As the refugee influx continues unabated, it is gratifying to see that our humanity is finally showing signs of life thanks to generous German, Serbian, Austrian, Greek, Italian and other European citizens. They follow the proud example of Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Egypt.
Our leaders are at last heeding how their voters tell them to behave and questioning the pandering to anti-immigration voices.
The negative narrative on refugees and migrants is beginning to change, allowing facts to prevail: there are clear economic and social benefits to receiving countries and countries of origin alike. And most European and other developed economies need immigration to meet present and future workforce requirements.
This is positive. But not enough. All countries should contribute.
In finding the necessary international solution, we can draw on our own collective institutional memory. This is not the first time we face a refugee exodus of this magnitude. Remember the Vietnamese boat people in the 1980s? Thousands took to the sea to reach neighbouring countries and, from there, the US, Canada and other countries. Thousands died, human traffickers made fortunes and the countries of first asylum sealed their borders. The problem seemed intractable.
And yet...
Enterprising UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) staff devised a comprehensive plan of action, approved by an international conference in 1989.
Bringing together the international community, it created an orderly process that distinguished between asylum seekers and economic migrants, established procedures for resettlement of refugees and the return of economic migrants. This mechanism successfully resettled thousands of refugees, all of them today productive members of the societies that welcomed them. A good example of how things can be done when there is the will and means to protect and assist in a humane and dignified manner.
The negative narrative on refugees and migrants is beginning to change
For this example to be successful today, we need to:
Set up receiving-screening centres in strategic transit countries like Turkey, Greece, Italy, maybe Tunisia (Libya when conditions permit), with UNHCR and IOM handling the refugees and migrants and respect for universally agreed procedures to establish refugee status, resettlement and the return to countries of origin of, and provision of assistance to, economic migrants.
Step up temporary search and rescue capacity in the Mediterranean.
Coordinate robust programmes to apprehend people smugglers.
Negotiate agreements with countries of origin of those determined economic migrants where returns are safe to accept their nationals and support reintegration.
Fund these measures on a global level and assist with the expenses of the primary receiving countries such as Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Greece as well as funding more targeted development interventions in the countries of origin.
Initiate information campaigns aimed at potential asylum seekers and economic migrants, explaining the procedures in place and the risks inherent in taking to the roads.
Change the negative narrative in actual and potential receiving countries based on social and economic facts.
Done right, these actions may prove that enlightened self-interest, humanity and international solidarity can again be combined into a win-win outcome.
But this will only address the current, temporary spike. We need to deal with the much broader, long-term refugee and migratory trend.
At the operational level, the agencies tasked with asylum and migration issues are overwhelmed and underfunded.
At the policy level, apart from the loosely organised Global Forum on Migration and Development, there is no formal international structure to provide policy options for future flows of victims of man-made or natural (read climate-related) disasters, both of which will define our daily lives far into the future.
In the absence of such a body, we need to give Sir Peter Sutherland, the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Migration and Development, the mandate and means to catalyse action.
One way to start the process may be to decide on greater integration of the work of UNHCR and IOM and allowing them to propose new long-term global policies.
The Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul next year, the meeting called by the UN Secretary-General in New York and the November meeting in Valletta between heads of state of Europe and Africa are opportunities to move this ahead.
Critically, we need to recalibrate the relationship between development aid and humanitarian assistance, with aid better addressing the root causes of humanitarian problems. The High Commissioner for Refugees, António Guterres, is a tireless proponent of this thesis. He needs our support.
Finally, we need to capitalise on the policy frameworks the world is adopting this year: the Sustainable Development Goals, a Climate Agreement and the Disaster Risk Reduction Agreement.
If we successfully implement the 17 SDGs we will stand an immeasurably better chance of dealing with future flows.
Any one of us may one day need refuge. Empathy, generosity and sound policies today will greatly improve the chances of the same being applied to our calamities tomorrow.
Michael Moller is head of the UN Office in Geneva.