President's Corner: Israel's Refugee Debate Raises Questions for World
Monday, August 20, 2007
Over the weekend, Israel refused to accept some Sudanese from Darfur, sending them back to Egypt. The expulsion, which has triggered a sharp debate in Israel, raises an important question about the obligation of all countries to determine whether people who seek sanctuary in their countries are legitimate refugees who need protection or economic migrants who don’t.
The 1951 Refugee Convention says that people who flee their countries in the face of "a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion" deserve protection as refugees. The same protection does not apply to economic migrants, people who leave their country to work elsewhere to earn a better living. There are about 150 million economic migrants, such as Mexicans working in the U.S. or Pakistanis working in Saudi Arabia, in the world today, compared to about 14 million refugees.
According to Monday’s New York Times, Israel expelled about 50 African migrants over the weekend without checking whether any of them had legitimate claims for refugee protection. The Times cited Israeli press accounts reporting that some of the expelled Africans were refugees fleeing from Darfur, where the U.S. has accused the Sudanese government of committing genocide.
Israel is not alone in turning away people before determining whether they have a right to refugee protection. Today, Jordan is turning away Iraqis and South Africa is turning away Zimbabweans without due consideration of their claims for protection as refugees.
To its credit, Israel has announced that it will absorb 500 refugees from Darfur already in the country. Most reached Israel through Egypt, which has absorbed large numbers of Sudanese, many of whom live in harsh conditions. I suspect that both economic migrants and refugees from Africa believe that life is better in Israel than in Egypt, even though most Sudanese trying to enter Israel are Muslims. But having accepted some refugees isn’t a sound reason for turning others away. Countries that refuse to determine whether they are rejecting sanctuary seekers with a legitimate claim for refugee status are undermining a basic element of refugee protection.
Earlier this month, more than half the members of the Israeli Parliament signed a petition asserting that "the refugees need protection and sanctuary, and the Jewish people’s history, as well as the values of democracy and humanity, pose a moral imperative for us to give them that shelter."
The Israeli parliamentarians are right.
--Ken Bacon
The 1951 Refugee Convention says that people who flee their countries in the face of "a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion" deserve protection as refugees. The same protection does not apply to economic migrants, people who leave their country to work elsewhere to earn a better living. There are about 150 million economic migrants, such as Mexicans working in the U.S. or Pakistanis working in Saudi Arabia, in the world today, compared to about 14 million refugees.
According to Monday’s New York Times, Israel expelled about 50 African migrants over the weekend without checking whether any of them had legitimate claims for refugee protection. The Times cited Israeli press accounts reporting that some of the expelled Africans were refugees fleeing from Darfur, where the U.S. has accused the Sudanese government of committing genocide.
Israel is not alone in turning away people before determining whether they have a right to refugee protection. Today, Jordan is turning away Iraqis and South Africa is turning away Zimbabweans without due consideration of their claims for protection as refugees.
To its credit, Israel has announced that it will absorb 500 refugees from Darfur already in the country. Most reached Israel through Egypt, which has absorbed large numbers of Sudanese, many of whom live in harsh conditions. I suspect that both economic migrants and refugees from Africa believe that life is better in Israel than in Egypt, even though most Sudanese trying to enter Israel are Muslims. But having accepted some refugees isn’t a sound reason for turning others away. Countries that refuse to determine whether they are rejecting sanctuary seekers with a legitimate claim for refugee status are undermining a basic element of refugee protection.
Earlier this month, more than half the members of the Israeli Parliament signed a petition asserting that "the refugees need protection and sanctuary, and the Jewish people’s history, as well as the values of democracy and humanity, pose a moral imperative for us to give them that shelter."
The Israeli parliamentarians are right.
--Ken Bacon
Labels: Darfur, President's Corner, refoulement
