De Fabel van de illegaal 63, March/April 2004
Author: Jan Tas
For some years De Pauluskerk ( a church in Rotterdam) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) are working together in a "voluntary return" project.(1) Recently the IOM published their first evaluation report. The Pauluskerk project is part of a much larger internationally coordinated project to control migration from the former Soviet Union.
Ever since the former Soviet Union collapsed, migration from Eastern Europe towards the European Union has grown. The political and military conflicts in the former republics produce many refugees, and the poverty produces worker migrants who come to western Europe and are exploited here. Just like elsewhere, also in Europe the IOM is used to control this migration. In 1996 the IOM started with projects to stop the uncontrolled migration of Ukrainians and others who travel through that country. The IOM helps the Ukraine government in creating an effective policy. The organization also delivers radio communication and infra red apparatuses.(2)
The IOM furthermore coordinates talks between the countries of origin, the transit countries and the destination countries.(3) This the IOM calls "a cluster process". In 2001 the IOM started such a "process" with three "sending" countries from the southern Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia) and five "receiving" countries in eastern Europe (Switzerland, Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany and Belgium). During this "cluster process" the countries decided on information campaigns to stop uncontrolled migration, information exchange between various authorities, "return treaties", technical cooperation and aid with the "reintegration" of "voluntary returned" migrants.
The IOM research department also started to investigate "returns" and the "reintegration" of migrants and refugees in the "sending" countries. For that purpose IOM offices in Baku, Tbilisi and Yerevan between October 2001 and March 2002 interviewed a total of 103 migrants and refugees who had "returned voluntary" or "forced". Most of the interviewed people came from the Netherlands, Belgium or Germany. Those countries send back the largest numbers of refugees and migrants. The researchers compared the efficiency of the various methods of "returning" and "reintegrating". Their conclusions are used at the Acluster process to further develop migration control.
Credibility
"Return" projects in the "receiving" countries are also of great importance to the "cluster process". In August 2003 the Pauluskerk project was for the first time evaluated.(4) This project turns out to be sponsored by the ministry of Justice and the Europese Vluchtelingen Fonds (European Refugee Fund). This fund wants to stimulate the growing together of European refugee policies, and therefore sponsors renewing strategies for migration control. The evaluation report starts by referring to this growing together. The European policy has three main themes and of these is "credibility". That credibility would have to grow by actually getting rid of rejected refugees and migrants. In that context the EU stresses "voluntary return" because that supposedly enlarges the chances that these people will really stay away. "In spite of the importance of an effective return policy for migration control", there is not enough information being published about it, writes the IOM. That's why they started to bring out a series of researches and publications. The IOM chose to start such a research project in the Netherlands, because this country seems to be quite some "receiver" of migrants from the former Soviet Union.
Friendly and relaxed
The common project of De Pauluskerk and the IOM is open to all refugees and migrants. But it especially targets people from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Gerogia, Ukraine, Belarus and the Russian Federation. A special office was opened to receive refugees and migrants from those countries in a "friendly and relaxed atmosphere". There they can meet fellow countrymen and migrants from other countries of origin. And of course there are Russian translators to interview them.
These interviews are based on standard forms filled with questions about age, etnicity, health, social economic position in the country of origin and in the Netherlands, how the person came to the Netherlands, whether the person can send money "home", and whether the person considers the stay in the Netherlands a success. In this way the IOM tries to understand the motives for migration and the chances on "reintegration" in the country of origin. Until the time of the evaluation already 173 refugees and migrants were interviewed. A 149 of them had asked asylyum, and 24 were undocumented. Between June 2002 and May 2003 a total of 399 persons "returned voluntary" to the 6 countries of origin, partly through De Pauluskerk.
The research results are as to be expected. Most refugees and migrants foresee a lot of problems after their "return". Besides, most people were not very eager to be interviewed. Although the IOM and De Pauluskerk give 15 euros for each interview, most refugees were only interested in the services offered by the office and not in the interview.
Enthusiastic
"One of the conclusions the IOM drew from this project is that employees who speak the language and know the culture of the asylum seeker, in combination with the availability of an IOM employee, are better able to guide the asylum seeker. Based on this experience the IOM started the Randstad Return Initiative", it says on the IOM website.(5) "We think that in the other large cities (Utrecht, The Hague and Amsterdam) a similar situation exists as in Rotterdam (groups of former asylum seekers no longer in asylum camps). The IOM therefore wants to collaborate with organizations in Utrecht, Amsterdam and The Hague to create similar projects as with De Pauluskerk." In the future much support will come with the pressure to "voluntary return". That would lead to a situation in which refugees and migrants are not safe anymore with organizations which claim to support them.
From the research it also appeared that general "return" programs like REAN (6) which do not offer individual support, are not enough to make refugees and migrants "return voluntary". Therefore the IOM pleads for tailor made "return" programs like the Bureau Maatwerk (Bureau Tailor Made) (1) offers.
"Voluntary return" is the final stage of the exclusion policy. Unfortunately, many supporters do not consider "voluntary return" a large problem. It is no problem to collaborate with the IOM people at De Pauluskerk also think. But taking one step back, and overlooking the entire international "voluntary return" project, one cannot but conclude that collaboration with the IOM makes one part of the migration control machine. And that goes against the autonomy of migrants and refugees.
Notes