By Laura Bramall
In February I watched Ms Shu Shin Luh advocate on behalf of six asylum seekers ‘unlawfully housed’ in the dangerous and restrictive Napier Barracks (Kent). After months of preparation, Luh learned at the start of the day that Lisa Giovanetti QC, the barrister representing the Secretary of State for Home Department, would concede on all points but one. In other words, Priti Patel had backed down upon closer examination of the claims against her treatment of asylum seekers. Hearing Luh’s account of the conditions in which these men were living made it clear why. The barracks had been declared unsafe to use during the pandemic by Public Health England, and the residents were not allowed to leave. Half of the 400 residents were affected by Covid-19, many were vulnerable from threats of torture, and inmates claimed to share one cold shower between 100 people.
Whatever the national perception of asylum seekers may be, there is no doubt that once they arrive in the UK, immigrants are frequently treated inhumanely. Priti Patel is not renowned for her compassion, but her treatment of asylum seekers in the Napier Barracks case (as in other cases) illustrates not just a lack of kindness but also an ignorance of the reasons that so many are seeking asylum at all. An awareness of Europe’s role in causing or aggravating the conflicts from which people are desperately fleeing shows that the UK’s obligation to provide asylum goes far beyond the principle of common humanity, although that is of course important itself.
An asylum seeker is someone who has left their country in the hope of protection from persecution or serious human rights abuses, but who has not yet been legally recognised as a refugee. While seeking asylum itself is a human right, a ‘refugee’ has fled persecution and has a right to international protection when their own government cannot or will not protect them. In 2020 36,041 asylum applications were made to the UK but only 9,113 people were granted leave to stay here at the initial decision. This left over 26,000 people without the protected right to live anywhere and while they remain ‘asylum seekers’, they do not have the right to work in the UK and must rely on state support. This support comes in cash and amounts to £5.67 a day, which must cover everything including food. Pregnant women or mothers with children under three years old are given a tiny £3 extra a week.
The UK’s treatment of its asylum seekers is evidently far from generous. Yet one would do well to remember the reasons that people must flee their countries. According to Government statistics, the top four nationalities of asylum applications to the UK were Iran, Albania, Iraq and Eritrea. It is unsurprising that these countries are some of the worst conflict zones in the world, and all have appalling human rights records. The cause and severity of these crises can often be traced back to European influence.
Iran, for example, is still suffering under sanctions imposed by the US and EU. While the aim of these sanctions may be to tame Iran’s nuclear program and aggressive foreign policies, it is the ordinary people who bear the brunt of such economic deprivation. The inflation rate of domestic commodities has soared, and the government has cut back subsidies for those who need them. According to Transparency International, in 2017 Iran was the fourth most corrupt country in the world in the eyes of its people. The US and EU are therefore not restricting its powerful elite so much as punishing the poorest and making their living in Iran all the more impossible.
Yet even this corruption can be traced back to European meddling. Having invaded Iran with Russia in 1941, UK troops remined in the country until 1946 before working closely with the US to overthrow the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953. They did this in response to Mosaddegh’s attempts to limit the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company’s (now part of BP) control over Iranian oil reserves. Churchill’s actions appeared to have no consideration of the will of the Iranian people, and resulted in hundreds of civilian deaths, the imposition of a military government, and a long period of discontent that climaxed in the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Having created a country run by the military and heavily influenced by British and American control of oil, the UK then largely backed Iraq in its long war against Iran throughout the 1980s; it broke off relations with Iran completely after the 1979 revolution.
Iran is by no means the only country to have suffered from the UK’s ambition, and its people are not the only asylum seekers to whom the UK owes a great deal. The European Commission recognises the medieval code of blood feuds ‘kanum’ as a major push driving people from Albania, but the origins of its oppressive communist government can be traced back to London. It was here in December 1912 that Britain, Germany, Russia, Austria-Hungary, France, and Italy, having defeated Turkey, created the independent state of Albania. The boundaries that they drew largely ignored demographic realities, and gave vast regions to the neighbouring Serbia and Greece. It is only thanks to Woodrow Wilson that the state still exists; Britain, France, and Italy planned to partition Albania between its neighbours at the Paris Peace Conference (1919-1920). As a result there has been near constant political turmoil including Zogu’s overthrow of Noli and Hoxha’s periodic purges of his opponents. The people of Albania must suffer not only an often-changing political climate but also a dangerous one.
There are many reasons that people flee their country, and we need not attribute all injustices to European actions. Yet when approaching the discourse surrounding asylum seekers and refugees we would do well to remember that as a country we must take some responsibility for their plight. Perhaps treating these people with compassion and humanity would be a step towards making amends.