Our View: Cyprus has every right to stem irregular migrant flows

Human Rights Watch issued a scathing report about the treatment of Syrian migrants and refugees by the Cyprus and Lebanese authorities. The New York-based NGO, which interviewed some of these migrants, said they had reported “a myriad of abuses throughout the cycle of pull and pushbacks and expulsions.” It also claimed, in its 90-page report, that “both Lebanese and Cypriot authorities used excessive force at the time of arrest and during detention including beatings, body restraints and verbal insults.”

The pushbacks and collective expulsions carried out by the Cyprus authorities were a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights, said the NGO and urged the EU and other member-states to “hold Cyprus accountable for human rights violations against migrants and asylum seekers.”

While the mistreatment of migrants is unacceptable and the use of excessive force by some officers cannot be condoned, there is a bigger picture which neither Human Rights Watch nor the UNHCR seem remotely interested in. According to their reasoning, countries should always have open borders for everyone calling themselves asylum seekers or refugees, because this is what the Convention on Human Rights, stipulates – a convention that only the countries of the West are expected to respect.

In its report, Human Rights Watch also urged the EU to declare no part of Syria as being safe, which in effect is a free pass to the entire population of Syria to seek international protection in any country, which complies with the Convention they choose. Cyprus’ interior minister had been arguing at the EU that parts of Syria should be declared ‘safe’ as a way of stemming the flow of refugees and opening the way for repatriating some of them. It was a perfectly reasonable argument made by a country that for years had complied with the human rights convention taking thousands of refugees fleeing Syria when it was a war zone.

Will the whole country be regarded as a war zone indefinitely, putting pressure on neighbouring countries to carry on taking in Syrian nationals claiming refugee status?  Human Rights Watch, in fact, had the audacity to criticise Lebanon, currently hosting 1.5 million Syrian refugees – the largest number of refugees per capita and per square kilometre in the world – for pushbacks and pullbacks. Does the NGO not understand there is a limit to the number of refugees a small country with a failing economy can take in? Must Lebanon have to take in more Syrian refugees/migrants arriving there, in collaboration with Cyprus?

Organisations like Human Rights Watch and the UNHCR refuse to see the problem of migrant/refugee movements in its entirety. All they are interested in is pressuring countries to accept anyone claiming they are asylum seekers or refugees, even though many of them are economic migrants looking for a better future. They are campaigning organisations that work exclusively for the interests of the refugees. They are not concerned about the social, economic and political consequences these migrant flows have for the host countries, let alone offer solutions.

Instead, they come up with data, the UNHCR informing us that in 2022 there were 55 attempted movements by sea involving 4,629 individuals from Lebanon to Cyprus, in 2023 65 attempts by 3,921 people and by July this year 61 attempts by 2,541 people. The report did acknowledge that Cyprus has become the most common destination for boats with irregular migrants leaving Lebanon where social and economic conditions are very poor. If there were no pushbacks and Cyprus adopted an open-door policy, as Human Rights Watch advocates, thousands of Syrians could be arriving from Lebanon every month.

It is thanks to the pushbacks and expulsions this has not materialised. As President Christodoulides said on Thursday, the government policy had reversed the negative balance in net migration and there were now more returns than arrivals. He made no reference to the sea patrols and pushbacks, but these have been an effective part of the government policy.

The truth is Cyprus is not the only EU country that has had to impose tough measures to control the flow of irregular migrants. Germany’s migrant commissioner has said the EU could use the asylum facilities in Rwanda, which the new British government has decided not to use, for the offshore processing of asylum seekers. Sweden, known for its pro-immigration policies in the past, boasted that it now has the lowest number of asylum seekers since 1997, while France’s new prime minister, Michel Barnier has spoken about stopping all non-EU migration for three to five years.

Human Rights Watch and the UNHCR will carry on issuing reports about the violation of rights of irregular migrants, but the government has every right to have a strategy that would stop Cyprus being an attractive destination for them.