For more than a year the spiraling violence in Syria has continued without pause, forcing many thousands of ordinary people and their children to flee for their lives, seeking refuge in the neighboring countries of Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon and Iraq.
The refugee crisis is a human catastrophe of immense proportions. Every passing week brings large increases in refugees, and with no prospects for peace, it can only get worse. Before it does, however, the United States and the international community should take a hard look at the way we assist refugees in these situations. Are we really delivering help to desperate Syrian refugees in the best way possible?
Last month, U.S. Committee for Refugees Global Ambassador Jeff Fahey, renowned photographer Sasha Gusov and I traveled to the border of Jordan and Syria to find out. So far, more than 40,000 Syrian refugees have registered with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees in Jordan, but the real number of those who have sought refuge is closer to 200,000, because many simply do not register with authorities out of fear or distrust. The Jordanian government and its people have responded generously and are to be commended for providing safe haven to those in danger, but there are financial and societal limits to their generosity. My impression during our trip was that those limits were fast approaching.
Dozens of desperate refugees we met recounted their stories of the trauma and flight they endured back home, and of the fear of being caught up in the fighting. Many of the refugees were confused, disheartened and doubtless suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder; most simply want to go home safely.
The Jordanian government responded to the surge of Syrian refugee arrivals with humane and innovative policies. They established transit centers, typically converted apartments or mobile trailers, and a "bailing out" system that enabled refugees to enjoy freedom of movement, and access to health care and the school system.
During our visit, Jordanian government, UNHCR and local and international NGO officials all expressed aversion to establishing a refugee camp for myriad reasons including political and humanitarian concerns. But off the record they admitted that this "last resort" was the only option if the flow of refugees continues.
Three weeks ago the "last resort" became a reality and a refugee camp of tents in the hot, stifling desert was erected at Za'atari, Jordan, a short distance from the Syrian border.
From all reports the camp is primitive, remote and beset by frequent dust storms. It barely has electricity and all supplies, including water, food and basic medical supplies, must be trucked through the desert to the camp. So far 6,000 refugees have been relocated, but there are plans to expand the camp so that tens of thousands of families could live in tents.
Immediately, the refugees began protesting that the sandstorms, heat and scorpions are jeopardizing the health of babies, children and the elderly. Some said they would rather face the bullets of the Syrian Army than endure the suffering and humiliation of this refugee camp. Why was the establishment of this dangerous camp the only option?
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., speaks with reporters following a vote in the Senate. Gillibrand’s proposal to remove military commanders from the process of reviewing sexual-assault cases was left out of the bicameral deal on the defense authorization bill, but the senator is pushing for a vote on her plan soon.
Each year since 1990, CQ Roll Call has reviewed the financial disclosures of all 541 senators, representatives and delegates to determine the 50 richest members of Congress. This year's report, derived from forms covering the calendar year 2012, shows it took a net worth of $6.67 million to crack the exclusive club.