Russia Distances Itself from Neighboring Afghan Refugees: Part One
Russia is seen as a transit country for those fleeing elsewhere, but it is also the final point of destination for refugees who do not have the same mobility to go anywhere else. In Russia, immigration alarmism surrounds refugees, the same rhetoric used in the U.S. This alarmism results in de-individualization and inaccurate assumptions that Afghans are leaving for economic reasons. Cynthia Gorman, a professor at West Virginia University whose research focus is legal geographies of political asylum, wrote an article, “Defined by the Flood,” about the same discrimination perpetuated by the United States legal system toward refugees from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. Putin using the fear mongering of a “flood” of immigrants parallels the perceptions and treatment of Latin Americans who claim asylum. Violence and conflict push immigrants to leave, economic reasons are certainly part of the problem, but not the actual determinant to flee their home country. In many of the asylum rejections, Russian officials “contend the Afghan citizens are exaggerating the threats to their lives at home and claim their real motivations for staying are economic.” Russian courts are purposely obtuse to the dire situation of these refugees.
President Vladimir Putin has warned about “militants under the guise of refugees,” perpetuating the idea that Afghan refugees are not even refugees, but dangerous militants. Putin’s nationalist agenda is meant to panic Russians over “the spillover of extremism” from Afghanistan into Central Asia and Russia. In August 2021 a Kremlin meeting highlighted the “importance of preventing the infiltration of radical Islamism” in the member states of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), a Moscow-led military alliance made up of six post-Soviet states. According to the CSTO’s official site, the meeting’s discussion consisted of the drastic deterioration of the situation in Afghanistan and implications for the security of CSTO member States. The CSTO agreed to pursue further cooperation in “counteracting the challenges and threats emanating from the territory of Afghanistan.” Putin is goading Central Asian countries to limit cooperation with the Western airlifts out of Kabul. Concluding the meeting, Tajikistan confirmed to strengthen the parts of the Tajik-Afghan border to contain the “increasing presence of militants of international terrorist organizations, who are using that country as a fallback ground for their…expansion.”
Russia’s migration policy needs a clearer path and fewer bureaucratic obstacles. By 2023, Russia began to deny everyone asylum extensions without explanation in the midst of this humanitarian crisis. The Russian bureaucratic system is notorious for its inefficiency, especially toward providing asylum seekers protection. It is clear Russia cannot “adopt a refugee system adequate for one of the world’s top 20 economies.” But the government needs to prioritize a path for asylum that will “at least not let people die because of red tape.” Russia’s immigration system is “volatile and reactive,” with laws changing often, affecting how migrants “gain and maintain legal status.” Their policy needs to be consistent and receptive to refugees. Instead, an increasingly “weaponized” citizenship policy is being enforced upon migrants and refugees. The best interests for Russia are to change their migration policy to make the process of asylum requests simpler and provide a safe haven for as many Afghan refugees who seek protection.
When the 2018 World Cup was hosted in St. Petersburg, entrance to the country required attaining a Fan ID, a system which some found as an opportunity to enter Russia. Once in the country, which is not a frequent occurrence, those Afghans could apply to migration services, and if they did not present proper documents, they were detained and fined 5,000 rubles for violating their stay on Russian territory. They were not kicked out of the country, but reports of instances in temporary detention centers include withholding food and water. Javad Musavi told Novaya Gazeta of his attempt to interact with the Russian government office for refugees. Visiting constantly, his asylum request could not be registered because he didn’t have a particular form or there was no translator. Eventually he was told to come with six other Afghans, promising that a translator would now be present. Instead they were met by the police and sent to a detention facility. Some have remained on their visas, but other Afghan students were sent back to Afghanistan upon earning their diplomas.
Examples like these, and the discussed shortcomings and mistreatment, reduces the attractiveness of Russia as a host country for Afghan migrants. Fleeing to Russia regardless, all Afghans deserve asylum and legal status; Russia is not adhering to international law or upholding the moral obligation to protect refugees seeking legal status. Russia’s institutional capacity for migration management is hardly functional, impossible to navigate, and bolstered by discriminatory attitudes.
Author: Charlotte Kropf
Managing Editor: Alex Sarchet
Web Editor: David Kobylka
