Last week, we defined a refugee in the context of the 1951 UN convention as someone who is “owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country’’. We enumerated the positive benefits of refugee to host country. For details on these positive benefits, read here. Today we explore the negative consequences of such a state of affair. It’s important to note that Uganda is one of the largest refugees hosting nations in the world with over 1.4 million refugees in the country. With its open door refugee policy, no doubt the country has had some violent backlash within refugee hosting communities. However, always the negative effects are also quite damning ranging from short term, medium and long term implications.
It is true that in reality refugees often take on jobs the native citizens are willing to do. It is clear that refugees do not necessarily concentrate in and compete for one specific type of job; rather, they pursue a multitude of diversified employment opportunities, and competition is therefore diffused although at times it is hard for the locals because competition is usually so high depending on seasons within the country. However, when refugees do drive out competition for lower-skilled jobs, it can push natives, by necessity, into increasingly specialized jobs and lead to long-run wage increases for natives on average, which is quite a good thing.
The other social problem related to strained services, is the issue of overcrowding in the host nation. Uganda per say is having an overflow of refugees especially in Nakivale camp. Sometimes some refugees are shifted and taken to Oruchinga refugee camp due to congestion. However, this comes at a cost, there is need to create more space for placing the refugees.
Usually there is encroachment on the local’s land and in this case the law protects the refugees, so usually the locals are grieved and frustrated. The congestion has led to the outbreaks of diseases like hepatitis, cholera, malaria, and the spread of HIV/AIDS. This has immediate negative social and economic effects on the country and also have long-term economic effects by negatively impacting maternal and early childhood health.
Furthermore, overcrowding can lead to environmental degradation, which has become a serious concern in areas faced with a large influx of refugees. One finds that trees are cut in assistance with house construction, charcoal burning for sale and trees cut for fuel. The UNHCR concedes that refugee affected areas may face increased issues of deforestation, soil erosion, pollution, and depletion of water resources. These environmental consequences also have spillover effects, whereby excessive damage to the environment not only causes deterioration of refugees’ welfare but also leads to competition with local communities over scarce resources.
On a broader level, refugees may increase the potential for internal conflict and war in the host nation. On a smaller scale than all-out war, refugees can create social tensions, especially in cases where the refugees have distinct religious, political, or ethnic identities from the citizens of the host country.
Gender based violence related issues have also been examined in the context of livelihood opportunities in situations of displacement. There are studies showing that gender relations within camps can be affected by the increasing participation of women in income generating activities, which affects not only the distribution of resources within households, but also traditional roles of family structure.
Women in these camps are often more active than the men, as they get themselves involved in economic activities, income generating activities, and there are rules protecting them from the harsh social conditions as well, especially in Oruchinga refugee settlement. Their participation in social groups has often lifted up their spirits and kept them busy from being idle, the reality is, most men are always in the bars drinking and moving or visiting the refugee offices from time to time, and as well as committing petty crimes.
The above problem has created an instability in different household and increased sexual gender based violence as well. However, when the women in the local host communities see all these opportunities directed to the refugee women, there is a lot of grievance too, as this makes them feel as if there is inequality. Many refugee women are given money in schemes for development and yet the local women usually have to toil on their own.
On a political note, personal gains or greed have driven refugee issues in Uganda towards the wall. In this case, much as the politicians involved are gaining, the local community is losing. Donors must be in position to understand the politics behind the policies the Ugandan politicians have put in place.
To begin with, the country’s leaders rely upon patronage to maintain power, and the ability to maintain their networks of support which are the donor organizations. But at the same time, external recognition matters more to them than internal opinions and long term effects as a result of the open door policy, the theory of extraversion can best explain this paragraph where by the politicians involved have continued to actively participate in the processes that have created and maintained the country’s dependent position with the donor organizations which may include, the United Nations, International Red Cross Society among others.
Although welcoming towards the refugees, Uganda’s aspects on open door legal framework on issues like, opening Uganda’s door to all asylum seekers irrespective of their nationality or ethnic affiliation, granting refugees relative freedom of movement, permitting refugees to leave and return to their designated settlements, and the right to seek employment, providing prima facie asylum for refugees of certain nationalities and giving a piece of land to each refugee family for their own exclusive agricultural use can only lead to tensions in a long run.
While grievances and hatred between the locals and the refugees silently increases, this can only lead to a civil war or ethnic conflicts and tensions within Uganda. In addition, the Ugandan government assumes the crisis to be temporary and as such has set up transit camps like Nyumanzi. However, these are acting insufficiently as permanent solutions, because the government needs to put up real permanent solutions and endeavor to return them to their countries of origin when it safe for them to return.
There are emerging emotional and controversial debates on the role of refugees and illegal immigrants in Uganda’s politics and demography. Uganda’s economic and political troubles have involved foreigners for over one hundred years. Uganda since colonial days has pursued, developed and maintained a liberal labor immigration and refugee policy which has complicated its political economy and demography.
The role of refugees, foreign workers and illegal immigrants should not be underestimated in Uganda’s population and political dynamics. The issue on refugees and illegal migrants can lead to increased insecurities in the country. Dangerous drugs can be smuggled into the country, of which this is dangerous to the citizens. Increased issues on small arms and light weapons as well leading to the creation of rebel groups and other insurgencies.
In conclusions the government of Uganda needs to look into her refugee policy, to begin with the refugee act of 2006 and clearly amend it for it has many loopholes which can in the long run be dangerous to the citizens. Much as Uganda wants to be internationally recognized as a refugee darling and success story, there should be consideration of the local communities and their grievances because these can turn into group violence and civil unrest in the end.
In addition, specific attention is needed for urban refugees who have the freedom of movement and access to social services, they need to respect the locals residing or owning businesses in these areas in order to avoid silent ethnic tensions. Although it is clear that Uganda cannot sustain its open door policy unless an increase of funding matches the rate of refugees, one can only hope that proper leadership is in place for the system to be a bit critical and limiting towards the numbers being received into the country.
It would also benefit Uganda as a whole if sustainable solutions to the refugee crises are offered and implemented. Also, Uganda needs a wakeup call to return the refugees from countries that are clearly free from war. For example, those from Rwanda. However, there are refugees that have lived in the country for decades, this may be hard for them to return since they lived most of their lives in Uganda.
