The airlifting of refugees is a mistake

It is natural that people watching the human tragedy unfolding on the borders with Kosovo should want to respond to alleviate…

It is natural that people watching the human tragedy unfolding on the borders with Kosovo should want to respond to alleviate the suffering. It is also perhaps understandable that the victims, who are our European neighbours, should prompt such a public reaction.

Indeed, the most compassionate response is one that everyone wants. Trocaire has relied on being compassionate over the past 26 years in our relief operations from Cambodia to Rwanda to Honduras.

But to have an effect, well-meaning intentions must be translated into a meaningful response. The last thing the people need is a mere humanitarian gesture. They need a sustainable solution.

This is why Trocaire questions the appropriateness of flying refugees en masse out of the Balkans. Before embarking on any humanitarian initiative, Trocaire assesses what is in the best interests of the people.

READ MORE

In her excellent book, Do No Harm, which deals with humanitarian interventions in conflict situations, Mary B. Anderson argues that the first and absolute requirement for any organisation providing humanitarian assistance is that it must not contribute to making the situation worse, such as prolonging the conflict or putting the lives of civilians in danger. The fundamental principle is to do no harm.

Yet to any observer the situation in Kosovo has been made worse on the ground by the NATO actions to date. More than half-a-million people have been displaced and become refugees, with dozens dead from exposure.

Hundreds, maybe several thousand, have been murdered in Kosovo by Serbian forces.

Now the NATO countries want to organise airlifts of hundreds of thousands of people to destinations throughout the world. It is extremely high-handed, perhaps even a form of neo-colonialism, for governments to assume they know best what the refugees want and impose it on them.

Has anyone asked the refugees what they want? I have yet to be convinced that the Kosovans want what is being proposed. Trocaire's partner organisations, currently working around the clock in Albania and Macedonia, haven't requested this kind of support.

A spokesperson for the Kosovo Information Centre in London said clearly yesterday that refugees should be assisted on the spot.

Before we make any radical decision in the Balkans, we should start from the simple premise: how can we make things better for the Kosovo people in the long run?

Trocaire's experience over the past 26 years of working with refugee populations is that, invariably, most people want to return home as soon as possible. Whatever strategy we adopt must serve to deliver on this basic objective.

We have also found that when refugees have been moved to third countries, there is a tendency towards "cherry-picking" to ensure that the professional and middle-class and educated refugees are given preference over the old, the infirm and less capable. In other words, the people who need help most are often the ones who are left to the side.

We must learn from past experience. By 1995 there were 1.3 million people displaced from Bosnia. Of these, 80,000 people have been able to return home. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees does not expect any more people to return in the foreseeable future.

This proposed airlift is a gift to Mr Milosevic. Through it, we would be contributing to his programme of ethnic cleansing. While a high-profile humanitarian gesture may prove popular in some NATO countries, we must ask if it is the best long-term solution for the people of Kosovo.

It is far more appropriate that a humanitarian operation similar to the Berlin airlift of 1948 is organised along the borders to Kosovo. There is an assumption that an airlift is easy and cheap to achieve. This is not so. However, if the same efforts were put into flying resources and assistance into the region, as is being proposed for the outward airlift of refugees, their appalling plight could be greatly alleviated.

Obviously, we need to protect the refugees and provide for their basic needs. Trocaire has just allocated £150,000 worth of aid to the refugees. These funds will be issued for the purchase and distribution of basic food, blankets and mattresses, soap and clothing. The money will also be used to provide support for host families for the refugees in Albania.

People will be aware from media reports that many Albanian families have taken in refugees, and Trocaire is supporting their efforts. Is this not a much more effective action than taking people from the borders of their homeland and scattering them throughout the world?

We are facing a last opportunity before Orthodox Christian Easter to have a cessation of bombing and to try, once more, for a lasting solution. Mr Milosevic has offered a unilateral ceasefire which has been rejected by the NATO countries.

We would argue that any offer of a ceasefire, however sceptical about it we might be, must be pursued. For any peace package to be effective it must contain the following elements: the introduction of a peacekeeping force into Kosovo; international human rights monitors as well as representatives of the International Criminal Court for Yugoslavia to be allowed in; and free access for aid agencies.

The people of Kosovo have been stripped of any control over their lives. By not listening to their opinions, we will only compound their tragedy.