Lost in Limbo

Kara Weinacht
9/11/2009
10:11 am

This article serves as a big-picture and a good introduction to my topic - refugee trends. Opening with a discussion on what exactly the UNHCR (The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) considers a refugee. Yes, the overall number of refugees worldwide has decreased from 16 mil. in the 1990s to about 10.5 mil. now, but what about the people who are uprooted and displaced within the same country? Clearly there are some status disparities that have yet to be dealt with.
The article continues and stumbles upon its next point of how serious some refugee situations are. Claiming that the UN has begun to give more attention to protracted refugee situations (which are defined as cases where at least 25,000 people of the same nationality have been in exile for at least five years in a given country), the article then declares a shocking statistic that over 2/3 of all refugees fall into this category.
What would an article be without a controversial conclusion? It turns out, that when refugees seek asylum in some richer countries, those countries turn them away by paying them to seek shelter in a closer country to their home. Thus, refugees are forced to go to poorer countries, with no resources or opportunities, and often saturated with danger.
Ending this, the article picks at the reader's brain for ideas for a solution. Reluctant to offer the option of permanent development, but aware that cash donations, if available, can only do so much, we are still left without a resolution, and the disappointment in knowing that all of these people are so deeply dependent on the UN for aid, direction, and support.

How can I start to react to this? Firstly, I'm pissed at the rich countries. It must be nice to buy a fantasy world where there are no problems... Why is it the poorer nations responsibility to host 80% of the world's refugees? I say that we're all a part of this world, and especially since richer countries have the resources to better care for these people that they should do what's right-we're all human, we need to take care of each other!
Secondly, this article makes the UN seem unorganized, scatterbrained, and at a loss of what to do. I don't think the author should have been so harsh. I'm sure that the UN's agencies are doing the best they can; it's not as if they, as an institution, have unlimited resources.
Overall, this article yanked my heartstrings into feeling a great deal of sympathy for the people who have to live in these conditions. The conclusion, with no resolution, couldn't have fit any better. How can we solve such a huge problem? I know solutions don't pop out of thin air, but I think it's about that time we came up with a long-term plan to get these people into living conditions that actually let them live, instead of perpetuate the violence and poverty, and get them on the way to self-sustainability.

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14302845&CFID=82119817&CFTOKEN=47929519