Union provided a great resource for this particular crisis and took policy convergence and integration of the refugees. As a result, all the governments of Western Europe, North and South America in terms of population and resources accepted the Yugoslav refugees.

Six years ago the second round of crisis, the revolution in the “Arab Spring” started in 2010 with the expansion of the Syrian civil war and peaked in March 2011. Arab Spring after a year, changed to “winter Arab’’ and instead of becoming a good opportunity for the Middle East it brought crisis. Arab Spring crisis was followed by three civil wars: Yemen’s civil war, Libya’s and Syrian civil war. However, the continuing war in Iraq intensified this crisis. Arab Spring caused a political crisis in the government of Egypt. The political crisis in Egypt even affected Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco. On the other hand, the religious crisis in the Middle East flared up. Saudi Arabia and Iran by using religious hegemony in the war region of Yemen, Bahrain caused intergovernmental social instability in Lebanon and in the Middle East. This approach even affected the peaceful and wealthy states like the UAE, Qatar and Jordan in their stance against Iran. In the meantime, Israel due to absence of regional integration in the Middle East exacerbated the crisis.

Extent activities of Islamic State of Iraq and the Shaam (ISIL) from Iraq to Syria and occupying strategic locations on the Syrian border (especially in Raqqa, al-bukamal, Shaddade, Al-Basayrah and Talabyat) to Iraq (especially in Mosul, Fallujah, Tikrit, Ramadi and Baiji) and Turkey, brought the Middle East crisis. Meanwhile Daeesh began crimes against humanity, particularly genocide of Shia in areas which were under their control in Syria and Iraq.  Hundreds of thousands residents of cities under occupation in Iraq and Syria lost their composure to save themselves from death. As a result, about four hundred thousands of people were killed in wars in the Middle East and nearly four and a half million people from Syria, Iraq and Yemen became Refugees and were homeless.

The White House could not run a good solution to overthrow Daeesh establishment. Opposition of The White House Office to the regime of Bashar Assad in Syria, supporting combat troops of Iraq and strategic conflict with Iran, is showcasing activities of America against the Islamic State.

Middle East crisis went out of boundaries when Russia involved in the Syrian war. Russians in supporting the Assad regime started extensive airstrikes against the Islamic State resources. This approach prevailed Paradoxical situation in the region. However, the Russians and the Americans fought a common enemy, but friends and strategic partners of both in the region were different. Americans relied on Saudi Arabia and Turkey while Russians on Syria and Iran.

This strategic contrasts of Americans and Russians were the cause of downfall of relations between Turkey and Russia and due to which crisis happened to be in the broader range. Political instability, brutal long-range wars in Syria, political instability and ideological crisis in Iraq caused millions to be displaced in the big cities and the borders of Middle Eastern states were flooded with people. It gathered a large quantity to Jordan, Turkey and other neighboring countries and the Middle East was stormed moderately.

Second part

2 Three Trapped routes with a common goal

On the other hand Afghanistan was held with complex fluctuations. National unity government in the country was the result of a political deal that the Obama doctrine was imposed on the Afghans. Fraud and widespread violations of electoral legitimacy crisis, the political structure crisis, the crisis of the rule of law, inconsistently in the functions of national unity government programs, activation of headquarters of the ISIS in Afghanistan, insecurity, withdrawal of the international community institutions, to fears of limiting international support in Afghanistan, International non-governmental organizations in Afghanistan were reduced because citizens become distrustful towards their future more than ever. Therefore, a large number of Afghans decided to leave the country at any expense.

In fact, emigration from three massive paths of Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan to Europe began almost simultaneously. Route connecting all three ways of migration to Europe ways via Turkey’s border with Greece. Afghans illegally and legally moved to Turkey and from there through the Mediterranean Sea moved toward Greece and Europe.

Iraqi and Syrian borders with Turkey and through illegal channels reached the Turkish border and from there took on the path of Greece and Europe. Turkey being the passageway received about three and a half million refugees in the past two years, and nearly a million refugees crossing Greece went to the Europe Union member states in order to seek asylum. refugees after passing Turkey and Greece through Maqdonia, Hungarian and other states and Eastern Europe by crossing the border from Austria to Western Europe and from there to countries in western and northern Europe the demand asylum.

3American’s approach to crisis

United States of America has assumed responsibility for accepting ten thousand refugees. This figure seems too small proportion for the world’s million refugee crisis.

Resolution 1386 of UN Security Council the international community that does military operations in Afghanistan, was legitimized under the leadership of the United States of America and formalized Resolution 1441, approved in November 2002, the UN Security Council to intervene in Iraq, suffered the lack of definition and interpretation of “responsibility” of actors of war and government’s role in the war. This “deficit” have caused governments, not to take responsibility for the consequences of the war in Afghanistan and the Middle East

Displaced Afghans, Syrians and Iraqi refugees are the main victims of the war against international terrorism led by the United States. According to research institutions in the West, the war against terrorism in the world cost approximately eight hundred billion dollars and the United States has undertaken approximately eighty percent of it. This war has taken the lives of almost a million people and has brought damage to nearly twenty million people. As a result of this formal and informal war structures seven government has seen the severe damage.

The question that arises is why the United States is the founder and responsible for this “mega global” war and does not take the responsibility of victims. To protect life and property of a million refugees who came to Europe, estimated 17 billion euros that is approximately twenty billion dollars is needed. The question is why American war which costs eight hundred billion dollars, does not provide 20 billion by taking responsibility of refugees?

The answer to this question is clear. America’s long-term economic interests in the Middle East and Central Asia to maintain and to expand its hegemony. America’s responsibility for resolving the crisis in the rich region of the world, will bring the United States’ influence in the world to the lowest level. That is why the people of poor nations with corrupt governments and leaders, liars, absolutist and dictatorial, will become the main victims of the war. These governments, with such leaders cannot escape influence the United States but the citizens of this state are the main victim of this strategy.

Because of the far distances to the United States of America, it is very difficult for the asylum seekers to reach American states. US has considerable limited ways for human trafficking. The only way to get refugees to America, is lawful ways. Canadians are better than the United States. They by sending chartered aircrafts have attracted groups of refugees from the camps in Turkey and Jordan to Canada. But this role is too small and narrow to fit Europe counts.

4Islamic countries

Islamic governments to solve refugee crisis has a very passive approach. All asylum seekers included in this crisis, belong to the religion of Islam.  The rich Islamic governments do not fulfill the necessary responsibility. UAE Arabic states, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain are considered among the world’s richest countries, but took the least responsibility for resolving the crisis. This annoyed European governments, Prime Minister of Germany Angela Merkel said that “although Kaabah of Muslims is in Saudi Arabia, but all Muslim refugees are coming to Europe.”

League of Arabic states in its February meeting issued statement and urged the international community to cooperate refugee crisis. This is despite the fact that most support already come from the international community to refugee camps in Turkey and Jordan, by the Europe Union, the governments of North America and the Far East.

European critics believe that the rich Arabic countries League have high costs for war in Yemen, Iraq and Syria, while do not have plans for the outcome of this war.

Third part

5Europe Union

Europe Union based on the Human Rights Convention of EU, the Optional Protocol IV and Article III, Articles 12 and 13, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union of Europe has an obligation to investigate and resolve the refugee crisis. But Europe has been surprised by the onslaught of refugees. Germany was the only to witness greater demand from refugees. Sweden although a small country has seen about three hundred thousands of refugees. Likewise Austria that saw tens of thousands of refugees.

In 2014, the League of Europe, passed the new law called “Dublin”, which obliges member states to identify and attract first application for asylum-seekers in the Government’s prime responsibility. The law insists on restricting illegal immigrants and requires member states to collaborate in identifying human traffickers.

But beyond international responsibilities of European Union member states, people have lamented at the coming of this large group of asylum seekers. And right-wing nationalist parties offered anti-slogans about asylum-seekers, stood stronger than ever in front of the Europe Union programs. This intellectual and political conflict caused the Europe Union in paradoxical situation. On one hand international responsibilities on the basis of intergovernmental union rights were obliged to protect refugees on the other hand was suffering social unacceptability about mentoring programs of asylum seekers.

6Steps to resolve the crisis.

In March this year, the heads of European governments set up dialogue with the Turkish government, who is considered the main approach path for asylum seekers to Europe,. At the conference, the Europeans agreed to pay three billion euros to Turkey to spend for Reintegration of asylum seekers who are sent back from Europe, Most of these refugees are Afghans and Iraqis. The Europe Union has decided to accept Syrian refugees. But the Turks have offered a demand of six billion euros from the EU. The Turks demand that they will accept the plan if the Europe Union to facilitate visa sweep for Turkish citizens and accelerate ways to the uptake of Turkey to the Union Europe.

In the implementation of this program challenges will be against asylum seekers. First, the fate of the number of three million refugees remain unknown. Second, Turkey will continue blackmailing Europe Union. In fact, Turkey will become like Pakistan during the Cold War because he was blackmailing the international community to support the millions of Afghans refugees.

7Conclusion

The problem of refugees has become one of the most notorious elements in foreign and domestic policy of European Union member states. In EU Parliament and Commission one of the most controversial topics on the agenda of the League of Europe after the Cold War is refugees. It seems that the member governments may arrange severe legal barriers against asylum seekers. States that have good name and reputation in the reception of asylum seekers in the world like Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, Finland and Germany may form limitations, for integration and family reunification of immigrants and asylum seekers. Media of Europe Union Member States also plans to present a disastrous picture of economic, social and cultural geography of Europe to show the presence of Muslim asylum seekers. Reactions and complaints of civil societies, does not effect politicians and law makers.

On the other hand the influx of a million refugees in Europe caused ideological and religious dialogue in small communities of Europe. European churches have pressure on governments to take action and control the extent and expansion of Islam in Europe. That is why the League of Europe with full force will attempt instead of being the reception of asylum seekers in the geography of Europe, provide pressure on the return of refugees either obligatory or voluntary.

I believe that every citizen who decides to seek asylum in one of the European governments must rethink about their fate. I, as an active researcher for Human Rights, on the basis of international law, including international human rights law considers seeking asylum as most basic human right. But also believe that their right to life should be taken from oneself. International relations and situations should be carefully followed and then one should seek suitable ways as alternative to migration.

 

Leave a Reply