Robert Greenhill is former managing director of the World Economic Forum; Nigel Fisher is former UN regional humanitarian co-ordinator for the Syria crisis and, previously, for Haiti and Afghanistan.
--------------------------------------
The horrible refugee crisis in Syria, personified by the tragic death of Alan Kurdi, has focused our country on the need to do more. But what is more?
There are calls from across the political spectrum to recreate the spirit of 1979. Then, the Conservative government of Joe Clark, in response to the plight of refugees from Vietnam, launched an innovative program that massively increased the number accepted. The program continued seamlessly when the Liberals were re-elected in 1980. In total, more than 60,000 Vietnamese refugees were welcomed here. It was a great example of bipartisan collaboration and collective Canadian generosity.
We are debating how to recreate the generosity of that time: could we accept another 10,000 refugees, an additional 25,000, or even an additional 200,000?
Today's crisis dwarfs that of 1979: The challenge is not of tens of thousands, but of tens of millions. In Vietnam, some two million people became refugees over a number of years. Today, there are more than 12 million forcibly displaced people from Syria alone – more than four million registered refugees and another eight million driven from their homes but not considered technically refugees because they are still within Syria.
That country is just one epicentre of misery. There are millions of additional refugees fleeing conflict or oppression from Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Eritrea, Myanmar and elsewhere.
According to UN High Commission for Refugees, there are almost 60 million forcibly displaced people around the world today – 20 million of them are refugees.
So back to our question: What is more? In an ocean of more than four million Syrian refugees, accepting 10,000 refugees is a small drop. Even 200,000 is less than 5 per cent of the Syrian refugees, and only a fraction of a per cent of the 60 million displaced people around the world. We face an unparalleled challenge in our collective responsibility to protect tens of millions of displaced people in the world today.
We can certainly accept many more Syrian refugees into Canada. This is the right thing to do and will also be good for Canada – with their skills and talents, they will help us build for the future. However, we need to go further. Let us not limit our help to welcoming refugees to our shores. Let us extend much more help to Syria's neighbours hosting millions of refugees. Let us help inside Syria too – affected and displaced Syrians still in their own country. Canada is indeed doing this, but we can do much, much more.
There are extraordinary organizations, staffed by some of the most courageous, committed people in the world, who know what needs to be done. Doctors Without Borders has boats rescuing refugees in the Mediterranean. The World Food Program has a half-century of experience getting food to the most needy in the toughest parts of the world. UNICEF, Save the Children and other NGO partners know how to get vital food and medicine, and equally vital schooling, to young refugees to prevent their physical or educational stunting.
They know what to do and how to do it, but they cannot, because they simply do not have the money. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Antonio Guterres, has warned, "We are so dangerously low on funding that we risk not being able to meet even the most basic survival needs of millions of people over the coming six months."
This is where Canada can step up. In 1979, the federal government committed 0.48 per cent of gross national income to humanitarian assistance and development. Last year, it spent only 0.24 per cent – barely half the level of 1979. A fraction of a percentage point may not seem like much, but it means that, as a country, we spent $4.5-billion less helping the most needy of the world than if we had been as generous as in 1979. We can do better than this.
Stephen Harper, Thomas Mulcair and Justin Trudeau should jointly announce the creation of a special $3-billion fund ($1-billion in additional annual spending for three years) to provide comprehensive, sustained support to young children like Alan Kurdi and their families affected by the refugee crisis in the Middle East.
It should be for three years so that, without being open-ended, it provides the predictability needed to achieve the best impact on the ground. We know that, even under the best circumstances, the present crisis will not be solved for years.
It should include a mechanism to match every dollar given by a Canadian individual, foundation or corporation over this time. It should be all new money, none taken from existing Department of Foreign Affairs development funds.
This should not be a party promise – "Regardless of which party is elected, this is what Canada will do." For this reason, it should be separated from each party's separate engagements on whether to balance a budget or run a $10-billion deficit.
It might be called the Alan Kurdi Canada Fund, in memory of the tragic death that focused our attention on the larger tragedy, and finally galvanized us to action.
The billion dollars a year would not solve all the financial challenges of supporting refugees. However, it would make a huge difference to the lives of millions of desperately needy people. It could pay for a million tents, full food rations for two million people, education for half a million children, and more.
This fund would encourage others to do more on the scale that is truly needed. On Nov. 15, G20 leaders will meet in Turkey. Our prime minister, whoever he or she is, would arrive at a G20 meeting playing a leadership role on a critical global issue.
The Alan Kurdi Canada Fund would be a down payment on our collective commitment as Canadians to return to the international, caring role that we have played so well in the past and can play again in the future. We would not just be helping the thousands whom we welcome to our shores, we would be changing the lives of the millions in Syria and beyond who need and deserve our help just as much.