President Joe Biden recently announced that, in addition to $1 billion in humanitarian aid to Europe, the United States would accept 100,000 Ukrainian refugees using the “full range of legal pathways.” Despite representing a fraction of those fleeing Ukraine, Biden’s goal would be a watershed moment if only it were possible.
Regrettably, though, this is merely a headline grabber rather than a policy grounded in reality.
Aside from the fact that the administration has not laid out any concrete plans to accomplish Biden’s commitment, America’s legal refugee framework was not built to handle emergency relief measures on such a large scale. To the extent it could have handled such numbers in the past, that’s certainly over post-Trump.
Between COVID-19 and the prior administration’s anti-immigration policies, a system that processed and welcomed more refugees than other any country since 1980 has been left decimated. The Department of Homeland Security under Trump shifted many government refugee officers to other agencies, adopted new security vetting procedures that lengthened wait times, and added redundant layers of government bureaucracy in order to deliberately slow the process.
The proof of the administration’s inability to meet these goals is demonstrated in how little progress America has made on recent refugee commitments. Biden raised the refugee cap twice, to 62,500 for 2021 and 125,000 for 2022, yet the United States resettled the fewest refugees ever in a fiscal year, just 11,411 during FY2021. The aftershocks of Trump’s putative immigration policies continue to reverberate in disastrous ways, and we do not have the tools to respond adequately.
Knowing full well we cannot admit 125,000 refugees, the administration will likely look to other avenues. Using the “full range of legal pathways” sounds promising, but these measures currently proposed are either meant for temporary protection or are contrary to the way immigration law is designed.
The White House has signaled interest in extending the humanitarian parole program to Ukrainian refugees, as it did for Afghan ones, but this would be a temporary and insufficient solution. The program offers no formal pathways to permanent citizenship and would only delay the issue of where such refugees would go, especially for those who cannot return home.
Further, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has processed less than 5% of the more than 40,000 Afghan applications in seven months; there is no reason to believe Ukrainian applicants wouldn’t be subject to the same arduous wait times.
As for other “legal pathways,” using nonimmigrant visas (NIV) as Biden has suggested, is a non-starter. Such visa classes are designated for temporary tourism, business, study or work and the administration would be hard-pressed to convince consular officers to issue visas they know will not be temporary in nature.
Rather than release press statements for proposals that simply are not possible, Biden should instead come forward with an honest assessment to the American people: our immigration system is broken and in dire need of reform.
Though Americans desperately want to help Ukrainians, our current system does not allow us to do so. He should go to Congress with a package of smaller, more piecemeal reforms that fit the time-sensitive needs of the situation and reflect bipartisan support for bringing over Ukrainian refugees. Comprehensive reform of the immigration system is likely dead, but proposals from both sides of the aisle remain in reach and should be considered.
Biden has already implemented the bipartisan push to grant Temporary Protection Status for Ukrainians already in the United States, but he should go further to bring refugees that are overloading European nations. He should expedite the applications of those with family in the U.S., including those with pending Lautenberg applications designated for persecuted minorities with relatives in the country. These reforms are outlined in a letter written by Rep. Jason Crow and others to the White House last week.
If the administration wants to admit Ukrainians rapidly but without bureaucratic hassles, they should consider a parole program similar to the one used to aid Afghans in the immediate aftermath of the Taliban takeover. The United States could also admit Ukrainians by using the Visa Waiver program, known as ESTA, which is used for most Europeans to enter our country. With ESTA, any Ukrainian could be vetted for security and granted parole once they land in the United States.
Biden should also focus on institution-level reforms that tackle some of the system’s biggest inefficiencies, including the overwhelming USCIS case backlog. Proposals such as those from Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar and Sen. Thom Tillis would facilitate Ukrainian refugee resettlement, ease processing delays and assist millions already in the country.
The window of opportunity to meet the moment and act for those suffering is closing fast. A bureaucracy that allows up to 125,000 refugees this year, yet has processed fewer than 8,000 to date, is not one prepared for the crisis unfolding in Ukraine or any future one for that matter.
Biden rightly said that assisting Ukrainians in need is an international responsibility. Now is the time for him to follow the will of the American people and make a statement on what can be achieved through a resolve to preserve human security and democracy.
____
ABOUT THE WRITER
Neil Schwartz is a J.D./M.A. student at the University of Texas at Austin, focusing on global policy and international development. Schwartz is also a research affiliate at Innovations for Peace and Development.
