Responding to Threats to Refugee Rights in the Russian Federation after the Fall of the Soviet Union

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, political instability and a number of regional conflicts drove massive population movements. Ethnic Russians were often targeted by members of newly developing nationalist movements in the former Republics of the Soviet Union who saw them as imperialist oppressors. By 1993, an estimated 1.8 million ethnic Russians had fled to the Russian Federation to escape such concerns. Additionally, thousands of refugees were displaced from emerging conflict in the Caucasus, Central Asia and Moldova. In addition to these large populations from the “near abroad,” smaller numbers of asylum seekers were coming from areas further abroad such as Afghanistan, Somalia and Ethiopia, usually in transit to Western Europe and the United States.

In 1993, Human Rights First organized a conference in Moscow between Russian and Western NGOs and Russian government officials to discuss the emerging challenges of protecting refugees in a country struggling with redefining almost all of its key institutions. The meeting was extremely successful in enabling Russian and Western NGOs to connect and coordinate their advocacy effort. The high profile of the conference helped to seriously engage government officials and bring them into closer cooperation with both local and international NGOs.

Following the conference Human Rights First continued to work with NGOs in Russia to monitor the situation of asylum seekers in that country. In 1995, this research culminated in the publication of a report entitled “Commitments without Compliance: Refugees in the Russian Federation” which examined the procedures available for those wishing to seek asylum in Russia. The report found that access to procedures was often denied, particularly in the case of refugees from outside the former Soviet Union, and that the capacity of outside actors to monitor the process was minimal. In addition to provide recommendations for the improvement of the Russian asylum system, the report addressed the policies of some Western governments recognizing Russia as a “safe third country,” meaning that asylum seekers who had transited through Russia could be removed there. The report argued these “safe third country” designations were inherently problematic and that the designation was particularly inappropriate in the case of Russia.

< Previous | Next >