Third country resettlement

Third country resettlement or refugee resettlement is, according to the UNHCR, one of three durable solutions for refugees who fled their home country. Resettled refugees may also be referred to as quota or contingent refugees, as countries only take a certain number of refugees each year.

History of resettlement

• The International Refugee Organization resettled over 1 million refugees between 1947 and 1951. They were scattered throughout Europe after World War II. 80% of them were resettled outside Europe.^[1] An example for those resettled within Europe are the 150,000 Polish soldiers and their families who were resettled in the UK by 1949.^[2]
• Due to the Soviet invasion in Hungary in 1956, 200,000 Hungarians fled to Yugoslavia and Austria. Nearly all 180,000 Hungarians who fled to Austria were resettled to 37 third countries within three years.^[3] The Soviet invasion in Czechoslovakia in 1968 had the same effect; many Czechoslovakians fled their country and were subsequently resettled.
• Most of its Asian minority were expelled from Uganda in 1972 and some 40,000 Ugandan Asians were resettled in third countries.
• Following a coup d’état in Chile in 1973, 5,000 refugees from neighbouring countries were resettled.
• 650,000 Vietnamese refugees were resetted in the United States.^[4]
• Between April 1992 and June 1997, following the first Gulf War, approximately 21,800 Iraqis were accepted for resettlement from Saudi Arabia.
• Between 1992 and July 1993 over 11,000 inmates from places of detention in Bosnia and Herzegovina had left for third countries. By June 1997, UNHCR had been directly involved in resettling some 47,000 refugees from former Yugoslavia.^[5]
• More than 100,000 refugees from Myanmar have been resettled from the refugee camps in Thailand since 2004 and as many people have been resettled from Malaysia during this same period.^[6]

Usefulness of resettlement

It is an incentive for refugee hosting countries to work with UNHCR and other organisations and has thus a large potential to strengthen civil society participation of these countries. It is likely to reduce the influence of human smuggling and trafficking. Some argue it is itself a pull factor though. Refugees who arrive bring many skills and other characteristics with them that contribute to the economy and to the society and culture of the receiving countries. Moreover, the service infrastructure which is put in place for resettled refugees has flow-on effects on the support available for asylum seekers. It helps to decongest or consolidate refugee camps and therefore improves the living conditions for those refugees remaining there; and the freed-up service capacity, previously only available to refugees, could also be made available to local residents. Remaining family members could potentially reunite with the resettled refugees if they make an application for family reunification. Remittances sent from resettled friends and relatives are enhancing the self-reliance and well-being of those who stayed behind. Remittances can eventually become an important economic factor for some refugee hosting countries. Resettled refugees are also likely to participate in peace-building initiatives. The existence of resettlement as an option makes countries of first asylum less likely to close their borders down as well as to refoule individuals or groups. The prospect of resettlement already westernises refugees and makes them aware of harmful traditional practices and hence influences refugees’ behaviour and attitudes. It helps balance the obligations of refugee hosting countries and is likely to prevent onward movement as well as further movements within the country.^[7]

Selection process

Precondition for resettlement is to be registered as a refugee with the UNHCR and to have undergone the Refugee Status Determination (RSD) process based on the 1951 Refugee Convention refugee definition. Among those refugees the UNHCR or other organisations (e.g. RefugePoint or HIAS) make referrals for resettlement if they identify a high level of risk and vulnerability whilst being in the first country of asylum. Selection procedures can vary between UNHCR offices.^[8] If one or more of the above criteria are met it still needs to be assessed whether third country resettlement is the most appropriate durable solution compared to voluntary return and local integration. After the refugees are referred for resettlement and agree to be resettled they are suggested to suitable countries that run resettlement programmes. Each participating government can select from the referrals and refugees themselves cannot choose their country of resettlement. Even though receiving countries should not select refugees according to their own criteria, it may be that societal and political desires influence which groups of refugees are received.^[8] Countries make their decisions based on either just a dossier or following an interview with the refugee.

It is also possible for multiple refugees to be submitted for resettlement if they share specific circumstances, such as similar reasons for their flight and no prospects of return. Examples for group resettlement were the Lost Boys of Sudan from Kenya, Liberians from Guinea and Sierra Leone, Burundians from Tanzania and Eritreans from Ethiopia and Saudi Arabia.^[9]

Biases in the selection process

Receiving countries tend to use their own criteria for selecting refugees for resettlement. Many governments prioritise women and complete families and deprioritise single males. This happens in order to minimise potential security risks.^[10]

Even the UNHCR resettlement officers who submit refugees' dossiers to potential receiving countries may themselves bias the selection. For example, it was revealed that UNHCR staff in Nairobi extorted money from refugee for resettlement places.^[11] Apart from that, large families are more likely to be considered for resettlement than singles, because resettlement officers have to work through fewer case files per submitted person when referring large families. Also single men, who are likely to receive a more thorough and time consuming security screening from resettlement states, are less likely to be submitted.^[12]

To be referred for resettlement may involve a tedious game with refugee chairmen, agency personnel or security guards. Chairmen can help making up stories or can ignore real security issues. The refugees themselves may manipulate the selection process. They may not mention that they have recently married in order not to delay their departure or they make themselves younger or older in order to, putatively, increase their chances for resettlement. They may even exaggerate their level of vulnerability as has been noticed in Kakuma: men staged violent attacks on themselves or their dwellings and women pretended rapes; they may be hiding their military or rebel past, or change their ethnicity, in order to belong to a certain persecuted group.^[13]

Stages of the resettlement journey

Pre-departure

After the selection process is completed there may be additional government interviews and security checks, followed by health assessments and a cultural orientation training. The latter should emphasise on the potential challenges for refugees in the receiving country.^[14] The cultural orientation trainings do not always happen and they differ in duration and depth. The Gateway Resettlement Programme for example, used to provide two weeks of cultural orientation when it was launched in 2004; however this has shrunk to three hours in 2016.^[15] In addition to helping refugees begin to prepare for life in a new country, cultural orientation can also contribute to the uncertainty and stress associated with resettlement.

Departure

Refugees are assisted to travel into the receiving country, usually by airplane. From being selected for resettlement to actually arriving in the US, it usually takes between 18–24 months.^[16] Refugees who are resettled in the US have to pay back a loan for their flight tickets.^[17]

In certain circumstances, where refugees have to be evacuated immediately from life-threatening situations in the first country of asylum, they can be brought to Emergency Transit Centres (ETC). These provide a temporary safe haven before receiving countries are ready to take them. The Timișoara Emergency Transit Centre in Romania, that opened in 2008, was Europe’s first evacuation centre.^[18] The Humenné Emergency Transit Centre in Slovakia was opened in 2009.^[19] However, these ETCs together can only accommodate up to 300 people.

IOM staff escorts the refugees to the receiving country and can provide a medical escort, if needed. As most refugees have no experience of air travel, the escort assists them with the preparation for the travel and with the journey itself, guiding and monitoring them throughout the journey and until they are handed over to the post-arrival service of the receiving country.^[14]

Post-arrival

Refugees are met at the airport and get immediate integration and orientation support in most countries. Upon arrival in the country refugees have the right to reside in the country and do not need to apply for asylum. Refugees who are resettled to the US have to pay rent after six months.^[17]

Resettlement programmes

In 2012 there were 26 third countries which run specific and ongoing resettlement programmes in co-operation with the UNHCR.^[20] The largest programmes are run by the United States, Canada and Australia. A number of European countries run smaller schemes and in 2004 the United Kingdom established its own scheme, known as the Gateway Protection Programme^[21] with an initial annual quota of 750.^[22] The smallest is run by Japan which offers 30 resettlement places per year.^[23]

Europe

In September 2009, the European Commission unveiled plans for new Joint EU Resettlement Programme. The scheme would involve EU member states deciding together each year which refugees should be given priority. Member states would receive €4,000 from the European Refugee Fund per refugee resettled.^[24]

Bulgarian refugee children from Gorno Brodi after the Second Balkan War resettled in Pestera

United States

The United States helped resettle roughly 2 million refugees between 1945 and 1979, when their refugee resettlement program was restructured. They now make use of 11 "Voluntary Agencies" (VOLAGS), which are non-governmental organizations that assist the government in the resettlement process.^[25] These organizations assist the refugees with the day-to-day needs of the large transition into a completely new culture. Usually, they are not funded by the government, but instead rely on their own resources and volunteers. Most of them have local offices, and caseworkers that provide individualized aid to each refugee's situation. They do rely on the sponsorship of individuals or groups, such as faith-based congregations or local organizations. The largest of the VOLAGS is the Migration and Refugee Services of the U.S. Catholic Conference.^[25] Others include Church World Service, Episcopal Migration Ministries, the Ethiopian Community Development Council, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, the International Rescue Committee, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, and World Relief.^[26]

There are a number of advantages to the strategy of using agencies other than the government to directly assist in resettlement. First of all, it has been estimated that for a federal or state bureaucracy to resettle refugees instead of the VOLAGS would double the overall cost. These agencies are often able to procure large quantities of donations and, more importantly, volunteers. According to one study, when the fact that resettlement workers often have to work nights, weekends, and overtime in order to meet the demands of the large cultural transition of new refugees is taken into account, the use of volunteers reduces the overall cost down to roughly a quarter.^[27] VOLAGS are also more flexible and responsive than the government since they are smaller and rely on their own funds.

South America

Around 1,100 refugees, mainly Colombians, were resettled within South America between 2005 and 2014 through the "Solidarity Resettlement Programme". However, as many refugees expected to be resettled to the US or Europe 22% of them left again, possibly returning to the country of first asylum or the country of origin.^[28]

In 2011 the combined quota of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay together was 230 resettlement places.^[29]

Resettlement gap

UNHCR Statistics

Resettlement arrivals

Resettlement departures

In terms of resettlement departures, in 2008, 65,548 refugees were resettled in 26 countries, up from 49,868 in 2007.^[38] The largest number of UNHCR-assisted departures were from Thailand (16,807), Nepal (8,165), Syria (7,153), Jordan (6,704) and Malaysia (5,865).^[38] Note that these are the countries that refugees were resettled from, not their countries of origin.

References