Thanks again for writing. I think my point as far as ‘end of conflict’ is concerned, is that people–and I mean this globally, not in reference to a single country–can hardly produce peace, yet alone maintain it. Just as we are searching for durability, we too much search for a solution that is both timely and (this is key) possible.

I would love to be proven wrong in this regard. I would love to eat a piece of humble pie and swallow my words on this, but as it stands, I don’t think peace is either durable or realistic in the long term.

I’m not talking about individual conflicts, but conflict as a whole. Because what does it matter if we solve one refugee crisis if we just turn around and make another? And again, by ‘we’ I mean it globally.

Back to voluntary repatriation: many of my Iraqi clients are also skilled laborers, engineers, etc. And yes, some of them will find America is not the ‘land of opportunity’ they hoped it’d be. But for most of my clients–and I know this is a bit of an assumption–I think they’d rather be in a menial job in America than dead in Iraq. I suppose it comes down to personal experience on this. I just happen to see many clients that have had family killed in front of them, or have received numerous death threats. I have yet to see anyone opt to go back.

But then again, my job does not entail a lot of follow up. So perhaps years down the line they do. I would lying if I said I know for sure. We’ll chalk ‘voluntary repatriation’ up as the ideal solution, and sometimes a viable one. But I have my doubts about its reliability en mass enough to deal with the numbers. Although, there is the issue of time frame. Repatriation requires the end of conflict, in most circumstances. These modern wars we fight, they aren’t quick. And what about places like Sudan or Eritrea and Ethiopia? These aren’t really wars at all, just deep-rooted conflicts that go back to tribal ties, colonial boundaries, etc. Solving them is even harder, and even slower.

The question becomes: what do we do in the meantime?

Again, back to aid: I agree with you in spirit on funding private agencies, NGOs, and other groups that are involved in helping refugees where they’re at. But from personal experience, even in my small office where I knew everyone and judged them to be good, we had issues with where money came from and where it went. People take advantage of the system all the time. Before we can pump money into it and expect it to work better, we need to reform and regulate it. Otherwise it’s just wasting more money on the same problems we’ve known about forever: corruption, embezzlement, and even just negligence. These are not just political buzzwords. It happens all the time.

The problem with this is, how do we govern American money, or money from any country, when it’s pumped abroad to a country like Egypt, where we have no real jurisdiction, and the government is more concerned about itself than its people? I’m not a law student, and correct me if I’m wrong: but I don’t think we can do much about it.

Why not better fund American institutions, and better prepare our communities for refugees? Why not create jobs and housing and opportunity here, where we can govern it and regulate it?

Just an idea. It’s not perfect. I know that. But if there is a better option, one that works and is real and keeps people where they want to be, and keeps them safe, then by all means, tell me so I can jump on board. I will cheer harder for it than anyone.

Perhaps in disagreement, I think an end to conflict has to be the goal being driven toward. To say that conflict always exists and always will is accurate, but thats akin to say that certain countries will always be at war and it’s unrealistic to try and end them.

As far as voluntary repatriation goes, much like durable solutions and end to conflict, its a path, not the right one for everyone, but a possibility. many of the iraqi clients i’ve worked with who have been resettled in the west opted to return to iraqi and other places because they did not have any opportunities in the US. They had been architects and skilled workers in Iraqi… upon arriving in the US they had to find menial jobs and they weren’t willing to start from the bottom again. An understandable position, but one of the avenues where resettlement fails to live up to the expectations that so many people put on it.

Yes, Egypt is an awful place to be a refugee. Egypt made so many reservations to the ’51 Convention and abdicated so much responsibility to the UNHCR that it’s next to useless. However there are still a number of groups and agencies not related to the government who are striving to assist refugees in place. I think expansion and support for those efforts is a much better ‘results based’ response than just resettling them.

To say that you are working so that refugees can have a chance to wake up free one morning is certainly an admirable goal. But most of the refugees i have worked with would rather wake up free and safe in their own country, than in the West.
I have no problem with immigration reform and the expansion of caps on resettlement. I just don’t see it as the larger durable solution that you do, I think.

Loving the dialogue on your article.

Thanks again for your insights. End to conflict is of course the primary goal. If I could ‘wish upon a star’ or something, of course that is what I’d pick. Unfortunately, conflict has always existed and I can’t imagine it will ever stop. There will always be refugees. It is easy to say, “Stop fighting” or “Let’s have no more war”, but how realistic is this as a durable solution for refugees?

And voluntary repatriation is of course the next best thing. Unfortunately, in most circumstances it’s not an option. Consider my Iraqi clients, who fled at various times and for various reasons. Even though the “war” is over, the country isn’t safe. And if we deemed it so, the sectarian violence is so deep anyway that many of my clients have received death threats from Iraq even though they’ve ran all the way to Cairo. So I can’t imagine telling one of them to go back to where they came from in the face of that. These conflicts take years and years and years. What do we do in the meantime?

As far as local solutions. I don’t mean to be a glass-half-empty kind of person, but Egypt, and many countries I have been in, can hardly support their own population, let alone refugees that don’t have citizenship. Of course we could rely on foreign funding. Unfortunately there is a tremendous amount of corruption in Egypt, and all over the world, and how much of that money can we expect to get into the hands of the people who need it?

I’m not a politician, or an economist, and I certainly didn’t study conflict resolution. But my work demands real solutions, and it demands them quickly. And most often it doesn’t happen.

I’m not so worried about America reflecting some of the problems of Europe. I was just in Paris, and it was lovely What I’m saying is this: I will vote for immigration reform knowing full well that it will negatively impact our economy and, some would argue, our social structure. I will vote knowing the implications. I think we have a moral obligation to do so. To give up a little bit of our comforts so that someone far less fortunate than ourselves may be able to wake up one morning and, for once, know what it’s like to be free.

I do agree that more states should be engaged with the resettlement process and reexamine the criteria and numbers they use, I do think that true durable solutions need to be explored sur place, so to speak.

End to conflict, local solutions and support, voluntary repatriation when a conflict ends. These are all options that can be expanded and developed more before resettlement is used. Resettlement is the there is no protection or adequate assistance available to you here option. The final card to play. And much like when donor fatigue happens, if States took in larger and larger numbers of refugees i fear the backlash would be counterproductive. We already see some of these examples in europe and other places. Thanks for the continued work and writing.

Resettlement requests are about details and facts, and we have to get them right. We can’t afford to leave anything out, and we can’t afford to assume our clients will just naturally tell us everything. We have to solicit the truth actively to get it.

And in regards to your comment, re: not wanting to know. Perhaps I should have used “need” instead of “want,” but I assure you that the refugees I interview are engaged respectfully and always with care. Translators help us deal with misunderstandings, which are inevitable.

Also, the process can be a very emotional one. Legal counsel, as well as clients, often take breaks or change topics as a way to break stress and calm the situation down. It’s often the best way to make sure people keep talking, even though it might seem contradictory.