HOME    WORLD    U.S.    POLITICS    CRIME    ENTERTAINMENT    HEALTH    TECH    TRAVEL    LIVING
February 21, 2008
A crisis on OUR hands?
Posted: 01:04 PM ET

Throughout this political season, as the candidates debate and discuss their future strategies regarding the Iraq war, very little has been discussed about how they plan on dealing with the more than 4.4 million Iraqis who are now displaced because of the war. The Iraqi refugee crisis is now the fastest growing refugee crisis in the world, and experts predict that the number of displaced Iraqis will reach 5 million by the end of the year.

Exactly one year ago, the US government set a goal to resettle 7,000 Iraqi refugees by the end of FY 2007. It is exactly one year later and only a paltry 1,608 refugees were actually admitted with no explanation from the Bush administration as to why so few. In contrast, Sweden, which played no part in the Iraq war, welcomed nearly 20,000 into the country last year.

ALT TEXT

These statistics hit home even more when you consider that tens of thousands of Iraqis seeking refuge in the United States are doing so precisely because they helped our own troops. These American-affiliated Iraqis, among the best and brightest in Iraq, have loyally served the U.S. as translators, security personnel and as participants in the reconstruction effort. They did so, and continue to do so, despite the harsh reality that insurgents could, at any moment, kill them and their families for assisting the “enemy.”

Over the weekend I met with Kirk W. Johnson, a former US AID worker in Iraq who has spearheaded the effort to get these American-affiliated Iraqis into the United States. His organization, called The List Project, literally maintains a list of Iraqis whose lives have been threatened.  Of the nearly 1,000 Iraqi names Johnson has accumulated on this list, only 25 have been allowed into the U.S..

In the attempt to help alleviate this refugee problem and to help restore our image in Iraq, it seems natural that the administration would at the very least begin by granting asylum to those Iraqis who have put their lives at risk to help U.S. forces.  First of all, this is smart politics. If our government is ignoring the very people who risk their lives to help us, who is to say that anyone will be willing to stand by our side in the future? This is also a matter of stability. How can Iraqi society be expected to heal when millions of their citizens are fleeing and struggling to survive in neighboring countries?

But essentially, the bigger issue boils down to responsibility. Whether you deem our invasion of Iraq a success or a failure, one thing is for sure: it has resulted in a dramatic overhaul of the daily lives of millions of Iraqi men, women and children.  We will be judged, both by Iraqis and by the international community, on how our next administration will confront this refugee crisis, a crisis that resonates on a very basic, humane level.


-Mona Lisa Mouallem, 360° Staff

14 Comments
Filed under: AC360° Staff •  Raw Politics
14 Comments
Jason Dufault   February 21st, 2008 1:16 pm ET

The United States always creates a humanitarian crisis when it invovles itself in affairs it can’t conrol. Part of the planning for this War, should have been one of large humanitarian relief. It should have been part of the strategy. It should be no surprise to any of us, that this humanitarian crisis will last longer than any military occupation. The why?, the Where?, The How? and etc. should have been answered before ever getting our military in harms way. Apparently the only question they had an answer to was the when?. In addition, responsibility is the issue. It has resulted in a dramatic overhaul of our daily lives in the US too. We also have to remember that if our country doesn’t take steps to help our own Humanitarian crisis here, we will never be able to help the other people in the world that need it too.

Reality Check   February 21st, 2008 2:04 pm ET

I believe Hillary Clinton is the only candidate who has made mention of the fact that US cannot simply pulled out of Iraq, without taking into account the thousands of Iraqi civilians who have sympathized with the US efforts. Check your tapes on one of the debates- I believe I’m right.

Lilibeth   February 21st, 2008 2:25 pm ET

It is shameful that we went into this war and not protect the people, who, not only were displaced, but also risked their lives to help us. There are no words to express my displeasure of the current administration right now. There is so much damage the next president has to repair. He/she needs all the help they can get.

Ruthie Rader   February 21st, 2008 2:34 pm ET

To qoute a line from the song “Save The Life Of My Child”, recorded by Simon and Garfunkel: “Oh my grace, they’ve got no hiding place.”

Justin W.J.   February 21st, 2008 2:43 pm ET

Maybe in the debate in Texas, CNN can ask the candidates if they have a plan for Iraqi reconstruction. And whats more, ask who will front the bill. The war has already cost the tax payers a half a trillion dollars! I sincerely hope that our soldiers don’t end up doing the ground work of rebuilding that country.

Cindy   February 21st, 2008 2:46 pm ET

I think that through out history we have always neglected our part in helping the refugees in our wars. I mean we go in and do our thing declare victory or whatever and then leave the mess for others to clean up.

I think it is a shame that we promised these Iraqi’s help if they helped us and we aren’t following through. We are essentially leaving them there to die. Because if they are ever caught they will. I hope that something can be done to speed up the process of helping them get out of there!

Cynthia, Covington, Ga.

Charlotte D   February 21st, 2008 3:00 pm ET

This morning I saw the President’s speech in Liberia. He said he knows first hand how much easier it is to tear down a country vs building it back up. How nice that he realizes that now. Poor planning on his administration’s part will result in an emergency for the next administration. Let me echo Justin’s comment and request that the candidates be asked tonight how they will deal with the Iraqi reconstruction, including the refugee issue. Also, 360 might want to delve into the costs of refugee services–what the federal gov’t pays and what falls to the states. In the past the feds have mandated services but have left the states to pay without providing funding. This all needs to be thoughtfully considered.

Charlotte D
Stockton, CA

Sharon from Indy   February 21st, 2008 3:26 pm ET

I believe history will show that the US invasion of Iraq was never about the freeing the Iraqis people from Saddem Hussein. It was about securing US interests, including oil. To disrupt millions of lives based on Hussein’s tyranny would be idealistic, but it just isn’t true.

The issue with Iraqis refugees is one case in point. If the war was about the people of Iraq, the refugees would have been resettled or at least found their way home by now to a better place. Instead, they live as nomads throughout the world and their country is in shambles.

Whatever happen to the human rights that America stands for? Or has the fight for justice become a convenience to accelerate a fight or apply sanctions?

I believe the next administration will have to make firm decision about the resettlement of refugees from Iraq and the individuals who have aided our armed forces. Otherwise, we are just as bad as the regime we defeated in 2003.

Taylor Rutland   February 21st, 2008 3:56 pm ET

The results of this war have been very hard to notice. I realize that. However, why do we constantly bring up more and more issues to prove that the war in Iraq has been a failure? Yes, there are a number of people who need to be taken out of Iraq, but that is not that easy of a task. If we bring them over here then what? We still have to provide them a place to live, jobs, clothing, and food. It is very easy to say we need to get them all out of Iraq, but this is a process.
I also would like to say congratulations to Sweden for housing 20,000 refugees. Unfortunately, it is not quite that easy for us. We are in a war with the very country that we are trying to help. I know that not everyone that lives in Iraq is a terrorist and hates America, but we still have to be very cautious when it comes to allowing these people to come to America. It is a very tough situation to handle. I feel like the government is handling it as best as they can.
I agree that it is completely our responsibility to make sure these people are taken care of. However, it can’t be done over night. We need to constantly reevaluate and come up with better ways to help those who are left in Iraq. So we haven’t brought the 7,000 over like we originally promised. Is this the first goal that hasn’t been reached in this war? Is this the first promise a politician has not kept? I don’t think so. Let’s quit pointing out the problems with this war and start trying to point out solutions.

Lisa   February 21st, 2008 4:10 pm ET

To grant asylum to the thousands of refugees we have displayed by our little sojourn into their country would require they go on social programs this administration and the party they represent so detest. It would be unrealistic to think they could come to the US and just start living a normal life. They need to learn English, be provided housing and food. And as I’m sure they are unfamiliar with the western lifestyle, they will need help to accomplish assimilation into our society. My guess is that help needs to be in the form of social programs.

There would be absolute outrage to cut benefits to Americans while giving them to refugees. It is what got the social programs into the pickle they are in today. And it would be even more disasterous for the Republican party to allow any type of social program help on one hand while on the other telling Americans they need to stand on their own 2 feet and continue to freeze, cut and/or allow very basic COLA increases.

This is, unfortunately, a no-win situation. My tax dollars are already going to rebuilding Iraq (Haliburton & Co. were awarded those no-bid contracts if I recall), not to mention the other expenditures required to maintain our presence there. I’ll be damned if my parents’ Social Security and MediCare benefits are frozen or the COLA increase is minimal while others are allowed to join the party and then hear how the system will be out of money in a few years.

I realize this sounds cold. But, really, I’m getting tired of footing everyone else’s bill while those in the US must suffer. Iraqi infrastructure is being rebuilt, meanwhile the US’ continues to decay.

Maybe the administration and Congress should have thought about the after-costs before pre-emptively striking. I certainly don’t envy the incoming President (regardless of party) who gets to attempt to clean up this mess. Even if we “end” the war in Iraq, the aftermath must still be dealt with.

As an earlier poster mentioned - it would be interesting to hear the candidates tell us what their plans are for the aftermath of Iraq - whether we stay or go.

Jonah Carrington   February 21st, 2008 4:18 pm ET

Of course refugees generally, and refugees who have helped us particularly, should be (and should always have been) part of American post-war strategy in Iraq. Just like in every other area of this horrible mistake, how did they not think this would be a problem?

That said, Mr. Bush has been in a tight spot concerning this for a while now. He cannot actively support the evacuation of pro-American Iraqis, since a) they are the very people we should have living and working there and b) more importantly, it would be a grave admission of the uncontrollable situation.

Perhaps now that things are objectively settling down a little, I wonder if Bush can more calmly look at this thing and separate the truly endangered from those who may not be in immediate peril but are instead just generally fed up with the situation and want to get out. It is about fairness in the end.

Finally, great job to Kirk Johnson and the List Project. True American heroes are not the ones who run years-long electoral campaigns or eagerly snatch opportunities for demagoguery; they are instead those who take on heavy responsibility, oftentimes without choice, and carry it with grace, humility, and inspiring resolve.

Daniel Christopher   February 21st, 2008 4:45 pm ET

As the author points out, this often overlooked issue has applicability not only to our current situation, but also to those likely to arise in the future. In a time when wars have become much less conventional and troops need so much more support from the native populations in the areas of engagement, alienating those people is not a desired political outcome. How can we expect to receive the necessary support if we are not willing to provide support to those affected once we leave? The “paltry” number of refugees granted asylum is saddening, who knows how many American lives these people saved through their actions. I would be curious to know what the numbers were like before the war, is this even that much of an increase?

Sabrina in Los Angeles   February 21st, 2008 7:19 pm ET

It is not fair that women and children are hurt because men wish to fight with each other.

There should be a way to assist them.

I think that the USA doesn’t allow many Iraqis in because of the fear that they are going to be suicide bombers. Sadly, the innocent get hurt because of the few bad people.

We need to help them in their country then if we don’t take them in.

Very sad.

Annie Kate   February 21st, 2008 9:40 pm ET

I was always taught that if you broke something you fixed it. These people have risked everything literally to help us. They were there for us when we needed help but we are conspicuously absent when they need us. Is our reputation now going to be compliments of the Bush administration that we cut and run when those that we needed turn to us with their needs? No wonder people in other countries dislike us so.

Annie Kate
Birmingham AL

Comments have been closed for this article

subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

A behind the scenes look at “Anderson Cooper 360°” and the stories it covers, written by Anderson Cooper and the show’s correspondents and producers. Insight you can’t find anywhere else.

For more details, read our tips on how to win 360° approval for comments.

Send your instant feedback to Anderson Cooper 360°.

Featured Contributors
Candy Crowley
Candy Crowley is CNN's senior political correspondent and an AC360° contributor
David Gergen
David Gergen is CNN's senior political analyst and former presidential advisor
Roland S. Martin
Roland S. Martin is a nationally award-winning journalist and AC360° contributor
CNN Comment Policy: CNN encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. Please note that CNN makes reasonable efforts to review all comments prior to posting and CNN may edit comments for clarity or to keep out questionable or off-topic material. All comments should be relevant to the post and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. By submitting your comment, you hereby give CNN the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying information via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. CNN Privacy Statement.
Home  |  World  |  U.S.  |  Politics  |  Crime  |  Entertainment  |  Health  |  Tech  |  Travel  |  Living  |  Business  |  Sports  |  Time.com
Podcasts  |  Blogs  |  CNN Mobile  |  Preferences  |  Email Alerts  |  CNN Radio  |  CNN Shop  |  Site Map
© 2009 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by WordPress.com