“Keepin’ it Real” is a weekly blog that analyzes news and events in the international system through a realist perspective. In this blog, Tania Gomes looks into whether the United States presidential candidates will stick to their views on the refugee crisis, and if the crisis is even on the agenda at all.
In light of the 2016 U.S. election, the refugee issue has been the centre of both parties’ policy platforms. The Republicans, led by Donald Trump, continuously affirm that a migration increase from the Middle East would be a national security threat. The Democrats, represented by Hillary Clinton, insist that they will improve the country’s current policies and commitment to refugee resettlement. I don’t think it matters who wins office this election season. Migration and refugee policy will not be the main priority on the policy agenda.
The United States is reported to be working on a new pilot project that will increase the role of the private sector in sponsoring refugees. In an interview published by The Huffington Post, David Bier of the libertarian Cato Institute said the U.S. private sector can do much more in advancing the country’s support in accepting and resettling Syrian refugees. He also stated the White House is optimistic that a program emulative to that of Canada’s is possible and currently in the works. However, an official confirmation of these sentiments has yet to be announced from the White House.
It is no surprise that the U.S. has fallen short on their responsibilities as a global leader in combatting the current refugee crisis. Thus far, the country has only accepted 10,000 refugee claimants. On the other hand, middle powers have demonstrated their commitment to the refugee issue, despite their economic and/or territorial inferiority to the United States. Canada has been receiving international recognition for accepting and successfully resettling over 27,000 Syrian refugees through the implementation of their private and quasi-private sponsorship initiatives. In addition, the international community has followed suit: at least 13 countries have made an effort to kick-start a similar program, Australia and New Zealand being two excellent examples. The European Union has also done amazing work by accepting over a million migrants and refugees in 2015, with 476,000 received in Germany alone.
If Trump wins office, any effort to meet international standards of receiving refugees will be neglected and terminated. If Clinton is voted in, she will not have the flexibility and authority to make effective change in this area. There are a few reasons for this assumption. One, a presidency’s term is four years. Their priority when they enter office is to enhance domestic policy and appease their citizens so that they may be re-elected in the future. American citizens are largely not concerned with the refugee crisis. They are primarily concerned about their job security, their safety, and their healthcare options. Two, this is one of the most controversial elections in U.S. history. Therefore, there is a great deal of skepticism in Clinton’s ability to run the country. I believe, if elected, Clinton will be forced to avoid controversial policy initiatives in the hopes of appeasing a large American population that may not want to see an influx of refugee immigration.
Therefore, this pilot project is a lot of talk and not enough action. The U.S. government will always put the needs and wants of its own citizens over that of the international community, as any self-interested country would. This discourse could be an effort to divert the conversation away from the recent U.S. bombings in Aleppo and towards the state doing something positive to contribute to international efforts of resettlement. Whether it will have tangible results is another unanswerable question.
It is plain to see that the United States has the capacity to do more when it comes to the resettlement of refugees. However, the country’s current political state shows that it is highly unlikely that any effective ‘pilot projects’ will be implemented in the United States in the near future.
