While it is true that former President donald trump relaxed certain sanctions during his tenure, particularly for humanitarian aid, the United States—alongside the EU and other international actors—still maintains a wide array of sanctions targeting the Assad regime, especially related to human rights abuses and war crimes. These sanctions continue to impact the economy, reconstruction efforts, and civilian life in Syria. More importantly, sanctions alone are not the primary reason why refugees flee or remain abroad; the core issue is safety, political repression, and a lack of viable infrastructure.
Many Sunni Muslim refugees left syria to escape not just war but persecution, conscription, arbitrary detention, and torture, particularly from the Assad regime, which remains firmly in power. The notion that they can now return safely because of a shift in international sanctions policy ignores the continued authoritarian nature of the Syrian state and the risk returning individuals face, especially if they are seen as having opposed the regime or avoided military service. Human rights organizations and UN bodies consistently warn that syria is still not safe for mass returns. In fact, many returnees have reported intimidation, arrest, or worse upon re-entering the country.
For european nations hosting refugees, the question of return is governed not by emotion or public pressure but by international law and humanitarian principles. Refugees are protected under the 1951 Refugee Convention, which states they cannot be forced to return to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom. While voluntary returns are encouraged when safe and sustainable, forcing or pressuring over a million people to return to a still-volatile state risks violating international obligations and could lead to severe humanitarian consequences. The conversation about syria and its displaced citizens should focus on long-term peace, justice, and rebuilding—not blanket demands to return before those conditions are met.
Many Sunni Muslim refugees left syria to escape not just war but persecution, conscription, arbitrary detention, and torture, particularly from the Assad regime, which remains firmly in power. The notion that they can now return safely because of a shift in international sanctions policy ignores the continued authoritarian nature of the Syrian state and the risk returning individuals face, especially if they are seen as having opposed the regime or avoided military service. Human rights organizations and UN bodies consistently warn that syria is still not safe for mass returns. In fact, many returnees have reported intimidation, arrest, or worse upon re-entering the country.
For european nations hosting refugees, the question of return is governed not by emotion or public pressure but by international law and humanitarian principles. Refugees are protected under the 1951 Refugee Convention, which states they cannot be forced to return to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom. While voluntary returns are encouraged when safe and sustainable, forcing or pressuring over a million people to return to a still-volatile state risks violating international obligations and could lead to severe humanitarian consequences. The conversation about syria and its displaced citizens should focus on long-term peace, justice, and rebuilding—not blanket demands to return before those conditions are met.
click and follow Indiaherald WhatsApp channel