‘At serious risk of destitution’: the marginalisation of Syrian refugees in Turkey
By: Laura Hanton
Tags: Refugees, Syria, Syrian Refugees, Marginalization, Syrian Civil War

The EU-Turkey Deal

The deal came into effect in March 2016 | Photo by geralt via Pixabay

The most controversial reaction to the Syrian crisis has been the EU-Turkey Deal made on 20 March 2016. The deal is said to have had ‘deleterious effects for thousands of refugees’ and has ‘violated international law and norms of refugee protection’. The crux of the agreement was that the Turkish government would take back all migrants who entered Greece through “irregular” routes (i.e. via boat and without official permission) in return for EU member states accepting a maximum of 72,000 Syrian refugees directly from Turkey and remunerating the country with an initial €3 billion.

The deal came in response to the worsening migrant crisis at the beginning of 2016: nation borders were closing; far-right political groups were gaining traction; and an influx of newcomers was seen as a threat to European culture and resources. The general attitude towards refugees was becoming more hostile, and European states were pressurising Turkey to control departure from their coastal cities. The aim of the deal, then, was to reduce the incentive to use human traffickers from the Turkish coasts to the Greek islands and thus halt the huge numbers of people who were losing their lives in the Mediterranean sea: a report by the UN estimated that 2,275 individuals died making this journey in 2018 alone.

Yet according to the charity Help Refugees, reception facilities and temporary camps on the Greek islands were transformed overnight into detention centres for refugees awaiting transportation back to Turkey. Previously poor conditions rapidly deteriorated, leaving thousands living in ‘squalid conditions and overcrowded camps, without access to proper sanitation facilities, medical care or nutritious food’. Many refugees launched legal battles resisting the notion that Turkey would serve as a ‘safe’ country for them, with ‘safe’ being defined by Human Rights Watch as a place where an individual refugee has rights in line with the Refugee Convention, including rights to work, healthcare and education. These rights have not materialised, and in reality ‘80% of Syrians in Turkey live below the poverty line’. However, the EU-Turkey Deal remains firmly in place, and its normalisation is endangering the future of refugee protection. The deal has, in effect, ‘outsourced border control in exchange for cash and political gestures’, and left refugees in a position of extreme marginalisation and legal limbo.

Turkish media are also contributing to the marginalisation of Syrian refugees | Photo by Nerostrateur via Wikimedia Commons

Turkish media are also playing a role in the marginalisation of refugees and their inability to integrate. An analysis of media outlets in Turkey found that the Cumhuriyet newspaper in particular was highly critical of the government over their response to Syrians, and paid little attention to the humanitarian aspect of the crisis, using the issue instead for political gain. Turkish newspapers are also reporting that the attitudes of the public towards refugees are wholly negative, ranging from concerns that ‘they will be able to vote in elections’ to ‘they are becoming Turkish citizens’. Most studies conclude that there is little awareness or information about Syrian refugees provided by the media, and such disinformation can only lead to further social segregation.

The future for Syrian refugees

…is looking bleak. With President Assad’s government slowly regaining control of Syria and terrorist groups including ISIS losing their grip, demands are being heard in neighbouring and host countries for refugees to go home. A report by the Netherlands Institute of International Relations has questioned whether this ‘post-war phase’ that the Syrian regime has been trying to foster the image of is true at all, arguing that the fact that more than half of the pre-war population is living in exile has been ‘conveniently omitted from the image presented of this new Syria’.

Even if refugees were voluntarily wanting to return, huge barriers lie in their way. The Arab Weekly highlighted the legal obstacles in the way of refugee repatriation, including local vetting procedures for returnees and legislative frameworks for the recovery of private property. Such processes have made it nearly impossible for Syrians to return and resume a normal life, while the very persistence of Assad’s regime ‘continues to represent a principal obstacle to return’. The Netherlands Institute of International Relations also claim that one of the greatest limitations on a refugee’s prospect of return is fear, with the regime having disseminated the message that refugees are nothing more than ‘cowards, traitors or terrorists’. As a consequence, many refugees are anticipating resettlement in a third country or are hoping to travel to Europe in an effort to build a more secure life for themselves and their families.

Currently, however, Syrian refugees are only just surviving in an unparalleled position of precariousness, outstaying their welcome in and financially burdening host countries like Turkey, whilst being unable to return home out of fear of violence and persecution. They seem to belong nowhere, with their future ambiguous and uncertain. They are, arguably, the most marginalised community of our times.