A Refugee Crisis in Flux: Examining the Role of Serbia along the Balkan Route Silviu Kondan & Jelena Djuric

University of Toronto

Research in Serbia February 11th – 21st

Purpose of our research: Contextualize Serbia’s geopolitical position

as a transit country Compare with the refugee crisis from the

1990s Defining the “domino effect” Describing UNHCR influence on Serbia’s

Asylum System Frame interagency coordination

“Eastern Mediterranean and Western Balkan Route”

Transit Country Define: Geography and Appeal

local reception, living standards, labor market conditions, and access to government support

Defined before journey “Germany, Sweden, Austria”

“Buying Time” in Serbia Access to resources and services – non-SIA Intention to seek asylum in Serbia in 2014 was 16, 490

in comparison to 2015 where the figure rose to 66, 428.

Past and Present 1990s

1. Long term accommodations

2. Ethnolinguistic similarity

3. Entire families/communities

4. Integration mechanisms resettlement programs

Now1. Basic necessities for

duration of transit2. New nationalities 3. Waves – primarily young

men (change)4. No integration strategy

*Serbian national refugees in EU

Domino Effect Policy change on one border

determines the number of refugees in Serbia Serbian government policies

reflecting neighbouring closures Unpredictability – importance

of contingency plansVisible hotspots:

Šid and Preševo, & Belgrade

Image: Refugee Aid Serbia

Domino Effect Increase duration of closure = increase in

likelihood of smuggling, exploitation, and/or Serbian asylum claims

Poses: economic, political, legal, and social challenges

to Serbia Change in Serbian narrative: “Open to Close”

UNHCR Presence & Asylum Las UNHCR and EC conducted asylum

determinations on behalf of Yugoslavia in 1979 Continued in 1990s – UNHCR ‘lead agency’ Push for individual rather than territorial asylum

procedure 2008 Law of Asylum – EU accession

CEAP (Common European Asylum Policy ) versus reality: no consensus

Set of “European Values” high expectation in post-Socialist Balkan space

Dublin III – country of first entry (Croatia 11%) Serbia as a host

Interagency Cooperation:Existing Structure: Commissariat for Refugees and Migration and Ministry of Labour

Protection: High likelihood of

exploitation/violence Non-SIA

identification and information systems IOM Inaccurate info Translators & cultural

mediators

Health:maternity care and

health care during birth, psycho-social support, and first-aid treatment.

Mobility effective

Interagency Cooperation:

ShelterExpansion of

overnight facilities – when are they really open?

Long-term stayCommunity backlash

Supporting local communitiesWaste

managementPrivate propertyCombating

intolerance

What This All Means?

• Policy affects the future • Asylum Seekers are continuing to need

basic aid despite the closing of borders• The constrained capacity to provide

for them will continue to play out• This situation will be considered in

Serbia’s accession into the EU• There are limits to the contingency

plans and a separation between the goals of grassroots organizations and government bodies

• The conflicts across North Africa and the Middle East will continue to have an effect on the Balkan countries