IVERNA McGOWAN

According to the UNHCR, over 60 per cent of the world’s 19.5 million refugees and 80 per cent of 34 million Internal Displaced People (IDPs) live in urban environments. What are the main causes that underpin forced displacements?

 

Very often the causes for internal displacement are the same as those which cause people to flee across borders. Take Afghanistan as an example, the intensifying conflict there has taken a devastating toll on civilians. As of April 2016, a staggering 1.2 million people were displaced within the country. This is a substantial increase compared to the end of 2012, when these numbers stood at almost 500,000. In the first four months of 2016 alone, 118,000 people had fled their homes of whom approximately 80% required emergency humanitarian assistance – this is an average of nearly one thousand newly displaced people per day. Other causes can also lead to internal displacement such as economic crises, drought, famine etc. One of the challenges that IDP can face is that there is a risk of deprioritisation of responding to their plight as they are still within their own country and therefore are often not seen as obviously in need of humanitarian relief as refugee camps which are in other countries. In Afghanistan the conditions of IDPs remain woefully inadequate partly due to the governments political difficulties and to the fact that international donors have not yet put enough focus on the needs of IDPs when looking at longer term strategies for Afghanistan.

 

The role of Amnesty International in a refugee crisis is extremely complex due to the existence of different levels of crisis, from emergency rescues to policy-making advising. In this regard, what are the main challenges that face Amnesty International to date?

 

We must be very clear that when we talk about Europe there is no refugee crisis. There is a crisis of politics, policy and humanity perhaps but in terms of tangible numbers arriving there is no refugee crisis in Europe. There are currently some 20 million refugees worldwide. The vast majority are hosted in low and middle income countries, while many of the world’s wealthiest nations host the fewest and do the least. We cannot in the EU, the world’s wealthiest political bloc with a  population of over 500 million people, rationally explain why 50,000 refugees remain stranded in Greece in appalling conditions, nor why the resettlement figures into the EU remain so painfully low. All this is to say that the most challenging thing for Amnesty International in this context is the lack of political leadership. Mainstream political leaders, also at EU level, are pandering to extremists and trying to support the idea that there are no other options left other than to abandon international obligations and damn millions of people to misery.

Earlier this year Amnesty International conducted the Refugees Welcome Index which ranked 27 countries across all continents based on people’s willingness to let refugees live in their countries, towns, neighbourhoods and homes. The results were staggering with four in five people saying that they would welcome refugees to their country. It seemed that UK and Australian governments were more out of touch than any other leaders globally: an astonishing 87% of British people and 85% of Australians are ready to invite refugees into their countries, communities – even their own homes. So although we see on an individual human level inspiring levels of compassion from ordinary people, lazy political leaders instead use their own people’s lack of willingness as an excuse and even try and pin their own political failings as leaders on refugees and migrants. That is one of the largest challenges we face. Of course the sheer scale of the global crisis with more people on the move since the Second World War also means that we have to work around the clock to monitor, report on and challenge new harmful policies and practices as we see them when it comes to refugees. The scale on which to do this poses its own challenges.

 

Germany has been the EU country which has by far received the highest number of asylum applications in 2015, with more than 476,000. What benefits do you think can be brought to German society itself by building and urban development that is focused towards refugee and migrant integration?

 

This is not something we would have official commentary on.

 

Some scholars argue that homogeneity within neighbourhoods makes it easier for refugees to feel ‘at home’, thus facilitating migrant and refugee integration to the arrival country. What pros and cons do you think segregation can have for people trying to settle?

 

Segregation is highly problematic, look for example at the treatment of the Roma people in many countries across Europe. In many countries (EU has opened infringement proceedings against Czech Rep. and Slovakia for this) Roma children face segregation in education. Equal access to housing and education let’s not forget are human rights. It will be vitally important also in the case of refugees and migrants that a strong anti-discrimination approach is used to ensure that segregation and the potential accompanying rights violations are avoided.

 

Making Heimat addresses the idea of creating a “new home” for refugees who have left their familiar environments. In short, it underlines the importance of an integration process. To what extent could resettlement contribute to the successful of a process of integration?

 

It is challenging enough for anyone to move to a new place, new culture, new language often away from networks of family and friends. Refugees have often fled very traumatising situations and therefore its desirable that they receive further assistance to help their transition such as counselling, training etc. Resettlement processes when done properly can hugely help in this way by speeding up and facilitating the transition process, this can also (depending also on whether they are allowed to work) increase the transition time to economic self-sufficiency and integration into society.

 

Do you think a temporary ‘Heimat’ is possible?

 

Having studied German philosophy and culture at University I understand that the German word ‘Heimat’ carries with it an emotional weight, going beyond the physical place of home to the broader psychological and cultural links to a social unit. Myself an Irish person living in Belgium, and having lived in many other countries over the past number of years I do believe indeed that a temporary Heimat is possible. Home as we say in English is where the heart is, so once you are willing to emotionally and intellectually invest in the place where you find yourself you can build a sense of Heimat in that place. Making new friendships and social connections is vital to this process I believe.

 

Amnesty International collaborates with Forensic Architecture, a research agency that provides advanced architectural and media research to legal and political forums. How can architecture contribute to making migrant and refugee needs visible?

 

Indeed Amnesty International collaborates with a research agency to use Forensic Architecture to document and analyse breaches of international humanitarian law and human rights law. It allows us even in densely populated urban areas, for example in the case of bombings, to dissect and model dynamic events as they unfold to ensure that evidence of any international crimes are fully recorded. With regard to refugees of course it is often conflict that they are fleeing. We hope by using this evidence in the long-run that there can be justice and accountability for breaches of international humanitarian law and therefore a reduction going forward in such violations in the future which would hopefully lead to a reduction in the number of those who need to flee in the first place.

More broadly architecture can be used to remind us all of the stories of migration from our own histories or reflect current events. Often in European countries you can see a historical trace of the migration history through the buildings that still stand. Whether it’s the relics of ancient Roma buildings in northern Europe or the beautiful gardens of the Real Alcázar Palace in Spain we can see how movement of different people through generations has influenced in beautiful ways our surroundings. This should serve as a reminder that the phenomenon of people moving is as old as human history itself and perhaps challenges some of the irrationally fearful narratives we hear today on the ‘dangers’ of migration. Marvelling at architecture brought to Europe by different cultures can also serve as a positive enforcement of the richness that a more diverse society can bring.

 

The 1951 Refugee Convention is said to be outdated. What changes could boost refugees’ empowerment and autonomy?  

 

The Convention is not outdated, it is extremely currently relevant. The problem is the lack of political will and leadership in today’s world to hold up the Conventions noble ambitions and to respect the rights that people hold under it. When we look at what is happening on the ground in Greece at the moment, we must despair. Men, women and children including elderly people, sick people and pregnant women are forced to live in circumstance that are not fit for the human person. Nothing is undermining their autonomy and empowerment more than this dehumanising treatment. It is vital that their needs and voices are directly listened to by policy makers. All too often at the moment political deals are made which will have huge consequences on peoples’ lives with little thought for what the people themselves want and need.

 

The UNHCR’ Global Trends 2015 shows that a growing number of refugees prefer to seek opportunities outside of refugee camps, away from encampment restrictions on movement, access to resources, ownership of assets and limitations on business activities. In light of this why do refugee camps persist?

 

Of course it is human nature not to wish to live a life on hold – to be left for years on end in a camp. We all aspire for a better life. The camps unfortunately persist due in part to the lack of willingness globally to provide resettlement places to those living there. They have nowhere else to go, they cannot return to the conflict zones but have no safe and legal routes such as resettlement to a more sustainable life either. This is why we are seeing so many people embarking on often dangerous irregular routes.

 

One of the most chilling statistics appearing in the media relates to the number of the missing children – more than 10.000 according to Europol – which further stresses the urgent need for action. Which immediate actions are required to tackle this?

 

Early detection and triggering of protection procedures is key. The EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency has also pointed to the problem that we do not have a fully functioning guardianship system in Europe, with each country operating a different system. What is very concerning is the cynical approach we see from certain politicians towards child rights in this situation. Some cite the ‘anchor child theory’ whereby children are sent alone with the sole purpose of abusing family reunification laws later. These allegations have never been backed up by any research. The sad reality is that war and conflict has created many orphans, led to families being separated. In addition to this and perhaps more importantly is, irrespective of the circumstances these children are highly vulnerable and have rights which are not being taken seriously enough by certain authorities. We need to treat every child as an individual with rights and have policies and practices that hold up their best interests given their particularly vulnerable situation.

 

The arrival of migrants and refugees has influenced the physical landscape of cities. Do you think that refugees and migrants should have a role in urban development planning in the host country?

 

Not something we would officially comment on.