Call us
COMMENTARY

Rushed returns of Syrian refugees would be a mistake – and a missed opportunity






Migration / COMMENTARY
Alberto-Horst Neidhardt

Date: 18/12/2024

The fall of Bashar-al Assad is welcome news for Syrians everywhere, including the millions who found refuge in Europe. Yet, Syria faces an uncertain present and a complex transition ahead. Instead of hastening returns, EU member states should develop joint plans to engage Syrian refugees in rebuilding the country, while preparing for further instability and displacement.

Following the end of Bashar al-Assad’s brutal rule and his escape to Russia, thousands of people in Syria, neighbouring countries, and Europe took to the streets to celebrate. Naturally, many displaced Syrians are now considering returning to their homeland, with queues at the country’s land borders with Türkiye and Lebanon attracting extensive media coverage in Europe and the West. Yet, Syria faces an uncertain future.

In response, just hours after rebels seized Damascus, several EU states suspended asylum applications from Syrians. Germany, which hosts the largest Syrian population in Europe, announced it would halt asylum processing for around 50,000 Syrian nationals. Soon after, Belgium, Greece, Finland, and other EU and non-EU countries followed Germany’s lead.

Austria, where the far-right Freedom Party (FPÖ) recently emerged victorious in the elections, also suspended asylum proceedings for Syrians. However, the Austrian government went a step further, announcing plans to implement a “return and deportation programme” for Syrians.

These decisions appear to stem from domestic priorities and short-term calculations, rather than a long-term vision for Syria’s future and refugees’ prospects in it. The European Commission, alongside UNHCR and the UN Refugee agency, urged caution regarding any mention of return plans.

While insisting refugees return rapidly to a war-torn and unstable country would be counterproductive, the EU and member states should develop joint and coordinated approaches to facilitate Syrians’ safe and voluntary repatriation. In doing so, they should also create opportunities for refugees to contribute to Syria’s reconstruction.

At the same time, freezing asylum applications falls short of ensuring adequate preparedness for potential further instability and cross-border movements from Syria. The EU and member states should consider all plausible scenarios and mobilise existing resources to avoid a repeat of past failures to anticipate and address humanitarian emergencies and international displacement.

Preparing for the post-Assad era

Bashar al-Assad will be remembered as a ruthless dictator whose authoritarian control of Syria was marked by imprisonment, torture and the murder of thousands. Yet, the future of Syria remains as unpredictable as ever.

Among the groups that led the rebellion are the Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army, which have alternated between strategic alliance and rivalry. In several areas of the country, hostilities persist. Meanwhile, HTS has emerged as the most powerful rebel faction but is widely considered a terrorist organisation, with significant human rights concerns in the areas under its control.

The days after Assad’s overthrow showed that Arab states, Türkiye, the US, and Israel, along with a weakened Iran and Russia, all hold competing stakes in Syria’s future, and will try to profit from the current uncertainty. Their conflicting agendas and potential backing of opposing groups also heighten the risk of reigniting the Syrian civil war.

Moreover, any transition will have to restore accountability and justice while ensuring a future that includes all ethnic and religious groups. Given Syria’s fragility, today’s widespread optimism and commitments to an inclusive and democratic transition could quickly give way to inter-ethnic and inter-religious conflict.

Continued uncertainty calls for a cautious approach

Contrary to conspiracy theories circulating online, there has been no mass exodus from Syria. According to the UN, however, 880,000 people in Syria have already been displaced within the country since the escalation of hostilities that resulted in Assad’s fall. Organisations on the ground report that emergency shelters in many critical regions are at full capacity, exposing internally displaced persons to serious health and safety risks. Even prior to recent events, over half of Syria’s population were struggling with food insecurity, with 3 million experiencing severe hunger.

In this context, the EU should prioritise humanitarian aid to stabilise the situation on the ground and help to meet the most immediate needs. This assistance could also prevent extremist groups from taking control. In the longer term, however, the EU will have to live up to its pledges to mobilise the necessary assistance for development and economic stabilisation.

But these steps alone will not be sufficient to achieve stability and a successful transition, and no potential scenario should be excluded. Further large-scale displacement, including across Syria’s borders, remains a real risk. This will continue to create fears about onward movements to Europe, as neighbouring countries would struggle to accommodate more displaced Syrians.

Despite existing tools and the recent establishment of an ad hoc ‘crisis management’ framework to address the possibility of large-scale movements, publicly, most member states’ responses have so far remained limited to suspending asylum applications by Syrians. Instead, the currently fluid and uncertain situation calls for close monitoring and strong situational awareness as well as enhanced coordination. This should be conducted together with EU actors and agencies, as well as with other international partners operating on the ground, including UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration (IOM).

An assessment of potential future scenarios, and the required financial and operational support in case of further internal and cross-border displacement, should also not be delayed with the assumption that the situation will necessarily improve.

European responses: Return policy, but which one?

While negative experiences with democratic transitions and emergency responses in the past call for caution as well as better preparedness, the potential return of Syrians will also be at the heart of the future policy debates.

Some displaced Syrians spontaneously embarked on a journey back to the country, with 1 million refugees expected to return in the first six months of 2025, mostly from neighbouring countries. In Europe, too, some have vowed to return as they celebrated Assad’s oustingHowever, in the aftermath of Austria’s announcement, there are concerns member states may take a “cynical turn” and seek to accelerate returns, even unilaterally, despite the Commission’s calls for a cautious approach.

Due to the decade-long civil war, the protracted presence of displaced Syrians within the wider region and in Europe has become an increasingly contentious political and societal issue, with less welcoming attitudes and restrictive policies introduced in many refugee-hosting countries. Against this background, returns to Syria could happen spontaneously, through ‘incentives’ for voluntary repatriation, but also by systematically reviewing Syrians’ status and residence rights, in accordance with current EU and national legislation and future rules that allow their cessation and revocation if circumstances in the country of origin have changed.

A fundamental question in this context will be how to ensure that refugees can engage in so-called ‘pendular movements’ – return for limited periods – between Syria and host countries, while also offering sustainable opportunities for return on a more permanent basis. Convincing Syrians who found shelter in Europe to depart will take more than just financial incentives. Like other displaced groups, Syrian refugees will be more likely to return, either temporarily or permanently, if the option of re-entering their European host countries remains.

This shows that the EU can and should take the lead on the promotion of sustainable and balanced approaches to facilitate Syrian refugees’ safe and voluntary return. Hastily developing and implementing return programmes due to domestic political considerations, on the other hand, would be counterproductive, given Syria's ongoing instability.

The complex political and security dynamics in Syria suggest that any process of democratic consolidation will be long and challenging. Some provinces may also remain unsafe. Implementing hasty return programmes, especially via cessation grounds, would thus be in tension with international legal principles. Given the likely legal challenges, it would also impose an unnecessary administrative burden on Europe’s asylum and judicial systems.

In addition, speeding up the return of Syrians, even without systematically invoking cessation grounds, would provide motivations to countries in the neighbourhood, and especially Türkiye and Lebanon, to do the same. This would increase the risk of premature large-scale returns, inevitably altering the ethnic and socio-economic makeup of already unstable regions. To make things worse, they would likely happen without considering the required conditions for the returnees’ reintegration. UNHCR estimates that close to €300 million will be needed to address the critical needs of those expected to return early 2025, including shelter, food and water.

Refugees have an important role to play in rebuilding Syria

A further reason to seek more balanced approaches over hasty returns is the potential contribution by the Syrian diaspora to rebuilding efforts. While the reconstruction’s challenges and needs are hard to anticipate and to meet – with the country’s infrastructure and economy on its knees and the costs estimated in the hundreds of billions of euros - Syrian refugees would nevertheless constitute an invaluable resource.

Syria will need engineers, teachers, doctors, nurses, administrators and workers across skills levels for its reconstruction. The labour market inclusion of Syrian refugees in EU countries has been slower compared to, for example, Ukrainians – with many still working in low-wage, low-skill jobs. However, Syrians in Europe are employed in a variety of relevant sectors, spanning social services, education, logistics and manufacturing, with a significant presence in healthcare and construction. These skills and competences cannot be overlooked.

Even those who would not go back permanently could contribute. Remittances from abroad will remain a critical lifeline for many households and internally displaced persons in the short term and could play a key role in sustainable development and poverty reduction in the long term. Syrian refugees living in Europe could also help to develop better relations between the EU and post-Assad Syria, directly or through diaspora engagement.

For these resources to be mobilised effectively, member states will need to set aside short-term political considerations and strike the right balance between immediate needs and future reconstruction prospects, between incentives for sustainable returns and the durable and appropriate involvement of Europe-based Syrians.




Alberto Horst Neidhardt
 is a Senior Policy Analyst and Head of the European Migration and Diversity programme.

The support the European Policy Centre receives for its ongoing operations, or specifically for its publications, does not constitute an endorsement of their contents, which reflect the views of the authors only. Supporters and partners cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.







Photo credits:
Aris Messinis / AFP

The latest from the EPC, right in your inbox
Sign up for our email newsletter
14-16 rue du Trône, 1000 Brussels, Belgium | Tel.: +32 (0)2 231 03 40
EU Transparency Register No. 
89632641000 47
Privacy PolicyUse of Cookies | Contact us | © 2019, European Policy Centre

edit afsluiten