The Foreign Service Journal, April 2016

34 APRIL 2016 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL Current practices for admitting refugees date from the post-World War II period. Some 146 countries adopted the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees that entered into force on April 20, 1954, and was limited to persons fleeing events occurring before Jan. 1, 1951, within Europe. A 1967 protocol removed those limi- tations and expanded the Convention to universal coverage. Pursuant to these measures, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees based in Geneva, Switzerland, is the focal point for regularization and international coordina- tion of such efforts. Whenever there is a large-scale movement of people, national and international nongovernmental agencies, assisted by the UNHCR, concentrate on quickly setting up emergency shelter, food, water, sanitation and medical services. Only then do they focus on screening individuals to determine if they qualify for refugee status. Once the refugees’ physical needs are met and refugee status determined, more stable conditions are established. Some refugees live among the local population, while others have families in neighboring countries. The objective then becomes a durable solution. Ideally, refugees will return to their homeland as soon as the situation allows. Lamentably, all too often this outcome is prevented by continuing political unrest, or the fact that the refugees belong to a minority ethnic or religious group that remains unwel- come. The next-best solution is for them to be settled in the country of first asylum and integrated into its society. But in some relatively few cases, third-country resettlement may be the best option. Of the millions of refugees in the world, who should be selected for resettlement? In 2006, UNHCR designated broad priority categories for refugee resettlement, such as: survivors of violence or torture, family reunification, medical needs, and women and children at risk. Within these categories, narrower designations were established to respond to specific situations and to apply to specific countries. For example, the category used for resettlement of Liberians to the United States was “women-at-risk”—older women who were raising their grand- children because the parents had died, either from violence or from diseases such as malaria and HIV/AIDS. Another was “The Lost Boys,” young Sudanese who had become separated from their families during their flight from the fighting in the south of Sudan and were resettled in the United States in 2001. Following the Rwandan genocide, “mixed marriage” refugees—Hutu and Tutsi—were identified as “at risk,” but the Rwandan government objected to the implication that such families could not reside peacefully in postwar Rwanda. Is the American Commitment to Aid Refugees Fading? Historically, the United States has permanently resettled more refugees than all other countries combined. In 1980, the year of highest U.S. resettlement, Congress set an annual ceiling of 207,000 arrivals. This number has gone up and down through the years in response to different periods of unrest leading to increased population migrations as well as to domestic political pressures. From 2008 to 2011, the ceiling was set at 80,000, but not met. Since 2013, the ceiling has been established at 70,000 and has been more or less fulfilled each year. Recent terrorist attacks have led to calls to bar or severely limit the number of new refugees entering the United States. But such proposals ignore the fact that the screening process for refugees is far more rigorous than for any other group entering the United States (generally taking between 18 and 21 months of vetting). Further, the U.S. government can refuse entry to any foreigner, including a refugee, without cause. Once individuals are identified as eligible for resettlement they all go through the intensive screening process, as did Aisha mentioned above, conducted by the UNHCR, international voluntary agencies and, for those considered for entry into the United States, representatives of the State Department, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. This involves collecting biographical data, medical clearances and intensive security screening. The majority of refugees are normally resettled in 15 states: California (which takes nearly 16 percent), followed by Wash- ington (just under 15 percent), New York (nearly 9 percent), Florida (7 percent), North Carolina and Texas (5 percent each). Oregon, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Georgia and Arizona each accept just over 3 percent of refugees, while Missouri, Massa- The screening process for refugees is far more rigorous than for any other group entering the United States.