A Striking Double Standard: The Global Perception of Ukrainian vs Middle Eastern Refugees
Several European states have permitted entry to more than 360,000 Ukrainian refugees seeking asylum from the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian conflict in the last week. The war began on Thursday, February 24, when Russian President Vladimir Putin, threatened by NATO expansion and the growth of Western influence less than 500 kilometres from Moscow, sent troops into Ukraine to strike.
The world stands with the courageous people of Ukraine, fighting to protect their country amidst a Russian invasion. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, former Miss Ukraine Anastasia Lenna, and even Ukrainian habitants of other countries have all returned to fight for their homeland and depicted admirable patriotism and bravery. These efforts have earned popular global support for Ukraine on news and social media. In addition, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Moldova, and Romania have opened their borders to welcome migrants fleeing the conflict. While this public support and hospitality are heartwarming, it nevertheless highlights a stark yet consistent contrast between the treatment of European refugees and those of other areas, such as the Middle East and Africa.
According to Bulgarian Prime Minister Kiril Petkov, the Ukrainian people are different from other migrants: “These are not the refugees we are used to… these people are Europeans, these people are intelligent, they are educated people… this is not the refugee wave we have been used to, people we were not sure about their identity, people with unclear pasts, who could have even been terrorists…”
Unfortunately, the blatant and overt discrimination evident in the above statement is not a rarity among leaders welcoming Ukrainians into their land. European nations, collectively, have taken a much more merciful and charitable stance towards European refugees than they have towards Arab or African migrants trying to reach the shores of safety. In November, Polish security forces beat back migrants from Afghanistan as they tried to enter. Thousands were left in the forest between Belarus and Poland, and at least 19 migrants died in the cold. Poland’s response to this occurrence resulted in the construction of a 200-km wall with razor-wire fencing. Over the last few days, Poland has welcomed Ukrainians at their border with smiles, hugs, and hot drinks. They are even allowed to bring domesticated animals without the entry paperwork required under normal circumstances and have been offered free public transport throughout Europe. The EU has also proposed to reactivate the Temporary Protection Directive, a rule offering Ukrainians up to three years of protection in EU countries, including access to education, housing, and labour. In reference to this explicit disparity, Syrian-American and Princeton University postdoctoral associate researcher Rana Khoury states that “Somehow war and violence are endemic to the Middle East in ways they are not in Europe.”
Black international students attempting to flee Ukraine and return home to Nigeria have also had difficult experiences crossing the border: video evidence has surfaced of these medical and college students being blocked from boarding trains in Ukraine and denied entry at the Polish border. They have received tremendously different treatment than their white Ukrainian counterparts.
Syrian journalist Okba Mohammad fled his hometown of Daraa, Syria, in 2018 and now lives in Spain. His perception of the current Ukrainian situation is one of great similarity to his own experience several years ago: he sheltered underground during Russian bombing campaigns. He also fled persecution with thousands of other migrants, and he too was separated from his family at the border. In their plight to reach Europe, over 2,500 Syrians drowned in the Mediterranean, some whose inflatable boats were shot down by the Greek coastguard. Images of a deceased three-year-old Syrian child washed up on the Turkish shore of Bodrum in 2015 symbolize the heartbreaking reality of this period. Having personal experience with Russian military intervention and consequential displacement of thousands of civilians, Syrians watched in anticipation of the world’s reaction to Russia’s latest armed interference. On BFM TV, the most-viewed cable news channel in France, journalist Phillipe Corbe compared Ukrainian and Syrian refugees: “We’re not talking about Syrians fleeing the bombing of the Syrian regime backed by Putin, we’re talking about Europeans leaving in cars that look like ours to save their lives.” CBS reporter Charlie D’Agata maintained similar sentiments during his broadcast: “But [Kyiv, Ukraine] isn’t a place, with all due respect, like Iraq or Afghanistan that has seen conflict raging for decades. This is a relatively civilized, relatively European - I have to choose those words carefully too - city where you would not expect that.”
Eastern Europe’s welcoming and acceptance of Ukrainian people in their time of need might have been justified due to their similar cultures and mutual experiences under Soviet rule. However, comments from Ukraine’s former deputy general prosecutor, David Dakvarelidze reveal a different, racially-tinted agenda: “it is very emotional for me because I see European people with blonde hair and blue eyes being killed every day with Putin’s missiles and his helicopters and his rockets.”
The misrepresentation of refugees based on their ethnicity is a multi-dimensional issue not limited to Eastern Europe. It also includes Western media’s warped depictions of migrants’ participation in the conflicts they face. For instance, the media glamorize Ukrainian citizens’ use of Molotov cocktails as a resistance tool and continuously designate the population as tenacious, heroic, and valiant. During the conflict in the Middle East, journalists tend to utilize an alternative media strategy. According to one social media user, “If they were [from] Yemen or Palestine doing the same thing, they would be labelled terrorists and deserving of US-Israeli or US-Saudi drone bombing.” One article dedicated to the anniversary of Palestine’s Second Intifada outlines protestors’ use of rocks and firebombs to injure five Israeli Defense Force (IDF) soldiers. The article also mentions “dozens” of Palestinian casualties in the clash, although this number actually exceeds 2,700. In this case, variations in emphasis and language of journalists’ description of the events reveal a clear preference to depict Palestine as the aggressor and the Second Intifada as a Palestinian attack. In several instances, Palestinian deaths are described in objective passive voice, whereas Israeli casualties are reported as “murders” at the hands of Palestinians. This tactic is misleading: the conflict’s initial eruption started after Israeli leader Ariel Sharon stormed the Al-Aqsa mosque with over 1,000 armed police - the response of Palestinians to a sudden Israeli confrontation in this manner should be considered one of defence.
Footage from Palestinian protestors confronting the IDF, as well as photos of Israeli airstrikes in Palestine, have also recently circulated online and received substantial support while misrepresented as Ukrainians facing Russian Armed forces. Due to its falsified connection to Ukraine, this media has received significantly more traction than when initially posted. Critics point to another contradiction, relating to the use of crowdsourcing and setup of public funds to finance Kyiv's military, whilst similar projects for charities promoting Cuban medical supplies or the support of Palestinian and Syrian civilians have resulted in the frozen PayPal accounts of donors.
One cannot help but notice the underlying western hypocrisy and racism that appears to have become alarmingly thematic among media reports and political speeches on the Russo-Ukrainian conflict. On a similar note, US President Joe Biden condemned Russia’s unprovoked attack on Ukraine, promising that “the world will hold Russia accountable” and that “President Putin has chosen a premeditated war that will bring a catastrophic loss of life and human suffering.” To be clear, Russia is the aggressor in this conflict, attempting to illegally overtake the sovereign state of Ukraine by force. However, Biden’s comments reveal a significant double standard in his denouncement of foreign military interventions of non-Western countries whilst maintaining clear disregard of Western interferences into similar conflict situations. Such Western military interventions, including into Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Libya, and Venezuela, have destabilized countries and also produced refugee crises similar to the situation in Ukraine (although the refugees from these countries were repelled by the countries currently welcoming Ukrainian refugees). Despite commentary on social media identifying this double standard, most countries have failed to acknowledge its existence.
It is inspiring to witness this month’s unprecedented global unification backing a tenacious Ukraine. International collaboration is at an all-time high; however, so is the western hypocrisy and racism underlying the collective political and media agendas. The west’s public criticism of Russia is tinged with irony. On several occasions, the west has found itself in the position to mobilize support in a similar format when faced with conflict in the Middle East, although it has never taken the opportunity. Countries should be as open to all refugees from Middle Eastern areas as they are to those from Ukraine. Discriminatory, preferential treatment between different groups of refugees is unacceptable and fails to advance the global ideals to which all humanity should strive.