TRANSCRIPT: The Rescue Situation
David Miliband:
We feel, in our work, the absence of American diplomacy. I mean five American ambassadors out of 55 appointed in Africa, you can feel that. No assistant secretary for Africa, you can feel that.
Ian Bremmer:
Hi, I'm Ian Bremmer, and welcome to the GZERO World Podcast. I'm host of the weekly show, "GZERO World" on Facebook Watch. In this podcast, we share extended versions of the big interviews from that show. And this week, I sit down with David Miliband, president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee, and former foreign secretary of the United Kingdom. His recent book, "Rescue: Refugees and the Political Crisis of Our Time," dives into the global refugee crisis and offers real solutions as to what people across the globe can do to help. Today I'll ask him about the impact that an increasingly anti-immigrant America has had on the migration crisis across the world and if the days of welcoming refugees with open arms are behind us. Let's get to it.
Announcer:
The GZERO World is brought to you by our founding sponsor, First Republic. First Republic, a private bank and wealth management company, places clients' needs first by providing responsive, relevant and customized solutions. Visit firstrepublic.com to learn more.
Ian Bremmer:
I'm here with David Miliband. He is president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee, former foreign secretary of the United Kingdom and most recently author of this book, "Rescue: A Critical Issue of Our Time." Delighted he's here. Welcome David to the GZERO.
David Miliband:
Thank you, Ian. Good to be here.
Ian Bremmer:
This was never going to be an easy job, but it has to feel like it's getting harder.
David Miliband:
Well, someone once said that if you look at the statistics on refugees, you get depressed. It's only if you look at the people that you can have hope. I think that whenever anyone says it must be a tough time to be leading an organization that's an international humanitarian aid organization, a refugee resettlement agency in the U.S., I always reflect it's much harder on the front line. And we've got 800 staff in Yemen, we've got a thousand staff in Syria, we've got 700 staff in Afghanistan. But what has changed is not just that there are more needs out there, not just that those needs are becoming more complex and more difficult to serve, but that it increasingly feels as a western, especially American based organization, focused on displaced people, there's a sense of siege. And we are used to a sense of siege in countries that are trying to crack down on NGOs, but we're not used to a sense of siege from our own home base.
Ian Bremmer:
Do you think that what's changed is actually pretty deep-rooted in the United States? Do you think that this is a change in the American psyche about the melting pot and about the Statue of Liberty or do you see this as more of a temporary reaction?
David Miliband:
It feels to me like there's been the surfacing of some very deep antagonism. Remember, it's not a new thing for Americans to be leery of foreigners. Two thirds of Americans said that European Jews shouldn't be allowed into the country in 1939, 1940. But the sense that this country has come to question something fundamental about its identity, namely that it's bringing people from all over the world, does feel like it has a potency and a purchase that is greater than ever before. And it's allied with this extraordinary global sense of global retrenchment.
David Miliband:
America seeking a smaller role in the world while other countries, notably China, are seeking a bigger around the world, Richard Haass talks about an abdication.
Ian Bremmer:
An abdication.
David Miliband:
And it's the two things that go together because it's not like Americans are saying, let's increase our international humanitarian aid, let's do our duty to refugees in Kenya or Ethiopia or Jordan or Lebanon, but let's have them stay away. It's saying we want less international humanitarian aid, the administration anyway, and we want fewer foreigners coming here. And the combination I think is very striking and very dangerous and has a domino effect elsewhere.
Ian Bremmer:
But let me start more positive, which is yes, clearly there's a change in what we see in the administration policy and this has become a very politically salient and divisive issue. On the other hand, Americans have historically been some of the greatest humanitarians around the world, and that's not new. We had that with the Carnegies and the Rockefellers, too. To what extent do you see that individual American willingness to provide major humanitarian support, philanthropic support, for your organization, others like it, to refugees directly? Is that also coming off or is that still robust?
David Miliband:
No, it's polarizing. It mirrors the national debate. People say to me, "What's it like to lead a organization helping refugees in an age of backlash?" And I say, "No, it's not an age of backlash, it's an age of polarization."
Ian Bremmer:
So what about, internationally, tell me where you think you're having big success. I mean, clearly the Europeans are not facing the same urgency of refugee crisis today that they were a couple of years ago.
David Miliband:
No, but they're fearful as well. And I think what's interesting is that where the debate goes most wrong, and this is partly the answer to you about the situation here, but it also applies in Europe, is that we know when the refugee issue and the immigration issue become confused, it's bad for both because there's a different moral claim for a refugee than for an immigrant. A refugee has a well-founded fear of persecution, can't go home for fear of their life. An immigrant is in a different position, not that one is good and the other is bad. They're just different. When the two of them become confused, and they did become confused here because of the issue of the 11 million undocumented here, the refugee issue became mixed up with that. We know that in Europe that's also a very significant issue. There's an issue of migration and there is an issue of refugee status.
David Miliband:
There's a third element though, that the European issue brings to the forefront and that makes for the perfect storm. And that is when citizens believe that their government "no longer controls their borders." And for the European Union, which until recently didn't have an agreed entry and exit system so that everyone who came within European borders was registered and recognized, you've then got real danger. And so it's not just in America that you've got this backlash. There's an issue even where it isn't a fear of the foreigner. It can be a question about whether or not the government has lost control.
Ian Bremmer:
Now give me the most recent major example in your view of where the international community has gotten it right on refugees and why do they get it right?
David Miliband:
Well, the international community rarely gets it right, but countries can get it right. The best example of that is over the last year, a million South Sudanese have fled to Uganda. Uganda has an average annual income, last time I looked, of about a thousand dollars per person per year. I was in Uganda in June visiting our programs. The Ugandans have stuck to their commitment that any refugee arriving gets land. Any refugee arriving gets right to a job. Any refugee arriving has freedom of movement. Any refugee arriving gets their kids into school.
David Miliband:
You'd also have to say that the conditions that the Rohingya are facing in Bangladesh are very, very challenging. But the Bangladeshi government has not put up a wall to stop them coming. And so there are examples around the world of countries that have proved themselves either open to refugees, or a bit less recently, you'd have to say that Jordan and Lebanon, small countries, relatively lower middle income countries, they've had literally millions of refugees from Syria over the last seven years. So if you're looking for examples that can give you a sense of hope, you're actually looking to poorer countries rather than richer countries.
Ian Bremmer:
How telling is that? That it's actually the countries that in a sense can do the least, but also maybe feel the greatest sense of identity?
David Miliband:
And the greatest sense of fate, because it's obvious that if you are bordering a country at war, you've got the greatest sense of proximity and you've got the greatest sense of brotherhood, sisterhood towards the people who are suffering from it. You'd also have to call out the Canadian government. I think they've put themselves forward over the last couple of years. And I think that the Macron example is interesting because he's staked out a position that isn't a purely liberal position. He's emphasized that those who claim refugee status but don't qualify, have to be sent home. When I lead a humanitarian organization, but I would say that's a perfectly reasonable thing to say. You can only defend the system of haven for refugees if you're willing to say that those who don't qualify can't stay.
Ian Bremmer:
Have to go.
David Miliband:
Yeah.
Ian Bremmer:
Americans and the Europeans have had a more challenging record of late and the trajectory has been a direction that is making your job harder, no question. Let's look at Europe first. Did Merkel not understand?
David Miliband:
No, I don't think so. I think that her decision in August 2015 reflected two or three things. One, she'd been accused of attentisme, of kicking the can down the road when it came to the Euro crisis. And she didn't want to be accused of that again. She was accused of lack of leadership and she didn't want to be accused of that again. Secondly, there were already three, 400,000 asylum seekers in Germany when she made her announcement. So she was dealing with an issue that was already present.
David Miliband:
And I think thirdly, she felt that she was in a very strong position and that Europe's sense of purpose and place in the world was at stake. Now, I think you'd have to say that the processing of asylum claims has been done extremely efficiently and effectively, that the distribution of those who are successful around the country has been done in a very thoroughgoing and systematic way. And that German public and business have responded remarkably effectively to try to get refugees into jobs. Where you've had the backlash is obviously in the politics.
David Miliband:
And I think that you'd have to say that the real problem with Mrs. Merkel's response was that she lined up no European support at all for the decision in advance. And she was unable, therefore, to say to the German people that we are bearing a fair share of the European responsibility. In fact, she's been having to play catch up on that. The quandary I think, is that economics and politics are pulling in opposite-
Ian Bremmer:
Exactly.
David Miliband:
... directions in Western societies. And that's such a contrast to the time when I was in government in the '90s, in the 2000s, when economics and politics seemed to be in harmony. And it's the tension between economics and politics on immigration, on trade, on welfare, on the sharing of sovereignty to tackle global problems that I think it's the realignment of the economics and politics that holds the key to getting out of this quandary.
Ian Bremmer:
And who do you think is getting that right?
David Miliband:
Well, our friend Emmanuel Macron has certainly got the greatest claim. I mean, I heard a French minister say that, "Britain has chosen retreat, America has chosen defeat, and France has chosen hope." So there's certainly a sense that Macron has got the economics and the politics much more closely aligned. I think he's very smart to be reforming first and then trying to get German economic support for his economic plans, second. The other way around won't work, but you'd have to say that he's got that.
David Miliband:
I think that the other point I'd make, which is maybe different from if we've been having this conversation a year ago, and you'll know this better than I actually, that while there's a global crisis of diplomacy, a deficit of diplomacy, the global economic upturn is a new factor that wouldn't have been present a year ago. And we're in a new world, at least for the moment, of much more stronger economic growth rates around the world, leave the UK out of it. But around the world, you've got a sense that the wheels of economic motion are moving much faster than that.
Ian Bremmer:
And are you feeling that at all yet in your organization?
David Miliband:
No, because the places that we are working, the Yemens, the South Sudans, are on the absolute receiving end of what's going on. You raised in the economic, in the top 10 risks this year, you raised Nigeria and you said it was doing well economically. We work in the northeast of Nigeria. It's not feeling that.
Ian Bremmer:
It's not feeling it at all. No, those are two different countries effectively.
David Miliband:
Yeah. But nonetheless, the strength of the global economy is a factor that I think may need to be thought through when you're asking yourself the question, how's this populist upsurge going to play out?
Ian Bremmer:
So you've mentioned now a couple of [beep] hole countries that you visit and you spend more time there than most people I know. How much has Trump's rhetoric and which of Trump's policies have actually made an active difference? Since you've been traveling these countries in the way they are working with the Americans?
David Miliband:
Well, I think two things are very, very striking. First of all, everyone knows about President Trump and everyone knows about the wall and lots of people want to say we're not building walls because that's not the way to solve the problems of the world. So he's certainly made himself the pole of global, he's made himself a global reference point in a very significant way. Actually, there's three points.
David Miliband:
The second thing is we feel in our work, the absence of American diplomacy. I mean, five American ambassadors out of 55 appointed in Africa, you can feel that. No assistant secretary for Africa. You can feel that. That sense of American abdication is really felt on the diplomatic front. And you've got to ask yourself, in the end, the solution to the refugee crisis is not just much better humanitarian aid, which I would argue for-
Ian Bremmer:
It's diplomacy.
David Miliband:
Exactly. We've got to get better at stopping wars and stopping wars starting than just responding to them. There's a third thing which I do know is we do a little bit of work in Europe, in Greece, we're working in Serbia, so candidate country for the EEU, and obviously we've got offices in Brussels and in Germany. Being anti-Trump is a popular political play in large parts of the world at the moment.
Ian Bremmer:
Well, whatever God you believe in, David Miliband's doing God's work right now. I think that's pretty clear. And it's really good to see you again.
David Miliband:
Thank you very much.
Ian Bremmer:
Thanks for being on.
Announcer:
The GZERO World is brought to you by our founding sponsor, First Republic. First Republic, a private bank and wealth management company, places clients' needs first by providing responsive, relevant and customized solutions. Visit firstrepublic.com to learn more.
