Ignoring the plight of refugees does not make us safer

The quality of a society is not necessarily measured by the success of those at the top, but more by the way it treats those who are underprivileged and in need of help and support. This is true for global and domestic society alike.

Those who flee for their lives from war-torn countries and oppressive governments desperately require a place of refuge. It is not only physical care they need, but also our kindness to welcome them, and empathy in understanding the horrors they have endured. Sadly this is not what refugees experience at the moment in many countries.

Two separate, but not unconnected, decisions taken by the British government and the new US administration illustrate the carelessness and heartlessness with which this is dealt. First, President Donald Trump issued an executive order suspending the entry of refugees into the US for four months, and those from Syria indefinitely, spreading fear that these people pose a “threat to the security and welfare of the United States.” Then Britain’s Home Office ended a scheme to bring lone child refugees to the country.

In Trump’s case, any flicker of hope that he would behave differently in the White House from his antics on the campaign trail has faded very quickly. His lack of compassion, let alone hatred for everyone and everything that is different to him, is so deep-seated that it is almost unreasonable to expect him to show newfound empathy, even for those who are in the most desperate situations.

However, the British government’s decision to end the “Dubs amendment” that allowed entry to the most vulnerable child refugees, after granting entry to only 350 of them, is scandalous. This is a far lower figure than the 3,000 lone children from European refugee camps that was expected. 

Lord Alfred Dubs’ life was saved as a 6-year-old Jewish child in 1939 because he was allowed to settle in the UK after he fled Nazi-occupied Czechoslovakia. He lobbied for this amendment in the House of Lords because he knows first-hand how such a scheme changed his life.

Turning our backs on refugee children epitomizes our approach to migration in general and refugees in particular. Hiding behind the security pretext in order to avoid having to protect refugee children, especially lone ones, is less than disingenuous. What security threat can be posed by defenseless, very young people who desperately need our protection?

By denying them a bright future, we expose them to an array of dangers including radicalization. By neglecting them, we fail them and potentially create a security threat, thus failing our own societies.

According to the UN refugee agency (UNHCR), there are presently more than 65 million forcibly displaced people worldwide, 21.3 million of them refugees. Only a tiny fraction are lucky enough to be properly settled. Migration is fast becoming, if not already is, the one issue that defines our generation.

Elections are won or lost over the issue, leaving societies deeply divided and opening the way in mainstream politics to xenophobic ideologies and politicians. The success of Brexit and Trump, and the repulsive legitimization of politicians who spread hatred — such as Marine Le Pen in France or Geert Wilders in the Netherlands — is strongly correlated with the emergence of an anti-migration discourse in their countries.

The challenge of migration, and refugees in particular, may be the biggest the international community is facing because it questions the basic tenets of our own societies. For decades following World War II, standards of behavior in relation to displaced people were established through international law, treaties, conventions and rhetoric. It is in times like these that our sincerity in what we claim to believe is tested.

It is mind-blowing that the fifth-largest economy in the world, the UK, does not have the capacity, or worse the desire, to help 3,000 children, who without our help might face a very bleak future.

It is inconceivable that in the face of a growing humanitarian catastrophe, the wealthiest countries in the world, who claim that human rights are central to their way of life, cannot come up with a viable strategy to provide a safe and welcoming environment to those fleeing the horrors of war and conflict.

Countries with lesser resources — such as Jordan, Lebanon, Ethiopia and Turkey — are hosting millions of refugees, while in large parts of Europe and the US there are politicians who incite against them. Future generations will ask hard questions as to why we did not do enough for these people, the same way we asked previous generations when they neglected their human duty to care for those who faced mass brutality.

• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations at Regent’s University London, where he is head of the International Relations and Social Sciences Program. He is also an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. He is a regular contributor to the international written and electronic media.