An Initial Response to the Syrian Refugee Question

I have read many articles and social media posts over the past few days in regards to refugees, Syria, and the recent terrorist attacks in Paris.  And, as someone who has personal experience with refugees – including Syrian refugees – I feel a responsibility to speak up about what I know both from personal experience and from a professional understanding that comes with working in the refugee resettlement field.  I do not seek to be divisive, but rather informative and thought-provoking.  My ultimate desire is for people to respond to the current situation with prayerful consideration of all the facts. 

Why should you trust my research or my opinions?  Well, frankly, you shouldn’t.  Research the information for yourself and draw your own conclusions.  I will try as much as possible to provide some basic sources of my information here in an informal list if you would like to do further follow-up.  However, I also want my readers to know that I am not merely another concerned citizen who feels the need to weigh in on these issues because everyone else is too.  I am both passionate and, hopefully, well-educated on the issues.   (If you wish to learn more about my “resume”, check out the “About Me” page.)  Much of what I share comes from personal experience and observation.  But I am obviously not the end-all, know-all on refugee issues.  And there are many questions for which I honestly do not have answers.  New information is constantly coming forth, and we all must do our part to stay informed.

First, let me address some of the misunderstandings about refugee resettlement that need to be discussed at the outset:

    1. Not just anyone can claim to be a refugee.

Individuals much meet very specific criteria in order to receive the specific label of “refugee”.  They must:

• Have fled their home country and crossed an international boundary.
• Prove that they left due to persecution or threat of persecution.
• Be unable to return to their home country as a result of the threats or persecution.

It is true that oftentimes refugees cannot provide specific documentation of their situation, especially if they left their homes suddenly and were not able to retrieve important documents.  However, circumstantial evidence, world events, and the testimony of other people are utilized to corroborate stories and be used as “proof” of an individual’s refugee status.  The point is that people cannot simply claim refugee status on their own.  They must be granted the status by a U.N. official who has corroborated their story and provided them with documentation of their approved refugee status.

 2. Refugees do not get to dictate if or where they will be resettled.

Less than 1% of the approximately 13 million refugees (figure from UNHCR) around the world (Syrian or otherwise) get selected for permanent resettlement to another country.  And once selected, the refugee does not get to decide where they will be resettled.  Refugees have no idea whether they will be going to the U.S., Canada, Australia, or one of the many other countries that accepts refugees for resettlement. 

The United Nations and other agencies can refer a refugee case to the United States government for resettlement.  However, the U.S. is never under any obligation to accept any singular case.  Ultimately, the decision to accept a case for resettlement rests with the U.S. government, under the auspices of the Department of Homeland Security.

 3. The United States does have a system for vetting incoming refugees.

This is a major point of contention.  Some people are under the impression that the U.S. does not vet refugees at all.  This is absolutely not true.  Here is what I know:

Obviously, the United States uses all viable resources available to assess whether a refugee should be admitted for resettlement.  And it is important to understand that background checks do not come solely (or even at all) from the refugee’s country of origin.  This would be absurd considering the fact that 1) most of the nations that refugees are fleeing from are in upheaval and do not have effective government bureaucracies, and 2) the reason that refugees are fleeing is often due to government persecution, meaning that information provided by their own governments would not be reliable.

Any refugee recommended for resettlement to the United States is required to go through a specific vetting process.  The State Department runs the names of all refugees referred to the United States for resettlement through a standard CLASS (Consular Lookout and Support System) name check.  Certain refugees (such as those coming from countries with terrorist-ties) also undergo an additional security review called a Security Advisory Opinion (SAO), which is basically an in-depth investigation into possible ties to espionage or terrorism.  These cases require a positive SAO clearance from a number of U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies in order to continue the resettlement process, often including the FBI, CIA, Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, the Department of State's Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, or even Interpol.

In addition, a trained agent from the Department of Homeland Security travels to the country where the refugee resides and conducts and in-person interview.  Typically, refugees that meet a minimum age requirement will also have their photograph and fingerprints taken at this time, if they have not already.  Depending on the information in the refugee’s file and the results of the interview, the DHS agent will then decide if the individual is admissible under U.S. law and meets the qualifications of a refugee.  Obviously, anyone found to have a criminal background or ties to terrorism is barred from entry into the U.S.

According to Larry Bartlett, the director of refugee admissions for the State Department, if there was any question as to the legitimacy of a refugee’s story or the validity of their background, then their case would be denied.

Refugees go through one final check just prior to their departure to the U.S. to ensure that no new information has surfaced. 

My no means can I (or anyone else) guarantee that a terrorist would never slip through.  But I can say that the U.S. appears to take very detailed and specific precautions to ensure that this does not happen.  Since 9/11, the U.S. has resettled around 745,000 refugees.  None have ever carried out a terrorist attack.  However, in 2009, two Iraqi men who entered the country as refugees were arrested after they were found to have supported Al-Qaeda activities when they lived in Iraq.  They had not (yet?) perpetrated any acts of terror, however, in the U.S.  These men received extensive jail sentences, including one lifetime sentence.  That is two refugees out of 745,000, or less than .0003%.    According to Bob Carey, the director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, refugees are the most highly screened immigrants to enter the U.S.  This means that a terrorist would have a much more likely chance of infiltrating our country if they were to come with a passport or to cross our border illegally.

This entire topic deserves a post of its own since it is the biggest “hot-button” issue right now and there is so much more to say.  In a separate post, I will discuss in further detail the vetting process as it relates specifically to Syrian refugees and the testimony from the congressional hearings.  I will say that at this point, from all that I have read and heard, I do understand the concern about Syrians.  I would even go so far as to say that I would support a temporary halt in admitting Syrian refugees until security measures can be verified or strengthened.  More on that in another post.

 4.  Refugees do not travel to the U.S. immediately after their case is referred for resettlement.

There is a significant wait time for refugees between being referred for resettlement to the U.S, getting approved for resettlement, and arriving in the United States.

Most refugees wait at least 18-24 months before receiving clearance to enter the United States.  And these are only those refugees in the most desperate of situations or in the most immediate danger.  The majority of refugees wait at least five years - some even more than a decade - for approval.   It is important to keep in mind that refugees are often forced to wait for resettlement in the midst of desperate circumstances that could include physical danger (war), starvation, and disease.  Some die before they ever receive clearance to resettle to another country.  The reason for the extended wait time is because the U.S. ensures an appropriate length of time for the background checks, clearances, and interviews to be conducted. 

There are very rare exceptions made to the general processing time for certain medical cases in which an individual is facing life-threatening medical complications.  However, in these situations, individual do not bypass the security screenings, but rather get moved to the top of the list and do not have to “wait in line”. 

5. Syrian refugees who come to the U.S. are not predominantly single men.

The U.S. does accept single refugee cases of both men and women.  However, in general, priority is given to families.  The only reports I can find thus far (from the Obama administration) say that about half of the Syrian refugees admitted thus far are children.  The gender breakdown is approximately 50/50.  And less than 2% are “single men of combat age”.  I have personally met a number of Syrians who have been resettled in Tucson this year.  They were all families with three or more children, all with horrific stories of persecution by the Assad regime and/or extremist entities.  I have yet to find any documentation or hear any official reports that the U.S. is planning to resettle predominantly single Syrian men.  I assume that this rumor came out of the reports of single Syrian men reaching the shores of Europe.

6. The refugee situation in the U.S. is completely different from that of Europe.

It is important to understand that Europe’s situation with Syrian refugees has been vastly different from the U.S.’s situation.  In fact, what happened in Europe can be more likened to our situation with illegal immigrants coming across the Mexican border.  Droves of refugees were flocking to Europe out of desperation and fear for their own lives.  It appeared that the majority of European nations were unprepared for the unprecedented numbers of people crossing their borders.  And, with the sudden and immense influx of these immigrants, European nations faced a serious dilemma: Should they provide safe haven immediately?  Should they risk their security situation by allowing them entry without proper vetting?  Should they set up detention camps?  Should they turn them all away?  There was no easy answer.  International law includes a principle called “non-refoulement”, which essentially means that those fleeing persecution cannot be returned to their home country where they would face that persecution again.

In contrast, the U.S. is not facing an influx of Syrians at our borders.  We have the ability to carefully choose who we do and do not allow to enter.  I do not doubt that the U.S. vetting process for refugees will only become more stringent with the increased threat from ISIS.  As stated previously, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has the final say as to whether a refugee can be admitted to the United States.  If there were ever a question in regard to a refugee applicant’s past, that applicant would be denied.  I agree with that approach, even though it means that some legitimate refugee applicants will be turned away.

Now, for the “editorial” part.  Fair warning in case you do not want to read any further.

I want to make it abundantly clear that I consider national security to be a top priority.  We cannot be a compassionate nation without protecting our own sovereignty, which includes the protection of our own citizens and resources, as well as all those who seek refuge in the U.S.  ISIS is evil, and poses an ominous threat to the U.S. and other nations.  Nonetheless, barring Syrians completely from our nation also serves to empower ISIS.  It signals our own fear.  It demonstrates that we will abandon those that we have pledged to protect.  I believe we can have compassion on our Syrian neighbors, while still displaying a reasonable level of caution. 

I was truly shocked this week when I opened my computer and learned that so many states were refusing to take Syrian refugees.  I asked myself, “What has changed between this week and last week in regards to the procedures for refugees coming to the U.S. to elicit such a reaction?”  The answer: nothing.   Nothing about the process changed.   But what has changed is our level of fear.  And that is exactly the point of terrorism.  To instill fear.  If ISIS can make a coordinated attack on Paris, then what is to stop them from doing the same thing in a U.S. city?  I do think the Paris attacks serve as a solemn warning to every other Western nation that opposes ISIS.  But I think that we as a nation need to think long and hard about the legitimate ways that we can aid those Syrians who are refugees.  Compassion should go hand in hand with courage, not cowardice.

What better way to get the Western world to stop resettling refugees than to make the refugees appear as a threat?  I am not really convinced that this was ISIS’s intention with the Paris attacks, but it seems to be an outcome.  These refugees are the very same people who suffered in the wake of a war involving ISIS, who may have even opposed ISIS, and who ultimate decided to flee rather than live in the “caliphate” that ISIS is attempting to create.  They are also the “enemy” to ISIS.  And whether intentional or not, the Paris attacks have now resulted in an attempt to sow discord between the Western world and those seeking their protection.  But we have the same enemy.  And we are one of the few nations who can offer the necessary and permanent protection required. 

Ultimately, I think that if ISIS wants to plan an attack on the U.S., it will do so regardless of the refugee situation.  To infiltrate the U.S. disguised as refugees means that the jihadist must pass through numerous steps: having their refugee story corroborated, being selected for resettlement to the U.S. as opposed to another resettlement country, passing the security measures, and most of all waiting at least one and a half to two years before even having the chance to enter the country.  Yes, it could happen.  But this seems like a lot of hoops to jump through when you could just plan an attack using radical elements already within the country or covert jihadists with passports to travel to the country.  Given the options, entering the country as a refugee seems least effective and inefficient.  But then again, I am not a terrorist.

Should we completely trade security for compassion?  Absolutely not.  But, there will never be a way to absolutely ensure that no ISIS terrorists enter our country unless we completely close our borders and refuse entry to all foreign nationals, Syrians or otherwise.  And even then, nothing would be guaranteed. 

More posts are in store.  There is frankly way too much information to address it all here and now.  These are just some points for initial consideration.  If you made it to the end of this post, congratulations.  This was my shortened version.

·                       United States Handbook for Refugee Resettlement, http://www.unhcr.org/3c5e5a764.html
·          “Safe and Secure Refugee Protection”, published by Refugee Council USA.
·          “Security Screening of Refugees Admitted to the United States: A Detailed, Rigorous Process”, published by U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants.
·          “The United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) Consultation and Worldwide Processing Priorities,” http://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/refugees/united-states-refugee-admissions-program-usrap-consultation-worldwide-processing-priorities
·          “Expedited Protection and Resettlement of Refugees”, U.S. Department of State, http://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/factsheets/2011/181021.htm
·          “Refugee Resettlement: Myths Busted”, publication by Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services.
·          “Syria – Complex Emergency.” Published by the U.S. Agency for International Development.  https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1866/syria_ce_fs05_03-31-2015.pdf.
·          Personal notes from a Q&A session by national director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, Bob Carey, at the State of Arizona Refugee Resettlement Program Quarterly Meeting, Tucson: September 24th, 2015.
·          “Syrian Refugee Crisis Differs from Iraq, and Experts Say That’s OK,” http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/10/22/syrian-refugee-crisis-differs-from-iraqs-and-experts-say-thats-ok.htm
·          “U.S. Process of Admitting Syrian Refugees includes Security Vetting,” http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article45099942.html
·          “Suspicious of Syrian refugees coming to the U.S.? Here’s a reality check.”  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/02/donald-trump-has-his-suspicions-about-syrian-refugees-they-are-unfounded-heres-why/
·          “Exclusive: US May Have Let 'Dozens' of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees."  http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131
·          “Yearning to Breathe Free.”  http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21674694-america-should-reclaim-its-role-beacon-those-fleeing-persecution-and-war-yearning?fsrc=scn/tw/te/pe/ed/yearningtobreathefree
·          U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security. “Countering Violent Islamist Extremism: The Urgent Threat of Foreign Fighters and Homegrown Terror.” Hearing. 11 Feb 2015.
·          U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security. “Admitting Syrian Refugees: the Intelligence Void and the Emerging Homeland Security Threat.” Sub-committee Hearing. 24 June 2015.