Migration Political Refugees

Stefan Zweig wrote, after having lived through one world war and
fled another, "Our greatest debt of gratitude is to those who in these
inhuman times confirm the human in us."
In our world of global interdependence, there is none other issue, which binds us
closer than Migration. An estimated 232 million people currently live outside their
country of origin, many having moved for a variety of reasons in which the search for
protection and the search for opportunity are inextricably entwined. Many countries
are now simultaneously countries of origin, destination and transit. For some
migration has been a positive and empowering experience. However, most migrants
today are victims to dirty, dangerous and degrading jobs leaving them vulnerable to
human right violations.
In this article, we would be addressing the human rights issue as faced by political
refugees. A refugee is someone who has left his or her country, or is unable to return
to it owing to a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion,
nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.
The UN has set up an International Migration Convention, which seeks to draw the
attention of the international community to the dehumanization of migrant workers
and members of their families, many of whom are being deprived of their basic
human rights. Only when conceived in terms of human rights will migration be able
to fulfill its potential as an enabler of development for migrants and for states alike.
Protecting human rights is important in order to promote the social inclusion and
integration of migrants, thus enabling them to lead economically productive as well as
culturally and socially enriching lives.

Despite the fact that India is a host to diverse groups of refugees, it has no specific
laws or cohesive policy for refugees. India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee
Convention or its 1967 Protocol on the Status of Refugees. India, the land of unity in
diversity, with its history, culture and tradition has set an example of benevolence in
the way it has opened its borders to all the people who have come looking for safety
or sanctuary. There are Tibetans, Afghans and Burmese in India and it has maintained
an open door policy for all. An evidence of Indias generosity lies in the fact that they
have granted long-term visas and work permits to the refugees.
Apart from their struggle for legal recognition in the host country, India, refugees face
discrimination and harassment at the hands of the government, police authorities and
local communities. While it is acknowledged that refugee protection cannot be
achieved unless India ratifies the 1951 Convention and establishes a domestic legal
framework for refugees, it can be argued that the UNHCR has been largely
unsuccessful in providing 'protection' and 'durable solutions' to refugees. This section
will critique the UNHCR's policies towards refugees through an analysis of its
refugee determination process and the extent and nature of community services
provided to refugees.

Most refugees living in India do not see 'local integration' as a viable solution to their
problems. This is primarily attributable to their antagonistic relationship with the local
community. As foreigners, they are often treated as outsiders by the local population
and language barriers further deepen the divide between the two.

Many children enrolled in private schools are forced to drop out midway, as their
parents are unable to continue paying the high school fees. With regard to Burmese
refugees, it has been seen that families do not see themselves living in India in the
long term. They have an unrealistic expectation of being resettled in a developed
country in the immediate future and do not want their children to study in government
schools, despite their economic situation.
Despite its limitations, however, the UNHCR is often the last beacon of hope for
many refugees who flee to India in search of a secure refuge. However, in the recent
past, refugees under UNHCR protection have been losing faith in a system that is
plagued by insensitivity and inefficiency. To redeem itself in the eyes of those it seeks
to protect, the UNHCR must engage directly with refugee communities to better
understand their problems rather than delegate all responsibility to its implementing
partners.

Far from being propelled by economic migrants, this crisis is mostly

about refugees. Majority of those trying to reach Europe are fleeing
poverty. These are countries torn apart by war, dictatorial
oppression, and religious extremism and, in Syrias case, all three.
Their citizens almost always have the legal right to refuge in Europe.
It is believed that migrants would speed the collapse of the
European social order. In reality, the number of migrants to have
arrived so far this year is so minuscule that it constitutes Europes
total population of 740 million. The worlds wealthiest continent can
easily handle such a comparatively small influx.

There are countries with social infrastructure at breaking point

because of the refugee crisis but they arent in Europe. Lebanon
has a refugee crisis. Europe does not.
There certainly isn't enough provision to take in refugees quickly
and without conflict. There also isn't enough awareness of the fact
that it is necessary to take in refugees. Every time the number of
refugees rises somewhere, the EU has problems with reception,
distribution, division of funding and much more. One idea would be
a EU-wide distribution key with clear criteria, including possibly
distribution according to population and tax revenue. That way, one
wouldn't always have this jealousy and bad feeling and the refugees
wouldn't be politically instrumentalized.

In conclusion, what we can never fail to remember is that there is no

justification ever, for the degrading, the debasing or the exploitation
of other human beings on whatever basis: nationality, race,
ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age or
caste.
Yet today, the international news is still replete with the sobbing of
refugees. This remains a most pathetic stain on humanitys record of
achievement.

From a human rights perspective, it is clear that the need of the

hour is to curb the increasingly alarming rate at which the problem
of political refugees is developing. It is no longer just a few hundred
men from every continent who are struggling with this issue. This
problem has crept into the lives of children who are at risk of
forcible recruitment and sexual violence and women, who have
been the targets of severe restrictions.

In the words of Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, United Nations High

Commissioner for Human Rights, The treatment of non-nationals
must observe the minimum standards set by international law.
Human rights are not reserved for citizens only, or for people with
visas. They are the inalienable rights of every individual, regardless
of his or her location and migration status. A tendency to promote
law enforcement and security paradigms at the expense of human
rights frameworks dehumanizes irregular migrants, enabling a
climate of violence against them and further depriving them of the
full protection of the law.

Our aim should therefore be to form the foundation of humanity in

such a way that upon it rises an unshakable and immovable faith in
human decency. In a global society, this asset would be valued over
all other material wealth. After all, the world is not in need of an
even greater number of highly intelligent people, nor politically
powerful or affluent people; the blatant truth is that these alone
cannot save us. In order to save this situation, we need more
compassionate, immensely considerate and wise people piloting our
collective fate brimming over with courage.