The questions and criticism started only days after the March 22 suicide bombings in the Belgian capital of Brussels: Is the dysfunctional city the Jihadi capital of Europe? Could the terrorists have been stopped if not for inept security forces?
Full article published in Dallas Morning News on 19 April 2016.
RIGA – More refugees arrived in Latvia yesterday but Interior Ministry official says they could be returned home once conflicts are over.
A second group of refugees from Iraq and Syria – four families, a total of 15 people, including seven children – arrived in Latvia yesterday under the European Union’s refugee relocation programme, the LETA news agency reported.
Latvia is set to receive 481 asylum seekers from Greece and Italy by the end of 2017 as part of the EU’s relocation programme. In addition, the government has agreed to resettle another 50 refugees from outside the EU. The first six refugees – two families from Eritrea and Syria – arrived in Riga in February.
However, Interior Ministry State Secretary Ilze Pētersone-Godmane yesterday claimed that in the event of a halt in conflict, their refugee status would be reviewed and they may have to return to their home country, the Baltic Times reported. According to Pētersone-Godmane, the status of refugees who fled the Balkan wars during the 1990s is currently hotly debated in Germany. She asserted that according to German law they would have to return.
Pētersone-Godmane is correct that under the EU program there are no specific provisions about the exact status asylum seekers relocated from Greece and Italy will need to be provided by host countries. The Interior Ministry State Secretary is also right when she says that refugees may be returned to their home countries once conflicts are over.
Refugee (Geneva Convention) status versus subsidiary and humanitarian protection
Formally recognised refugees are judged to be facing a “well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership of a particular social group” and for these reasons are unwilling or unable to return to their home country. So-called “subsidiary protection” applies to those who do not qualify as refugees but would “face a real risk of suffering serious harm” if returned to their country of origin. Finally, rejected asylum seekers can be allowed to stay temporarily on “humanitarian status” to protect individuals such as the terminally ill or unaccompanied minors.
The table below illustrates the status of those granted international protection last year. The cross-country variance is striking: Germany granted 97 per cent of asylum seekers Refugee (Geneva Convention) status but Slovakia only six percent. The difference can be explained by different asylum policies, not the characteristics of asylum seekers themselves.
Typically, recognised refugees receive a temporary residence permit for three years, after which the government can indeed review the situation of the country of origin. (Those with “subsidiary” and “humanitarian” protection usually receive a one-year temporary residence.)
Yet it is unclear what debate in Germany the Interior Ministry State Secretary is referring to. The European refugee crisis of the 1990s displaced 2.5 million in the former Yugoslavia and its successor states. The 350,000 refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina who fled to Germany were only provided temporary protection status, because European neighbours were not willing to provide them long-term asylum. Their cases were also not individually reviewed, as is required under the Refugee Convention. This meant that they were immediately repatriated after the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement. Most, if not all, of the Bosnian war refugees returned, resettled in the United States or have become German citizens.
The Vilnius Regional Administrative Court yesterday rejected an appeal by an Iraqi refugee family who arrived in the Lithuanian capital under the European Union’s refugee relocation programme in December 2015, the Lithuania Tribune reported.
The family had appealed against the Lithuanian Migration Department’s decision in February to grant them subsidiary (temporary) protection instead of full-fledged refugee status.
Refugee status grants permanent residency whereas subsidiary protection provides only temporary residence, which can be revoked once the situation in the country of origin improves.
“The asylum seekers failed to provide sufficient arguments regarding individual persecution directed directly against them and their minor children,” the court motivated its decision to dismiss the case in a press release. Judge Arūnas Kaminskas told reporters that the Migration Department had adequately assessed the family’s situation in Iraq, according to the Lithuania Tribune.
The family of four was the first that arrived in Lithuania under the EU relocation scheme, through which EU member states will take 160,000 refugees that are stranded in Greece and Italy by the end of 2017.
Under the EU programme there are no specific provisions about the exact status (refugee or subsidiary protection) relocated asylum seekers will need to be provided by host countries.
Football great Johan Cruijff today died at age 68 after a battle with lung cancer. Cruijff was probably one of the most famous Dutchmen and definitely the most well-known Dutch football player: wherever in the world I have been over the past 30-odd years, the name Cruijff was always a foolproof topic to strike up a conversation.
Cruijff was the first “modern” football player, an athlete who revolutionised the game in more than one way. He was a visionary and master of football tactics. He introduced, together with coach Rinus Michels, the concept of “total football” at Ajax Amsterdam and later as captain of the Dutch national team during the World Cup in Germany in 1974. (The first of three World Cup finals the Netherlands played, and lost, during my lifetime.) He helped Ajax win three European Cups in a row from 1971-1973.
Total football, with players passing the ball frequently to seek advantage, and switch positions seamlessly to adjust to the flow of play, electrified and influenced the game worldwide. This possession-based playing style Cruijff promoted, with an emphasis on relentless attack, has been widely copied since.
After his successes with Ajax he moved to FC Barcelona mid-season in 1973 and led the Catalan team to its first national title in 14 years. Most memorable was the 5-0 win at arch-rival Real Madrid, a team that was heavily supported by Franco’s dictatorship. Some Catalans still refer to Cruijff as “El Salvador,” the saviour.
Johan Cruijff revolutionised and professionalised the game in other ways too. The transfer fee FC Barcelona paid to Ajax (US$14 million in today’s dollars) was unheard of at the time and considered a milestone in the commercialization of sport. He was also one of the first football players to take on corporate sponsorships. For the 1974 World Cup the Dutch football federation had signed a sponsorship deal with sports brand Adidas whereas Cruijff had his own deal with rival Puma. He refused to wear the team’s official jersey and ended up playing in a custom-made shirt, and shorts, bearing only two stripes on the sleeves instead of Adidas’s famed three.
Cruijff’s virtuosity won him many accolades: he was awarded the European Footballer of the Year trophy in 1971, 1973 and 1974. And was named Europe’s best player of the 20th century. As coach of Ajax and Barcelona, with whom he won four Spanish titles, he won his fourth European club title.
Unfortunately I was too young to have seen Johan Cruijff play during his glory days at Ajax and Barcelona in the 1970s. My first memory of hearing his name was during the World Cup in Argentina in 1978, an event Cruijff had decided to boycott for reasons that are still not fully known. That there were frictions with other players on the national team was no secret; Cruijff has always been known for being dominant, stubborn, uncompromising and forceful. Another reason given at the time was that he opposed the military dictatorship in Argentina, which, a few years later, made him stand out for me among the mostly apolitical football players.
The first time I saw Cruijff play was on 6 December 1981, when, at age 34, he made his comeback at Ajax after his tenure in Barcelona and an interlude playing for the Los Angeles Aztecs and Washington Diplomats in the United States. He scored an absolutely magical goal, concluding a rush past several defenders with a subtle lob over the goalkeeper from the tip of the penalty box. For several years my generation had the privilege to enjoy Cruijff’s superb game, until his retirement in 1984, which he crowned with both the national cup and championship playing for arch-rival Feyenoord Rotterdam. As a teenager I, and many of my friends, always tried to copy the so-called “Cruijff turn” — a technique he used for passing defenders by faking toward them, then flicking the ball behind his own other leg in the opposite direction and darting after it.
Cruijff was larger than life. He announced last October that he was suffering from lung cancer but continued to write his popular –and in Dutch football very influential– weekly column in De Telegraaf newspaper. Last month Cruijff said he was “2-0 up in the first half” of his battle against cancer. Cruijff was known for his creative use –some would say, abuse– of the Dutch language, commonly referred to as “Cruijffiaans.” “Every disadvantage has its advantage” and “You can’t win without the ball” are oft-quoted classics.
As former Dutch tennis player Raemon Sluiter aptly put it: “‘You have to have lived, otherwise you may not die’ he would probably have said. Rest in peace, Mr. Cruijff.”
After months of negotiations, the 28 European Union leaders and the Turkish government last weekend reached an agreement to slow the refugee influx from Turkey. In exchange for taking back Syrian refugees who crossed to Europe illegally, the EU will accept refugees from Turkey, along with 6 billion euros ($6.7 billion) and a renewed prospect for Turkey to join the EU.
Full article published in Dallas Morning News on 23 March 2016.
BRUSSELS – Dozens were killed and hundreds injured in Brussels this morning in apparent suicide attacks.
Around 8 am local time two bombs went off in the departure hall of Brussels international airport, Zaventem, 11 kilometers from the city center. Shortly thereafter an incoming train exploded at the Maelbeek subway station, in the middle of the European Quarter in Brussels.
“This is our 911,” said Bart Somers, the mayor of neighboring Mechelen on Belgian public radio shortly after the attacks.
Belgian authorities immediately closed down all public transport and train stations in Brussels and advised everyone to stay inside while hunting down possible suspects involved in the attacks.
A few hours after the attacks downtown Brussels looks like a ghost town. Central Station is still closed. The famous medieval Great Market, which on a regular day attracts huge crowds, is nearly empty.
Yet public life in Brussels has not completely come to a standstill. In Schaerbeek, a Brussels neighbourhood bordering the European Quarter, men can be seen hanging around public parks, not sure what to do. A mother is picking up her daughter from a daycare. “I am in total shock,” says Nathalie DeHaene, who can’t wait to be reunited with her 3-year old.
Unlike during the manhunt for the Paris attackers last November, Brussels’s European Quarter is now completely locked down. Police and military are patrolling the streets. The EU flags at the buildings of the European Commission, the heart of Europe, at a stone throw from the Maelbeek subway station where at least 20 people died and more than 100 were wounded, are halfmast. Civil servants are leaving the numerous buildings of EU institutions, including the European Parliament. No one is allowed to (re)enter the area.
Meanwhile tourists gathered in places like the Parc du Cinquantenaire, are following the ensuing developments on their smartphones, waiting what happens next.
At 14:30 local time the sounds of ambulances bringing victims from the metro station to nearby hospitals can still be heard. And helicopters are hovering over the city to provide back up and surveillance.
At 15:45 authorities lift the lock down for most of the city. Office workers make their way to parking garages and the main train stations. The streets fill up. Brussels gets ready for the evening commute as traffic resumes. At Central Station in downtown Brussels commuters are waiting, patiently and visibly relieved, in an ever-longer line to access the one entrance that is open. Each passenger entering the station is strip-searched by police officers.
“We have been so lucky not to have been among the victims,” says Marie Teunstedt. She arrived at work in downtown Brussels this morning at 8:15, right after the bombs exploded at Brussels Zaventem airport. The Maelbeek metro station is three blocks away from her federal government office. Ms. Teunstedt has been following the events all day from her office via the Internet as telephones were down. “This is so difficult to comprehend,” she sighs.
Julie, a civil servant for the European Commission who did not want to give her full name, also stands in line in front of Central Station. She was on board of the subway to Madou station, one stop before Maelbeek station, when the bomb went off. Julie works as a communications officer in the Directorate-General for Competition of the European Commission. As far as she knows, none of the colleagues in her department have been wounded or killed. “Only an hour-and-a-half after did we receive an update. I guess they wanted to be certain that all information was accurate,” she says.
Brussels North Station is now also open. All but the main entrance to the train station has been cordoned off by police and military. The station is encircled by police vans and military vehicles.
The stores in the sprawling departure hall are still closed down. Police halt and search a young immigrant who stands by, which under normal circumstances would have been described as profiling.
In the heavily guarded departure hall commuters are waiting for their delayed trains. Koffi Djokpa waits for his ride to Brain-le-Comte, a –French-speaking– Walloon municipality south of Brussels. He arrived at work this morning after the attacks and just before public transport was shut down. “I guess I was lucky,” he says in fluent Dutch.
He admits that during his workday as a maintenance engineer in the Flemish Ministry of Education, one of the high rises next to North Station, he did not get much information about what was going on in the city.
“I did not expect this. In fact, Brussels has become safer over the past years in my view,” says Mr. Djokpa, an immigrant from Togo who has lived in Belgium for 15 years.
When I tell Taher Alkhteb an hour later that public transport is running again, he is surprised. He did not know. He is the Egyptian owner of a falafel restaurant in a buzzing commercial street with a Middle Eastern flavour in the nearby Schaerbeek district. His restaurant has been open all day. “Politics, always politics…,” says Mr. Alkhteb. “This is the darkest day in my life.”
Five minutes later police find a bomb and an ISIS flag during a search in an apartment two streets over from his restaurant.
40-YEAR SAHRAWI STRUGGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE
SMARA – The Sahrawis were displaced during the Western Sahara War (1975-76) by Moroccan forces and have been living in refugees camps near Tindouf, Algeria ever since. With most of the estimated 90,000 to 135,000 Sahrawis still living in the camps, their situation is one of the most protracted refugee crisis in the world.
The limited opportunities for self-reliance in the harsh desert environment have forced the Sahrawis to rely on international humanitarian assistance for their survival. However, the Sahrawi camps differ from most refugee camps in the level of self-organisation. Most affairs in camps are run by the refugees themselves, with relatively little outside interference. The five camps are governed by the Polisario Front, the government of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR). SADR’s government in exile and administration are located in the Rabouni refugee camp.
A photo essay.
!["Long live the RASD [Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic]"](https://i0.wp.com/frankelbers.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/22Long-live-the-RASD-Sahrawi-Arab-Democratic-Republic22.jpg?ssl=1)
!["Long live the RASD [Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic]"](https://i0.wp.com/frankelbers.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Monthly-distribution-of-flour-by-the-World-Food-Program.jpg?ssl=1)
!["Long live the RASD [Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic]"](https://i0.wp.com/frankelbers.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Banner-for-divestment-campaign-in-Western-Sahara.jpg?ssl=1)
While the refugee crisis in the Middle East and Europe captured headlines around the world in 2015, another major migration trend is picking up pace behind the scenes: urbanization.
Full article published in Deseret News on 23 February 2016.
TORONTO – A cholera outbreak in the world’s largest refugee camp in Kenya has now killed at least 12 people and sickened over 1,500 amid rains linked to El Niño.
Health workers and humanitarian agencies fear cholera will spread to other camps and refugee settlements in East Africa when the rainy season starts next month.
Cholera, a water-borne bacterial illness transmitted through contaminated drinking water causes fever, vomiting and watery diarrhea, flared up in November in Kenya’s Dadaab and Alinjugar camps. The first victim was a boy who had played in contaminated water pools at the camps, which house 348,000 refugees and asylum-seekers, the majority who have fled violence in neighbouring Somalia.
In Dadaab and other refugee camps and settlements in the region, there have been outbreaks in 2011, 2013 and 2014, but were always isolated cases that could be stopped immediately.
Neighbouring counties in Kenya have also been effected by cholera, as well as next-door Tanzania. But, camps and other temporary settlements are at higher risk due to the limited drinking water and sanitation infrastructure.
“From Ethiopia to Haiti to Papua New Guinea, we are seeing the damage from El Niño, and we believe the impact on public health is likely to continue throughout 2016, even after El Niño winds down,” warned Dr Richard Brennan of the World Health Organization (WHO) last month. “To prevent unnecessary deaths and illnesses, governments must invest now in strengthening their preparedness and response efforts.” Doctors Without Borders (MSF) recently added cholera as one of the five epidemics to look out for in 2016.
The current El Niño from 2015 to 2016 is predicted to be the worst in recent years, and comparable to the El Niño in 1997-1998, which had major health consequences globally.
El Niño is a weather pattern caused by Pacific Ocean warming. It has brought massive droughts to parts of Eastern and Southern Africa, while countries around the Great Lakes region like Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda face unusually heavy rainfall and flooding.
Increased displacement in the Great Lakes region, including people fleeing conflicts in Burundi and Mozambique, has also put displaced peoples camps in neighbouring countries like Malawi at risk. “Clearly, places that are overcrowded are at higher risk,” said Dr. Dominique Legros, cholera focal point at WHO’s Department for Pandemic & Endemic Diseases in a telephone interview.
The cholera outbreak in Dadaab is now under control and has not reached other major refugee camps settlements in Kakuma (northeastern Kenya), Nairobi and Mombassa. An outbreak control team from the UN refugee agency UNHCR and partners has worked with the Kenyan Health Ministry and Department of Refugee Affairs officials to treat cases and stamp out the disease at the sprawling Dadaab complex with increased levels of chlorine, which kills cholera-causing bacteria, at water points in the camps. Better hygiene, especially the use of latrines and hand washing with soap, has been promoted through hourly public announcements. Each refugee also received 250-gram bars of soap with the latest food distribution, and this will continue monthly for several months, according to Mr. Duke Mwancha, spokesperson for UNHCR in Kenya.
Now the emphasis will be on prevention. In January, WHO approved a third cholera vaccine in order to increase its global stockpile. These vaccines can contribute to preventing outbreaks among populations living in high-risk areas, where usual control measures are not sufficient. The vaccine was pre-emptively administered in refugee camps in Tanzania after one outbreak.
“The vaccine is not the silver bullet, it is a new tool to help,” said Dr. Monica Rull, operational health advisor for MSF in Geneva. There is a limited stock of the cholera vaccines. It is mainly used during humanitarian emergencies when it is administered pre-emptively, as in Tanzania last year, or reactively to contain an outbreak, as is now being done in new refugee camps in Malawi. Both Dr. Rull and Dr. Legros emphasize that the vaccines are to be used in combination with traditional cholera control measures. “It’s vaccine and awareness raising and access to safe water and treatment of patients,” said Dr. Legros.
Cholera is a disease that spreads very quickly. “If you want to contain an outbreak […] you really need to detect it as soon as possible,” said Dr. Legros.
WHO will organize a regional meeting with the ministries of health, humanitarian agencies and political leaders in Nairobi next month to review the response to cholera outbreaks and how to prepare for future responses.
RIGA – “Do you people live here?” a Riga taxi driver yells at a black woman wrapped in a thick scarf who is pushing a stroller down a street lined with delapidated grey brick buildings and covered in a thin layer of snow.
Marie (not her real name) and her one-year-old daughter arrived in Riga in August from the Democratic Republic of Congo. They are among a handful of asylum seekers living in the Mucenieki refugee centre on the outskirts of Riga, Latvia’s capital.
Built as a Soviet military base, today the area consists of cheap housing for primarily blue-collar workers who commute to the capital. The refugee centre – a fenced-off three-story building, which opened in 1999 – can accommodate around 200 people but currently only houses 54.
The Baltic states – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – between them are expected to accept 1,481 asylum seekers by the end of 2017 as part of the EU’s controversial relocation programme. Latvia, with two million inhabitants, is set to receive 481 asylum seekers – a fraction of the 160,000 refugees EU member states agreed to take from Greece and Italy over the next two years. In addition, the Latvian government has agreed to resettle another fifty refugees from outside the EU, according to UNHCR and the Latvian government. The relocation scheme will cost EUR 14,9 million, with EUR 8,4 million coming from the national budget and the remainder from the EU.
Just before Christmas, the first refugee families arrived in Tallinn and Vilnius, the capitals of Estonia and Lithuania. Latvia expects its first arrivals through the relocation scheme in February.
The asylum system in Latvia is relatively new in comparison with many other member states. To date, the country has received among the lowest numbers of asylum applications in the entire EU, in both absolute and relative terms. From 1998, when the asylum system was introduced, until September 2014, a total of 1,366 persons had applied for asylum in Latvia of which 64 were granted refugee status, and 112 temporary protection, according to the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR.
As in other East European countries like Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, there is a lot of resistance to the EU relocation programme. Policymakers worry that the refugees will use up limited resources. And ordinary citizens are both concerned and divided. “I’m afraid of losing my traditions,” an old woman told a local newspaper, standing next to Riga’s Freedom Monument. “I already suffered under the Soviets. Finally we live in a free nation, and I don’t want to lose this again.” There appears to be a generation gap in the perception of refugees in Latvia, with older generations – including many politicians – having more negative views than younger Latvians who grew up after the collapse of communism.
Most Latvian political parties, both the main opposition social democratic Harmony party and the ruling centre-right coalition, have responded to the European Union’s calls for more solidarity in accepting refugees through the relocation scheme by warning that the newcomers will not be able to integrate, will live on benefits and engage in criminal activities. The centre-right government, composed of the Unity party of prime minister Laimdota Straujuma, the conservative Union of Greens and Farmers and right-wing National Alliance, reluctantly agreed to the EU relocation scheme. Yet prime minister Laimdota Straujuma resigned on December 7, along with her cabinet, partially due to disagreements within her own Unity party over the EU relocation scheme.
The fact that in the past 25 years, Latvia has not been able to fully integrate its large Russian minority is often cited as another reason the country should not accept newcomers from more unfamiliar cultures.
Yet unlike in neighbouring Estonia, where protestors marched through the capital as part of an anti-immigrant rally calling for stricter EU border controls and a national referendum on whether the country should accept its quota of refugees, there haven’t been public protests in Latvia.
It is the lack of experience with refugees and migrants that is striking in homogeneous Latvia.
“We have one student from China,” said Pēteris Ševčenko, the principal of Riga’s Natālijas Draudziņas Secondary School, the only school reachable by public transport from the Mucenieki refugee centre. Four refugee children from Iraq are expected to start school here this year. Ševčenko admits that although his teachers are highly motivated, his school is ill-prepared to welcome students that don’t speak Latvian or English. “Parents tell me that they fear that the newcomers will try to convert their children to Islam,” said Ševčenko.
According to Iveta Zarina, spokesperson with the Ministry of Education and Science, a total of eight schools in the country have experience teaching refugees.
“Teaching Latvian to refugees arriving here is the highest priority for the Latvian government and people, therefore every person arriving to Mucenieki will receive a three-month intensive course in Latvian,” explained Zarina. But currently, there are no language-instruction courses on offer at Mucenieki and Marie, the Congolese asylum seeker, says she has not had the chance to learn any Latvian. “But people here have been very welcoming,” said Marie, who expects to hear next month if she is granted asylum.
For now, NGOs are being called on to fill the void in language instruction. Patvērums “Drošā māja” (Shelter “Safe House” – PDM) is the only non-governmental organisation in Latvia that is working with refugees and asylum seekers to help them integrate. The NGO recently organised a tour of downtown Riga for inhabitants of the Mucenieki refugee centre during which they visited some of the city‘s most significant historical and cultural buildings. The tour was part of the “Introductory Course about Latvia” offered by PDM with support from the Ministry of Culture. PDM also offers language classes.
Parts of the private sector are pragmatic in their approach to the prospect of more refugees settling in Latvia, although only a minority would employ them, according to a recent survey carried out by the Latvian Chamber for Commerce and Industry. “It is clear that the refugee issue in Europe is becoming more and more important. Businessmen have to think if they are ready to employ refugees,” Jānis Endziņš, chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, told the Baltic News Network. Twenty eight percent of business owners surveyed said they were prepared to hire refugees and 23 percent thought refugees could have a positive impact on Latvia’s economy and labour market. Yet 58 percent of entrepreneurs noted that the situation is risky and that Latvia should resettle as few refugees as possible. Many respondents pointed out that they saw language barriers as an obstacle.
Earlier this week outgoing Justice Minister Dzintars Rasnačs (National Alliance) announced that Latvia will introduce a burqa ban in public. “This ban is needed not to ensure public order and security, but to protect Latvia’s cultural values, our common public and cultural space, and each individual,” Rasnačs told national LNT television.
