The Syrian crisis, with some perspective

Two weeks ago, over thirty governors of US states 'declared' they will not accept Syrian refugees. Clearly calculated, such a threat is effectively toothless, as governors are not legally able to change immigration policy—this is the purview of the federal government. What does have teeth, however, is the fact that the House of Representatives voted to effectively stop a program aimed at resettling Syrian refugees, and many Democrats recently broke rank with President Obama, complicating established US refugee resettlement policy as well as this administration's overall foreign policy.

The United States has largely chosen to close its eyes and borders to the unprecedented refugee crisis and simultaneously fall into the trap laid by the international terrorists these desperate people are fleeing from. France, on the other hand, which experienced its worst attacks on its soil since the end of World War II, has remained steadfast and declared it would welcome 30,000 Syrians over a three year period.

The “refugee issue” has polarized citizens, resulting in a backlash by cynical groups and individuals on both sides of the political spectrum. Suddenly every pundit appears to be an expert on resettlement, ISIS, Islam, and the Middle East. This results in mistruths and half-truths while conspiracies proliferate by the day: Obama is bringing 100,000 Syrians next year; people are pretending to be Syrian; the US is unable to background-check people from a war-torn and failed state; and so on.

Syria will never be as it once was. Half of the country is displaced in some form or fashion and this number continues to grow, and since 2011, roughly 300,000 people have been killed. To provide some context: combined, the number of those killed in the Algerian civil war (1991-2002) and Lebanese civil war (1975-1990) is more or less equal to the current number of those who have died in Syria.

The circus of presidential candidates in the US is also using this situation to exacerbate many American's fears about the safety and security of their country, purely for political gain. Top Republican presidential candidates Donald Trump and Ben Carson have recently both been under fire for insinuating there should be a registry for America's six million Muslims, and comparing them to “rabid dogs,” respectively. These men are intelligent enough to know what they are saying, and given the recent tragedy in Paris, it was politically expedient to do so: not unsurprisingly, they received more media airtime for their comments, as well as a boost in polls.

In the US, the increased refugee hysteria is largely unfounded. Cynical political rhetoric aside, since 2001, the US has welcomed nearly 750,000 refugees from across the world. Between 2004 and 2013 there were only a total of 221 Syrian refugees, and in 2014, only 132 were admitted. The marked increase is very recent: in 2015 and 2016, the estimated number of Syrian refugees increased to 1,800 and 10,000, respectively. Importantly, in every presidential order regarding refugees, there is an “other” category listed, created explicitly to accommodate unforeseen crises. The 10,000 slots for Syrians will come out of this emergency number and out of the overall numbers previously ear-marked for other Middle Easterners. While 10,000 is the stated goal, realistically, far fewer will actually come.

According to the Migration Policy Institution, in the last 14 years, only three refugees have been charged for terrorist activities and this number is only slightly higher cited in other sources and according to New America, there have been ten refugees charged for terrorism. The discrepancy is due to categorization of domestic versus international terrorism and acquittals compared to convictions.

The political cynicism belies a greater reality: the reaction to this increased refugee resettlement was pre-planned. There has always been an anti-refugee sentiment in certain states and these governors are using the Paris tragedy to further their agenda, as is the case in the State of Georgia.

The Syrian war has been waging since early 2011, but the international communities' hysteria only reached its zenith when refugees began setting foot in Europe. Where were these same leaders in 2011? Where were they when ISIS and other extremist groups began to amass for battle and attempt genocide against Christians and Yezidis?

Crucial questions to consider related to the refugee debate should include: why has it not been thoroughly investigated where militant groups receive their finances and weapons? Why are some groups considered “moderate” while others are not? How was ISIS able to secure so much support—and from which communities and tribes?

Until these questions and others can be answered satisfactorily, the world cannot expect to see much change in Syria—or Iraq—and though various forces will likely be able to liberate more territory in the end, in many respects it will be a pyrrhic victory—the greater threats will remain. But for the refugees, many of whom have been waiting in camps for years, resettlement is a chance at a hopeful future away from the ongoing conflict and misery.