The Rohingya crisis in the east rages on. The number of Syrian refugees is still absolutely staggering. Afghani displacement remains commonplace as the war with the Taliban continues.
What do these crises have in common? Stateless people.
or Log In
Trusted News and Intelligence From Spec Ops Veterans Login
Luke Ryan Luke Ryan is a freelance journalist in Tampa, FL. He is a former Team Leader from 3rd Ranger Battalion, having served four deployments to Afghanistan. He grew up overseas, the son of foreign aid workers, and lived in Pakistan for 9 years and Thailand for 5. He has a degree in English Literature and also owns a small film production company, Gravitas Studios.
It really is just a bad situation all around--and you hear a lot of "solution" type arguments, and I'm always skeptical when I hear them. You can find best case scenarios (which still are never good), and there is still going to be a danger of infiltration from malicious groups and/or the mass neglect of needy people. No matter what. The number one best way to deal with this stuff is obviously to deal with the source--while you can't exactly sanction a group like ISIS in the same way you can other legitimate countries, sanctioning and hard political stances CAN induce change in scenarios like with the Burmese. But that's not always viable, especially when they can find alternatives to your country's business. Burma has a history of turning to China and India during times of sanction with the U.S. And so it seems we're very often left to make the best out of terrible situations.
Sorry, I just re-read this. I guess the countries agreeing to take them in probably have some process for providing vital stats docs for these folks. It's hard because it seems like the numbers of people who truly need help far outnumber the terrorists and criminals, but I am also very uncomfortable letting anyone and everyone in. However, it seems very inhumane to leave people to fester in refugee camps. What a tragedy.
But in the new Western countries with no vital stats records - how does that get handled???
It depends! Many people in the world live like this without having to face genocide or escape with their lives. Those that do usually flee first to neighboring countries, as they are often running out of their houses with whatever they can carry. From there they try and get "Refugee Status" and find a country that will take them--they need a new home, but it becomes difficult when you get terrorists and criminals taking advantage of their situation and hiding among them. Because of all this, you get border refugee towns that are densely packed with sometimes like a million people. I've seen it on the Thai/Burma border.
This is so terribly sad! In what, to us, is a modern world, it's hard to imagine that there are people who are born, live their lives and die, and leave behind no proof that they ever existed, except in the hearts of those who loved them. It seems the best outcome for all these people would be to return to their villages. If peace could be established in their countries, these people who truly have a right to the lands and belong there, could reclaim their previous lives. All the years of many nations fighting the bad guys never seems to allow resettlement of the rightful population back to their homes. It's frustrating, and seems like that should be the ultimate goal, and one of the main reasons for fighting evil. Thank goodness for the countries, militaries, and aid groups that try to help these people while they wait, and may God help them return to their homes and the land that should belong to them. Thanks, Luke.