As events unfold in Europe with regard to the refugee crisis, we’re reminded of
what it means to live in a global village. Suddenly what happens thousands of
miles away from our doorsteps can no longer be conveniently ignored, whether by
our politicians, or more importantly, by our conscience. Syria may be the exception
to the rule, a kind of extreme situation, but what we’re seeing in Syria may one day
become the norm. Finding a solution to the refugee crisis in Syria consequently
becomes important not only for dealing with the current crisis, but also for
handling future crises around the world as nations implode through internal
conflict.
HOW THE CIVIL WAR IN SYRIA STARTED
The war in Syria started in 2011. It’s called, technically speaking, a civil war but like civil wars in the future it has taken on an international dimension as regional powers support one side over the other. Syria has a population (or had) of 18 million but is divided by ethnicity and religion. A full 60% of its population is comprised of Sunni Arabs, while Alawites, a branch of the Shia faith, make up 12%. Christian Arabs, Armenians, Druses, Kurds, Turkmen, & other minorities make up the rest.
Syria is in a rough neighbourhood. It borders Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, and Israel. A French possession for many decades, Syria gained its independence from France in 1945 and has been ruled under emergency law for most of its existence. The country’s ethnic and religious mix has never been easy for Syria. The current conflict started in 2011 as part of the Arab Spring when Sunni groups sought to overthrown Bashar al-Assad, the Alawite president, who succeeded his father in 2000.
It would be easy to say that this is a civil war between Alawites who fear for their existence, and the Sunni majority. But like most things about the Middle East, which policymakers in the West don’t always understand, it gets complicated. The Alawites, with only 12% of the population, could not have ruled Syria all these decades without the support of ethnic and religious minorities who fear Sunni rule. Adding to this coalition are middle class Sunnis, especially from the merchant class, who fear that the Sunni groups leading the uprising are seeking to turn Syria, a secular country, into a theocracy. Many Syrians, both Sunni and non-Sunni, are also however fighting to overthrow what they see as an authoritarian and dictatorial regime intent on denying the country’s citizens basic human rights.
Enter the international community. In many ways this conflict is symbolic of the greater conflict occurring around the world between the two main branches of Islam: Sunni (80% of Muslims) and Shia. Supporting the Sunni groups are the Saudis, who practice an extreme form of Islam known as Wahhabism, which takes a literal approach to interpreting the Koran. Most Muslims around the world, including Sunnis living in Syria, don’t subscribe to this form of Islam. The US also supports some of the more moderate Sunni groups but to a lesser extent. The Alawites (a branch of the Shia faith) are supported by Iran, the world’s largest Shia state, and the Russians, who see themselves as defenders of Syria’s Orthodox Christians.
The death toll since the war started stands at 200,000 with millions more forced to flee the country as refugees. In all, over 7 million Syrians have been displaced, with millions fleeing to neighbouring countries like Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan. Syrians now make up at least 20% of Lebanon’s population, a tiny country that has its own volatile mix of sectarian groups.
Enter ISIS and other extreme Muslim groups. The Syrian government currently controls only one third of the nation’s territory, not to mention less than 60% of its population. This has given groups like ISIS free reign to rampage through Syria and Iraq, bringing terror and destruction to Sunnis and non-Sunnis alike. Extremists love a vacuum and the inability of the international community to find a solution has helped groups like ISIS to take advantage of a volatile situation. The problem is compounded by the inability of moderate Sunni opposition groups and the Assad regime to come to some agreement on how to end the civil war while destroying ISIS.
There currently seems to be no solution to the civil war in Syria. More troubling, Lebanon’s civil war lasted from 1975-1990, a full 15 years. It’s thus possible that the civil war in neighbouring Syria could go on for another decade. The situation is even worse when one considers the presence of fanatical groups like ISIS. The crisis in Syria is here to stay which makes finding a solution to the refugee crisis even more imperative.
FINDING A SOLUTION TO THE REFUGEE CRISIS
As events unfold, thousands of Syrian refugees are headed to Germany, the only country that seems to have both the will and the resources to take in so many desperate souls. Germany expects to receive 800,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2015, equivalent to 1% of its population. This would be equivalent to Canada receiving well over 300,000 asylum seekers in just one year, or well over 3 million in the case of the US.
What about the rest of the European Union? Like Canada, the US, and Australia, most countries in the EU are getting a free pass on settling refugees. Hungary’s Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, has even publicly stated that the presence of so many Muslim asylum seekers poses a threat to Europe’s Christian roots. Other countries meanwhile simply feel they don’t have the resources that Germany enjoys.
Germany, in contrast, takes a sharply different position. Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, makes the point that Germany is only doing what it is morally and legally required to do as a European country, proving yet again that both she and the German republic are the undisputed leaders of Europe. But Germany’s resources are not infinite and calls on the part of Chancellor Merkel and Francois Hollande (French president) for other EU states to take in refugees has been met with little enthusiasm.
Are these other EU states justified in rejecting so many refugee claimants? Evidence suggests that most of the migrants are heading for Germany. To get there they’re crossing through Greece, Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary, and Austria, before arriving in Germany, their final destination. These refugees may be destitute but they’re not stupid which explains why no one is seeking asylum in an economically destitute EU country like Greece. Germany it seems is the perfect destination for asylum seekers. Not only is it Europe’s largest economy, it also has a low birth rate. Refugees bring workers and young children to an aging society in desperate need of both.
Some might logically think that France would be a natural country for these refugees to settle in, since so many of them speak French. Unfortunately France has problems of its own, starting with a high unemployment rate. France also has a large Muslim population, and many French citizens feel they’re not integrating as well as they should. But more disturbing for the future of French democracy has been the unfortunate rise of the far right National Front (led by Marie Le Pen) which has become a prominent player in French politics. The fear is that the arrival of more Muslim immigrants will only drive more young voters to vote for Marie Le Pen at the expense of both the Socialist and Gaullist parties.
Can the rest of Europe help by taking in more refugees? Unfortunately countries like Portugal, Spain, and Italy all have high unemployment rates, and a poor record at integrating Muslim immigrants. Other countries like Belgium and the Netherlands, tiny nations by North American standards, already feel they have taken enough legal immigrants and have far right wing parties of their own to worry about.
WHICH COUNTRIES SHOULD TAKE IN REFUGEES
There are three countries that should be taking in more refugees from the Syrian conflict: Canada, Australia, and the United States. All three countries should set up operations in Lebanon, Turkey, and Jordan for accepting refugees who would otherwise make the hazardous trip to Germany.
Let’s start with Canada, the country my family emigrated to from a small town in Southern Italy back in 1956. Canada is, as anyone who has driven across it can attest to, the world’s second largest country but with a relatively small population of less than 37 million people. Canada enjoys one of the world’s highest standards of living, is a member of the G8, and is officially bilingual. Canada also has a low birth rate but receives 250,000 immigrants each year. These immigrants allow Canada to better deal with its aging demographics. They also bring much needed job skills and cheap labour. It’s a win-win situation for both Canada and newcomers.
Bringing in 100,000 Syrian refugees over the next 5 years is something Canada can easily accomplish. For starters, French speaking Syrian refugees could be sent to Quebec, where they could be more easily integrated. As for the rest of the applicants, they could be resettled in large cities like Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton, and Calgary.
Is there any precedent for this in Canada’s history? Of course there is. Over 60,000 Vietnamese boat people were brought to Canada as refugees back in the late seventies and early eighties, and thousands of Hungarians fleeing the Hungarian uprising arrived in the nineteen fifties. Taking in refugees has never been a problem for Canada. So what are Canadian politicians recommending? The current government is aiming for 10,000 refugees over three years, while opposition leaders are throwing numbers like 10,000 and 25,000.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is desperately campaigning to keep his job and recently stated that Canada is the most generous country in the world on a per capita basis with regard to accepting immigrants and refugees. But how many countries in the world enjoy Canada’s wide open spaces and level of prosperity?
Australia is another country that can do more. But like Canada and the United States, it has taken in fewer than 3,000 refugees. And like Hungary, Australia is not ashamed to pursue a policy of exclusion with regard to asylum seekers, going even so far as to deploy its navy to turn back boats with migrants, including asylum seekers, before they come to close to Australia’s shores. Those turned back are then held at detention centers run by private contractors on nearby islands, including the tiny nation of Nauru. All this is quite frankly immoral. Australia, like Canada, enjoys a high standard of living and took in thousands of Vietnamese boat people decades ago. Most of these refuges have integrated into Australian society. Australia could easily accept 100,000 refugees and spread them over its largest cities.
As for the United States, 300,000 refugees could be settled in its largest cities. With an unemployment rate of only 5.1%, the US receives more immigrants, legal and illegal, than any other country. It also has a large Arab-American community that is dynamic and fully integrated into American society. It has in the past welcomed millions of Vietnamese, Iranian, and Cuban refugees and could easily do the same with Syrians, many of whom are middle class and educated. And with a population of 300 million, 300,000 refugees can easily be assimilated.
CONCLUSION
The refugee crisis in Syria will not end until a political solution is found. This requires that the warring communities in Syria come to some kind of political compromise. But how does one compromise with an organization like ISIS? And are the benefactors of each side, namely, Iran and Saudi Arabia, ready to forge some kind of compromise? Defeating ISIS will likely require help from NATO, Iran, Russia, and Saudi Arabia. But what happens once ISIS is defeated? Do the different groups, religious and ethnic, then go back to slaughtering one another?
In the meantime millions of refugees in countries bordering Syria dream of immigrating to Europe, the US, Canada, and Australia. Canada, Australia, and the US can do their part by taking in a fair number of these refugees until a political solution is found. All three countries have the territory and level of economic development that can easily absorb such a small number. And all three countries are multi-ethnic and based on the rule of law. Most European nations, in contrast, are small in size and economically stagnant. Other countries like Japan, China, and Korea can do their part as global citizens by providing large amounts of financial aid to the many refugee camps situated in Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq, and Syria.
The world watched in horror as the lifeless body of 3 year old Aylan Kurdi was carried out of the water and laid to rest on a Turkish beach. Millions around the world watched this scene on television and read about it on the internet or through social media. What these same viewers don’t know is that some 12,000 children have perished in Syria’s civil war.
Countries like Canada, Australia, and the United States all refused to take in Jewish refugees in the 1930s and 40s, many of whom were Aylan Kurdi’s age. Now is the time to show how far we have all come by taking in a modest number of Syrian refugees.
