Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Refugees and Statistics
The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic.
–Usually attributed, but probably erroneously, to Joseph Stalin
In the comments on a number of posts concerning the global refugee crisis, some Ricochet members have asked me questions about the refugees’ demographics. A rumor has been circulating that they’re mostly men, and that most are not legally refugees, but migrants. Let me do my best to explain some of what I know.
Begin with legal definitions. The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights was mostly drawn up by US diplomats; the drafting committee was chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt. The United States voted for it in the General Assembly. The Declaration isn’t a treaty, but it’s considered a customary part of international law. From Article 14(1) of the declaration: “Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.”
The most important documents devolving from it are the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. The US ratified the 1967 Protocol in 1968. The Refugee Act of 1980 is modeled on the 1951 Convention and in places uses identical language. The key passage is Article 1A(2):
… the term “refugee” shall apply to any person who: … owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country …
Most states that are party to the 1951 Convention or the 1967 Protocol — including the US and all of the EU member states — have incorporated the Convention’s definition of a refugee into their domestic law. People who have been compelled to leave their country of origin as a result of international or national armed conflicts aren’t normally considered refugees under the 1951 Convention or 1967 Protocol, but they’re provided similar protection through other instruments such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its associated protocols on the Protection of War Victims and Victims of International Armed Conflicts.
So the definition of a “refugee” is fairly settled and clear. It hinges on “well-founded fear of persecution.” And it is the law in the signatory countries, until it’s legally and constitutionally repealed.
The states in question apply the laws. Typically, the determination is made by an official from a designated government department or agency; the process usually involves interviewing the person who’s seeking asylum to evaluate his evidence and credibility. The burden of proof is on the asylum seeker. He has to prove that he meets the definition of a refugee, and if he doesn’t, too bad. Since refugees often flee with, literally, nothing but the clothes on their backs, my guess would be that more legitimate refugees are turned away than phony refugees admitted, although I do not know this for sure.
Economic immigrants, or migrants, on the other hand, are people who are seeking better jobs and economic security. I’m a migrant. The key distinction is that they can return to their native country, without fear of persecution, whenever they want. Individual states deal with migrants under their own immigration laws and processes, which, obviously, vary considerably. But countries that have signed the 1951 Convention or the 1967 Protocol have committed to dealing with refugees through particular norms of refugee protection and asylum; they have already undertaken specific responsibilities to anyone seeking asylum on their territories or at their borders.
So a great deal of the debate you might be hearing about whether Europe should admit these refugees is nonsense and lip-flapping. It’s not a matter of debate. Countries that have signed these documents but refuse to accept asylum-seekers who meet the established definition of a refugee are breaking their own laws.
Here’s the latest update from the UNHCR on Syrian refugees. It dates from September 6. Now, the UN does have a tendency to exaggerate numbers in emergencies, as we saw during the Ebola epidemic. But even assuming, and this is highly unlikely, that they’ve outright trebled the numbers, we’d still be looking at a massive crisis. In fact, given that these numbers refer to registered refugees, it seems more likely to me that this is an undercount of the number of people who would be eligible for refugee status were they all registered:
The ratio of men to women is almost the same in every age bracket, and more than half are children.
The way the UNHCR determines refugee status parallels the way asylum adjudications are conducted by states party to the Convention or Protocol. Asylum-seekers register with the local UNHCR office; then they’re interviewed by a UN Eligibility Officer who examines their application and supporting documentation.
It’s entirely possible that some or even many are not genuinely eligible, and may well be found ineligible by the states where they eventually seek refuge. They will then be sent back. Naturally, when you’re processing applications in such huge numbers, the interview and intake process will not be as thorough as they would be if you were dealing with a smaller pool of people.
Here’s the 2011 Handbook and Guidelines on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status, if you’re curious about the way the UN assesses this. But definitely, when they say “refugee,” they mean “refugee,” not “economic migrant.” You can see from the questions they use that the distinction is precisely the one they’re seeking to establish.
That the UN has declared someone a refugee doesn’t mean every individual state must agree. Every state retains its sovereign right to conduct its own inquiry and assess the petitioners’ claims — and does. But the idea that many of those considered eligible by the UN — or even a substantial minority of them — wouldn’t be eligible in the signatory states seems extremely far-fetched, for the simple reason that the number of Syrians seeking asylum is correlated to the known and rising scale of the disaster in Syria — and likewise with other refugee populations.
Fighting has intensified in almost all Syrian governorates. There’s been a rise in rocket and mortar attacks on Damascus; a rise in vehicle explosions in Lattakia, Aleppo, Homs, Hassakeh, and Qamishli; heavy bombardment in Zabadani and rural Damascus — of course such things turn people into real refugees, not just people seeking better jobs.
Now, is it true that having reached Turkey, the refugees are safe and should thus stay put? Yes for some, no for others. Turkey’s refugee camps have been widely lauded as the best in the world. But the refugees lack legal status, which increases their vulnerability to a range of abuses. Forced and early marriages have reportedly risen compared to the pre-crisis period, for example. Domestic violence and violence against children are high in the three countries (Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq) that accept the most refugees per capita; these risks are increased by crowded living conditions. There is a great deal of prejudice against the refugees, too, as you might expect.
Even those dismissed as mere “economic migrants” are hardly taking these nightmarish risks to flee toward Germany because they reckon they’ll be given a Ducati or a ticket to EuroDisney on arrival. Acute malnutrition among refugee children — five-years-old or younger — is a growing concern across the region, given the collapse of Syria’s health service. Large numbers of children have been out of school during their time in exile; capacity in local schools is overstretched; many families rely on their children to support their households. Thus much discussion of a so-called lost generation of Syrians, who, even if they can ever safely return to Syria (unlikely in our lifetime), will return illiterate, possibly brain-damaged from trauma and malnutrition, and utterly unable to participate in the rebuilding of the country. Unsurprisingly, parents want to get their kids to countries where they might have a shot, at least, at having access to food and medical care, and where they might be able, at least, to learn to read and write.
Today’s legal protections for refugees were drawn up in response to the Holocaust, “barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind.” In other words they were designed, God help us, with exactly the situation we now confront in mind.
Yesterday, according to the usually-reliable Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, 161 Syrians were killed. Among them were eight civilians, including a child and an old woman.
Here’s the news from today, from the same source:
Damascus Province:
Mortar shell fell on near the Damascus Citadel, which caused injuries, also two citizens died today and others were wounded by a mortar shell landed at al-Amara area in the King Faisal Street at the center of the capital, while clashes continue between the regime forces and members of the popular committee – General Command against the Islamic Factions in the northeastern areas of al-Yarmouk camp, and information about casualties among both parties, amid shelling by the regime forces on areas in the camp.
Al-Quneitra Province:
The regime forces opened fire of heavy machine guns on the areas in the town od Om Batneh in the mid-sector countryside of Al-Quneitra, while the regime forces renewed the targeting using heavy machine guns on places in the villages of al-Ajraf and Western al-Samadaniyya in the countryside of Quneitra, no information about casualties.
Homs Province:
The regime forces targeted using heavy machine guns areas in the city of Talbiseh in the northern countryside of Homs, no information about casualties, the countryside is witnessing ongoing shelling and airstrikes carried out by the regime air force where a lot of people were killed and wounded.
If you have the time, listen to this radio interview with a Syrian mother of three in Budapest. It reminds me of my grandmother’s story. She too crossed every border in Europe, while pregnant with my father, trying to find safety. My grandmother didn’t want to go to Germany, of course — even though she too had relatives there. She wanted to go to America. She made it. Her relatives in Germany perished in Auschwitz.
Here we are, still alive. I cannot say I that I intuitively understand why some people feel contempt for these refugees because they’re fleeing a nightmare of savagery beyond all imagination and trying to get their kids to a country where they might have a future.
Published in General
It was signed in 1951 by people with immediate, recent memory of the Holocaust and the postwar refugee crisis, so I think it’s entirely fair to imagine that they were readily capable of imagining mass population movements — precipitated by unspeakable atrocities and state breakdown — in a way most of us probably couldn’t until quite recently. But this isn’t something we need debate; the history of the document is very clear; it was a response to the Holocaust. (Sorry to appeal to Wikipedia, but it’s correct in its chronology, in this case, and easy for everyone to check; if anyone wants a more scholarly and serious reading list, I’m happy to provide it.)
I did, at length, and then went back to fix a typo and my comment disappeared. Let me see if I can figure out where it went; that’s maddening.
That is maddening. I look forward to seeing your response.
I look forward to that as well, although those facts (should they be true) don’t necessarily deter the humanitarian argument Claire is making.
There aren’t any good options here due to the many-years delay in action by the U.S. and our allied nations, possibly due to the remarkable ineptitude that the Obama and Cameron governments showed in Libya.
The question is if the least bad option is to accept refugees without foreseeable end and hope you can filter out the bad actors eventually or turn them all away rather than risk letting the bad actors in.
I personally land on the side rejecting wholesale admission: the government of a nation’s highest duty is to its citizens and although the Syrian civil war is terrible I do not believe it rises to the level of a systematic mass murder of a people such as the Holocaust or the Holodomor that requires sublimation of that duty for humanitarian reasons.
Wow. It affects the Powers that Be, tooo. The best way seems to be to compose in a word processor and paste the final version to Ricochet.
No, just the question. Motivation? Depends on how purely rhetorical Erdogan’s quotation of the poem was:
Just curious: We’re looking for that comment and trying to figure out what caused it to disappear, because no one should have to suffer the frustration, fury, and despair I’m feeling about losing my comment right now. It’s a humanitarian disaster.
Did anyone here see it, however briefly? I said that I would have to consult with people who would really know, but I explained my best guess about why the boats are disproportionately full of men, and closed with an anecdote about the problem my grandmother had on the boat that brought her to the US. It was a long comment. Does anyone remember seeing that at all?
Well Claire, let’s take the UN stats as accurate. Half of the refugees aren’t from Syria, 70% are adult men. What should Europe do, assuming that is true? Only take Syrians? To the extent that proving origin is a problem, should only mothers and fathers with children who can’t prove origin be allowed to enter? DNA test to determine true parentage?
Well, I’m not willing to live with the risk. The fact is that if the United States did not permit Muslims to immigrate and settle here, even temporarily, thousands of American civilians would still be alive. There would have been no planes flown into office buildings, no people at army bases in Texas massacred, no footraces in Boston bombed, no military recruitment offices shot up.
It is a historical fact that Islam and its followers do not play well with others. And perhaps some ancestral memory (French and Spanish) is coming up at my end in this instance: Charles Martel and Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar are a couple of historical figures that come to mind. Islam was spread by the sword then and it is spread by the sword now. We in the West should want nothing to do with it.
Claire – yes, I saw it for a minute but then blacked out and, when I came too, it was gone. Just kidding, but I really did see it. I only had a chance to glance through…you wrote some points on more women and children possibly taking the land route (I’d have to research this as I have not seen numbers on it) and said you would ask your friends who work with refugees on the genders and ages.
Anyway, since you can’t find it I’m going to say my brilliant comment was spot on and nothing you said remotely refutes it ;) Sorry for the frustration
My policy preference is to admit children from any of the unstable countries and the parents of those children after lab work to prove parentage. The men without kids can be given the option of becoming part of a UN peacekeeping corps, housed and trained at a UN refugee center. This peacekeeping force would then become the basis for a UN led military response to ISIS and Afghanistan. After serving two years with distinction the men could apply for asylum in the West. Anyone who declines to serve is turned away.
I think Manny had a good reply to that above, where he noted that Jewish people had already been integrated into Christian European nations for centuries. There was already a long history of intra-national Jewish-Cristian relations in place, and the United States was an ideal location for Jewish refugees to settle because of the newer tradition of religious tolerance that had emerged since colonial times. It simply was not an environment where a radical, revolutionary ideology like communism could flourish.
Claire, even on nonpolitical sites like Reddit there are pictures of these young men mocking police and throwing food and water given them at the railway stations. I know you have a good heart and want to follow an anti-Goodwin’s Law by squeezing this phenomenon into another Holocaust tale, but that’s not where the facts lie.
On your last post I suggested we make some allowance for children under 12, maybe their mothers as well, I stand by that humanitarian idea, but bowing to anarchy as Merkel is doing is not good policy.
That is because it is an ideology founded by a warrior/conqueror (see: Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan) looking to unite nomadic tribes to protect his own interests.
Another interesting note is that the Torah and the Bible had many contributors; the Quran was compiled by Muhammad’s companions looking to maintain their socio-economic power.
I read your full comment back when I left my comment so it was there Claire.
The reason I am uneasy is the following – call it what you want, but something is odd: The Arab Spring, complete upheaval in middle East, then the mass migration of immigrants to US from South and Central America – they are still coming – no cohesive strategy to fight ISIS – now mass migration from middle East – strategy? Even the playing field of the world – force the spread the wealth has been the message from Obama and now upcoming UN- my builder told me all his Hispanic crew told him all their relatives have been told to get here before Obama leaves office – that was early 2014 – I don’t remember such chaos and confusion on such a large scale – no fighting back, letting evil get a foothold, unlike WWII when countries did fight back – then trade agreement contents hidden, healthcare contents hidden, Iran deal contents hidden – lawlessness and ditching the Constitution – what is the goal here? I don’t know but its not right.
It looks as though there are two different groups under the rubric “refugees.” One, probably heavily Syrian, actually are refugees and have an age and gender balance reflecting that. The other is largely men of what used to be referred to as “of military age.”
Definitely saw it.
Claire…. I may be sad on seeing photos of a very small crumpled body on the beach, but want nothing to do with taking in 100,000 of his older brothers. So I take what I think is your point. But I disagree. This country erred in not rescuing Jews, and was all the better for the presence of those who made it here. Yes, I know it’s hard hearted, but I’m not willing to make the same statement about a flood of refugees or emigrants who are predominantly young Muslim men. They won’t fit in, won’t want to fit in, and a good percentage will end up hating us. Islam has bloody borders for a reason. And I am not a nativist for thinking so. I rescue kittens and cats, but I don’t bring ferals into the house. Tim
Claire,
Perhaps I seem a bit distant on my comment on this post. I didn’t mean to be so. I felt that we needed perspective and not be stampeded into guilty and foolish reactions.
I read the last few lines of your post again about your Grandmother. My Great Grandfather came over with his two sons before WWI from Lithuania. His sons began to have disagreements. One met a girl in NYC and decided to stay there (my Grandfather). The other wanted to continue with the agreed upon enterprise and go to Iowa where business contacts were waiting (my namesake James my Grandfather’s younger brother). My Great Grandfather was very religious. He was not particularly pleased with America and its secular ways. He was furious that his two sons had split up and he was expected to choose which to live near.
Great Grandfather went back to Lithuania. As the twenties became the thirties it was clear what was going on in Europe. My father’s younger sister, Selma, was very good with the pen. Later she became an English teacher. She was called upon to write to the family back in Lithuania urging them to leave for America immediately. They didn’t understand and would not go. Selma wrote many times. She was only 12 or 13.
Later after the end of the Iron Curtain Selma tried to find them. She was heart broken that she could not find a trace as the Holocaust had obliterated them and the entire town they lived in.
We are all more than statistics.
Regards,
Jim
Well, you definitely saw it (whether or not you agree with it) so that means I didn’t imagine writing it, and it’s in this system somewhere. But where? This is the kind of thing on which my brain gets stuck … I won’t be able to let it go until I find it.
Take a break and read DocJay’s worst movie evah post. It’ll cheer you up!
True. Moreover, as Robert Spencer and others have argued, Mohammed and his confederates may simply have appropriated an already-existing religious text. So ol’ Mo may have been a plagiarist, too!
One more thing – Annika’s picture of the precious little boy lying on the beach is still the picture of this crisis – On NBC News tonight, Syrian mothers and children in Hungary were smiling – they said the bad conditions (Hungary is looking to discourage) are far better than where they were – they had bread – they wanted the family back home to know they were ok – she said the US and others can stop the war.!!! ..interesting comment because I agree – but there has been a holding back – she said I don’t want to go to US – I want to go home.
Whatever the reason for the lack of a strategy to fight the evil scourge running amok in Middle East and elsewhere, these sweet souls do not deserve to suffer – but they suffer – because of the radical element to the religion they hold dear. My grandparents fled Ukraine and Poland during WWII – they were Catholic – Like Claire, I would not be here had they not. I believe the mothers fleeing are thinking the same. Now we make a tainted agreement with Iran and allow Russia to get a foothold in Syria – these decisions will affect our country and the western world for many years to come.
I’ve spent hours looking for the errant comment. While I believe it still exists, it is beyond my technical power to find it. To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven. I suppose tonight just wasn’t the time for it.
Forgive me.
I’ll get a good night’s sleep, come back refreshed, and rewrite the comment — it will be bigger, better, stronger, and more persuasive — and life will go on.
But for now, I must gnash my teeth, rend my garments, curse the day I was born, pity myself, wail, shake my fist at heaven, “Cry ‘Havoc!’, and let slip the dogs of war, pace the walls of my apartment, and sulk.
]
It took me years and all my fortune to develop a computer virus that takes down Claire’s best arguments from Ricochet, but it was worth it. Claire 8,542, PPF. . . . now 1. Just teasing…..good night! Have to get start getting the kids ready for bed soon myself (sad that you are in Paris and I’m in Chicago, yet this happens at the same time)
Claire, you #28 is a false dichotomy, technically the argument from ignorance.
There are more options than you are presenting. The fact that others are not popular does not mean that I must support one of the two mentioned.
Send the men back to fight. Hold the women in Turkey.
This is not about refugees. This is about shutting down the Middle East as a permanent source of this sort of horror.
It’s their turn to work on it.
Nothing presented so far makes this even remotely simar to the Holocaust (shame on you, gently), and nothing presents me or any other American with a duty to import this human wave.
America is no longer competent at assimilating immigrants, and should stop for dear life.
Wait, wait, wait…
This “UN” I see referenced…
I wonder- is it the same “UN” that continually passes idiotic and vile resolutions that would if enforced essentially require Israel to commit suicide?
If so, I wonder why anyone should pay any attention at all to such a moronic organization, or why anyone should expect either Israel or various European Nations to commit suicide to prevent Muslims from killing each other.
I’m sorry that Muslims are so violently incompetent that they continually manage to fall victim to their violent minority, despite the fact that most of them aren’t so violent- but this is not a problem Europe can solve nor is it a problem Europe should import.
I also note that there seems to be a distinct lack of interest when those violent Muslims kill non-Muslims en masse, nor is there outrage when those non-Muslims are allowed to be massacred.
Bottom line- I have no sympathy at all for the refugees flooding into Europe, nor do I feel I should.
Claire,
Now cracks a noble heart. Good night sweet princess:
And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest! Why does the drum come hither?
Sweet Dreams,
Jim
It’s reassuring to learn that the Saudis – who won’t admit Syrian refugees to their kingdom, and aren’t spending that much to support them materially – will support 200 mosques in Germany to meet the spiritual needs of the migrants.
Saudi supported mosques have been central in the promotion of jihad ideology in the USA and abroad.
Claire if you want some perspective on how conservatives over here feel about this issue read this:
http://townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/2015/09/11/americas-reckless-refuge-for-jihad-n2050676