TY - BOOK
T1 - Expanding protection options?
T2 - Flexible approaches to status for displaced Syrians, Venezuelans, and Ukrainians
AU - Selee, Andrew
AU - Fratzke, Susan
AU - Davidoff-Gore, Samuel
AU - Freier, Luisa Feline
N1 - Policy documents.
PY - 2024/1
Y1 - 2024/1
N2 - Since 2011, the global protection system has faced three of the largest international displacement crises in the post-World War II era. The massive and rapid displacement of Syrians, Venezuelans, and Ukrainians presented neighboring countries with an impossible task: providing welcome, legal status, and protection to these vulnerable populations, even though their asylum systems lacked the capacity to handle such a large influx. In response to each of these crises, governments chose to innovate, forgoing the traditional tools of the international protection regime—and crucially, determination of protection needs on a person-by-person basis—in favor of flexible and temporary forms of status. Receiving-country governments in each case faced similar circumstances. The mass displacement was from neighboring countries with strong cultural and political ties to the receiving society. Entry requirements were few (for example, Syrians and Ukrainians had visa-free entry to Turkey and the European Union, respectively). Additionally, receiving-country governments had political and diplomatic incentives to provide some form of protection because they opposed the causes of displacement: Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, Venezuela’s Maduro regime, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Finally, in each case, the domestic asylum or refugee system was strained beyond capacity, or in the case of Turkey, did not exist for the purposes of the affected population.
AB - Since 2011, the global protection system has faced three of the largest international displacement crises in the post-World War II era. The massive and rapid displacement of Syrians, Venezuelans, and Ukrainians presented neighboring countries with an impossible task: providing welcome, legal status, and protection to these vulnerable populations, even though their asylum systems lacked the capacity to handle such a large influx. In response to each of these crises, governments chose to innovate, forgoing the traditional tools of the international protection regime—and crucially, determination of protection needs on a person-by-person basis—in favor of flexible and temporary forms of status. Receiving-country governments in each case faced similar circumstances. The mass displacement was from neighboring countries with strong cultural and political ties to the receiving society. Entry requirements were few (for example, Syrians and Ukrainians had visa-free entry to Turkey and the European Union, respectively). Additionally, receiving-country governments had political and diplomatic incentives to provide some form of protection because they opposed the causes of displacement: Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, Venezuela’s Maduro regime, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Finally, in each case, the domestic asylum or refugee system was strained beyond capacity, or in the case of Turkey, did not exist for the purposes of the affected population.
KW - Protección internacional
KW - Desplazamiento
KW - Estatus legal
KW - Siria
KW - Venezuela
KW - Ucrania
KW - Enfoques flexibles
KW - International protection
KW - Displacement
KW - Legal status
KW - Syria
KW - Venezuela
KW - Ukraine
KW - Flexible approaches
KW - Policies documents
M3 - Commissioned report
BT - Expanding protection options?
CY - Washington, DC
ER -