to be a European.

有時候 我真的覺得很丟臉

In the last year,

因爲我是歐洲人。

more than a million people arrived in Europe in need of our help,

光是去年，

and our response, frankly, has been pathetic.

就有超過一百萬人來歐洲尋求幫助

There are just so many contradictions.

而歐洲的反應，坦白說，很可悲。

We mourn the tragic death

過程中實在充斥著許多矛盾。

of two-year-old Alan Kurdi,

在我們哀悼慘死的

and yet, since then, more than 200 children

兩歲幼兒艾蘭·庫迪之後，

have subsequently drowned in the Mediterranean.

從那時起，卻又有超過兩百名兒童

We have international treaties

溺斃於地中海。

that recognize that refugees are a shared responsibility,

雖然國際公約認定

and yet we accept that tiny Lebanon

難民收容應由各國共同分擔，

hosts more Syrians than the whole of Europe combined.

但我們收容的黎巴嫩難民很少

We lament the existence of human smugglers,

所收容的敘利亞難民 卻超過全歐洲的人口。

and yet we make that the only viable route

我們悲嘆人口偷渡的存在，

to seek asylum in Europe.

卻又使偷渡成為 難民唯一去歐洲尋求幫助的

We have labor shortages,

可行途徑。

and yet we exclude people who fit our economic and demographic needs

我們的勞工短缺，

from coming to Europe.

然而我們卻將符合 歐洲經濟及人口結構需求的人

We proclaim our liberal values in opposition to fundamentalist Islam,

排拒於歐洲之外。

and yet --

我們宣稱我們對自由的價值觀 與伊斯蘭基本教義派對立，

we have repressive policies

然而，

that detain child asylum seekers,

我們用高壓政策

that separate children from their families,

來拘留尋求庇護的兒童，

and that seize property from refugees.

拆散兒童跟他們的家人，

What are we doing?

並且掠奪難民的財物，

How has the situation come to this,

我們到底在做什麼？

that we've adopted such an inhumane response to a humanitarian crisis?

怎麼會讓情況演變成這樣，

I don't believe it's because people don't care,

我們竟然用如此不人道的方式 來處理人道主義危機

or at least I don't want to believe it's because people don't care.

我不相信 原因是因為人們不在乎，

I believe it's because our politicians lack a vision,

至少我不願意相信 這個理由。

a vision for how to adapt an international refugee system

我認為是因為 政客缺乏一種遠見，

created over 50 years ago

一種遠見來改寫50多年前建立的國際難民系統

for a changing and globalized world.

因應世界的瞬息萬變和全球化趨勢

And so what I want to do is take a step back

所以我想做的是 退一步

and ask two really fundamental questions,

然後問兩個真的很基本的問題，

the two questions we all need to ask.

兩個我們都需要問的問題。

First, why is the current system not working?

第一，為什麼 目前的系統不能用？

And second, what can we do to fix it?

第二，怎麼修復它？

So the modern refugee regime

現今的難民保護制度

was created in the aftermath of the Second World War by these guys.

是被這些人創立於二戰的戰後時期。

Its basic aim is to ensure

它的基本目的在於確保

that when a state fails, or worse, turns against its own people,

當一個國家失敗， 或者更糟，逼迫自國人民時，

people have somewhere to go,

人民有地方可以去投奔，

to live in safety and dignity until they can go home.

在可重返祖國之前 能夠安全且有尊嚴的活著。

It was created precisely for situations like the situation we see in Syria today.

這個系統所針對的情況， 正如我們今日所看到的敘利亞現況。

Through an international convention signed by 147 governments,

通過一個由147個政府所簽署的國際公約，

the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees,

1951年《難民地位公約》，

and an international organization, UNHCR,

和一個國際組織，聯合國難民署，所約定，

states committed to reciprocally admit people onto their territory

簽署國相互 允許人們進入他們的領土範圍

who flee conflict and persecution.

來逃離紛爭以及迫害。

But today, that system is failing.

然而今天，這個系統卻在崩解中。

In theory, refugees have a right to seek asylum.

理論上，難民具有 尋求庇護的權利。

In practice, our immigration policies block the path to safety.

現實中，我們的移民政策 堵住了通往安全的道路。

In theory, refugees have a right to a pathway to integration,

理論上，難民有權利 透過途徑居留在庇護國，

or return to the country they've come from.

或返回他們自己的國家。

But in practice, they get stuck in almost indefinite limbo.

但是在現實中，他們卻陷入了 幾乎無止境的混沌狀態中。

In theory, refugees are a shared global responsibility.

理論上，難民 是全球各國共同承擔的責任。

In practice, geography means that countries proximate the conflict

在現實中，地理位置 鄰近紛爭的那些國家

take the overwhelming majority of the world's refugees.

收容了全球絕大多數的難民。

The system isn't broken because the rules are wrong.

難民系統行不通 不是因為系統的規定是錯的。

It's that we're not applying them adequately to a changing world,

而是因為我們沒有合適地 應用這些規定到瞬息萬變的世界，

and that's what we need to reconsider.

而這就是我們需要進行反思的。

So I want to explain to you a little bit about how the current system works.

所以我想跟你們解釋一下 目前的系統是如何運作的。

How does the refugee regime actually work?

難民保護制度到底是怎麼運作的呢？

But not from a top-down institutional perspective,

但是不從一個從上往下的 機構角度，

rather from the perspective of a refugee.

而是從一個難民的角度來看。

So imagine a Syrian woman.

所以試想一個敘利亞女人。

Let's call her Amira.

讓我們稱她為阿米拉。

And Amira to me represents many of the people I've met in the region.

而阿米拉對我來說 代表了許多我在該地區遇到的人。

Amira, like around 25 percent of the world's refugees,

阿米拉，如同世界上 大約百分之二十五的難民，

is a woman with children,

是一名有孩子的婦女，

and she can't go home because she comes from this city

而她不能回家 因為她來自這個城市

that you see before you, Homs,

你眼前所看到的城市，霍姆斯，

a once beautiful and historic city

一個曾經美麗以及歷史悠久的城市

now under rubble.

如今卻形同廢墟。

And so Amira can't go back there.

所以阿米拉不能夠回去那裡。

But Amira also has no hope of resettlement to a third country,

但是阿米拉也沒有 再安置到第三國的希望，

because that's a lottery ticket

因為那是一張彩票

only available to less than one percent of the world's refugees.

全世界僅有少於百分之一的難民可獲得。

So Amira and her family

所以阿米拉和她的家人

face an almost impossible choice.

面對著一個幾乎沒有可能的選擇。

They have three basic options.

他們有三個基本的選項：

The first option is that Amira can take her family to a camp.

第一個選項是阿米拉可以 帶著她的家人到難民營。

In the camp, she might get assistance,

在難民營中， 她可能得到幫助，

but there are very few prospects for Amira and her family.

但是那裡對於阿米拉 和她的家庭來說幾乎沒有前途可言。

Camps are in bleak, arid locations,

難民營位於荒涼和乾旱的地方，

often in the desert.

通常是在沙漠。

In the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan,

在約旦的扎塔利難民營，

you can hear the shells across the border in Syria at nighttime.

在夜間，你可以 聽到穿越敘利亞邊境的砲彈聲。

There's restricted economic activity.

那裡有受到限制的經濟活動。

Education is often of poor quality.

教育品質通常很差。

And around the world,

而且在全世界，

some 80 percent of refugees who are in camps

大約百分之八十處於 難民營中的難民

have to stay for at least five years.

需要待在那裡至少五年。

It's a miserable existence,

那是一種悲慘的生活，

and that's probably why, in reality,

而那大概就是為什麼，在現實中，

only nine percent of Syrians choose that option.

僅有百分之九的敘利亞人民 選擇如此。

Alternatively, Amira can head to an urban area

或者，阿米拉可以 前往一個城市地區

in a neighboring country, like Amman or Beirut.

一個鄰近國家的城市， 例如安曼或者貝魯特。

That's an option that about 75 percent of Syrian refugees have taken.

那是大概百分之七十五 敘利亞難民的抉擇。

But there, there's great difficulty as well.

但是在那裡， 在那裡也有極大的困難。

Refugees in such urban areas don't usually have the right to work.

在這些城市地區的難民 通常沒有工作的權利。

They don't usually get significant access to assistance.

他們通常沒有太多途徑可以得到幫助。

And so when Amira and her family have used up their basic savings,

因此當阿米拉和她的家人 花光了他們的積蓄時，

they're left with very little and likely to face urban destitution.

他們所剩無幾 並有可能面臨都市貧困。

So there's a third alternative,

所以他們還有第三個選項，

and it's one that increasing numbers of Syrians are taking.

而這正是越來越多 敘利亞人民的選擇。

Amira can seek some hope for her family

阿米拉可以給她的家人帶來希望，

by risking their lives on a dangerous and perilous journey

通過冒著生命危險 走上一段險象環生的旅程

to another country,

前往另外一個國家，

and it's that which we're seeing in Europe today.

這就是我們如今 在歐洲所看到的。

Around the world, we present refugees with an almost impossible choice

在世界各地，我們給難民 幾乎都沒有辦法選擇的選項

between three options:

在三個選項中：

encampment, urban destitution and dangerous journeys.

難民營、都市貧困、 和危險旅程中進行選擇。

For refugees, that choice is the global refugee regime today.

對難民來說，那選擇 代表著當今全球難民保護制度。

But I think it's a false choice.

但是我認為它是 一個錯誤的選擇。

I think we can reconsider that choice.

我認為我們應該 對這個選擇進行反思。

The reason why we limit those options

我們之所以限制選項數量

is because we think

是因為我們認為

that those are the only options that are available to refugees,

只有那些是難民可以獲得 的選項，

and they're not.

然而並不是的。

Politicians frame the issue as a zero-sum issue,

政客們把這個問題 設計成一個零和的問題，

that if we benefit refugees, we're imposing costs on citizens.

如果讓難民得到好處， 我們就會把成本強加於公民身上。

We tend to have a collective assumption

我們傾向集體假設

that refugees are an inevitable cost or burden to society.

認為難民對社會會 造成不可避免的損失或負擔。

But they don't have to. They can contribute.

但是他們不一定如此。 他們可以作出貢獻。

So what I want to argue

所以我想要提出的是

is there are ways in which we can expand that choice set

我們仍有許多方式可以 去擴增那些選項組合

and still benefit everyone else:

同時讓每個人都得到好處：

the host states and communities,

難民收容國和社會群體，

our societies and refugees themselves.

我們的社會和難民都得到好處。

And I want to suggest four ways

而我想要提出四種方式

we can transform the paradigm of how we think about refugees.

能夠讓我們改變 我們對難民問題的思考模式。

All four ways have one thing in common:

這四種方式都有一個共同點：

they're all ways in which we take the opportunities of globalization,

都是透過把握 全球化，

mobility and markets,

流動性和市場的機會，

and update the way we think about the refugee issue.

更新我們對難民問題的 想法。

The first one I want to think about

第一個我想要思考的是

is the idea of enabling environments,

有利環境這個概念，

and it starts from a very basic recognition

它始於一個很基本的認知

that refugees are human beings like everyone else,

那就是難民和每個人一樣都是人類，

but they're just in extraordinary circumstances.

只是他們處於 很特別的境況中。

Together with my colleagues in Oxford,

和我在牛津大學的同事們一起，

we've embarked on a research project in Uganda

我們著手了一個 在烏干達的研究項目

looking at the economic lives of refugees.

這個項目著眼於 難民的經濟生活。

We chose Uganda not because it's representative of all host countries.

我們選擇烏干達並不是因為 它代表了所有的難民收容國。

It's not. It's exceptional.

它並沒有。它是例外的。

Unlike most host countries around the world,

跟世界上大多數的難民收容國不一樣，

what Uganda has done

烏干達所做的

is give refugees economic opportunity.

是給予難民經濟上的機會。

It gives them the right to work. It gives them freedom of movement.

它給予他們工作的權利。 它給予他們活動的自由。

And the results of that are extraordinary

而由此產生的結果是 非同尋常的，

both for refugees and the host community.

對於難民和難民收容國的社會 他們雙方來說都是。

In the capital city, Kampala,

在首都，坎帕拉，

we found that 21 percent of refugees own a business that employs other people,

我們發現有百分之二十一的 難民們擁有自己的生意並雇用其他人，

and 40 percent of those employees

而百分之四十的員工

are nationals of the host country.

是難民收容國的國民。

In other words, refugees are making jobs

換句話說，難民在創造 工作機會

for citizens of the host country.

給難民收容國的公民。

Even in the camps, we found extraordinary examples

更甚至在難民營中， 我們也發現了不尋常的例子

of vibrant, flourishing and entrepreneurial businesses.

那裡有著充滿活力、蓬勃發展的 自創生意。

For example, in a settlement called Nakivale,

例如，在一個叫 納吉瓦萊的安置所，

we found examples of Congolese refugees

我們找到一些剛果難民的例子

running digital music exchange businesses.

他們經營數字音樂交換的生意。