Offline
Refugees Encounter a Foreign Word: Welcome
How Canadian hockey moms, poker buddies and neighbors are adopting Syrians, a family at a time.
TORONTO — One frigid day in February, Kerry McLorg drove to an airport hotel here to pick up a family of Syrian refugees. She was cautious by nature, with a job poring over insurance data, but she had never even spoken to the people who were about to move into her basement.
“I don’t know if they even know we exist,” she said.
At the hotel, Abdullah Mohammad’s room phone rang, and an interpreter told him to go downstairs. His children’s only belongings were in pink plastic bags, and the family’s documents lay in a white paper bag printed with a Canadian flag. His sponsors had come, he was told. He had no idea what that meant.
Across Canada, ordinary citizens, distressed by news reports of drowning children and the shunning of desperate migrants, are intervening in one of the world’s most pressing problems. Their country allows them a rare power and responsibility: They can band together in small groups and personally resettle — essentially adopt — a refugee family. In Toronto alone, hockey moms, dog-walking friends, book club members, poker buddies and lawyers have formed circles to take in Syrian families. The Canadian government says sponsors officially number in the thousands, but the groups have many more extended members.
When Ms. McLorg walked into the hotel lobby to meet Mr. Mohammad and his wife, Eman, she had a letter to explain how sponsorship worked: For one year, Ms. McLorg and her group would provide financial and practical support, from subsidizing food and rent to supplying clothes to helping them learn English and find work. She and her partners had already raised more than 40,000 Canadian dollars (about $30,700), selected an apartment, talked to the local school and found a nearby mosque.
Ms. McLorg, the mother of two teenagers, made her way through the crowded lobby, a kind of purgatory for newly arrived Syrians. Another member of the group clutched a welcome sign she had written in Arabic but then realized she could not tell if the words faced up or down. When the Mohammads appeared, Ms. McLorg asked their permission to shake hands and took in the people standing before her, no longer just names on a form. Mr. Mohammad looked older than his 35 years. His wife was unreadable, wearing a flowing niqab that obscured her face except for a narrow slot for her eyes. Their four children, all under 10, wore donated parkas with the tags still on.
For the Mohammads, who had been in Canada less than 48 hours, the signals were even harder to read. In Syria, Abdullah had worked in his family’s grocery stores and Eman had been a nurse, but after three years of barely hanging on in Jordan, they were not used to being wanted or welcomed. “You mean we’re leaving the hotel?” Abdullah asked. To himself, he was wondering, “What do these people want in return?”
Much of the world is reacting to the refugee crisis — 21 million displaced from their countries, nearly five million of them Syrian — with hesitation or hostility. Greece shipped desperate migrants back to Turkey; Denmark confiscated their valuables; and even Germany, which has accepted more than half a million refugees, is struggling with growing resistance to them. Broader anxiety about immigration and borders helped motivate Britons to take the extraordinary step last week of voting to leave the European Union.
In the United States, even before the Orlando massacre spawned new dread about “lone wolf” terrorism, a majority of American governors said they wanted to block Syrian refugees because some could be dangerous. Donald J. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has called for temporary bans on all Muslims from entering the country and recently warned that Syrian refugees would cause “big problems in the future.” The Obama administration promised to take in 10,000 Syrians by Sept. 30 but has so far admitted about half that many.
Just across the border, however, the Canadian government can barely keep up with the demand to welcome them. Many volunteers felt called to action by the photograph of Alan Kurdi, the Syrian toddler whose body washed up last fall on a Turkish beach. He had only a slight connection to Canada — his aunt lived near Vancouver — but his death caused recrimination so strong it helped elect an idealistic, refugee-friendly prime minister, Justin Trudeau.
The Toronto Star greeted the first planeload by splashing “Welcome to Canada” in English and Arabic across its front page. Eager sponsors toured local Middle Eastern supermarkets to learn what to buy and cook and used a toll-free hotline for instant Arabic translation. Impatient would-be sponsors — “an angry mob of do-gooders,” The Star called them — have been seeking more families. The new government committed to taking in 25,000 Syrian refugees and then raised the total by tens of thousands.
“I can’t provide refugees fast enough for all the Canadians who want to sponsor them,” John McCallum, the country’s immigration minister, said in an interview.
In the ideal version of private sponsorship, the groups become concierges and surrogate family members who help integrate the outsiders, called “New Canadians.” The hope is that the Syrians will form bonds with those unlike them, from openly gay sponsors to business owners who will help them find jobs to lifelong residents who will take them skating and canoeing. Ms. McLorg’s group of neighbors and friends includes doctors, economists, a lawyer, an artist, teachers and a bookkeeper.
Advocates for sponsorship believe that private citizens can achieve more than the government alone, raising the number of refugees admitted, guiding newcomers more effectively and potentially helping solve the puzzle of how best to resettle Muslims in Western countries. Some advocates even talk about extending the Canadian system across the globe. (Slightly fewer than half of the Syrian refugees who recently arrived in Canada have private sponsors, including some deemed particularly vulnerable who get additional public funds. The rest are resettled by the government.)
The fear is that all of this effort could end badly, with the Canadians looking naïve in more ways than one.
The Syrians are screened, and many sponsors and refugees take offense at the notion that they could be dangerous, saying they are often victims of terrorism themselves. But American officials point out that it is very difficult to track activity in the chaotic, multifaceted Syrian war. Several Islamic State members involved in the 2015 Paris attacks arrived on Europe’s shores from Syria posing as refugees.
Some of the refugees in Canada have middle- and upper-class backgrounds, including a businessman who started a Canadian version of his medical marketing company within a month after arriving. But many more face steep paths to integration, with no money of their own, uncertain employment prospects and huge cultural gaps. Some had never heard of Canada until shortly before coming here, and a significant number are illiterate in Arabic, which makes learning English — or reading a street sign or sending an email in any language — a titanic task. No one knows how refugees will navigate the currents of longing, trauma, dependence or resentment they may feel.
And volunteers cannot fully anticipate what they may confront — clashing expectations of whether Syrian women should work, tensions over how money is spent, families that are still dependent when the year is up, disagreements within sponsor groups.
Still, by mid-April, only eight weeks after their first encounter with Ms. McLorg, the Mohammads had a downtown apartment with a pristine kitchen, bikes for the children to zip around the courtyard, and a Canadian flag taped to their window. The sponsors knew the children’s shoe sizes; Abdullah and Eman still had keys to Ms. McLorg’s house. He studied the neighborhood’s supermarkets, and his wife took a counseling course so she could help others who had experienced dislocation and loss. When the male sponsors visited, she sat at the dining room table with them instead of eating in the kitchen — as she would have done back home — as long as her husband was around, too.
Continued at:
Offline
We the United States say WELCOME 484,072 times a year to legal immigrants!
Canada's immigration ranged between 221,352 and 262,236 immigrants per year.
How many people immigrate to the United States each year?
According to the Department of Homeland Security, in 2012, there were 484,072 new, legal entries into the United States, as the Migration Policy Institute indicates. However, this number does not include illegal immigrants. Statistics estimate around 11.5 million illegal immigrants reside in the U.S.
Last edited by Common Sense (6/30/2016 1:10 pm)
Offline
Strange reaction.
There is no need to feel jealous of Canada.
BTW, do you really think it's appropriate to brag about how the US welcomed not quite twice as many legal immigrants than Canada when our society is about 9 times their size?
Your comparison is not valid.
Last edited by Goose (6/30/2016 1:52 pm)
Offline
Not sure what anyone wants to take from this, but the population of Canada is about 37 million and the population of the USA is around 320 million. Comparing immigration numbers without including the total population of any particular nation doesn't tell the whole story.
Offline
Just Fred wrote:
Not sure what anyone wants to take from this, but the population of Canada is about 37 million and the population of the USA is around 320 million. Comparing immigration numbers without including the total population of any particular nation doesn't tell the whole story.
Yes indeed. The comparison is not a valid one.
And, couldn't we just learn about and appreciate the Canadian endeavor without doing some mental gymnastics in some silly effort to tell ourselves that we are better?
How tiresome
Last edited by Goose (6/30/2016 1:55 pm)
Offline
The strange reaction is the good old USA welcomes 484,072 legal immigrants every year and some how you seem to want to belittle that! Why would that be?
It's got nothing to do with being better than X! It's that our country has from it's inception welcomed legal immigration. Nothing more than that but some get crazy ideas in their head and seem to go off the deep end. How about appreciating what we do?
Offline
Common Sense wrote:
The strange reaction is the good old USA welcomes 484,072 legal immigrants every year and some how you seem to want to belittle that! Why would that be?
It's got nothing to do with being better than X! It's that our country has from it's inception welcomed legal immigration. Nothing more than that but some get crazy ideas in their head and seem to go off the deep end. How about appreciating what we do?
Where did we "belittle" the U.S.?
Please show me.
I simply pointed out that your numbers neglected to take account of the huge differences in the sizes of the two societies. You do understand concepts like scale and percentage?
Really, you should stop making things up.
Last edited by Goose (6/30/2016 3:14 pm)
Offline
I wasn't trying to belittle or be snarky about anything, Common. I was merely pointing out that a nation of 37 million accepted roughly 250 thousand refugees and another nation of 320 million accepted roughly 500 thousand. We could appreciate both efforts. I wasn't trying to say one nation did too much or the other nation didn't do enough. Just wanted to inject some facts into the conversation.
Offline
I take exception to being accused of disparaging my country.
I would appreciate an apology, CS
Offline
Getting back to the subject; I'm happy for these people.
I had seen dozens of hate posts on Facebook claiming the refugees are terrorists in disguise. There was one political cartoon from Great Britain with a Trojan horse motif.
I'd had protracted discussions with the people who were posting such tripe. Usually I'd just ask "Haven't these people been through enough?"
After relating the story about the German Jews who tried to leave Germany before the war broke out. Their ship was turned away from every port with claims such as "It's not our problem" or "Things can't possibly be as bad as they are saying they are."
When they began to run low on food, water, and fuel, they had to go to the only port that would have them...that being the one they were trying to escape.
For some reason, people seem to fee that the WW-II incident was tragic without making any direct connection to the exact same thing happening now. The victims are different but the situation is not.
I've always wondered how people can feel no empathy at all.
Would they stand by and watch someone being beaten, raped, or murdered right in front of them?
At one point in my life the answer to that question would have been an automatic "no!"
Now, I'm not so sure.