This prevalence of Islamophobia in Bosnia and in EU refugee policy prompts questions about change and reform, especially given the imminent need to respond to modern conflicts affecting Muslims. The 2022 Ukrainian War and refugee surge prompted EU policy that welcomes Ukrainians but contradicts EU responses to Bosnian and Syrian refugees in 1992 and 2012. This double-standard towards non-Muslims and Muslims suggests a continuity in Islamophobic sentiments over the last 30 years. Since the start of the Russian invasion in February 2022, Ukrainians have been subjected to violence and war crimes on a massive scale, with the New Lines Institute even concluding that “there exists a serious risk of genocide” within Ukraine (Diamond, 2022). This horrific violence and destruction has led to the displacement of nearly 15 million Ukrainians (8 million internally and about 7 million refugees), making this the worst year on record of forcible displacement (Karasapan, 2022). In response to this tragedy and the resultant surge of Ukrainian refugees, European countries opened their borders and implemented policies to grant Ukrainian refugees asylum – notably, the Temporary Protection Directive. While created in 2001 following the conflicts in former Yugoslavia, the Temporary Protection Directive was activated for the first time this year in response to the Ukrainian War. The Temporary Protection Directive grants refugees many of the same living and working rights as EU citizens, including a residence permit for the entire duration of their protection and access to employment, accommodation, social welfare, medical care, education, and free movement through the EU (European Commision, 2022). With the start of the Bosnian War 30 years prior, approximately 1.3 million Bosnian refugees fled to Western Europe, escaping destruction, sexual violence, and genocide, much as Ukrainians are doing today (Barslund et al., 2017). However, Western European countries only granted Bosnian refugees initial temporary residency, limited access to labor and education, limited integration measures, and limited financial support (Barslund et al., 2017). In the Dayton Agreement which ended the Bosnian War, European countries prioritized measures to return refugees to Bosnia and Herzegovina despite persisting ethnic tensions and economic difficulties in the country (Barslund et al., 2017). While the conflicts in both Ukraine and Bosnia featured extreme levels of violence and created influxes of refugees, these countries received unequal responses from European refugee policy. In considering the reason for this disparate treatment, one cannot help but notice the differing religious demographics – while Ukraine is a majority Christian state, Bosnia is predominately Muslim. Professor Mehnaz Afridi, the Director of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Interfaith Education Center at Manhattan College, views “temporary protection for the Ukrainians as a double standard.” She acknowledges a geopolitical motivation for Europe, suggesting “the reason the international community has done so much for Ukraine is that their real nervousness is about Russia and Russia’s power in that region, because Russia could spread back into Ukraine, usurping Ukraine and potentially other parts of Eastern Europe.” However, in addition to this geopolitical factor, Afridi attributes the double standard to Islamophobic sentiments within Western Europe. “There is this fear of people letting in Muslims because they are perceived as connected to extremism, violence,” she said. “When Muslims suffer,” Afridi observes, “there’s less of an open door.” Since the Bosnian War, other Muslim groups have similarly experienced Europe’s “closed door.” With the escalation of the Syrian War in 2012, there were nearly 12 million refugees under the UNHCR Mandate (UNHCR, 2012). While Europe accepted one million Syrian refugees, the majority have only been afforded an international protection status—the Temporary Protection Directive was not activated (UNHCR, 2021). Contrary to the provisions of the Temporary Protection Directive, an international protection status only provides limited access to residence permits, travel documents, employment, education, social welfare, healthcare, and accommodation (European Commission, 2022). These rights are further compromised as European countries increase the pressure on refugees to return to Syria, despite the dangers of the ongoing war and unsafe conditions for return. Even though these problems in Syria persist, European efforts to classify Syria as a safe country are on the rise, with countries such as Denmark even revoking some refugees’ residency permits (Sly, 2021).
Defense Report
Europe’s Double-Standard: Implications of the Disparity of Refugee Policy in Ukraine, Bosnia, and Syria By Natalie Larsen | Balkan Diskurs
Tags