Rufgee crisis: Lessons David Cameron can learn from Lebanon’s example

In the midst of the current refugee crisis it’s easy to get caught up in numbers. Germany is expecting 800,000 by the end of the year – and 500,000 annually for years to come. Australia says they’ll let in 12,000 and David Cameron announced that the UK will accept 20,000 of the most vulnerable Syrian refugees by 2020. However, these seemingly “huge” numbers need to be put into perspective.

Let’s imagine for a minute that 15 million refugees suddenly appeared at Dover, and that number increased to 30 million by the end of the year. On top of this, let’s imagine that “Great” Britain couldn’t provide sufficient electricity or water to the population, that the NHS didn’t exist, and that the country had never fully rebuilt after the destruction of World War II.

Welcome to Lebanon.

Since the beginning of the Syrian Civil War, 1.1 million Syrian refugees have been registered in Lebanon – and that’s only those that have been registered as the UN certainly don’t tally all those that cross the porous border. Considering that the population of Lebanon, which is only half the size of Wales, is 4.5 million, “a lot” would be an understatement. I have no doubt that if the equivalent ratio of refugees appeared in any European nation over the course of four years, there would be uproar. Borders would be closed, the idea of a “borderless Schengen zone” in Europe would certainly collapse, populations would revolt, and state institutions would struggle to survive.

This, however, has not happened in Lebanon. That is not to say that the Syrians enjoy the best quality of life there – one only has to refer to the iconic image of the Syrian father selling pens while holding his daughter on the streets of Beirut. But Lebanon has not closed its borders.

Nor does this mean that Lebanese are waiting at the border, singing with open arms and offering sweets; it’s all to easy to find many complaining about the Syrians’ burden on society. But in a country where the term “society” is a long shot to begin with, this isn’t hard to understand.

I’m not saying that Europe needs to open its borders to anyone who wants to come in, which would be unrealistic. But at the same time the European states, and others around the world, who enjoy the luxuries of a developed nation, need to take a leaf out of Lebanon’s book – and Jordan’s for that matter.

Jordan is in a similar situation. A country with issues of their own, Jordan is located in the midst of a region that only seems to be witnessing more crises as the years go by. Yet the country is still home to the largest Syrian refugee camp, has welcomed over half a million Syrians who have fled their home, and has no intention of shutting the door on its neighbours in the foreseeable future.

You only have to scroll through your Facebook feed or the comment sections of news sites to find unlimited amounts of fear mongering, complaining and blame directed at European governments for letting “so many” of refugees in. However, selectively choosing 20,000 refugees over the course of five years to join a population of 65 million is not enough. The UK constantly pats itself on the back for being the “only G7 nation to spend 0.7% of its GDP on humanitarian aid”, but throwing money at the issue isn’t going to solve it.

From other parts of the world comes the disheartening news of some states that are actively keeping refugees out. Israel, for example, is building a fence along its border with Jordan, while Hungary is considering sending troops to its frontiers.

Over the last week, I’ve frequently read the words: “No parent puts their child on a boat unless the water is safer than the land.” The UK – and others – need to understand this. They should be thankful that the numbers of refugees pouring in are as small as they are. Yet they still cause a fuss and still announce proudly that they’ll be letting tens of thousands of refugees in.

I have read that Germany is in a better position economically and can, therefore, afford to be welcoming more refugees into their country. They also have an ageing population and jobs for the taking, but this is no excuse. Lebanon isn’t in a better position economically, politically (or in any other sense for that matter), yet they haven’t shut their borders – and with the number of refugees there expected to rise to almost 2 million by the end of the year, they’re still not planning to any time soon.

So let’s just imagine 30 million refugees in the UK, then we might have a reason to be selective. But 20,000 over the course of five years doesn’t make Britain so “great” after all.