Asylum Under Siege

The global refugee protection system was first established by the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, which sets forth the obligations of states in dealing with refugee flows and the rights of refugees themselves. States, for example, may not discriminate among refugees on the basis of race, religion, nationality, or country of origin. They must grant refugees at least the same public benefits as are afforded to other legally resident aliens, and they must protect the fundamental human rights of refugees as rigorously as those of nationals. Most importantly, states may not refouler (return) a refugee to a state where his or her life or freedom would be threatened.

However, as the number of people fleeing their homelands increases and the willingness of states to accept them decreases, the pressures on the system established by the refugee convention have grown. Since 1981, the number of persons "of concern" to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has nearly tripled, reaching a peak of 27.4 million in 1995 and staying nearly that high ever since.

Most refugees flee developing countries to seek protection in other developing countries nearby. Thus it is these countries — Pakistan, which has hosted the largest refugee population for over a decade, as well as Iran, Jordan, Tanzania, Sudan, Kenya, and many more — that not only bear the brunt of increased refugee populations but have the fewest resources with which to support their new guests.

Industrialized countries have also seen increases in the number of people seeking protection, many of whom arrive under their own power and apply for asylum after arrival. Overwhelmed bureaucracies in most industrialized countries were unable to keep up with the increased flow of asylum seekers during the 1990s, often taking so long to process applications that asylum seekers became de facto residents. As a result, the general public came to regard the asylum process as just another form of economic migration. Public frustration with what is often perceived as a "flood" of "bogus" asylum seekers has been the driving factor behind many of the reforms that have taken place in countries of asylum since the mid-1990s.

Policymakers in the United States — the world’s second largest recipient of asylum applications — have responded to the increase in asylum seekers by de-linking the asylum application process from the immediate receipt of a work permit and increasing ins staff in order to process applications more quickly. But in the wake of the September 11 attacks, the debate is now centered on how to ensure that those truly in need of protection are not automatically denied entry because of religion or national origin. The U.S. refugee resettlement program, usually the largest in the world, is running at greatly reduced levels in 2002.

The tight restrictions placed on legal immigration into the European Union (EU) have led in many cases to abuse of the asylum system, as well as massive increases in the smuggling of humans into Europe. Further, different practices within the EU have motivated member states to continually alter their own immigration and asylum policies in order to stay a step ahead of their neighbors, thereby weaving an ever more illiberal web. Debate now focuses on how to create common EU asylum procedures and immigration policies that ensure protection for those in need without "opening the floodgates" to economic migrants.

Australia’s asylum policy was thrust into the news following the rescue of a large group of mostly Afghan asylum seekers from a sinking boat off the Australian coast in August 2001. Australia’s refusal to accept the asylum seekers and its increased interception of boats and strict detention policies have been condemned by many refugee advocates as clear violations of Australia’s responsibilities under international humanitarian law. Under current legislation, intercepted asylum applicants are not allowed to set foot on Australian soil and must instead have their claims processed in a third country. Those who manage to land in Australia are automatically detained in remote, austere facilities.