Enab Baladi – Yamen Moghrabi

European countries’ moves to reassess their policies towards the Syrian regime have raised fears of potential impacts on Syrian refugees.

While these moves appear political, they may also be related to stopping the influx of refugees into European territories.

According to the Financial Times, foreign ministers from Austria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Greece, Italy, Slovakia, and Slovenia wrote a letter to the EU’s chief diplomat, Josep Borrell, urging the union to reassess its approach to Syria.

The letter stated, “Our aim is a more active, results-oriented, and practical policy in Syria, which would allow us to increase our political influence and the effectiveness of our humanitarian aid.”

Refugees: The primary target

The link between this letter and the refugee issue, rather than just the political aspect, is evident through the European Union’s own actions in this matter and the steps it has taken.

France-based lawyer, al-Mutassim al-Kilani, told Enab Baladi that each country individually can impose restrictions on its own refugees.

Conversely, according to al-Kilani, there is a legal system governing the asylum process in the union, as well as the European Court of Human Rights, which regulates agreements and prosecutes countries for committing violations.

The pressure is part of changing these agreements and laws at the union level, then implementing them in local laws.

The UK previously passed a law to deport refugees to Rwanda, which the Supreme Court rejected, only for it to pass through Parliament legislation, before the European Court of Human Rights rejected it.

Al-Kilani believes the significant intervention and pressure exerted by several European countries come in two contexts: first, to pressure refugees by portraying Syria as safe, and second, to normalize the regime and close the Syrian file.

Alongside the UK, whose new government repealed the Rwanda Law in early July, Italy signed a similar agreement with Albania, approved by the Albanian Parliament last February.

Additionally, Finland completely closed its borders with Russia to prevent the arrival of migrants.

Normalizing the regime

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported the arrival of 4,976 migrants and refugees to Italy in May.

In a report published on July 10, it stated that the arrivals came by sea, 22% from Bangladesh, 15% from Tunisia, and 13% from Syria, adding that 19% were children.

While this number arrived in Italy, Italy was preparing to appoint an ambassador to Damascus, which it announced on July 26.

The appointment of an ambassador in Damascus was to “turn the spotlight” on the country, according to Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani, making Italy the first among the G7 countries to reopen its embassy in Damascus since March 2011.

These moves portray Syria as a “safe country” to return to, despite all the statistics and figures issued by the UN and civil society organizations.

According to al-Kilani, the European countries’ moves come in the context of “early recovery,” while the extreme right in these countries seeks to portray Syria as safe to pressure refugees and not receive them.

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) defines “early recovery” as an approach that addresses recovery needs emerging during the humanitarian response phase by using humanitarian mechanisms consistent with development principles. This approach allows people to benefit from humanitarian actions to seize developmental opportunities, build resilience, and establish a sustainable recovery process from the crisis.

Al-Kilani believes that the countries demanding a reassessment of relations with the Syrian regime, half of which belong to the former Soviet Union, mostly do not have the political or financial decision-making power.

He stated that there are countries whose serious moves could affect the refugee issue and normalization with the regime, such as Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Sweden.

These countries have previously raised the “three no’s” slogan (no normalization, no reconstruction, no lifting of sanctions before reaching a political solution). As long as this slogan exists, the matter won’t proceed toward acceptance from the union countries, according to al-Kilani.

The European Union still maintains its boycott stance against the Syrian regime due to the violations committed during the repression of Syrian protests for the 13 years of the Syrian revolution.

On May 28, the European Union extended European sanctions on the Syrian regime until June 2025.

According to a statement by the union published on its official website, the European Council extended the restrictive measures imposed by the European Union against the regime due to the seriousness of the deteriorating situation in Syria while removing five deceased individuals and another person from the list.

Since 2011, the union has imposed its sanctions on Syria, initially targeting 291 people with asset freezes and travel bans, along with 70 entities whose financial assets were frozen, in response to the Syrian regime’s crackdown on popular opposition demanding political transition in Syria.

Is Syria safe?

Among the key questions about pushing and forcing Syrian refugees, whether in Europe or neighboring countries, to return to their homeland is whether Syria is a safe country or not.

On July 9, a report by the Syrian Network for Human Rights documented the arrest of a Syrian refugee who forcibly returned from Lebanon with a group of refugees.

The young man named Ahmad Nemer al-Halli was taken to Palestine Branch, or Branch 235, affiliated with the Military Intelligence Division.

On May 27, Amnesty International confirmed that human rights organizations unanimously agree that there is no safe place in Syria for refugees to return to.

Last February, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights stated that many Syrians who fled the war face serious human rights violations and abuses upon their return to Syria.

A report by the UNHCR stated that documented violations and abuses were committed by the government, de facto authorities, and other armed groups across Syria.

The violations mentioned in the report include arbitrary detention, torture, ill-treatment, sexual and gender-based violence, enforced disappearance, and abduction.

People also faced extortion, expropriation of property, and deprivation of identity cards and other documents, while the overall Syrian population faces such human rights violations and abuses, with returnees seemingly at greater risk.

In addition to warnings from human rights organizations and the UN, the Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported in early June from a Lebanese parliamentary source that about 1,100 Syrians who voluntarily returned to their towns were sent back to Lebanon by an official decision from the regime, with only 400 accepted for return. The source noted that the regime classifies most displaced people as undesirable and poses a security and demographic threat to its survival.