BEIRUT: Bassem’s residency expired on Jan. 18, 2015, and the question of what the UNHCR-registered Syrian refugee should do next is a conundrum that lies at the heart of Lebanon’s revamped policy toward refugees.
General Security issued a memorandum announcing new regulations concerning residency renewal for Syrian nationals that differentiates between UNHCR-registrants and non-registrants. The difference between the two is that registered refugees have to sign a pledge stating that they will not work in Lebanon. Fees for both categories are set at $200.
General Security could not be reached to confirm the measures, which have not been publicized, but the Norwegian Refugee Council, which tracks legal issues pertaining to refugees, confirmed it is being implemented, though their observations suggest it is not being interpreted universally.
The recent measure is the most recent in a string of regulations meant to better control the entry and residency of Syrians in Lebanon and which has raised more questions than answers from aid groups and refugees themselves.
“If I promise not to work, how can I send my kids to school? How can I pay my rent? Or put food on the table,” Bassem asked.
The country is host to the largest number of Syrian refugees proportionate to its population, and the government’s policy to better manage them has frequently been reactive and piecemeal without practical forethought, critics have said, citing the most recent residency renewal measure as one such example.
While policies to better distinguish Syrian migrants from refugees at the borders have come to define Lebanon’s refugee policy in 2015, the country’s overall strategy appears to lack the fundamental vision required to address the long-term challenge of hosting such a vast refugee population.
By the second half of 2014 the saturated host communities in the north and the Bekaa Valley were beginning to feel the effects of the crisis which a World Bank impact assessment released in 2013 predicted, projecting the country would lose $7.5 billion as a result of spillover from the Syrian conflict, principally from hosting refugees.
According to the assessment, about 170,000 Lebanese would be pushed under the poverty line and the unemployment rate would double to above 20 percent. The quality of public services would also experience noticeable degradation, with crowding health facilities and a sharp increase in demand for public school places.
There are approximately 1.1 million Syrians registered as refugees with UNHCR, as well as an additional 300,000 considered refugees by the government. The deluge has overwhelmed Lebanon’s already feeble infrastructure and public services. As one Interior Ministry source told The Daily Star some weeks ago, “The Syria crisis really exposed Lebanon’s deficiencies.”
With the issue of Lebanon’s stability – now a buzz word around the refugee crisis – at stake, the government began taking measures to curb the entry of Syrian nationals to the country. Unlike previous years, the refugee response plan for 2015 was jointly launched by the government and UNHCR and seeks to address refugee-protection needs while reinforcing state institutions.
The policies enacted by the General Security – including imposing six new classifications for Syrian nationals wishing to enter the country and banning registered Syrians who leave Lebanon from returning – “are saying somehow that we cannot absorb any more refugees,” the government source said.
The launch of the response plan was considered the first step in implementing a three-point policy paper adopted by the Cabinet in October. The policy paper lays out priorities for the Lebanese government’s approach to the crisis, the first of which is reducing the number of Syrians registered as refugees. Addressing rising security concerns in the country and expanding humanitarian responses to include institutional and development approaches complete the three-way response.
But human rights watchdogs such as ALEF say the three-pronged policy paper cannot be considered sufficient as a solution to the crisis. “For one thing, it doesn’t define what a refugee is,” George Ghali, a researcher for ALEF, said.
“The three components of the policy are about Lebanon, it does not say anything about providing support to refugees,” he said. Ghali considers the strategy merely a development plan for Lebanon, as it lacks formal schemes to address the needs of refugees. “It is short term, counterproductive with no forecast for the future,” he said.
On the international scene Lebanon has capitalized on its legitimate security concerns to shore up support, both humanitarian and military. On the ground, aid workers who have been at the forefront of the crisis say Lebanon cannot manage alone.
“The government doesn’t have the experience to deal with a crisis such as this partly because refugees are dispersed in such a chaotic way,” said Sheikh Ayman Charkiya, who works with Dar al-Fatwa to provide relief in the Bekaa Valley.
“I would suggest having three big refugee camps where aid delivery can be focused – in Arsal, Zahle and Rashaya,” he added.
The issue of formal camps was the subject of political division in 2014 and has been disregarded as a solution, the government source said. Turning toward stricter border measures was a way for the government to manage refugees in the absence of camps, he explained.
“No one can be blamed,” Charkiya said. “NGOs and the government didn’t do all they could, but they never had the resources to do it.”
No comments:
Post a Comment