MEGHA GUPTA

1) failure of UN
It has been exactly six years since the Syrian conflict began, due to the Arab Spring which
was a democratic uprising against the government for the protection of the civilian rights.
The high rate of unemployment, unstable working conditions, lack of health and social
security instigated the civilians to stand against the Assad government. This started off as a
protest against the government but now it has given way to massive civil war situation
turning into one of the most sought after global crisis of the world with 300,000 people dead.

The UN involvement in Syria began in September 2011 by the United Nations Human Rights
Council establishing an independent International Commission of Inquiry to look into the
alleged humanitarian crisis. The commission has published multiple reports and came to a
conclusion that the Assad regime, as well as the anti-government, have committed a lot
of war crimes. Despite knowing the contentious problems in the region the UN has not been
able to solve the issue rather it has escalated the issue by theinvolvement of regional and
world powers, such as Russia, United States, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
Russia and Iran have been stern supporters of the Assad regime by providing military and
financial aid. Russia's involvement in Syria dates back to the Cold War era, where Russia is
trying to maintain its hegemonic position by keeping close control over Syria such that it can
indirectly have an influence over the Middle East to counter US presence in the region. The
United States, on the other hand, is intervening against the Assad regime for its own national
interest that is Russia presence in Syria. On the other hand, Iran and Saudi Arabia have
seen participation because of internal conflict in the region. The struggles between Sunni
and Shia forces and the growing sectarian clashes in Syria has revived tensions in the
region which has led to the involvement of Iran and Saudi Arabia. As a result of these
Influential powers, they have contributed directly to the intensification and continuation of the
proxy wars and turned Syria into a battleground.

The major step taken by UN to pacify the situation in Syria has been the Geneva talks which
have failed year by year. The Geneva ii Conference 2012 was unsuccessful as one of its
goal was to achieve and agreement between the government and the opposition for the
implementation of the Geneva Communique. The recent peace talk which was held on the
23rd February 2017 was set to be a failure as no concrete solution was brought about.
During past rounds of negotiations, the Syrian Government has categorically refused to
discuss Assad's fate, the opposition and the rebel groups are willing to hold talks but the
Assad government is not willing to cooperate. The government is refusing to even talk
directly with the rebels. One of the demands of the rebel group is to create a new interim
government with Assad stepping down. However, the regime is even refusing to discuss
Assad's role in possible elections. As thebalance of power continues to shift further into the
government's hands, the scope and shape of a feasible political solution in Syria are tougher
to come to.
UN has taken several initiatives to discuss the ongoing Syrian crisis, such as the Munich
Security conference 2017, where there was a panel discussion on Syria Meddling Through
but no solution was arrived at.
In the conference, the United Nations Secretary-General Antnio Guterres called for a boost
in preventive diplomacy and mediation efforts, as well as for a strategy to address root
causes of such conflicts in the world. He suggested for an all-inclusive strategy which should
be adopted by the Assad regime. Despite these conferences discussing this issue on a large
scale, no conclusive solution has been arrived at till date.
The fall of Aleppo is the single greatest crisis for the U.N. since the Iraq war, said Richard
Gowan, a U.N. expert at the European Council on Foreign Affairs. It has resulted in a critical
issue of mistrust in the Security Council. However, there are also allegations against
Western leadership, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the broader U.N. system that
has failed to provide humanitarian aid to 1 million Syrians under siege

The UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, has admitted that the UN Security Councils
shortcomings in Syria because of fragmentation of powers which could have stopped the
activity to end a conflict that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and driven the biggest
refugee exodus in a generation.
The UN secretary general told that Russia and China should look beyond national interest
and stop blocking security council action on the conflict in Syria as the flow of refugees to
Europe reaches unprecedented levels
There are various estimates for the death toll in Syria, extending up to more than 300,000,
while about half the pre-war population of 22 million has been displaced. This departure of
the people escaping the conflict has resulted in the largest refugee crisis of the generation
according to the UN High Commissioner,
This illustrates the core issue in the philosophy of the UN. Its based on the concept that if
countries just get together and cooperate to work out their disputes, they can find peaceful
resolutions to all global conflicts. This assumption informs the UNs framework of inviting
everyone to the table resulting in everyone walking away satisfied and the world will be
better off.
Another circumstance that is rendering the UN ineffectual and impotent is that permanent
members of the Security Council, like China and Russia, often have another agenda in mind
apart from solving the core problems.
Syria has brought into stark relief the reality of a twentieth century UN struggling to respond
to twenty-first-century challenges

According to sources, the Syrian conflict is estimated to have killed 250,000 people, injured
more than 1.2 million, and left extensive contamination with explosive leftovers, including
improvised explosive devices. Inside Syria, 13.5 million people are in need of humanitarian
assistance. Over half of the population has been displaced, including 1.2 million people in
2015 alone, many for the second or third time. More than 4.2 million Syrians are now
refugees. The paradox is that people are dying of starvation not even an hour's drive from
Damascus, where life continues relatively normal. There would be no problem in sending
them UN food aid convoys. But for this, the UN must have the consent of the Syrian
government. The latter rarely gives his permission, and when he does, he often criticizes
deliveries at the last minute.

Despite heightened insecurity and severe access constraints in Syria during 2015, nearly 6
million people received monthly food assistance and 4.4 million people received other
assistance and shelter support. Over 9 million people received medical care, and more than
5 million children benefited from education support.
The UN has set its funding requirements for the 2016 Syria response (Syria and surrounding
countries) at US$7.73 billion. An additional US$1.2 billion in funding required by affected
regional governments as part of national response plans must be noted in considering the
overall scope of refugee and resilience needs across affected countries.
UN has massively failed in solving the Syrian Civil War Crisis despite holding largescale
Intra-Syria level talks. A lack of organised funding or system of functioning in the Middle East
as well as the over involvement of the World Powers has led to the escalation of the crisis
2) Ongoing refugee crisis

The refugee crisis has been a phenomenon of an accumulation of varied reasons

such as the lack of citizenship and identity rights in Myanmar to the Rohingya Muslim
Community, the fear of an unstable regime in the Middle East primarily the
Palestinian Refugees,the ongoing fight going on between the Iraqi soldiers and ISIL
resulting in people to flee the city of Mosul, Syrian Crisis, South Sudan drought crisis
and Nigeria.
ROHINGYA MUSLIMS IN MYANMAR
Since October 9, 2016, 66,000 Rohingya, members of a Muslim minority in Buddhist-
majority Myanmar, have fled Rakhine State in the countrys west and entered
neighboring Bangladesh. The Rohingya have faced decades of persecution. Today,
they are not fleeing Rakhine Buddhists, with whom they first clashed in May 2012,
they are fleeing their own government.
In June 2012, riots in Rakhine State led to violent clashes between the Rohingya and
the Rakhine Buddhist communities, prompting the government to declare a state of
emergency. In the almost five years since then, around 140,000 Rohingya have
languished in segregated camps purportedly for their own security. They, along with
the Rohingya still in their villages, have little or no access to basic sanitation, health
care, or education. Freedom of movement is severely curtailed, limiting work and
other opportunities. In the run-up to the 2015 national elections, Rohingya
were disenfranchised, removing their last best hope of peaceful influence. These
indignities follow decades of exclusion and marginalization in one of Myanmars
poorest states.

SYRIA REFUGEES
The continuous and unresolved conflict in Syria has been the main reason for the
dramatic acceleration in displacement, which has resulted in the Middle East
becoming simultaneously the largest producer and host of forcibly displaced people
in the world. Four and a half years of thedisorderhas displaced an estimated 7.6
million people within the countryand across Syrias borders and into neighboring
Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Iraq with the count rising to more than four million
people.
These countries can no longer cope with the strain of hosting such large numbers of
refugees. Without support from the international community, refugee hosting
countries can no longer provide for this vulnerable population.
This outcome, along with renewed violence inside Syria, has compelled millions of
Syrians to seek refuge elsewhere, including Europe. Yet, as the number of refugees
has risen exponentially, it has also become much more difficult for them to travel to
Europe legally.
European countries have restrained visas once available to refugees, and a few
offered humanitarian visas, which allow asylum to persons in need of international
protection to access a thirdcountry.
European countries even after possessing legal tools to bring in refugees safely and
legally, use these tools quite infrequently. One such tool is resettlement, the process
by which very vulnerable refugees are moved to countries where they have sought
for protection.
Another tool is ahumanitarian admission, which bears resemblance to resettlement
but can be either temporary or permanent depending on the circumstances.
European countries can also acquire refugees through family reunification
admission,scholarships in universities, and private sponsorship schemes. The
European Union (EU), however, practices these tools makes limited manner. Due to
thedearth of safe and legal routes into Europe, refugees are left without any option
but to embark on threatening and illegal travels by sea and land to Greece and Italy.

PALESTINIAN

More than 60 years after the establishment of Israel, the fate of Palestinian refugees
in the Isreal-Palestine conflict still remains as utterly divided.

In the course of Israel's creation in 1948 and its occupation of the West Bank and
Gaza in 1967, more than half the Arabs of pre-1948 Palestine are thought to have
been uprooted from their settlements.

In the present day, there are about hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who are
unable to acquireland their families had settled in for generations and are now living
in exile as a result of this.

Many still suffer the legacy of their dispossession: destitution, penury, insecurity.

According to data, in 58 recognized Palestine refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon,

the Syrian Arab Republic, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East
Jerusalem Nearly one-third of the registered Palestine refugees, more than
1.5 million individuals, live

The plots of land on which the recognized camps were set up are either state land
or, in most cases, land leased by the host government from local landowners. This
means that the refugees in camps do not have ownership of the land on which their
shelters were built, but for residential purposes have the right to 'use' it.

The camps poor socioeconomic conditions have led to high population density,
cramped living conditions and inadequate basic infrastructures such as roads and
sewers.
IRAQ REFUGEES

According to data by the International Organisation for Migration, fighting in

Mosul has now forced more than 5,600 people to flee their homes in the recent turn
of events.

The abundance of Iraqi refugees who have fled villages on the outskirts of Mosul
have seeked asylum in the Debaga camp, on the outskirts of Erbil.In Mosul, coalition
forces are fighting to retake the city, which is controlled by Islamic State (IS) fighters.

About 30,000 people are already packed and crowded into the area. More than half
a million children and their families are fleeing from Mosul as Iraqi troops and
coalition forces are carrying out a major offensive on Islamic State's last major
stronghold in Iraq.

Humanitarian agencies have warned the battle to retake Mosul could unleash the
'worst man-made humanitarian crisis' seen in modern times.

SOUTH SUDAN

South Sudan is now Africas largest refugee crisis and the worlds third after Syria
and Afghanistan with less attention and chronic levels of underfunding.

the

The drought, famine and the ongoing civil war since its independence 2013, has
made South Sudanese a victim of one of the worst refugee crisis in contemporary
times.

In Uganda around half of the more than 1.5 million South Sudanese refugees are
taking asylum along withneighbouring countries in the region. More than two-thirds of
South Sudanese refugees living in Uganda have arrived since the outbreak of
violence in Juba in July 2016. Currently, the influx shows little sign of abating, with
more than 116,000 South Sudanese refugees having fled to Uganda in 2017 alone.

NIGERIA

In the first nine months of 2016,more people have migrated to Monguno alone than
left all of North AfricaNigeria, since the Boko Haram insurgency began.
A hundreds of thousands more might die from famine this year as the UN predicts a
food crisis warning in Nigeria.

Around 40% more people who reached Europe by boat in 2015 (1 million) have been
displaced and uprooted from their settlements throughout the Borno state.
Across the region, the war against Boko Haram has forced more people from their
homes 2.6 million than there are Syrians in Turkey, the country that hosts more
refugees than any other

A CALL FOR ACTION BY THE HOST COUNTRIES

The governments of these countries must provide a clear and expeditious path to
citizenship for the realization of the importance of its minoritiesespecially in
Myanmar. Like the Aung San Suu Kyis government should carry out citizenship
verification program, which allows undocumented Muslims to be considered for
citizenship.

In addition, the countries must consider and put in place strategies for economic
development and nation-building. Fostering identity along national lines will require
creating opportunities for different race and religious groups, to interact with one
another, while feeling secure about their place in the nation. Creating such
opportunities for the different groups to end their segregation and implementing
sensitively designed policies for the communities to live, study, and work together.
Such as in the case of Syrian and Palestinian Refugees.

The countries should create required safe zones for protecting the interest of the
terror-stricken countries and providing basic amenities for their well-being.

If the government continues to ignore the refugee crisis, violence would spread.
Cooperation plans must be madeto meet the persecuted minority group and look into
their interests.

A CALL FOR ACTION BY COUNTRIES RECEIVING REFUGEES

Protection services for vulnerable people Provision of survival kits and other basic
items Provision of emergency medical services Provision of clean water and
sanitation. Increased access to water in collaboration with local authorities,
Construction of emergency latrines or the rehabilitation of existing facilities, to ensure
the availability of hand-washing stations.Better access to basic hygiene and shelter
The IRC may provide cash, vouchers or materials, including hygiene
Vulnerable individuals and groups need to be classified and gain information,
support, and assistance in line with minimum international standards in a revised
environment .An improved protection environment Reduce risk of violence and
provide a safe, healthy environment To work with women and girls to understand
their specific needs and vulnerabilities, offer them a safe space and crisis
counselling.
CONCLUSION
Instead of welcoming refugees, countries are now taking a step back by closing the
borders.
Brexit is one of the finest examples where Britain chose to exit the European Union
as it feared an influx of refugees and its consequence of rising unemployment. This
was followed by the USA electing Donald Trump as he promised to stop the intake of
refugees and closing boundaries. In a recent executive order where he targeted
refugees of seven Muslim countries only shows the insecurity that countries
showcase when it comes to the question of accepting refugees. His revised
executive order call for a temporary ban on all refugees including Syrian. Similarly,
the recent french elections show a similar trend where the National Front Party led
be Marine Le Penn is gaining popular support solely on the basis that she will tighten
border regulations.

3) Brexit threatens the long term stability and security of the European Union. Discuss

The United Kingdoms vote to leave the European Union has triggered the worst political
crisis the EU has ever faced. Since the early 1950s, the EU has steadily expanded, but on
June 23, 52 percent of British voters ignored the experts warnings of economic misery and
opted to leave the bloc.
After Brexit, the EU has lost its largest military power, one of its two nuclear weapons states,
one of its two veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council, its second-largest
economy and its only truly global financial center.
Brexit will also cause the EU citizens to lose their automatic right to study, live and work in
Britain, which will be a major loss as Britain is considered as one of the popular countries to
offer good quality education. Brexit will have a negative impact for the students as their
tuition fees as a possibility of an increase. Now EU students will no longer get a fee cap or
any form of student support by the UK government.
There is also a fear that Germany under Angela Merkel will now play a dominant role in the
functioning of EU. On issues such as Eurozone Crisis, Refugees and the War in Ukraine it is
Germany which has determined the response of EU. EU was created as it would help control
Germany because of its dominant role in World War II and its economic revival, however we
now see a role reversal. Fears of Greater German dominance post Brexit now horrifies
politicians in Rome, Paris and Warsaw.
Britain could control the dominance of Russia on Eastern Europe, but since Brexit, Russia
will now have a greater role in influencing the member states of EU, such as Poland and
Hungary which is prone to becoming an illiberal democracy. Now EU is also susceptible to
relaxing sanctions on Russia's activity in Ukraine.

One of the biggest setback of Brexit is going to be encourraging other members to withdraw
the membership form EU. France's Exit (FREXIT) is seen as one of the possibility as
confirmed by the contending candidates of the National Front, Jean-Marie Le Pen, the
founder of the right-wing French political party. Le Pens nationalist, Euroskeptical, anti-
immigrant message is selling well also she is advocating for France's Exit from EU. She
believes that it is difficult living with the euro, because its counterpart is a policy of austerity,
which has aggravated the recession in various countries.

France can be seen as the second possibility of exit after Brexit, and it can also be seen as
an example of successive exits of member nations leading to the weakening of the EU and
ultimately its disintegration. Brexit could empower and embolden Eurosceptic movements in
other member states. In particular, if the UK negotiated a favourable withdrawal deal, with
high levels of market access, this would be seized upon by Eurosceptics elsewhere, who
would argue that their country should seek a similar deal, or at least some reconfiguration of
their relations with the EU. Furthermore there will be excessive centralisation of power by
Germany which would turn the citizens against the EU.
Brexit could weaken those states within the EU that benefit from UK support, Free trade is a
key policy area where Brexits impact would be felt. Brexit could also make the EU more
protectionist: the states with protectionist inclinations (e.g., France, Italy, Spain, Greece,
Portugal and Cyprus) would have a blocking minority in the Council, whereas the liberally
inclined states would not.
After US, Russia and China, EU was seen as an important power balance to these
superpowers and it helped in maintaining a Multi-polar World Order. But with the exit of
Britain and the internal instabilities in EU it will no longer be able to play a significant role in
the Contemporary World Order. EU might become less active on the world scene, despite
eurosceptic rhetoric. EU will no longer be seen as an important tool in pursuing foreign policy
goals.
Without Britain, there might be less opposition to the establishment of a European defence
policy, but there would also be much less capability available for EU operations. The
relationship between the EU and NATO might also become more difficult without Britain
acting as a bridge.
Brexit would affect every member state. It would have a significant economic, social and
political impact on Ireland, whose government is extremely concerned about the referendum
result. It would also affect domestic politics in other states, fuelling Euroscepticism in some.
In addition, Brexit would variously affect the positions of different states within the EU. States
that previously drew on UK support would be weakened, whereas Germany and the
Eurozone states could become more dominant.
While Brexit would make the EU less interesting to Asia, the EU would also be less
interested in Asia. The Indian PM Narendra Modi said in November 2015 that if there is an
entry point for India to the European Union that is the UK." The loss of the EUs second
largest economy would also reduce its bargaining power in trade negotiations with Asia.
Another area that could be affected by a British exit is EU development aid. The UK and
France are the EUs largest former colonial powers. A legacy of this colonial heritage is the
preferential trade and development ties many countries in the Caribbean and Africa enjoy
with the EU. The so-called Cotonou agreement, signed in 2000 between the EU and African,
Caribbean and Pacific countries, expires in 2020. After Brexit, and with the Cotonou
agreement under revision, it is uncertain whether former British colonies would continue to
enjoy the same degree of preferential access to the single market. Though the development
policies towards these countries would not change overnight, the priority attached to giving
assistance to former British colonies would alter; the UK would have to consider whether to
make up any resultant shortfall.
Brexit will also affect the art and cultural tradition which prevailed in EU. The access to story,
culture and writing is going to be restricted. EU funding on art will also come down which is
going to be a major soft power setback for the European member states.

The EU, meanwhile, should focus on the things that member states cannot do efficiently on
their own and that create mutual gains: negotiating international trade deals, supervising
systemically important banks and other financial institutions, responding to global warming,
and coordinating foreign and security policy. In Eurobarometer polls, about two-thirds of
European citizens surveyed consistently say that they support a common foreign policy for
the EU. National governments could start with a much more effective pooling of their military
resources to conduct joint peacekeeping and humanitarian missions overseas.

The EU does not need any more rules; it needs political leadership. Germany must give up
its opposition to eurobonds, or jointly guaranteed eurozone debt instruments, and common
deposit insurance, which would go a long way toward providing long-term financial stability in
the eurozone by preventing future sovereign bond market contagion and bank runs. It must
relax its insistence on tough fiscal rules to allow countries such as Italy and Portugal to
engage in aggregate demand stimulus. And it must take the lead in setting up new
mechanisms for promoting solidarity within the EU, such as a joint refugee and migration
fund, which could make up the difference in temporary shortfalls in local funding and help
member states more effectively share the burden of integrating new migrants across Europe.

Germany needs to finally embrace its leadership role. If Germany can overcome its
parochialism and recognize that it is in its long-term interest to act as a benign hegemon for
Europenot unlike the role the United States played in the Western world after World War II
there is no reason why the EU cannot emerge stronger from its current malaise. The
leaders of the other remaining large member statesespecially France, Italy, Poland, and
Spainmust reassure Berlin that they are committed to reforming their economies once
growth returns, pledge to actively contribute to EU-wide solidarity, and reaffirm that the
European project is in their national interests. Collectively, Europes leaders need to
reimagine what Europe is for and regain control of the process of European integration. Sixty
years on from the signing of the foundational Treaty of Rome, Europe needs a new grand
bargain, now more than ever.