The Syrian Civil War is over. The bloody conflict finally ended last year, after more than half a million deaths and a refugee crisis that forced over 5 million people to flee the country.
But now that the fighting is over, many of these refugees seem less interested in returning. In Germany, only 1,300 people have so far returned through official programs that offer them financial incentives to return.
The total number of those who have returned to Syria in the first half of the year is estimated at 4,000, out of over a million who arrived after Angela Merkel opened the borders in 2015.
This raises the question of whether many of these refugees are truly refugees. After all, if you are fleeing solely because of the war, then you would return when the war is over. The lack of willingness to return suggests that many refugees prefer to stay in the countries that gave them refuge, where economic conditions are better.
Germany is the perfect example. Mrs. Merkel's decision to accept so many refugees was initially presented as a great moral act, and at the same time as an opportunity to bring in the doctors and engineers of the future.
After backlash from conservatives, she stressed in 2016 that asylum should be temporary and that: "when there is peace again in Syria, when IS has been defeated in Iraq, then you will return to your country with the knowledge you have gained."
A decade later, it all seems so naive. Some of those who came as refugees turned out to be terrorists, carrying out a series of attacks that have shaken the country. This has boosted support for the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which is now leading the polls.
Far from being professional and educated, many refugees have remained unemployed, benefiting from Germany's generous welfare system. Nearly half of the beneficiaries of Germany's main welfare scheme are foreign nationals, with Syrians being one of the largest groups.
This is one of the greatest challenges of our time. Easy travel and social media have enabled people to move in ways that were previously impossible. Some 900 million people want to emigrate eventually, far more than any country or continent can afford. Many of them want to come to Britain, drawn by wealth and the prospect of an easier life.
But by coming, they are already destabilizing the very prosperity they seek.
It is also unfair to the British people, who are facing a bill of billions of pounds for so-called asylum seekers. But forced charity is not charity at all. The scale of the refugee flow and the role of human rights laws in allowing them in have meant that many refugees in the West have not been vetted at all, some have criminal records, and even when convicted of crimes, they still cannot be deported.
Therefore, it is necessary to change the laws that regulate the issue of refugees. Most of these laws date back to after World War II and were well-intentioned. But then refugees were relatively similar to each other, they often returned to their own countries, and the difference in wealth or social capital with the host countries was not so great. Today, refugees would be better treated locally, where there are fewer cultural problems and funding goes further.
We must be absolutely certain that refugee status is temporary. This will ensure that people can seek safety, but not enter as economic migrants. This status should be reviewed regularly and, when the situation in their country of origin changes, it should be withdrawn. Those who commit any crime should lose their refugee status and be deported.
Britain has seen an unprecedented wave of asylum claims in recent years and although many have been accepted, this has often been done on dubious human rights grounds, rather than due to the true circumstances.
Under the Illegal Migration Act 2023, anyone who has entered illegally should not be eligible to claim asylum. Politicians should withdraw refugee protection for anyone who has entered illegally since the law came into force.
This will send a clear message to those who would consider abusing our refugee laws that they will not be allowed to do so. Combined with the local treatment of refugees and regular reviews of their status, this will restore refugee status to its original meaning: temporary protection, and not a Trojan Horse for economic migration and welfare abuse, as is the case today.
The Telegraph
