Civil Society, NGOs and Religion in the European Refugee Crisis: A Review.

• Author: Ulker, Osman

Immigration is an important phenomenon with transnational and global political, cultural, social, and economic effects on states, civil societies, and individuals. A very recent example of the impact of migration has emerged when Turkey reopened its borders to Europe for refugees after mutual disagreements weakened the EU-Turkey refugee deal. On March 18, 2016, the EU and Turkey had agreed on tightening border control and restraining refugee flows to Europe. (1) But after Turkey's decision to reopen its borders, tens of thousands of immigrants gathered at the Greek border to pass into Europe, and the same sad image that had emerged three years ago refreshed memories of the 2015 European refugee crisis. This image had indeed been the main trigger of the refugee deal itself. Therefore, breaking the agreement put Europe in a spinner again. But why did Europe seek a refugee deal with Turkey in the first place? Why did the images of refugees at the Greek border evoke not solidarity and philanthropy but anger and fear?

To understand the European anxiety, it is necessary to look at the so-called 2015 refugee crisis in Europe. The refugee crisis, also known as the European refugee crisis, (2) is a catchphrase for the flow of a large number of immigrants to Europe during 2015-2016 and the mixed reactions it inspired. In 2015, nearly one million refugees arrived in European countries. The nationalities of the majority of these refugees illustrated that this flow was the catastrophic result of the foreign invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the long-lasting civil war in Syria. According to the United Nations (UN) reports during 2015, 46.7 percent of asylum seekers in Europe were Syrian, 20.9 percent were Afghan and 9.4 percent were from Iraq. (3) These statistics clearly show that the majority of these refugees had fled from civil war, uncertainty, and harsh conditions to a safer place. Nevertheless, most of the European governments did not perceive the crisis from this angle. Although the signs of the crisis had already appeared, the European Union failed to react in time and the member states followed their own interests rather than formulating a feasible, unified solution. Borders were closed, new regulations to block refugee entrance were implemented and the refugee problem was politicized.

As it continued to unfold, the refugee crisis sparked many controversies in the EU. The EU's insufficient immigration policy, and the failure of the member states to manage the refugee crisis correctly, forced civil society to fill the gap that should be filled by modern welfare states. While European states continue to follow anti-immigrant policies and neglect the problem, the de facto existence of nearly one million refugees in Europe has inspired civil societies, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and some religious institutions to take action to help refugees who are concentrated in train stations, city centers, and squares. On the other hand, some religious institutions in Europe have adopted nationalist rhetoric and deepened the crisis by supporting the anti-immigration bloc. Furthermore, the ongoing politicization of the crisis has blurred the lines between political and apolitical, so that actions such as helping others and solidarity for refugees has become a political stance.

Solidarity and the 'Refugee Crisis' in Europe

With their book, Agustin and Jorgensen contribute to the literature with respect to the topic by examining how civil societies intervened in the refugee crisis by functioning in the absence of state policies. The book is based on the idea that the EU in general and each European state, in particular, could not produce sufficient solutions for the refugees who managed to enter their borders or were waiting at the border or in temporary camps. Therefore, civil societies came into play in situations where the state was inadequate.

Solidarity and the 'Refugee Crisis' in Europe consists of six chapters. The first chapter presents a historical analysis of the 2015 events and concentrates on the EU and nation-states' reactions in Europe against refugees. After refreshing the readers' memories, the authors question for whom this was a state of crisis. According to the authors, it was not a crisis for the refugees--who were searching for a safer place to live and to fulfill this basic need, albeit they had to endure many challenges- but for the countries of destination. The authors also highlight that the term crisis' itself was/is deliberately used by European states to imply that this phase is not normal and to emphasize the need to take precautions. Thus, "crises open up for the deployment of authoritarian measures and interventions not limited by democratic concerns" (p. 5). Hence, the concept of 'crisis' rationalizes the anti-immigrant policies of the European countries.

The second chapter elaborates on the concept of solidarity in the context of the 2015 refugee crisis in Europe. It also aims to answer the questions that arise from the different forms of solidarity that can emerge from the very same circumstances. For instance, an anti-immigrant movement could use 'solidarity' to bind people around nationalist ideas, or civil actors create new alliances and solidarities to ease the effects of the refugee crisis. As can be seen, the concept of solidarity itself could turn into a field of conflict. Thus, the discussion about solidarity raises the question as to which definition of solidarity will prevail. For that reason, in the second chapter, the authors clarify what they mean by solidarity. The 'solidarity' the...