Tag: Conflict

Europe’s role in the worst humanitarian crisis since WWII

Posted on by Paula Ordóñez

girl-982119_1920

It is a commonly held opinion that Syria’s civil war is the worst humanitarian disaster of our time. Nowadays, it is believed that it all started in the Syrian city of Deraa where the Assad family held the power. In March 2011 locals took to the streets to protest after 15 schoolchildren were arrested and tortured for writing anti-government graffiti on a wall. The protests were peaceful, calling for the release of the children, democracy and greater freedom in the country. The government responded with the army opening fire on protesters. The opposition is split between groups of rebel fighters, political parties and people living in exile, who cannot return to their country. The war is now between those for or against President Assad. In Iraq 2014, an extremist group (Islamic State) began to take over large areas of the country (they are a radical militant group which has used violence against anyone who doesn’t agree with their point of view). Many Syrian people have been forced to leave their homes and escape to other countries with a desperate need of help. Europe has said they will accept refugees. But is this feasible ?

If Syria´s civil war is the worst humanitarian disaster since World War II, every single person should think; what are we doing wrong? If in 2015 an atrocity of that size happens, the whole world should make an effort to help and understand. In the first place, not only Europe but every single continent of the world should have an open border for anyone who needs it.

On the one hand, allowing refuges into your country is an act of humanity. As it refers to Europe; having an open border for all refuges is necessary by all means. As people may not know Syrians could bring a new culture to Europe and Europeans should accept them, regardless of their cultural and ethnical background. As there are hundreds of thousands of refugees, at least half of them are children which means an opportunity for the growing economy and an increasing number in the European population. The major European obligation come from the fact that we know that more than 11 million are forced to leave their homes, more than 220,000 have been killed, and over 12,2 million are in need of assistance, and that it is only up to us to improve their situation.

On the other hand, it is easy to be against having an open border, because people are used to seeing first the negative side of everything. For Europe, having an open border and accepting refugees in each country means having at least half of the population against them. As Syrians are coming to Europe to be safe, they do not plan anything, and they cannot bring anything, that means Europe will have to provide them food, medical assistance, homes, schools for the children, water etc. All of this has to be paid by Europeans.

Moreover, Europeans cannot feel safe in their country as a consequence of the prejudiced anti-Islamic attitude which considers Islam to be equivalent of terrorism, which makes Europeans believe that refuges will not be able to adapt to their lifestyle.

We can conclude by saying that it is a fact that when people are in front of a problem like this, they often think it is impossible to solve and leave the problems to others. I honestly believe that we should intervene in this civil war in Syria, and we have the resources to help them.

 

About the author:

Processed with VSCOcam with f2 presetPaulo Ordoñez is a 16-year old student from Spain who enjoys sports ,traveling and photography.

 

Europe should have open borders for all Syrian and Afghan refugees

Posted on by Irene Herruzo Villamor

barbed-wire-946525_1920

Since 1970 Syria is under the dictatorship of the al-Assad family. Bashar controlled the country until 2011, when the Syrian Civil War broke. Violent repressions against activists demanding economic prosperity and political and civil liberties started. Several sides are disputing the territory and fighting among themselves and against Assad. The most dangerous is the Islamic State, the “successor” of Al-Qaeda. The conflict has claimed more than 230000 lives, has generated 11.5 million displaced persons and a total of four million refugees had to leave Syria. The situation of Syrian refugees is Europe’s biggest humanitarian crisis since World War II. Tens of thousands of people try to escape the war raging the Middle East across the Mediterranean to seek asylum in Europe. Thousands have already died trying to reach our continent, and those who succeed face with the lack of reaction from the European Union. Never before 2015, when the EU began to receive large numbers of immigrants called by the promise of a better life, had this situation been of any serious concern. This has become a problem for countries of this continent, as the uncontrolled movement of people at the borders is causing problems due to the lack of resources. The current refugee crisis is, perhaps, one of the most widely debated issues, generating controversy among the European population. Should Europe maintain an open border for all Syrians or reinforce them? Why is the EU struggling with immigrants and asylum seekers?

First, Article 14 of the Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has the right to seek asylum, and to enjoy in other countries. It is more than enough reason to open Europe’s borders to immigrants fleeing their countries because of war bombing, seeking a better life. An example is the death of Aylan Kurdi, a three year old Syrian boy drowned off the coast of Turkey, following a shipwreck, which shocked the whole European population and gave evidence to act. More than 432.761 refugees have crossed the Mediterranean since January, and 2748 are dead or missing. Also, the decision of Hungary to erect a fence along its border with Serbia, blocking the Schengen area is benefiting people-trafficking mafias. It is necessary to promote a profound reform of the European migration policy and asylum, including the opening of legal channels and a fair distribution of the burdens of refugees, underlining if these people could come without resorting to traffickers and risk their lives, the flow would be much neater.

On the other hand, the uncontrolled opening of European borders creates various conflicts in countries of this union. When Europe has not yet emerged from the crisis, it is preparing to welcome more than 500000 Syrian immigrants, also Afghans fleeing violence, Eritrean dictatorship and abuse and poverty in Kosovo. Are all the people coming to Europe refugees fleeing political persecution? We must also bear in mind that many immigrants are illegal and others, almost two thirds, do not come because of necessity but also to find a job and improve their quality of life. Immigration is equivalent to an increase in unemployment among locals. Vast numbers of people coming into the EU seeking for asylum would result in higher taxes placed on European citizens, social expenditures would rise to service the new millions of poor, crime would rise, racial tensions intensify, budgets fail, currencies fluctuate. The southern countries like Italy and Greece, have seen themselves overwhelmed by the large numbers of immigrants. Meanwhile, richer northern countries receive relatively few, except Germany. For instance, Italy is providing $ 9.7 monthly in the programme; Denmark and others make it clear that they will not offer help for rescue operations. Another big problem is the international mafia which moves refugees and illegal immigrants from one place to another.

We do not want to see people suffering from hunger, lack of shelter, thousands of deaths, desperate people fleeing war in their country with their children in their arms, agglomerations in Hungarian train stations, border crossings full of mafias and the cheating of innocents. Sad is to say that to stop this there are two ways, let them all in or stop them trying to come. We can conclude by saying that borders should be open, not only European, but global, to solve this serious humanitarian problem of migration crisis. And also do everything possible to solve conflicts in the countries of origin so its inhabitants do not have to travel because of wars. Having non-governmental organizations, the United Nations, etc., it would be possible to contribute with international assistance in the refugee camps, providing basic needs.

 

About the author:

Irene Herruzo VillamorIrene Herruzo Villamor (16) is a student from Spain and enjoys expressing her opinion during debates at school.

Refugee crisis

Posted on by Mónica Martínez

map-of-the-world-1005413_1280

“The number of people living as refugees from war or persecution exceeded 50 million in 2013, for the first time since World War Two” states a report by the UN refugee agency. Not surprisingly at all, the current refugee crisis has become one of the most widely debated issues due to its repercussion on a global scale. While everyone agrees that the origin of such crisis was the Arab Spring, a series of peaceful, pro-democracy movements that began in 2011 across the Middle East which, unfortunately, led to terrible wars in Libya and Syria, most people fail to have similar ideas regarding what should be done in order to tackle the problem of how to host millions of people.

The notion that Europe should take in a number of refugees as large as necessary has been backed up by many using the following arguments. In the first place, since the article 14 of the UDHR states that everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy asylum in other countries, the advocates of an open European border claim that it is the duty of all to host the refugees. Besides the fact that it is a basic human right, empathy makes people want to help to the extent possible to those exposed to inhumane situations; would a normal person not want help when he has been forced to abandon everything he knew, to live in harsh conditions in refugee camps, or even to attempt to cross seas with no safety measures risking his life and the lives of his loved ones? Secondly, developing regions hosted 86% of the world’s refugees. Taking into account that according to UNHCR, it would cost $20,537,705 only to finance the Syria Regional Refugee Coordination Office, it becomes clear that the costs are high. Developing countries appear to simply not be able to afford to invest the necessary money on refugee camps as opposed to European countries. Lastly, refugees have skills, talents and aspirations, and the ability to contribute socially and economically.

On the other hand, a number of European nations have made it clear they are not willing to welcome many newcomers, despite the current crisis, e.g., Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban built a barbed-wire fence along Hungary’s border with Serbia and introduced a new migratory law making any fence crossing a criminal offense. Those who agree with the Hungarian Prime Minister often argue that taking in all asylum-seekers would have a negative effect on European societies as well as economies. Refugees will not only be a “loss of capital” for the states but also a threat to their civic identity. People shudder at the sight of the potential change that the refugees might bring with them, something which contributes to the rise of an anti-immigration feeling. Illustrating this point, Orban stated: “Is it not worrying in itself that European Christianity is now barely able to keep Europe Christian?”

In conclusion, the EU has announced an emergency quota system that will spread out the influx of refugees across its member states, aiming to improve the situation and avoid irrevocable mistakes. I strongly support the opinion of having open European borders for all Syrians and Afghans and honestly believe that the European Union should be realistic about the number of refugees that will arrive in the near future to our continent as to handle the crisis appropriately.

 

About the author:

Photo Mónica Martínez Jorge is 16-year-old student from Spain who is interested in politics. 

Message to our world leaders

Posted on by Manfred Pohl

Professor Pohl

Today we stand at an era of major change, but we are also at a crossroad where we have to make decisions on how we want to live our lives in the future.

The terrorist attacks in Paris on 13 November 2015 and the terror in many parts of the world today (e.g. IS and Boko Haram) illustrate in an extreme way that patriarchal structures are still very dominant in most parts of the world.

Not only have men invented religion but they also use religion to justify their actions. They want to decide on how people should live their cultural, religious as well as their social and professional lives. They misuse religion as a justification for their terrorist acts and want to create chaos, fear and a feeling of insecurity worldwide.

The consequence in western countries is not only the fear of more terrorist attacks but also an increase of right-wing extremism. In other words, liberal democracy is threatened from two sites: Global terrorism and right-wing radicalism.

We also know that the world has become more connected through modern digital communication systems that enable the sharing of information on a global level within seconds. Yet, at the same time terrorists are also using the same media for their own purposes.

Thus, the world has become more connected but also more vulnerable. What can we do about it?

  • We need a global territorial reform. The main world leaders, who are currently meeting at the G20 summit in Turkey have to send a strong political signal showing that they condemn the terrorist acts and that they do not tolerate war and terror. Moreover they need to demonstrate their will to solve current and arising conflicts between their countries. This means that state borders have to be determined and guaranteed. The use of armed forces will be necessary to carry out this task.
  • Furthermore it is indispensable to promote the inclusion and equal opportunities in countries with a high number of socially deprived groups and a high unemployment rate. It is important to create structures with equal access to education as well as economic and social help for those who need it, so that people get the chance to live in their own countries and are not forced to be refugees in the search for a better life.
  • Finally, the separation of state and religion is necessary for a successful global territorial reform. Moreover, the acceptance of every culture and every religion are fundamental requirements for a peaceful coexistence.

All of this might seem utopian. However, it is a project that is feasible if the powerful of the world today are willing to put it into practice.

 

About the author:

MP1Prof. Dr. Manfred Pohl is the Founder and Chairman of Frankfurter Zukunftsrat, the think tank that organises “My Europe”. more…

 

The European Unity

Posted on by Robin Blomgren
Unity of people, Spotlight Europe
European Unity means a unity of people. (Flickr: fady habib/licensed under CC BY 2.0)

There is a classic saying that roughly goes “we study history in order to predict what may lie ahead of us”. Bearing that in mind we can look back to grant the opportunity of seeing forward with a broader perspective. Allow me to more precisely justify what I am aiming at; the well-known struggle between the Eastern and Western world – now evolved?

To this day the conflict partly exists between Middle Eastern countries and the US. Fairly recently Russia too joined this game of power measurements. Controversial Putin managed to upset many of the Western world’s great leaders by initiating the “conquest” of Crimea – so as to show that he was in the running for the royal throne of Europe without further consent. Thus both of these examples are present, history reveals that this plot reaches far back in time, for instance the warfare Western Rome and the Eastern/Byzantine Empire held against one another.

Recent articles and theories suggest that our future concern in struggle might not exist within the West versus the East but rather between the poor developing countries localized on the Southern hemisphere and the rich industrial nations of the North. Material and financial inequality are enough to be considered injustice – is it fair that North America, Western Europe and Japan account for less than 18 percent of the world population but represent more than 60 percent of world income? Hardly.

“I fear for an outbreak”

My worrying conclusion is that should we not deal with this equality concern now, I fear we’re facing something ravingly more serious henceforth – with great danger towards not only the EU but our exclusively beloved earth. I fear for an outbreak affecting the majority of nations we so well have come to know. But the outbreak is yet to arrive and plenty of time remains for us to change our future from, what can turn into, dystopia to utopia. However, I believe a minor push by the EU is enough to alter the direction of where this eventual future crisis is heading.

“The EU can be an agent of change in the world, a trend-setter, and not just a passive witness.” – The Members of the Reflection Group

We must not take shelter behind the immense walls built by the right-wing extremists and isolate ourselves from the world outside. Time has come to open our arms, embrace our neighbors regardless of their ethnicity, condition or local ties. The human species is a herd animal by instinct. Therefore we must act by those standards and show the true meaning of a loving civilization. It is up to us all EU citizens to unite in pride, to discover solidarity within other nations for the challenges ahead are too vast for us to handle by ourselves. Prior to that though, we must furthermore secure internal cohesion fora solid growth within the Union. Thenceforth our ability of influencing developments beyond our borders will enhance.

“Optimism is key to success”

Realistically a prediction of the future is beyond the bounds of possibility. However, I choose to be optimistic. In fact, my experience is that optimism is key to success, regardless the task. Nevertheless, on account we unify, as in one European Unity, I see an increase regarding the world economy influence, but as well a firmer establishment in the aspects of military, defense and the preservation of peace. Moreover, I believe as in one single unity our ambition to unravel the economic crisis in areas such as Spain and Greece would be more eagerly escalated in comparison to how the situation is presently. In turn that equals less spending and financing in other areas. The currently stronger industrial countries would have to sacrifice; adapt their budgets for a future greater cause in form of economical contribution – leastwise the total distribution would look different.

“It is up to us all EU citizens to unite in pride.”

In addition to that I believe most of us primarily would feel rather confused due to the enormous transition. Without hesitation I can admit that it somewhat frightens me – to suddenly partake in something as colossal as a population of over 500 million inhabitants! The mechanics of democracy across the nation would become complicated. Endless diversity in traditions and culture. What would the educational system develop into? Countless questions will arise, a confusion of a former continent. I doubt we are ready for that by the year of 2030. However I wish our journey towards the Unity has come to a beginning. Certainly, we speak different languages and follow different cultures and traditions –however, our similarities outweigh the differences. We share the same history and will be part of the same future – the European Unity.

About the author:
Robin Blomgren, Spotlight Europe
Robin – Author at Spotlight Europe

Robin participated in the “My Europe” workshop in Stockholm, Sweden in November 2014.

Time for Change

Posted on by Manfred Pohl
Prof. Dr. Manfred Pohl Remix, Spotlight Europe
“It is time for change”, finds Prof. Dr. Pohl. (Picture: Remix by Spotlight Europe)

We have lost track of the trouble spots of this world. But you do not have to face the world´s problems in order to have doubts on a peaceful future. The very last days in Europe are enough to leave us stunned and make us shake the head in disbelief. Especially young people in Europe do not grasp what really happens here while all the political talk is done.

“One should send three young people to Minsk.”

The negotiations in Minsk have been a farce: Vladimir Putin, Angela Merkel and François Hollande talked for 14 hours without any real result to present at the end of the day. The vital question is, though: Have these politicians nothing else to do but to quarrel over an explicit breach of international law? Time can be used better. One should send three young people aged between 15 and 20 to Minsk. In one hour they would achieve a neat proposal for solution. But then: Who takes notice of the youth?

For sure not old tyrants like Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdogan or Viktor Orbán. It is up to the youth though to shape and be our future, not old quarrelling politicians.

In the second half of the 20th century, the disorder of the world has given way to the hope of building a peaceful world. Although communism and fascism are no serious issues at the moment, the gaining momentum of populist left- and right-wing movements threatens to pull down the fragile structure of peace and democracy and to destroy these hopes.

“Brussels clings almost desperately to its outdated system.”

Brussels clings almost desperately to its outdated institutional system and does not see the change that is needed. A change that can only come if the voice of young Europeans gains weight and is taken seriously! The youth’s system of values is much more credible than that of cautiously haggling politicians.

Thus, it is high time that the youth co-decides on the institutional framework of Europe. It is high time that the youth has its say on democracy. It is time for change.

About the author:

MP1Prof. Dr. Manfred Pohl is the Founder and Chairman of Frankfurter Zukunftsrat, the think tank that organises “My Europe”. more…