Research Paper on Refugees Issue

Background of the Study

Despite some remarkable improvements in democracy in many parts of the world, there is still an unprecedented number of refugees as a result of conflicts and war. Continuing conflicts in places such as Iraq, Syria, and Yemen result in the displacement of thousands of people-the majority of whom are women and children (Bakewell, 2008). Therefore, the international community must care and provide for the refugees who struggle against all the odds to get to safe-havens. Statistics show that more than 16 million refugees were in existence as of 2014, which most likely points to a higher figure now due to the increased conflicts, especially in the Middle East.

United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) estimates that the conflict in Syria alone has created up to 4 million refugees in addition to many that remain within the boundaries of the country (Loue, 2013). Iraqi on the other hand had about half a million of its citizens with refugee status in 2014, a figure that is estimated to have surpassed the 3 million mark due to conflicts in 2015. Generally, the majority of refugees run to neighboring countries such as Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon. Other places that also have a high number of refugees include Kenya and Ethiopia in Africa (the two countries host up to 800,000 refugees as of the year 2017) which are mainly caused by the conflicts in the neighboring country Somalia.

The Refugees issue in a host country can be solved by repatriation, local integration, or resettlement in a third country. Repatriation can only work if the situation in the refugees' country stabilizes. Local integration, on the other hand, requires the host country to assimilate the refugees fully so that they can enjoy the same rights and resources as the citizens of the country. Therefore, the host country needs to have the political will and the capacity to enable the process to be successful. For instances where the local community and the refugees share a common language and culture, this becomes the best solution. Local integration also requires the input of the refugees and their opinion regarding the issue must be taken into consideration. Some may hope to return to their country of origin eventually while others wish to resettle in a third country. Some individuals may decide never to go back to their country due to various reasons better known by themselves; thus they will benefit the most from local integration. However, local integration is a viable idea in cases where the refugee caseload is relatively low, and both the refugees and the host country opt to follow this solution.

Repatriation is the most preferred solution for refugees primarily due to being durable. The majority of the 12 million refugees under UNHCR will be repatriated to their home countries. Repatriation is considered the best way to ensure a sense of identity for the individuals since they usually are returned to the initial area from which they were displaced. This method is suitable because the refugees can then feel belonging to the place and can maintain and practice their culture and traditions unhindered. Many humanitarian organizations highly favor repatriation if the conditions in the home country have stabilized and they can safely return with a guarantee of their security and livelihood.

Since being a refugee involves a feeling of fear and anxiousness, the individuals must be prepared and assured that the place they are returning to has improved and that measures have been taken to ensure they live without any hindrance or danger to their life. The fear of persecution must be removed from their mind. For this to succeed then, the timing of repatriation must be taken into consideration. Once the circumstances for displacement become nonexistent, then the refugee status may be revoked legitimately. However, repatriation is first done voluntarily before the revoking is done much later when those who have been repatriated are reintegrated successfully.

There are many instances when local integration and repatriation are nonviable, and only resettlement to a third country is the best solution. When the conflict that caused the initial flight persists and has no foreseeable solution in the short to mid-term, relocation to a third country and local integration are preferable. Resettlement involves refugees relocated to a third country, which is willing and able to accommodate and welcome them. In such cases, women, children, and vulnerable groups are favored. UNHCR first used resettlement in 1956 when 200,000 refugees from Hungary were resettled and accommodated across Europe. The method also found use in the Vietnam conflict where individuals moved into Thailand and the United States.

The burden of hosting refugees has for long been left to the host countries to deal with which has resulted in the increased plight of the refugees as a result of lack of resources. It is due to this reason that UNHCR suggested permanent resettlement as a long-term solution to the crisis that has engulfed the Middle East. This suggestion has elicited a lot of reactions and views from many developed countries and the host countries which see it as endangerment and a relief respectively. It has however been widely accepted that the caring of refugees is a shared responsibility that should be supported politically and financially by the developed world. Europe (which usually is conservative in accepting refugees) has recently relaxed its stringent measures with many countries now on the frontline of accepting more refugees to settle there. Germany for instance has taken in almost 300,000 Syrians in their new program of refugee admission and resettlement.

In spite of the care and attention recently accorded to refugees, the uptake ratio remains too low as many countries are unwilling to expand the resettlement programs and some are still unwilling to incorporate refugees within their citizenry. UNHCR recently confirmed that they were able to resettle a paltry 70,000 individuals in 2013- mostly due to reservations and concerns in many European countries about their national security, their capacity, and the outcome for the refugees.

The United States of America has usually been at the forefront in the integration of refugees and their resettlement. It acts as a successful lesson on how to take in refugees to scale without bringing considerable harm to their citizens. However, even the program in the US has faced opposition with many critics pointing to the small amount of investment in the local level for supporting the integration program. In the absence of concrete data on the resettlement and outcomes for refugees, there will always be doubts about the program. The lack of data is likely due to a large number of refugees as compared to those seeking asylum, which therefore requires more workforce and resources to track resettlement outcomes and as such, few countries, if any, have such data (Loue, 2013). This lack of data and information is the cause of difficulties in identifying issues and solutions for refugees.

For the US government to be able to solve the problem of refugee resettlement there is a need for them to figure out the outcomes and trends for the already resettled individuals so that they can better design tools and kick-start programs to meet the current requirements. For this to be done Migration Policy Institute (MPI) effectively must be put to good use (Government of USA, 2014). The institute has recently compiled and analyzed data sourced from different agencies in the U.S government that deal with the resettlement of refugees and the American Community Survey (ACS). The collected information on the size of refugee populations and the resettlement program resulted in findings on challenges of refugee integration in the U.S.

For a long time, the U.S has been the favorite destination for refugees and the most significant contributor to the UNHCR and other international aid organizations with about USD 32 billion worth of aid. All refugees that find their way to the U.S have a right to approved social services that are unique and different from that provided to both documented and undocumented immigrants. Generally, the issue of immigration and refugees is a federal government function; the states and local authorities receive the funds and provide the required services accordingly. As of 2015, the U.S took in about 75,000 refugees and promised to increase the number by 10,000 individuals drawn explicitly from Syria due to a large number of displaced people in the country. This is a clear indication that the U.S has been steadily increasing the number of successfully resettled refugees in the country.

For a refugee to successfully be admitted into the US, he or she must meet the set criteria majorly include:

1. Meeting the provisions of INA section 101 (a) (42)
2. Not already resettled in any third country
3. Being of special humanitarian concern as determined by the president
4. Can be admissible as per the US law

Responsibilities and roles of stakeholders federal government play the most prominent role in the resettlement of refugees in the US. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is tasked with the responsibility of determining which of the applicants meets the requirements of the law to be bestowed the status of a refugee. Together with the department of state (DOS), they coordinate the resettlement of the refugees.

DOS deal with resettlement policy as well as initial processing of the refugees overseas, their transportation to the US, and cultural orientation. DOS funds various non-profit organizations, which are involved in receiving the refugees and their placement on arrival (Bruno, 2015). DOS has funding agreements with the agencies, and it is through them that arriving refugees are welcomed and receive essential services and personal necessities for their first month in the US. It links the individuals to longer-term services that are funded by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).

The responsibility of resettling refuging and providing financial aid, medical services, and other social services is taken over by the DHHS for up to 5 years. Through its Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), the refugee service programs are funded by the use of state governments and NGOs. State governments together with local governments have dedicated offices, which offer services to refugees and are financed by ORR.

In addition to the services that are given by the government, NGOs and other voluntary sectors play a critical role. Resettlement in the US is a public-private partnership where NGOs are involved in the whole process to offer useful and coordinated services. Other organizations that play a critical role inclu...