The Social Impact of the Refugee Crisis in the EU

Those who are up-to-date on the Syrian Refugee Crisis, a well-known situation unfolding within the European Union’s borders, have reviewed how the successes and failures of the EU’s public policies are impacting the current state of this crisis. However, there has been little discussion about how citizens of the EU, as well as incoming Syrian refugees, are dealing with the reality of the refugee crisis and the impacts on them. These refugees have experienced the atrocities of life under a war torn country and its devastating, consequential effects. With this, many expect for host countries to empathize with incoming refugees and to welcome them under the principle that they have been in their position before. International law has a place in dealing with the ever-growing refugee crisis taking place in the EU, but what are the people saying rather than the government? In the face of what seems to be an uncertain situation, how are the Syrian refugees within the EU reacting? Recent polls have showed many European citizens want to strengthen immigration regulation whereas Syrian refugees currently living within the borders of the EU feel the underlying policies of discrimination. Human ideals and societal influences of both parties have added a new aspect to what is already a complex situation, and trying to understand this bridges the gap between public policy and public influence.

Under the international law, when one claims a refugee status and is further granted an asylum, they are allowed to a number of certain rights and benefits. There has been great fear among the European populations that these migrants will have a severe impact on their economies and societies.The EU action, migration, and the subsequent pressures on the Schengen area has become of great interest to EU citizens. A recent survey conducted by the European Parliament (2016), found how citizens perceived the EU plan of action on migration and border management. The survey concluded that 74% percent of the respondents would like the EU to intervene more regarding the issue of migration, making this one of the policy areas with the highest support for EU involvement. The survey concluded that roughly two-thirds of EU citizens evaluate the current situation as insufficient, in which one can conclude that the citizens’ expectations of the EU’s involvement has not yet been attained, regardless of the increased attention to this policy area since the beginning of the migration increase. The highest support for the increase came from Cyprus (91%), Malta (87%) and Portugal (86%), with Denmark (57%), being the lowest (Orav, D’Alfonso & Dobreva, 2016). This clear disapproval of EU citizens can be further examined in a 2016 study by Jacob Poushter with Pew Research. He found that a median of 59% across 10 EU countries have concerns surrounding the idea that the increase in migrants will result in an increase the likelihood of terrorism in their home nations (Poushter, 2016). Additionally, there is a strong belief that the refugees will burden their society, as they have the potentials to take jobs and social benefits away from citizens. Another possible factor resulting in the negative views of migrants can stem from their lack in support for diversity in their nations as well as negative views about Muslims. Poushter found that “in no EU country surveyed did more than four-in-ten say that having an increasing number of people from many different races, ethnic groups and nationalities makes their country a better place to live” (Poushter, 2016).

Since 1999, The European Union has been working on building the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). This system was created to ensure that the rights of refugees under international law are properly protected in EU member states by proposing minimum standards of treatment and procedures for processing asylum seekers (Common European Asylum System, 2016). However, many EU states have failed to implement these standards properly, as the massive influx of Syrian refugees have overwhelmed Europe to resort to aggressive and suspicious treatment of incoming refugees. Refugees are fingerprinted, numbered and even detained for months at a time (Deaden, 2015). The refugees who fled to Europe seeking safety and acceptance are being met with hostility, suspicion and particularly brutal treatment from the police (Deaden, 2015). One Syrian migrant named Ramza said, “We always heard that Europeans took care of each other. And took care of animals. So it was a surprise when we were treated worse than dogs”. These refugees face hostility from the public sphere where people shout “get out of our country”, to the legal sphere where EU law allows refugees to be locked up for 18 months without a criminal conviction (Cobbe, 2016). They are often locked up for illegitimate offenses such as ‘threat to national security and public order’ and reasonable grounds to suspect the person will commit a crime (Open Society Foundation). Overall, refugees coming to Europe are met with blatant racism and discrimination legally and socially. They face even more hardships when these people desperately need human kindness in their turbulent lives. One refugee claimed life in the streets of Hungary was “the worst time. Even worse than living in the forest” (Cobbe, 2016). Of course, the EU does not aspire to treat these people so maliciously. The member states are clearly overwhelmed with numbers of refugees unprecedented in recent decades. However, there needs to be serious legal reforms in how the EU goes about handling and integrating these people, and above all there needs to be human compassion and kindness towards these people who have been met with nothing short of discrimination.

The hardest part of the refugee crisis is not accepting asylum seekers, but rather integrating them into society quickly and efficiently, so that they may continue to live in peace and with prosperity. According to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, member states are obliged to guarantee asylum seekers and refugees basic human rights upon arrival and after applying to the Common European Asylum System (Poptcheva & Stuchlik, 2015). However, the integration of asylum seekers varies amongst EU states; some practice inclusive integration policies, while others enforce coercive integration policies (Sunderland, 2016). Those who operate with inclusive integration, such as Sweden and Portugal, ultimately have the most success with social cohesion as they work to merge refugees into all aspects of life in the EU - healthcare, work, school, the economy, etc. Coercive integration, such as the religious dress-ban in France, can lead to xenophobic attitudes and failure to assimilate refugees properly, creating tensions within native people and newcomer migrants (Sunderland, 2016). While each member state is entitled to their own approach of integrating refugees, the EU does enforce fundamental policies that drive the assimilation processes of member states. For example, the EU Reception Conditions Directive ensures all applying asylum seekers receive housing, food, healthcare, employment, and psychological care (European Commision, 2016). While achieving refugee assimilation for each of these aspects is ideal, the reality is strikingly different. Several EU member states revert to placing asylum seekers in “isolated camps”, where residents are excluded from society and left with little to build their lives (Sunderland, 2016). This ultimately makes the assimilation process harder, and longer, since migrants are simply pushed to the side until “further notice.” It is understandable that EU member states are stressed with the high numbers of asylum seekers, but there is no quick, easy solution. Authorities and policy makers must remember that international human rights laws still apply, as well as the rights to nondiscrimination and equality, and should use them to guide their coming integration policies for the current refugee crisis (Sunderland, 2016).

EU countries have been divided on whether to use policies of Inclusive or Coercive integration. While inclusive policies are focused on humanitarian means of positively integrating refugees, coercive policies are driven by attitudes of unwillingness with the means of separating refugees from citizens. It is the job of the EU to educate the member state populations on the beneficial reasons of inclusively integrating refugees into society, rather than making the assimilation process into society intentionally hard for them. The EU has been silent on the issue of how policies of coercive integration are used by certain countries that infringe upon human rights of nondiscrimination and equality, which are principles of international and European law (Sunderland, 2016). Coercive integration is not working, and will not work; policies such as “religious dress ban” in France and “overseas integration tests” in the Netherlands are creating racial and religious tensions between citizens and refugees that can only end poorly. Additionally, coercive integration policies that require refugees to shed the fundamental aspects of their identity and culture are unlikely to succeed due to the fact that it is not a two-way process of mutual accommodation (Sunderland, 2016). The most effective way to integrate refugees into society is to use inclusive integration accompanied with a mandatory education program administered by the EU to inform the people on the benefits of inclusive integration. It is important for the EU to implement a policy that requires all countries to provide sufficient living conditions, food, water, education, and the opportunity for refugees to work and reunite with their families in order for them to become functioning members of society. Lastly, the EU must enforce that xenophobic attitudes, anti-muslim rhetorics, or any act committed that infringes upon refugee’s human rights will not be tolerated under the international laws of human rights.

The social and political views that many European citizens hold towards Syrian refugees has halted the progression of dealing with the refugee crisis. The various EU policies directly reflect upon of the public’s conflicting views regarding continuous arrival of refugees from Syria. This introduces new complications, in which member states are having trouble trying to find a policy that is fitting, effective, and fixes the situation at hand. Although European citizens are entitled to their own views and opinions, it is a problem when these views come into conflict with public policy. The humanitarian rights of Syrian refugees are being infringed upon due to certain integration processes that are currently be utilized within the EU. It is horrifying to see the loss of life and devastating events occurring in Syria, but to have these men, women, and children nearly escape death and be treated so poorly upon arrival to the EU is a global tragedy. Evidently, the European Union will continue to be divided by public and policy opinion regarding the refugee crisis until individuals are able to see that treating others with dignity and respect, rather than with discrimination, is ultimately the solution to the difficult task at hand.