The United States and Resettling Refugees
The United States has historically been the world leader in resettling refugees, and it remains the top resettlement country. Africa is one of the countries with a disproportionately large number of migrants, owing to numerous civil disputes such as tribal wars and armed uprisings. With global instability on the rise as a result of terrorism, the United States has been wary of accepting new refugees, especially after the 9/11 attacks. However, the government cannot afford to turn away citizens who really need refuge and security. Nevertheless, it must continue to exercise due diligence to ensure that its security is not compromised. Instead of blocking refugees from African nations from resettling in the US, the country should put up stringent measures to ensure only those who qualify are resettled through rigorous screening, thus addressing all security and other concerns without disadvantaging any refugee.
The Perpetual Woes of Africa
To begin with, the US should continue with its policy of resettling refugees, and give Africa consideration due to its perpetual woes. Since independence, African countries have been plunged into civil or tribal wars, most of which have led to the displacement of a lot of people. For instance, Shillington states that "The history of Eastern and Central African since the 1990s has been largely overshadowed by the spectres of civil war, ethnic conflict and genocide" (470). Similarly, the horn of Africa has seen significant levels of violence that have affected people's livelihoods. For example, Ethiopia and Eritrea have been involved in border disputes, the worst being the 1998 battle that ended with the victory of Ethiopia in 2000 (Shillington 471). However, the worst cases of violence are seen in countries like Somalia and Sudan, with the former existing in a continuous clan-based militia wars since the ouster of President Mohammed Siad Barre in 1991 (Shillington 472). As a result, the continent has for decades produced refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPS). Without resettlement into third countries like the US, most of the victims would be left in danger of dying from harsh conditions in their countries or the nations of first asylum.
The Need for Stringent Measures
However, there are conditions that should govern the admittance and resettlement of the refugees. Firstly, the US has a mandate to protect its citizens and maintain security. Therefore, thorough screening should be applied to ensure that only eligible and law-abiding people are allowed into the country. As Martin et al argue, it is extremely unlikely for the US to make an open-ended decision to resettle all people who escape various nations (2). Therefore, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) should ensure only those who qualify through a rigorous process involving individual interviews are cleared to resettle in the US. Only after looking into the genuine needs of an applicant for resettlement are the authorities sure that they only admit deserving persons, and that the beneficiaries do not pose a danger to the US population.
Adherence to Immigration and Nationality Act
Firstly, the DHS and USCIS should always adhere to the requirements of the Immigration and Nationality Act. It states that a person qualifies as a refugee if they are unable or unwilling to go back to their original country due to persecution or real risk of persecution based on religion, race, nationality, or being a member of a social or political group among other issues (Martin et al. 8). Additionally, the US should continue to impose the admission ceilings, which are the limit to which the nation can admit refugees in a year. The limit ensures that the country allows entry to only those people it can comfortably resettle, and also minimizes security risks (Martin et al. 5). Although the nation should not provide too few chances of people in need of resettlement, it cannot successfully admit an unlimited number of refugees.
Overcoming Barriers and Obstacles
According to the provisions of the US, an applicant must meet the INA definition of a refugee and not be already settled firmly in another country. Moreover, one may qualify as a refugee but fail to be admissible due to criminal records, security concerns, or other such serious conditions. Thus, as Martin et al. state "There exist genuine and legitimate barriers and obstacles to resettlement, as well as factors that might properly counsel against a resettlement initiative in specific circumstances" (1). It is upon the relevant departments to ensure that they overcome the barriers and resettle those who genuinely need it.
Conclusion
Overall, the United States should continue to resettle refugees from Africa but take measures to safeguard the nation's security and other issues. African countries are often involved in serious violent conflicts that end up displacing people. Since the US remains the leading resettlement nation, it is imperative that it does not close its doors on refugees from this continent. However, the country has a duty to safeguard its own security on the face of terrorist and other criminal threats. Therefore, due diligence must be exercised by the relevant authorities, including DHS and USCIS to ensure that only the right people are admitted to the country. Through rigorous screening, the departments should tighten the measures to limit resettlement to those who qualify.
Work Cited
Martin, David A, et al. The United States Refugee Admissions Program: Reforms for a New Era of Refugee Resettlement. Migration Policy Institute, 2005.
Shillington, Kevin. History of Africa, 3rd ed. Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
