The experiences we had with Syrian migrant families in New Zealand were nothing short of devastating. These were not philosophical studies from distant but deeply personal accounts of torture, prison, and illegal killings—testimonies that laid bare the unbelievable suffering inflicted by Bashar al-Assad’s program.
Any lingering misperceptions about the government’s ability for cruelty within the supposed standards of the liberal world purchase were dissipated by the repression’s large savagery. The idea of Syria’s release from such oppression felt less like a chance and more like an unattainable desire at those times.
However, after nearly 14 years, that moment arrived when Hayat Tahrir al-Sham ( HTS), led by Abu Mohammad al-Golani, seized control of major Syrian cities, including Damascus. Refugees worldwide, including in Europe, celebrated this rotating stage, taking to the streets with their flags of unity and full of hope for their country.
For the thousands of Palestinian refugees in EU countries, this moment of triumph brings confusion. While some may experience a sense of happiness, they also face a pressing fresh query: What comes next for them as immigrants?
However, EU nations have responded by halting new hospital programs, signaling a change that has raised worries among some Syrians. Some people may want to rush and see how HTS operates before making a decision to return to their country.
Legislators in the Union are now in a significant predicament. If they encourage Palestinian refugees to bring their own families back home with aid packages, or if they permit volunteer resettlement on an individual basis?
For migrants in Turkey and Lebanon, where they face conflicts and limited options, the decision to return may be more clear. Yet, for those in EU countries, the condition is more difficult.
Immigrants in the EU have access to social services and processes to membership. Some have visited Europe for almost ten years and have benefited from welcoming people and welcoming policies. The decision between staying in the EU and returning to Syria is challenging and deeply personal for these migrants.
The EU’s determination to end asylum applications appears to indicate that Western governments are getting ready for a lot of mass repatriation. In a post-conflict earth, their recovery and the profit of its residents might be seen as priorities from their viewpoint.
The end of Assad’s government is truly good news, and temporary safety procedures for Syrians in Europe may now be viewed as successful.
Yet, the safety of returning migrants remains a major concern. Units, while now in power, has past links to groupings like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. It’s unclear whether HTS will support minority-friendly government or build a one based on political principles.
For organizations such as the Yazidis, Christians, Shias and Kurdish Syrians, the position remains precarious. While Assad’s demise offers hope for a more egalitarian and political coming, this perspective may be balanced against fresh conflicts and power challenges.
Subsequent clashes between Kurdish and Turkish-backed forces have heightened worries of more unrest and violence, particularly in areas that have already been devastated by war.
In a quickly evolving political environment with much guarantee of safety or justice, these minority areas, which have long been marginalized and caught in the crossfire of opposing factions, are now at risk of dislocation and harassment. Hopes and aspirations for a freed Syria are tempered by the terrible reality of a scattered and dangerous state.
In response to various conflicts, such as the Afghan problems, where many refugees were forced to return, the EU has recently halted refugee applications. But as we know, Afghanistan remains illegal, specifically for minority and ladies, who continue to face serious restrictions on education and employment. This law raises questions about whether Syria is really prepared to welcome its citizens back safely.
Another complication is that the European Union is now deeply burdened with the task of assisting thousands of Ukrainian refugees who are fleeing Russia’s continuing anger. This has put a lot of strain on Western institutions, straining resources, and putting the limits of public and political compassion for large-scale movement to the test.
The possible relocation of Syrian refugees could lessen this strain by lowering the social and economic strains posed by hosting displaced communities.
The main problem is to decide whether Syria, especially the sections governed by Units, will uphold the rights, surveillance and livelihoods of returning Syrians, particularly those from minority communities.
Considerable doubts exist about the organization’s ability to promote a truly diverse and democratic society due to its historical ties to fundamentalist ideologies and its current hold on parts of northwest Syria.
Discussions between EU foreign secretaries and the Jolani group in charge of HTS are continuing, indicating an effort to find common ground or build frameworks for assistance.
These discussions are fragile because they must strike a balance between political concerns, political concerns, and the wider implications of speaking with a group that is still viewed with suspicion by many in the worldwide community.
Despite these attempts, the prospect remains ambiguous, as the way Units may consider in shaping its management, enforcing the rule of law, and ensuring the safety of returnees is yet to be seen. The idea of extensive repatriation is currently both a social gamble and a humanitarian necessity.
The Union must reconsider its method of relocation if Units adopts a restrictive position equivalent to that of the Taliban. Until HTS allows democracy to grow and ensures the safety of all citizens, irrespective of their religion, nationality, or history, Syrian refugees should not be pressured to profit.
Ultimately, the EU must uphold its commitment to voluntary repatriation. Syrian refugees deserve the freedom to choose this potentially fatal course of action at their own pace. EU leaders should be aware that refugees are subject to forced displacement and that repatriation is a gradual process.
Syrian refugees should be given temporary protection and should work with other countries to ensure their safe return when necessary. The EU must continue to support those rights as an institution that was founded on human rights.
A crucial conundrum is at the center of this situation: while the EU can encourage repatriation and lay the groundwork through diplomacy, returning must always be voluntary, especially for those Syrian refugees who are currently residing in EU member states.
Dr Sheraz Akhtar lectures at Thailand’s Chiang Mai University. His research examines the social, economic, and educational development of refugee communities in host nations.
Canadian author and editor Patrick Keeney. His areas of interest are at the intersection of philosophy, politics, and the study of ideas.  ,