My comments

UNHCR and the one-year deal

You're still reading my comments on point 5*

Some of you may ask if the UNHCR is able to accept such a deal to find solution for the refugees in Lebanon within one year, or if, technically, the UNHCR doesn’t have the potential and resources to meet the obligations that the government of Lebanon has placed on it.  I’ll discuss that now with simple information and thought.

First of all, I'd like to explain what the job of the UNHCR toward asylum seekers and refugees is exactly, to help us to understand the policies of the UNHCR. Liability of UNHCR toward asylum seekers begins the first day when any human being applies for refugee status. There are specific procedures the UNHCR uses to determine the eligibility of asylum seekers for refugee status. (I discussed this with detail in my book, THE TRUTH WARRIOR.)

UNHCR has 3 major obligations toward the asylum seekers and the refugees.  These are:

1. Providing protection.  This applies to both asylum seekers and refugees.

2. Providing daily life needs.  This is mostly for refugees, but sometimes for asylum seekers.

3. Finding a permanent solution for refugees.  This applies only to refugees.

Now I’ll speak about these points with some details.

Protection:

What does protection mean?  Actually, there isn’t a proper definition of it!  Logically, all governments are responsible for the safety of all people within their territories.  That means that all human beings should have some kind of protection, regardless of their legal status.  In the case of the refugees, most are illegal residents in second countries.  From that point, the convention defined protection; as immunity for asylum seekers and refugees from being deported to places where they face risks and dangers due to their status as asylum seekers, not for criminal acts or crimes against humanity.  That means protection will not apply to those who have committed criminal acts or war crimes, for example.  Also, there is some kind of immunity against punishment for entering the country illegally. One important point about protection is: Protection provides by the government where the asylum seekers and refugees live.

In many situations, the asylum seekers and refugees are facing different kinds of dangers in second countries, such as attacks from opposition militias or guerillas, such as what happened in the African countries of Chad and Rwanda.  In those cases, the UNHCR is supposed to ask the government where the camps are located within their borders so that it can provide military protection, or, if that isn’t possible, request other governments to provide that protection, called international protection.  Examples of this include the peacekeeping forces from NATO in Kosofo and Yugoslavia.

In our case as refugees in Lebanon, we just need protection against deportation. We don't need armies to protect us because we don't have camps. UNHCR just needs to accept the offer of the Lebanese so the government will provide us with protection for one year. In same time UNHCR works to find us permanent solution within one year.

Daily Life Needs:

According to the UN51 convention, daily life needs include providing:

Shelters, such as camps.

Food.

Health care.

Learning and educational requirements.

Financial support.

Actually, none of these needs are provided for the refugees in Lebanon.  These needs aren’t included in the offer from the government of Lebanon, because it has existed in the convention for more than 50 years, and the government didn’t ask the UNHCR to provide these needs.  Logically, it is the job of the UNHCR.

That point isn’t in the agreement, which means the offer didn’t mention or impose any new obligation on the UNHCR.  As such, the UNHCR doesn’t need to find financial resources to meet the offer.  On the other hand, the agreement enables refugees to work and have their own income, which will help them since the UNHCR is unable to provide financial support for them.

Finding permanent solutions for refugees:

This is the point of contention.  The government of Lebanon found that it isn’t possible to provide protection for the refugees for an unlimited time, so it suggested a period of one year.  But, the UNHCR wanted UNLIMITED time without explaining the reasons!

The big question is this:  does the UNHCR have the ability to find permanent solutions for the refugees in Lebanon within one year?  The answer is YES, for two reasons I will now explain: 

First point:  Resettlement in a third country is possible.

Permanent solutions, according to the UN51 convention, means one of three things:

1. The voluntary return of the refugee to his original country (1st country), if possible.

2. The integration of the refugee into the community where he has taken refuge (2d country), if that is permitted.

3. The resettlement of the refugee into a third country.  This is done with what is called a ‘resettlement in a third country’ program.  The UNHCR doesn’t have its own program, but that program is found in countries that like to host the refugees.  The job of the UNHCR is to manage that program so it reaches the most needful refugees.  Need depends on security concerns and urgent need for health treatment.

In our case as refugees in Lebanon, we can be considered from many points to have very high security concerns.  The government of Lebanon doesn’t provide any protection for refugees.  A great number of deportation cases have been reported.  Also, many registered refugees have died in the jails or the streets of Lebanon.  This is all because the UNHCR hasn’t managed the program well.

Technically, it is very easy for the UNHCR to manage the program to meet the needs of the refugees in Lebanon.  According to the UNHCR’S own statistics, there are nearly 4000 refugees registered in Lebanon.  The total number of refugees in that program every year is 250,000! It isn’t difficult to include a mere 2500 refugees in 250,000.

Technically, it is very easy for the UNHCR to manage the program to meet the needs of the refugees in Lebanon.  According to the UNHCR’S own statistics, there are nearly 2500 refugees registered in Lebanon.  The total number of refugees in that program every year is 250,000! It isn’t difficult to include a mere 2,500 refugees in 250,000.

In the past last 10 years UNHCR resettlement nearly 2.5 million refugees. The total number of the refugees registered in Lebanon in past 10 years was between 4000 to 6000 refugees, that’s mean each refugee has nearly 500 chances to join the 3contery resettlement program and it’s hard to understand how they missed these chances!!!!

I hope this has given a detailed picture of first point. 

Second point: does such agreement exist somewhere else?  

Yes, it exists in Jordan, but with one difference.  In Jordan, the period of time is only 6 months!

In 1998, the UNHCR and the government of Jordan signed an agreement that is the same as the government of Lebanon wants!  You can read about that agreement here: Jordan-UNHCR agreement on refugees.

Here is some of what is included in that agreement:

Ala’ Abdelat, director of the Department of Refugee Affairs at the Ministry of Interior, said that although the Kingdom rejects the principle of local integration, it has traditionally allowed six months for asylum seekers to either find a third country in which to resettle or has tried to alleviate the expense of repatriation to the country of origin by forgiving residence fees and exit taxes incurred for the duration of stay in the country.

I’m happy to read that the UNHCR will “bear the responsibility for finding third countries in which to resettle refugees.”  That was four years ago in Jordan.  I hope that it won’t take that long to include other countries.

It is difficult to understand how the UNHCR made such an agreement for six months with a country where the refugees face a minimum amount of risk, but refused the same agreement for one year in a country where the refugees are facing greater risks!

I’m sure you would like some logical explanations on that point.  I’ll discuss that next page.

Return to point 5*