Reykjavík Grapevine - 05.11.2010, Síða 8

8
The Reykjavík Grapevine
Issue 17 — 2010 Seems no matter who is in government, Iceland's handling of asylum seekers
will always be sorta shameful. This is depressing.
In some ways, the case of Medhi
Kavyanpor is typical of many asy-
lum seekers in Iceland. He fled Iran
in 2005, leaving behind a wife and
child, paying a smuggler an exor-
bitant sum to get him safe passage
to Canada, only to be ultimately
stopped in his tracks in Iceland.
Once here, he waited through
countless appeals to the institu-
tions that deal with asylum seek-
ers for any decision on the matter
to be reached. What makes Me-
dhi's case exceptional is just how
long he has been made to wait: it
was not until mid-October that a
decision was reached on his case,
making his the longest wait of any
asylum seeker to Iceland.
Medhi will not be sent back to Iran,
but this is only after years of appeals,
a hunger strike, and vows to sooner
commit suicide than be deported. This
is despite the fact that Article 19 of
Dublin Regulation II—Europe's contro-
versial and much criticised agreement
on the treatment of asylum seekers, of
which Iceland is a signatory—specifi-
cally requires that either deportation
occur “at the latest within six months”
or that the application process for asy-
lum be completed within “a maximum
of one year”.
NO REAL pOLICy, NO STANdARdS
Kolfinna Baldvinsdóttir, an advocate
of the rights of refugees who spoke
with the Grapevine on this issue, has
worked very closely with Medhi's case
and fought for his stay in Iceland. She
pointed out to us that there is a lack of
any clear policy with regards to how
Icelandic authorities are supposed to
handle asylum seekers. “There's no
red thread connecting one case and
the next,” she says. “No standard for
how someone is chosen to stay or told
they're going to be deported. I can't
tell someone who arrives here what
their chances are, unless they're cute,
white and Christian.”
The lack of any established policy
on asylum seekers has led to some
troubling discrepancies, in particular
the one Kolfinna raises. According
to the latest statistics from the Red
Cross, most asylum seekers in Iceland
come from Muslim countries such as
Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
However, between 2006 and 2009,
57.1% of asylum seekers who were
granted refugee status were self-iden-
tified Christians—only 20% were Mus-
lim.
“How is it that the one Christian
asylum seeker I met got their applica-
tion approved within 7 months, while
at the same time my guys have been
waiting two or three years for an an-
swer and still haven't gotten one?”
Kolfinna asks.
Related to a lack of an official asy-
lum seeker policy is that Icelandic au-
thorities seem to lack a sense of cul-
tural context. She relates the story of
an Indian refugee who ran into a land
dispute in his home country, and was
threatened with his life. Immigration
officers asked him why he didn't just
call the police, or get in touch with
an attorney. “They always approach
things from an Icelandic point of view,”
Kolfinna says. “Never taking into ac-
count what the situation in these other
countries might be.”
A FRUSTRATING LIMBO
While waiting for an answer that seems
to be made arbitrarily, asylum seekers
in Iceland aren't exactly living the high
life. Icelandair is heavily fined if they
allow refugees to fly out of Keflavík,
so customs officials there are specially
trained to identify false passports and
look for red-flag behaviour. As almost
all asylum seekers arriving in Iceland
do so through Keflavík airport, many
of them end up at Keflavík's Fit Hos-
tel. There, they get “a room, 2.500 ISK
per week, a library and pool card, and
weekly food rations.” However, the lo-
cation is isolated, and there is only one
shared computer for accessing the in-
ternet. They receive weekly visits from
Red Cross volunteers, but “the refu-
gees get tired of answering the same
questions over and over, telling their
stories again and again.” Furthermore,
Kolfinna says Fit Hostel also rents out
to tourists, and “asylum seekers are
told not to tell anyone that they're
asylum seekers.” She speculates that
this is because if tourists learn they're
staying with refugees, they might bring
media attention to their situation.
To be sure, the Dublin Regulation to
which Iceland is bound is flawed. The
European Council on Refugees and
Exiles has harshly criticised the treaty,
saying that it “increases pressures on
the external border regions of the EU,
where states are often least able to
offer asylum seekers support and pro-
tection” and “impedes integration of
refugees by delaying the examination
of asylum claims, by creating incen-
tives for refugees to avoid the asylum
system and live 'underground,' and by
uprooting refugees.”
But overall, it's the not knowing
that takes the greatest toll—having
no past precedent upon which to pull
together even the vaguest notion of
what an answer from the authorities
might be, living a frustrating and iso-
lated limbo that more often than not
leads to depression, desperation, and
anger. “What sort of future does the
state envision for its refugee policy?”
Kolfinna asks. “Do they want to see
refugees wandering around downtown
with nothing to do? Do they want to
continue this policy of neglect, letting
anger grow among these disaffected
people, possibly with disastrous con-
sequences for us all?”
News | Asylum Seekers
Stranded
Why Iceland's Asylum Seekers Need a Clear Policy
“Believe it or not, in these
times of globalisation and
international relations
there seems to be a silent
agreement about knowing as
little as possible about what
is happening in the rest of
the world. This agreement
crystallises in mainstream
media coverage, where the
appearance of actual world
news analysis is an exception
from an extremely narrow
frame of news content.”
Opinion | Snorri Páll Jónsson Úlfhildarson
When today’s upswing of
fascism and neo-Nazism is
discussed, referring to Nazi
Germany is a certain taboo
and a sidetracking cliché. It is taboo be-
cause in the eyes of so many it is never
legitimate to compare anything with the
Third Reich and the Holocaust. A piti-
ful offspring of that mindset is the anti-
Deutsche arm of Germany’s radical left-
ist and anarchist movement, which in a
fit of collective bad conscience supports
the bloody Israeli state. It is a sidetrack-
ing cliché because by always looking back
at these particular worst-of-all horror
events, one can unconsciously ignore or
deny the seriousness of what’s happen-
ing today.
A couple of neo-Nazis showed up in
a recent mass-protest against the gov-
ernment and parliament, waving their
swastika and sun cross flags. Since then,
surprisingly little discussion about the
matter has taken place, and that has been
sidetracked by people belittling the actu-
al threat of fascism as completely lacking
context.
This seems to be based on Iceland’s
isolation. Believe it or not, in these times
of globalisation and international rela-
tions there seems to be a silent agree-
ment about knowing as little as possible
about what is happening in the rest of
the world. This agreement crystallises in
mainstream media coverage, where the
appearance of actual world news analy-
sis is an exception from an extremely
narrow frame of news content. Even an
entire newspaper is now being published
shamelessly without any international
context.
One does not have to go far away to
witness how serious today’s upswing of
fascism is. It manifests itself in two ways.
Firstly, in what most people would call
extreme cases. In Greece, neo-Nazis and
police have for years worked side by side
against immigrants and refugees. See-
ing a group of Nazis stepping out of po-
lice vans, gathering for anti-immigration
demos, is not uncommon. In a recent
conflict about the cutting of the Khimki-
forest close to Moscow, Russia, a neo-Na-
zi group was hired to guard the construc-
tion area and fight with its opponents.
In second place it is seen in democ-
racy. The Tea Party in the US is a quite
non-radical group of super-nationalistic
Republicans, but under the surface it is
a breeding-ground for NS88 and other
Nazi groups, e.g. known for establishing
their own “border patrol” by the Mexi-
can Border. In Europe, racist political
parties are receiving ever-increased sup-
port. Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom
in Holland, the Sweden Democrats with
their neo-Nazi past and support, and
Pea Kjærsgaard’s Danish People’s Party
are few examples. Let us also remember
Angela Merkel’s recent announcement
about the death of multi-cultural societ-
ies.
After examining such random ex-
amples, it would be purely naive to claim
that the threat of extreme nationalism
is not to be found in Iceland. Very few
people dress up in brown shirts with
iron crosses but relatively many “normal
Icelanders” share the neo-Nazi’s nation-
alism and xenophobia. This is best seen
in the discourse about EU—and by the
way, I am not pro-EU—where a big part
of the opposition is built on xenophobic,
nation-pride exclamations. There is a
deep-rooted nationalism in the whole
party-political spectrum and though the
racist Liberal party vanished into thin air,
its members did not. They joined the In-
dependence Party or Blood and Honour,
depending on emphasis.
The problem is ignorance. The ones
who condemn neo-Nazis but at the same
time wave Icelandic flags on all occa-
sions, feel unity when hearing the na-
tional anthem, participate in campaigns
like InDefence’s “Icelanders do not look
like terrorists!”, talk about Viking-blood
and old Icelandic values, and see nothing
wrong with Iceland’s refugee policy don’t
seem to realise that they themselves are
the ground for neo-Nazi existence. Ex-
tremes can only come about, sustain and
expand if they have a solid base to grow
on.
The Nationalistic Ground For
Neo-Nazism
pAUL NIKOLOv
SIGTRyGGUR ARI jóHANNSSON
Mountaineers of Iceland • Skútuvogur 12E • 104 Reykjavík • Iceland
Telephone: +354 580 9900 Ice@mountaineers.is • www.mountaineers.is • www. activity.is
SUPER JEEP & SNOWMOBILE TOURS