Gil Loescher

The UNHCR and world politics : State interests vs. institutional autonomy

This article situates the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) within the context of world politics. States remain the predominant actors in the international political system. But this does not mean that international organizations like the UNHCR are completely without power or influence. Tracing the evolution of the agency over the past half century, this article argues that while the UNHCR has been constrained by states, the notion that it is a passive mechanism with no independent agenda of its own is not borne out by the empirical evidence of the past 50 years. Rather UNHCR policy and practice have been driven both by state interests and by the office acting independently or evolving in ways not expected nor necessarily sanctioned by states.

“The Long Road Home: Protracted Refugee Situations in Africa”

Protracted refugee situations are a critical and growing element in continuing conflict and instability, especially in Africa. Such situations can result in direct security concerns, including the presence of armed elements within the refugee population and the spill-over of conflict across borders, and indirect security concerns, as tensions rise between local populations and refugees over the allocation of scarce resources. Somali refugees in Kenya and Burundian refugees in Tanzania constitute two of the most challenging protracted refugee situations in Africa. The overall response to protracted refugee situations remains fragmented, compartmentalised and ineffective. What is required is a new policy agenda that extends beyond conventional boundaries and seeks to integrate the resolution of chronic and recurring regional refugee problems with economic development and security issues.

The missing link: the need for comprehensive engagement in regions of refugee origin

Asylum policies in Britain and in the countries of its EU partners are failing to cope with the demands made upon them. With migration pressures mounting and opportunities for legal immigration to many EU states restricted, larger numbers of potential migrants are turning to alternative means of entry and access, namely irregular migration and asylum channels. The responses of states to these challenges have been to adopt more restrictive policies and practices that have considerably changed the balance between immigration control and refugee protection. While states have the right to control entry and enforce their borders, the restrictive measures that have come to dominate policy-making and recent immigration enforcement initiatives in Britain and its European partners do not sufficiently discriminate between asylum seekers and other kinds of migrants, thereby failing to safeguard the right of refugees to seek protection. Current British proposals to move asylum seekers to ‘safe areas’ in regions of origin fail to understand the burdens, pressures and priorities of countries in the regions, fail to ensure effective protection for those in need, and are unlikely to deliver the UK policy objective of substantially reducing the numbers of illegal entries to Britain. What is needed is an approach that reduces the number of individuals seeking protection in Europe while maintaining the European tradition of providing asylum to those in genuine need. The ‘missing link’ in asylum policy that would respond both to the concerns of states and to the protection needs of refugees is more comprehensive engagement in regions of refugee origin. It is in this way that western asylum countries, including the UK, may best address the challenge of providing international protection to victims of persecution and respond to their own concerns about asylum.

Protracted refugee situations and state and regional insecurity

This article examines the long‐stating importance of refugee issues in international politics and underlines the changing emphasis given to these issues by policy makers and academic researchers, both in the immediate post‐Cold War and post‐9/11 periods. The authors then address the manner in which the relationship between forced migration and state security has been addressed in the past decade. The article highlights how this area of research continues to over‐emphasize the migration‐related security of Western states and the presence of armed elements in refugee movements in the Third World. In contrast, the literature largely neglects the security concerns of states hosting protracted refugee populations. Ironically, chronic refugee situations in regions of refugee origin constitute the overwhelming majority of the worlds refugee population.

Protracted refugee situations and the regional dynamics of peacebuilding

The international community’s approach to refugees focuses largely on mass influx situations and high profile refugee emergencies, delivering humanitarian assistance to refugees and war-affected populations, and encouraging large-scale repatriation programmes. In stark contrast, of the total number of refugees in the world (which exceeds 10 million) some 70%—or 7.7 million—are not in emergencies, but trapped in protracted refugee situations. Such situations, often characterised by long periods of exile, stretching to decades for some groups, constitute a growing challenge for the international refugee protection regime and the international community. While global refugee populations have fallen to their lowest in many years, the number of protracted refugee situations and their duration continue to increase. There are now well over 30 protracted refugee situations in the world, and the average duration of these refugee situations has nearly doubled over the past decade: from an average of nine years in 1993 to 17 years in 2004.

Refugees and Foreign Policy

Refugees are a distinct and unique category of human rights victims which the international community has targeted for special protection and benefits. In the decades following the Second World War, the United Nations adopted numerous declarations and conventions concerning human rights and established an international human rights regime.1 Along with that regime, a systematic transnational response to the world refugee phenomenon was institutionalised in the refugee-receiving nations and in an extensive structure of private and public international organisations dedicated to refugee protection, aid and resettlement.2 This network of international, national and voluntary organisations developed a response strategy which permits some refugees to remain in their country of first asylum, and permits others to be resettled in third countries. Alongside this institutional framework, there has evolved a complex structure of laws and agreements specifically designed to protect and assist people who have fled from their homeland. This body of norms laid down minimum standards for the treatment of refugees and introduced the fundamental principle of non-refoulement which protects them from being sent back to a country where their lives or freedom would be at risk. Over the past four decades, those norms and the mandate of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) have been expanded so that protection is accorded to a progressively larger group of human rights victims across the world.3

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) : The Politics and Practice of Refugee Protection

Introduction Part 1: Historical Overview and Emergences of Key Issues 1. The Origins of International Concern for Refugees 2. UNHCR and the Cold War: 1950-1990 3. UNHCR since the end of the Cold War Part 2: Key challenges and issues facing UNHCR 4. The Key Challenges of Mandate, Funding and Protection 5. The key issues of protracted refugee situations, IDPs and asylum 6. The Future of UNHCR in the 21st Century Conclusion

The significance of protracted refugee situations

Protracted refugee populations not only constitute over 70% of the worlds refugees but are also a principal source of many of the irregular movements of people around the world today. The long-term presence of refugee populations in much of the developing world has come to be seen by many host states in these regions as a source of insecurity. In response, host governments have enacted policies of containing refugees in isolated and insecure camps, have prevented the arrival of additional refugees and, in extreme cases, have engaged in forcible repatriation. Not surprisingly, these refugee populations are also increasingly perceived as possible sources of insecurity for Western states. Refugee camps are sometimes breeding grounds for international terrorism and rebel movements. These groups often exploit the presence of refugees to engage in activities that destabilise not only host states but also entire regions.

Defining the problem

Protracted refugee populations not only constitute over 70% of the worlds refugees but are also a principal source of many of the irregular movements of people around the world today. The long-term presence of refugee populations in much of the developing world has come to be seen by many host states in these regions as a source of insecurity. In response, host governments have enacted policies of containing refugees in isolated and insecure camps, have prevented the arrival of additional refugees and, in extreme cases, have engaged in forcible repatriation. Not surprisingly, these refugee populations are also increasingly perceived as possible sources of insecurity for Western states. Refugee camps are sometimes breeding grounds for international terrorism and rebel movements. These groups often exploit the presence of refugees to engage in activities that destabilise not only host states but also entire regions.

Blaming the Victim: Refugees and Global Security:

The bulk of the worlds refugees remain in the developing world. And the industrialized states, more worried after September 11, are taking new steps to keep them away.