The UNHCR has said that approximately 400,000 refugees from Africa and the Middle East will arrive in Europe this year and 450,000 more next year. Asylum seekers in Europe are mainly from Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Algeria, Cameroon, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Libya, Mali, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal, Somalia, Sudan and Tunisia.
In order to find out why these refugees want to go to Europe, rather than to other African and Middle Eastern countries, we have to find out why they want to abandon their nationality to gain the citizenships of their former colonial masters. This is a historical irony and gives us an important lesson on international politics and history.
Most of the asylum seekers come from the countries which gained independence from their colonial masters after World War II. None of these countries are democratic. Their governance systems are extremely deficient.
The basic functions of the state are to protect the security of the state from other states and nonstate actors externally and the safety of its citizens internally; to guarantee its citizens’ political freedoms and civil rights; to develop its economy and distribute its national wealth fairly; to provide social welfare and services; and treat all citizens in its territory equally and fairly.
But most of those states are ruled by dictatorial, corrupt, incompetent and exclusionary or partisan-oriented persons or groups. To make it worse, these “fragile states” (the term used by the Fund for Peace) suffer from ethnic or racial conflicts; religious or sectarian conflicts; regional separatist movements; and/or chiliastic religious and ideological movements. Under the circumstances, it is not surprising that most of them are suffering from all kinds of armed conflict. Peoples of other African countries under armed conflict may also want to seek asylum in Europe, but their countries are too far away from Europe, do not face the sea or are too difficult to cross the state borders and cannot contact asylum traffickers.
The reason these countries are regionally, religiously, racially and ethnically and linguistically heterogeneous is that their colonial masters granted independence to their respective colonies, not to the tribal states of the precolonial period. This means that the newly independent states were tasked to build the European type of nation-state system based on the principle of one culture and one language.
Their colonial powers expected or at least hoped that their colonies would adopt the Western democratic political system. In the beginning, most African leaders willingly imitated the Western political system, but gradually they have become authoritarian. In the Middle East, some military or religious leaders have advocated Pan-Islamism and have established either a military dictatorship or a theocracy.
The problem or dilemma here is that during the long period of colonial rule the African and Arab peoples were exposed to Western democracy and the young generation favors Western democracy, but the leaders of primordial groups seek either to seize power or to merge with a neighboring state, to establish a separate state or to gain autonomy. In contrast, the masses are apolitical and are more concerned about survival than anything else.
The best way is to secure safety and survival either by succumbing to the winning side or fleeing from their country. Unfortunately, poor people cannot afford to pay for passages to Europe and have to suffer all kinds of miseries. Which country would these desperate people choose to go to in such a desperate situation? They would choose wealthy, peaceful, familiar and geographically close countries. They are Western European countries.
Most of the receiving European countries are former colonial powers. The E.U.-Western Balkan states conference has been discussing the refugee issue. Western Balkan states are reluctant to accept any of the refugees and Western European countries want to accommodate a limited number of refugees. E.U. members, including former colonial powers and noncolonial powers, should act on both humanitarian and pragmatic grounds. The former colonial powers should remember the lesson from the book of Galatians: You reap what you sow. The former colonies should also learn that when a state is incapable of providing safety, food, housing and freedom, it loses its raison de’tre. Now is the time for fragile states to forget about the past and move forward on their own feet.
It is also time for world leaders to seriously ponder a permanent solution to the refugee problem. When African colonies were offered independence, they had three options: return to the precolonial political system based on tribalism, the establishment of a pan-African state or the independence of the existing colonial territories as nation-states offered by their colonial masters.
The power-hungry African political leaders chose the third without considering that nation-building would be extremely difficult and take a long time. The Middle Eastern leaders had similar choices: return to the precolonial theocratic state system, pan-Arabism or the acceptance of the state boundaries drawn by the Western colonial powers. Arab leaders also settled for the third option. Consequently, the two regions suffer from the same problems. But it is too late and almost impossible to abandon the nation-state system.
The primordial dividing lines — race, ethnicity, religion, sectarianism, regionalism, language and culture — combined with the malfeasant state are ultimately responsible for the refugee issue. Under the circumstances, the best solution is to democratize those states as soon as possible. So far, “fake” democracy, theocracy, praetorian dictatorship and any other political systems have failed to prevent internal armed conflicts.
Through democratic processes, people can debate and vote on such dividing issues as human rights, separatism, irredentism, regional autonomy and separation of spiritual and temporal power. Democracy has many deficiencies but it can solve primordial conflicts within a state and accelerate nation-building any other political systems. The role of international organizations, governmental or nongovernmental, is important for this purpose.
By Park Sang-seek
Park Sang-seek is a former rector of the Graduate Institute of Peace Studies, Kyung Hee University and the author of “Globalized Korea and Localized Globe” –Ed.
