The Shift of Turkey’s refugee paradigm: What next?

Teaser Image Caption
Muhammed Ahmed, 14 years old, works 11 hours a day for a monthly salary of 550 TL (eq. 170 EUR). A recent survey, conducted by TISK (Confederation of Turkey's Employer Unions) and HÜGO (Hacettepe University Center for Migration and Politics Research) and published early December, which collected opinions, expectations and advice from the business world concerning the Syrians in Turkey, points to the high number of working children under 18 years and raises concerns over the problem of child la

Turkey’s paradigm concerning Syrian refugees has changed completely in as short as six weeks. Let us begin with a brief summary of the latest events which will be detailed further below. Merkel’s visit to Turkey accelerated the process which culminated in a significant resolution at the EU-Turkey summit on November 2. According to this resolution, Turkey will be granted three billion Euros in aid in return for sheltering refugees. New chapters will be opened in Turkey’s membership talks with the EU. The next chapter to be opened will the the seventeenth on economic and monetary policy, which was opened on December 14 as planned.

This economic chapter underlines the independence of the Central Bank and states that it should not finance public corporations, and thus upholds the growth of the private sector. Although it places an emphasis on free circulation and talks about “free circulation of the labor force,” its main focus is the circulation of capital.

It is not so difficult to open a chapter. Fourteen out of 33 chapters have been opened for Turkey; however, only one was concluded. That is, Turkey has passed only one “lesson.” The other chapters are still open, and not much will change if one more is opened. It is not clear how the “economic aid” of three billion Euros will be paid. There is an ambiguous plan which suggests that 500 million Euros will be paid from the EU’s joint budget and that the rest will be assumed by individual countries. There is no payment plan, nor any clarity on what is to be done with this sum. Neither the EU nor Turkey has made any explanations as to where the money will be spent.

If this sum of money whose destination is unclear is granted as “aid,” in response to Turkey’s statement “We have spent seven billion Euros for refugees in four years; the burden needs to be shared,” then we can guess that it will not be spent on large scale structural change. The government might have assumed that this money will be paid to cover some of its previous expenses.

However, there is clarity on one point: Turkey will stop the irregular flow of migrants to Europe, and serve as a “safe country” which will take back those refugees who trespass the EU border. This is one of the issues we shall discuss in detail. Turkey’s refugee paradigm, which is currently shaped by the Regulation on Temporary Protection, will undergo a complete overhaul. Hence, we will present some more detailed predictions as to which directions the new paradigm might take.

Border patrol and “bribery”

After the summit on November 29, the government announced that Turkish citizens will be able to travel to the EU visa-free in 2016. However, this is not certain. In brief, although the summit of November 29 was presented by the government to the domestic public as a “huge success,” this is far from the truth. Let us leave aside the issue of what is beneficial about partnering up with a Europe which is becoming increasingly protectionist in the face of the flow of refugees, and is shifting towards pure neoliberalism without any economic safety nets. The EU does not embrace Turkey; it is just bribing Turkey to transform it into a border patrol unit.

We are not alone in pointing out that this summit and the three billion Euros are tantamount to bribery. Right after the summit, the ex-president of Belgium, Guy Verhofstadt, wrote that Europe’s refugee problem cannot be solved by “bribing Turkey.” Caricatures published after the summit depicted Turkey as a watchdog. In short, despite the government’s claims on the domestic front, Turkey has not gained any prestige or grown closer to the EU. Even if it eventually does get close to the EU, such an acquisition would not clean the stain left by this bribe. This bargain on refugees’ lives will remain a dark spot in both Turkish and EU history.

The Emergency in the EU

The number of Syrian refugees living in Turkey is 2.4 million according to official figures, and around 3 million according to non-official estimates. It is calculated that around 15% of Turkey’s official refugee population crossed into the European Union in the first six months of 2015. Of these people, 80% of them preferred not the land route, but the sea route to the Greek islands. Civilian populations were mobilized upon seeing bodies of refugees hitting the shores of the Aegean during summer months. Along the Turkish coast, on Greek islands and across Europe, solidarity networks were formed to aid the refugees.

We are going through the severest refugee crisis since World War II. Civil societies which approach the crisis through a “humanitarian” perspective miss the fact that such a humanitarian perspective is indeed reductionist. They disregard the fact that a political and economic crisis has triggered this huge refugee crisis, albeit in the absence of a World War III.

The deaths of refugees are a result of the proxy wars waged in the region. When looking at refugees, we cannot overlook the policies of the states behind these proxy wars.1 Although the EU has brought nation-states under a single umbrella and lifted internal borders, as a common “market project,” it will always have a formidable external border.

Europe has rarely applied its concepts of “liberty and equality” to non-European peoples. Let us not forget that we should defend these values despite the EU, and not by basing our values on Europe’s joint market project. The EU did not want to accept an inflow of refugees to whom it would have to offer rights and assistance, and instead chose to reinforce its borders. The EU should not have been expected to give a “humanitarian” reaction to this crisis anyway, because it never was a “humanitarian” union. The EU states never officially embraced the refugees the way their populations did. As a political and economic union, the EU has always met the requirements of a capitalist economy.

There were a number of reasons obliging refugees to go from Turkey to Europe. First, migrants protected by the Regulation on Temporary Protection have no refugee status. Although on paper the regulation grants them access to basic services such as education and health, they have difficulty in actually obtaining these services and do not have the right to apply for a work permit or refugee status. Turkey is a purgatory where refugees have no status, and are obliged to wait as asylum seekers or guests. Turkey has purposefully turned a blind eye on refugees’ irregular movement towards Europe in order to show Europe that it is an indispensable country. Afterwards, it used this movement as a bargaining chip -towards Europe and other countries in the region.

The Conditions of the new refugee paradigm

In return for three billion Euros, Europe wants Turkey to change its Regulation on Temporary Protection, and to give migrants refugee status with a new law or regulation. As such, there is a shift in the paradigm represented by Regulation on Temporary Protection, which has been in force for four years. The basic premises of the new refugee paradigm accepted by Turkey in return for three billion Euros are as follows: 1) Turkey should advance the implementation of the Readmission Agreement. Let us note that the European Union has already signed a Readmission Agreement not only with Turkey but with all other member candidates and many other countries neighboring the EU. The EU views this regulation as a policy of the neighborhood. 2) The irregular flow of migrants from Turkey to the EU should be stopped. Refugees ought to be sent through legal mechanisms, and the quota must be increased. 3) Refugees’ living standards in Turkey should be improved.

Application of the conditions

These premises are to be implemented as follows: 1) Any migrant who makes an irregular entrance to the EU from any neighboring country will be sent to Turkey. 2) Turkey and the EU will reinforce border security to prevent irregular entrance. 3) After setting a quota on the number of refugees to be admitted, Europe will open up centers in Turkey for refugee admission. Refugees will be able to apply to these centers; however, EU nations will decide which refugees are to be admitted. The quota is expected to be around 400,000. Considering the EU’s laws of harmonization, it can be assumed that highly skilled individuals will be accepted. 4) Turkey will bring Syrian refugees out of the “guest / asylum seeker” status, revise the Regulation on Temporary Protection, and pass a more permanent regulation or law. Accordingly, refugees will be given the right to work.

As a market union, the EU wants to pay its way out of this humanitarian crisis, which it helped create in the first place by joining the tragic proxy war in Syria. The EU did not disclose a plan as to when and how this money will be paid. There is word that committees will be set up to audit its expenditure, but the Turkish government is claimed to have said “Give us the money and let go of the rest.” In brief, the sum of this dirty deal has been agreed upon. Although one might think that it could partially improve refugees’ lives, the dirty deal is really about the well-being of national capitalist economies. 

Dirty deal and cheap labor

On November 29, the Association for Solidarity with Refugees (Mülteci-Der) called upon all the leaders to put an end this dirty deal to no avail, since the leaders are themselves engaged in this deal. As mentioned above, Turkey has guaranteed three billion Euros in return for arresting refugees, locking them up and keeping them from reaching Europe. However, neither Europe nor Turkey has made any explanations as to how the money will be transferred and where it will be spent. 

The right to work to be given to refugees and will pose a significant problem in a country already grappling with chronic unemployment. If the government transfers this money to the private sector with the aim of creating “new areas of employment,” it may be quite difficult to monitor the transparency of private enterprises. Furthermore, this could open the way to an even more fierce exploitation of refugees, already perceived by employers as cheap labor. Refugees may thus be pitted against local cheap labor to bring wages even lower—indeed, since the market logic rests on the competition of workers among themselves, such a possibility is not far-fetched at all.

The improvement of education conditions was also demanded by the EU; however, there has been no work on the education infrastructure as of yet. In short, Turkey seems to have promised only border patrol in return for the money. Refugees are highly doubtful as to whether living in Turkey will provide them with any benefits. The refugees I have spoken to in the Hatay province do not believe that the EU money will be spent on them.

“Aleppo will not forgive you”

Although Turkey fashions itself as the protector of the Sunni population and refugees in the region, refugees in Turkey are cognizant that Turkey is in fact arming the opposition and pursuing sectarian policies across the region. The youth who, in continuation of the Arab Spring, had taken to the streets to protest the Baath regime were obliged to withdraw within a couple of months. With their revolution hijacked and their country thrust into civil war, refugees do not view Turkey as a protector.

A young refugee I have spoken to in Hatay says, “We did not know who was Alawi and who was not; there was no problem of sectarianism.” They are angry at Turkey for its sectarian stance and for making refugees dependent on humanitarian assistance, instead of providing them with rights to preserve their self-respect. They are fully aware of Turkey’s role in the proxy war and annoyed with men sporting Salafi beards walking the streets of Hatay. “We were staging civilian protests; the Baath regime responded with violence. However, the so-called opposition of today has no connection to us.” In an echo of Fehim Taştekin’s interview with Samir Aita, this 26-year old man says “Aleppo will not forgive Turkey. Turkey did not offer us a home; instead it destroyed our home.”

A Misleading profile of refugees: “Well-behaved, obedient, Sunni”

In accepting its new role as a border patrol, Turkey might be thinking that it will come across refugees who are “well-behaved, obedient, Sunni, and therefore appreciative of Turkey.” However, a large part of the refugee population is angry at Turkey because of its role in Syria and the arming of opponents, their lack of basic rights and the opportunity to apply for refugee status, and obligation to work at low-paid jobs. The recognition of refugee status will allow them to raise their voice on issues about which they have to remain silent now. They do not want to be exploited as cheap labor, nor be deprived of education and democratic rights.

We are on the “same ship” with refugees

Turkey cannot rule the refugee population the way it rules the locals—that is, through oppression and security politics. Refugees will be even angrier at Turkey for its new role in border patrol. Besides, the disruption of the peace process and resumption of war in the Kurdish provinces, the suppression of democratic rights, the shift towards a security state, and high youth unemployment levels all suggest that significant social unrest may be in store for Turkey.

Unless it discusses these issues at length, brings a democratic solution to the refugee question, and negotiates with the Kurdish political movement and economic problems, Turkey will come to resemble Syria.

Although Europe insists on seeing Turkey as a “safe country” which will serve as a refugee camp, and flashes smiles at the Turkish government, Turkey will never be a safe country for neither refugees nor citizens unless it resolves social tensions through democratic means.

The only way to wake up from this nightmare and to prevent Turkey from becoming a prison for refugees and ourselves is to see that we are on the same ship with refugees and to wage joint democratic struggles.

 

1  For a detailed discussion of the proxy war, see Fehim Taştekin, Suriye, Yıkıl Git, Diren Kal, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2015.