Listen to the article
At the end of October 2023, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland and Iceland decided to strengthen their cooperation to deport migrants residing illegally in their respective countries. French daily newspaper Le Figaro then quoted Danish Minister of Migration Kaare Dybvad Bek as stressing the collective interest of the Nordic countries in “repatriating foreigners with no residence permits.” Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen advocated for a “zero refugee” policy in her country since taking office in 2019. In 2020, Denmark became the first European country to revoke residency permits for Syrian refugees, deeming the situation in the Damascus region “sufficiently secure” for their return.
As part of the joint policy agreed upon by the Nordic countries to address the harmful consequences of illegal immigration, Swedish Minister in charge of Migration Maria Malmer Stenergard announced in November 2023 that her government was considering deporting “dishonest migrants.” It proposed measures to facilitate the expulsion of migrants in irregular situations or those perceived as a threat to “Swedish democratic values.”
Is it necessary to recall that Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland and Iceland rank among the most prosperous, developed and democratic nations in the Western world? It is precisely to preserve this prosperity and internal stability that these countries adopted a firm stance towards migrants in irregular situations, actively working to facilitate their expulsion.
In Beirut, approximately ten days ago, Ivo Freijsen, the UNHCR representative in Lebanon, forwarded a memorandum to the Minister of Interior, Bassam Mawlawi, urging “an end to inhumane practices” (sic!) against Syrian migrants. The UN official was referring to the recent actions taken by Minister Mawlawi to address the irregular situation of many Syrian migrants in Lebanon, especially in the economic sector. These measures, in essence, echo those announced by the Nordic countries at the end of 2023. However, the UNHCR refrained from criticizing the European countries as it did the Ministry of the Interior… What seems acceptable and legitimate for the Nordic countries evidently does not apply to Lebanon.
The UNHCR in Lebanon feigns to ignore that Syrian migrants now make up nearly 40% of the Lebanese population, and that the Assad regime opposes their return. Lebanon must serve as a transit country for migrants, not an emigration destination, especially given the advanced downfall of the central State and the daily challenges faced by the Lebanese people amid the most devastating economic and financial crisis in their modern history. Yet, despite these circumstances, the UNHCR considers that what was deemed acceptable in Europe is not in Lebanon…
Mawlawi’s display of exceptional political courage was pivotal in confronting the issue head-on and adopting concrete measures aimed at ending the illegal economic activities of Syrian migrants. His laudable initiative was undoubtedly facilitated by the comprehensive campaign recently launched by the sovereigntist camp, particularly by the Lebanese Forces (LF), the Kataeb and independent figures. This campaign spurred widespread mobilization among municipalities, their partisans and certain local driving forces, especially following the assassination of Pascal Sleiman (LF coordinator in Jbeil), to urgently address the existential problem of the chaotic presence of Syrian migrants. This cultivated a prevailing climate of national consensus, fostering support for the Minister of Interior’s implementation of the robust measures against illegal migration, notwithstanding some dissenting voices.
However, all efforts to expel illegal Syrian migrants will ultimately prove ineffective as long as the borders with Syria remain porous. This is precisely where the international community can assist Lebanon by providing the army with the support commensurate with Lebanese expectations. But this is hindered by the weighty, uncontrolled presence of Hezbollah at the border.
The resolution of the migrant crisis unequivocally hinges on a radical action to remove this remotely controlled obstacle—this is, indeed, the fundamental issue—imposed by the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic. The responsibility of the international community, especially that of Western powers, is particularly significant in this regard…
