Our Huddled Masses: New Frontiers In Refugee Resettlement

Bob Montgomery began his career at the International Rescue Committee (IRC) in 1976 as a resettlement case manager. He currently serves as Executive Director of IRC San Diego, a position he assumed in 2001. The IRC provides disaster relief, refugee resettlement services, and other humanitarian aid to persons in over 40 countries. In San Deigo, the IRC focuses primarily on refugee resettlement, helping displaced persons begin new lives in the United States.

Do you feel that your experiences in San Diego are representative of immigrant integration issues across the country? Have you experienced issues specific to San Diego?

I have worked for the IRC in San Diego for 35 years assisting refugees and asylees to rebuild their lives, first as a resettlement caseworker and later as an administrator. In most cases the refugee experience is similar regardless where they make their home. Refugees are challenged by a new language and culture including complicated social service and medical systems. At IRC in San Diego, we have designed a broad array of resettlement services to facilitate the integration process and ensure that refugees achieve lasting self-sufficiency and quickly become productive contributing members of their new communities.

San Diego is unique in the fact that it is a border city that enjoys a diverse population, including both legal and undocumented immigrants. It is often necessary to educate the public, especially employers, of the differences of the various immigrant populations, as well as the special challenges that refugees face, which include experiencing persecution and suffering from trauma due from being forced to flee war or violent conflict with only a moment’s notice.

You note in a December 2009 interview with Voice of San Diego that the majority of refugees in San Diego are from Iraq. Is that still the case? How have the demographics of the refugee community changed during your career?

Since 2007, refugees from Iraq have made up the bulk of our resettlement caseload in San Diego. We also assist refugees from Burma and Somalia in significant numbers. When I began my work with the IRC and refugees in 1976, the vast majority of refugees were arriving from Southeast Asian countries, including Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Later, we received refugees from East African nations, including Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan, and Somalia. We have also resettled refugees from Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union and Cuba, as well as the Middle East and South Asia, a region which includes Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq. Early in my career, most refugees were fleeing communist regimes, but now we experience refugees fleeing totalitarian governments.

What steps have U.S. policymakers taken to better integrate refugees into American society? Do you feel refugees coming to America today have more resources available to them that the refugees you assisted at the beginning of your career?

In the beginning of my career, successful resettlement was narrowly defined as finding a job. Now, we understand that a first job is no guarantee that a refugee will achieve lasting self-sufficiency. As a result, we take a more holistic approach to developing services for each member of the refugee family. We also devote more of our resources to economic development programs like financial education, micro-enterprise, and career development to ensure long-term success. Finally, we have developed a community-based approach which means that we are more active in the communities and neighborhoods where we are resettling refugees, and even offer services to non-refugees who live in the community.

Our philosophy is if we invest in the community, we are also investing in refugees. The community-based approach has helped us develop more local resources to augment the federal dollars that are restricted to refugees. This combined approach has ensured that refugees better integrate into their new communities and achieve lasting self-reliance.

You were recently honored by the White House as a Champion of Change for Immigrant Integration. Is the Obama Administration’s stance on immigration different from previous administrations’ positions and actions? If so, in what ways?

Keep in mind that the IRC’s focus is on refugees. Comprehensive immigration reform is not our top priority. In general, the Obama Administration has been supportive of refugees and asylees. For example, many asylee applicants who were in detention pending the adjudication of their asylum application have now been released from detention while their application remains pending.

Furthermore, we no longer need to file waivers for approved refugees who have HIV or AIDS. Financial assistance to refugees has increased dramatically under the Obama Administration, rising from $900/refugee in 2009 to $1850/refugee currently. Also, the Obama Administration responded to calls to admit more refugees from Iraq, which the previous administration was reluctant to do.

Are you in favor of expanding the United States’ current definition of “refugee” to include those displaced by natural disasters? How would the IRC’s infrastructure have to change if America began to take in this additional category of refugees?

This is an interesting question that all refugee assistance organizations will need to grapple with. For more than ten years, the IRC has increasingly responded to the needs of refuges that were displaced by natural disasters including: the tsunami in Indonesia, the earthquake in Pakistan, the flood in Pakistan, the earthquake in Haiti and the earthquake and tsunami in Japan. In addition, the IRC lent its expertise to assist those Americans displace by Hurricane Katrina. Clearly, our mission statement has evolved to address the needs of refugees, regardless of the reason for their displacement.

Expanding the United States’ definition of refugee to include victims of natural disaster is another issue. Given current estimates of the world’s environmental refugees exceeding 50 million, it is unclear if third country resettlement is the most viable option. Currently, there are 15 million refugees worldwide that have been displaced due to persecution. The U.S. is resettling less than .5% of that total. So, addressing the needs of an additional 50 million environmental refugees would tax the resources of the current refugee relief and resettlement systems. Clearly, a worldwide approach would be required and would need to be based on the current economic and political environment, not only in the U.S., but in the Euro Zone as well. It would seem unlikely that this growing problem will be addressed anytime soon.

Feature photo:  cc/Butters_photo