Refugees and Human Rights Advocacy in the Post-Bush Era

by Michael Kagan

Published January 09, 2009 @ 09:40AM PT

A refugee family carries food from a WFP distribution to their shelter in Sam Ouandja | Nicolas Rost | UNHCR

Once upon a time, rhetoric about morality in foreign policy would have been dismissed as the romanticism of the “naïve left.” But we now have a President-elect who campaigned prominently on a promise to restore American moral standing around the world. Suddenly, human rights has the chance to be part of mainstream national security doctrine, at least some of the time, in a way we have not known for some time.

We human rights advocates are accustomed to being on the outside of electoral politics, because our concerns are for the fate of marginalized foreigners in far off places, and we are used to distrusting governments and their constant obsessions with security. I am not naïve enough to believe this will change with a presidency. But I do believe we have a brief opportunity now to build a new political basis for some positive human rights policies.

To adapt, the human rights movement must do two things to which it is not used to doing. First, we need to find areas where human rights and security concerns can actually reinforce each other. Second, we need to find new ways to build up domestic political constituencies for human rights programs.

To start this innovation in human rights policy, I suggest looking very early at refugee policy, and I proposed one way to do this on the Ideas for Change program. My idea is called "Revitalize the US Refugee Program, and Re-Open America's Doors to the Oppressed." The basic proposal is not unique. Increase the number of refugees invited to the US, and better fund the organizations that help refugees adapt once they arrive.

But there are two new elements.

First, involve private citizens in new ways in operating the program, to build a foundation beyond Washington for backing a human rights program.

Second, make refugee policy central to US foreign policy, and promote it with high profile presidential leadership – as part of a larger strategy to rebuild America’s global image. There is a risk here of politicizing refugees and human rights. But there is a greater risk in missing a chance to show that promoting human rights can sometimes also actually promote national interests.

The traumas of the Bush/Cheney/Guantanamo years have left us an opportunity, because Americans are, at least for a moment, yearning to find their global moral footing. Refugee policy offers one way to do this – in part because connects strongly with the American national narrative.

For human rights advocates to take advantage, we need to learn to talk in a new way. We are devoted to protecting others far away. Our instincts are to argue for refugee policy in order to lessen the suffering of others.

But sometimes it’s about us. Let’s open our doors to the persecuted – because it’s good for the United States.

This guest post was written by Michael Kagan. A pioneer in refugee rights advocacy and a 10-year social entrepreneur and veteran of human rights work in the Middle East, Kagan has helped develop legal aid programs in the global south. He currently teaches refugee law at the American University in Cairo. He was a co-founder of Asylum Access, and also started the website RSDwatch.org.