Another Brick in the Wall

11 Comments

1. 

   Don Durito on October 1, 2016 at 10:11 pm

   And as the timeline would indicate, wall and fence building began in earnest once the Syrian refugee crisis boiled over. If the conditions leading up to the refugee crisis were indeed ones induced by climate change (it seems like an increasingly plausible argument), we should expect to see more such crises in coming decades. Walls will not hold for long in the face of many desperate and determined human beings seeking survival. They will not meekly starve or dehydrate to death for the sake of allowing various local gentry to maintain their sense of national and ethnic purity. Even the US may have its share of climate refugees before long, as anyone living along a coastline is vulnerable to rises in sea level and anyone living in one of the more arid parts of the US is at the mercy of dwindling aquifers and rivers that were once fed by glaciers. In a sense, the Katrina crisis over 11 years ago gave us just a foreshadowing of what might be to come. The locals in my community were not always especially welcoming to the NOLA Lower 9th Ward residents who relocated here (many temporarily but some permanently). I would expect a repeat to be met with similar friction.

   In an age marked by warming surface and ocean temperatures, expect more people fleeing unlivable conditions. Expect previously stable regimes in those regions to collapse. The question is do we merely react – whether said reaction is well-intentioned or not – or do we figure out a way to get ahead of what we can safely guess is going to be an ongoing and worsening set of circumstances. Will those of us who might call for solidarity and humane treatment for those seeking refuge be drowned out by voices of fear and hatred? I don’t know the answer yet, but I can’t exactly say we as a species have reacted well so far.

   • 

     Marie3 on October 2, 2016 at 12:01 am

     Your general points on climate change refugees in the future is probably correct.  On Syria, and most other recent large refugee groups, it’s not.  War has been the primary driver.

     At the beginning of 2007, the UNHCR estimated that the number of Iraqi refugees in Syria was over 1.2 million.[18][1] 80-90% of the Iraqi refugee population lives in the capital city of Damascus.[5] The reason for its large refugee population can be attributed to more than just geography. Until 2007, Syria maintained an open-door policy to Iraqis fleeing the war-ravaged country.[Wikipedia]

     That 1.2 million translates to an additional 7+% within four years.  Would be like over 22 million Mexicans entering the US in four years.  That put enormous stress on the resources in the country (and for which the US should have been grateful because it too some of the pressure out the the mess WE created in that country).  

     That was followed by:

     The drought caused 75 percent of Syria’s farms to fail and 85 percent of livestock to die between 2006 and 2011, according to the United Nations. The collapse in crop yields forced as many as 1.5 million Syrians to migrate to urban centers, like Homs and Damascus.

     The drought had displaced Syrians long before the conflict began,” said Francesco Femia, president of the Center for Climate Security. “And what is frightening is that analysts who study the region completely missed it.”

     Missed it and no aid was offered.  (Not that we’re good even when droughts are killing people.)  I was at least vaguely aware of the Syrian drought before the Arab Spring and it did factored into my interpretation of what was going on in Syria and that US participation in regime change there would be a disaster.

     • 

       Don Durito on October 2, 2016 at 1:48 pm

       Not sure where you are getting these quotes from, since you are not providing hyperlinks to your sources. So be it. The contention that climate change could be linked to specific events, such as droughts, for a long time has been controversial. I get that. Conventional wisdom until very recently was that we could not say with any clarity that any given event is linked to climate change. I am under the impression, possibly mistakenly, that climate scientists are changing their tune. That the drought affecting Syria was extraordinary is not in doubt. That it occurred during what was at that point the warmest decade on record is also not in doubt. That the drought exacerbated a humanitarian nightmare already unfolding, and one that was largely preventable (i.e., the Iraq War, which created a large number of refugees in Syria and elsewhere along the Iraq border) should go without saying. To the extent that the drought was not a contributing factor, do those nations who were responsible for creating the crisis have some responsibility toward those who have been displaced as a result? Damn straight. Does that include the US? Damn straight. Were nations within the EU and on the border of Iraq and Syria prepared for the influx of refugees? Apparently not. How do we prepare for this or future crises? I wish I had an easy answer. I don’t. I am reasonably certain that building walls as a reactionary measure is ultimately doomed to failure. This will be true for politically caused refugee crises (Trump’s Mexico border wall is largely a reaction to the crisis of refugees flowing in from Guatamala and elsewhere in Central America), as well as ones that are more climate based (although untangling the two causes apart will be darned difficult). Will a Trump regime be one of peace, love, and understanding (but with walls to keep the “undesirables” out)? Hardly. If the point of your diary is that everyone builds walls to keep out their perceived “undesirable Others” and so what if Trump wants to build walls to keep out his base’s “undesirable Others” too, congratulations. You have now made that point loud and clear. Whether you’ll get much agreement with that, I don’t know. By the way, accusing those who disagree with you of groupthink is probably not going to win you any hearts and minds. Certainly not exactly effective marketing of whatever point you are trying to make ahead of this year’s vote.

       • 

         Marie3 on October 2, 2016 at 3:45 pm

         Wikipedia on Iraqi refugees to Syria  Plenty of other primary sources for this, but the Wikipedia entry is factually solid and one that some of us followed in real time.  It stressed the economy and resources of the country, and while safe from the war, the refugees struggled to survive in Syria.  (Many others fled to Jordan which may have been a better option for some but possibly no better than Syria for others.)

         To ignore a preexisting economic and cultural stressor before the drought began slants the profile of what came later.  

         Vice on Syria drought.  Not unique reporting, but it was a reasonable enough presentation that I grabbed it.  Devastating droughts put communities in a precarious position.  In this case, regardless of whether it climate change induced or not, the very last thing such communities need on top of it is war.  Of course, it’s also an opportunity for out and/or foreign groups to take advantage of the existing frailty.  And do so while denying any responsibility for the additional pain, suffering, and destruction that escalates the difficulties.

         The US Plain states droughts (1920s-1930s) were widespread and persistent.  But unlike Syrian farmers, the US farmers there at that time imported farming methods ill-suited to the land and that aggravated the conditions of the later droughts.  Families from that time could be viewed as climate change refugees.  As horrible as it was them, the impediments to leaving were several orders of magnitude less than what Syrians and those in the Horn of Africa have had to contend with. Why we heard so little about the drought in Syria was because widespread famine and dependence on foreign food aid to prevent starvation wasn’t prominent.  The functioning Syrian government was able to limit the impact of the drought above the level of famine. BBC  

         In a country that is mainly comprised of agricultural land, people have been hit hard by a food crisis sparked by the conflict and made worse by the effects of the drought that ended in 2010.

         Before the 2011 revolution Syria’s wheat reserves were roughly the equivalent to one year’s consumption: 3.5 million tons. But, by 2013, the government was reported to have imported around 2.4 million tons of wheat.

         At the end of a drought of several years, it takes time for farmers to return and re-establish agricultural production.  Interrupting that process in Syria is IMO evil.

         So, all the folks that now want to cite the drought as the precipitating factor in Syrian emigration after 2011 are merely looking for a scapegoat cover for the war facilitated by outsiders.  Not new — it’s often what western media focuses on during famines anywhere and dismisses the violent conflicts that are hardly never absent.  

         I’m not dismissing that GCC may lead to more disruptions of agricultural production and that in turn may lead to more refugees.  But the current reality is more what it’s always been –bad/no government and wars.  

   • 

     Marie3 on October 2, 2016 at 12:52 am

     btw — recovery from group-think is rare.  Always saddens me to see it.    

2. 

   Marie3 on October 2, 2016 at 1:48 am

   How could I have neglected to include one of the better wall builders?  RT — Israel seals off Palestinian territories, approves new settlements ahead of Jewish new year

   And:

   The Green Zone was completely surrounded by high concrete blast walls, T-Walls and barbed wire fences with access only available through a handful of entry control points, all controlled by Coalition troops.[7] It is this security that made the Green Zone the safest area of Baghdad,[7] and gave its name colloquially as “the bubble”.[8] The southern and eastern side of the zone is protected by the Tigris River – the only entrance to the zone from this side is the Arbataash Tamuz (July 14) Bridge (named for the date that the former regime came to power.)

   So, we Americans do like some yuuge walls.

3. 

   mino on October 4, 2016 at 11:11 am

   I am guessing that European nativists do not see this flood of refugees as being amenable to cultural assimilation as was practiced back in the 60s?

   Is a thorny problem. Is it wrong to ask for some  assimilation in exchange for immigration?  We have  taken it for granted over here.  By third generation, it was accomplished.  But I don’t think that is possible these days.

   • 

     Marie3 on October 4, 2016 at 7:23 pm

     Assimilation hasn’t been going well in Europe for the past few decades.  Hence, the slums and riots and “jihadi” radicals who appear to be 2nd generation.  It doesn’t take more than a small excess number of immigrants combined with a high birth rate of those immigrants to undermine assimilation.

     • 

       fjallstrom on October 6, 2016 at 8:56 am

       Yes, the radicals are second or third or fourth generation. The combination of being kept as labour reserve to keep wages down and jihadi preachers makes a few go of the deep end.

       But really, if you look at it long-term it is amazing how few it is.

       Assimilation worked when Europe practised full employment policies. That ended 1980-1990 depending on country, after that the problems has festered.

       • 

         Marie3 on October 6, 2016 at 12:58 pm

         Don’t know about radicals within Euro Muslim communities, but the ones that have been engaging in violence are reportedly 1st (born abroad and relocated at a young age or born to immigrant parents) and 2nd generation.  

         Not so easy to practice full employment when surplus labor is more than a percentage point or two.  

4. 

   fjallstrom on October 6, 2016 at 9:07 am

   The actual walls are the consequence of the legal wall that has existed since at least around 2000. It was then that transporter liability was introduced to make airlines makes sure that no refugees use them, and if not they are fined. That in combination with first-country asylum rules made the north physically removed from refugee streams and the south border countries more or less solely responsible for all refugees coming to Europe.

   The legal wall was as far as I can see a result of high-unemployment policies (aka low-inflation policies) and a fear that if immigration was also allowed the combination would lead to the rise of the far right.

   Now add a self-inflicted economic crisis centered on those same border countries, destruction of Libya that Europe used to bribe to keep refugees out and wars in the Middle East, and the legal walls are replaced by physical walls. Depressing but not surprising.