Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Feb. 23rd, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 12 of the House of Commons Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the subcommittee on Tuesday, October 28, 2025, the subcommittee is meeting on its study of internally and externally displaced people across the world.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. For those on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen, you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

I would now like to welcome our first witness, David Smolansky,

senior adviser to Nobel Peace Prize laureate María Corina Machado, by video conference. I would like to mention to the committee that Mr. Smolansky did not go through the process of testing, but there seems to be no flag from interpretation, so we can welcome him.

We'd also like to welcome Dr. Einat Wilf, author and teacher of Zionism, by video conference. From Climate Refugees, we have Amali Tower, founder and executive director, by video conference. From Conflict and Resilience Research Institute Canada, we have Dr. Kawser Ahmed, executive director and adjunct professor, by video conference. From International Organization for Migration, we have Anne Kathrin Schaefer, deputy director, department of humanitarian response and recovery. From the observatory on international migration, refugees, stateless persons and asylum, we have Ndeye Dieynaba Ndiaye, founder and professor of law.

Welcome to you all.

I would like to give each of you five minutes for your introduction. I will insist that you please try to respect the time, due to the number of witnesses.

I would like to invite Mr. David Smolansky to take the floor for five minutes, please.

The floor is yours.

[David Smolansky, Senior Adviser to Nobel Peace Prize Laureate María Corina Machado, As an Individual]

Thank you, honourable Chair and distinguished members of the subcommittee. It is an honour to be invited to the Parliament of Canada to testify about internally and externally displaced people around the world.

According to the United Nations, approximately 123 million people have been forcibly displaced. From South Sudan to Haiti, we witness people fleeing their villages, towns, cities and nations every year due to war, repression and natural disasters. In my case, I come before you as a witness to what is now the largest migration and refugee outflow in the world—that of Venezuela.

The United Nations estimates that nearly eight million Venezuelans have been forced to flee our homeland. Civil society organizations suggest that the number may be closer to nine million. If Venezuelan migrants made up a country, the country would be roughly the size of Portugal, or twice the size of Panama and Croatia. This outflow has not been caused by war or a natural disaster. It is the direct result of a brutal dictatorship responsible, over the past decade, for at least 20,000 arbitrary detentions, 18,000 extrajudicial killings and more than 2,000 documented cases of torture.

Venezuelans have fled a country where access to food, medicine and basic goods has collapsed. An estimated 7.3 million people in my country cannot eat three times a day. The humanitarian conditions can be compared with those of such nations as the Democratic Republic of Congo or Yemen. Between 2022 and 2024, more than 670,000 Venezuelans crossed the Darién Gap in Panama, a 10-day journey through extreme weather, with criminal groups and human traffickers there. Millions have walked from Venezuela's border with Colombia to Ecuador, Peru and Chile. To put this into Canadian perspective, the distance is comparable to walking from Vancouver to Toronto. How severe must conditions be for thousands of mothers to walk that distance carrying their children in their arms? How desperate must a population be to cross nearly an entire continent simply to survive?

The lesson Venezuela teaches the world is clear: War and natural disasters are not the only drivers of mass displacement. When democracy collapses, when liberties are stripped away and when access to justice disappears, a country can lose its population at levels greater than those caused by armed conflicts or earthquakes. Today, approximately 2.3 million people have fled South Sudan. Nearly seven million have fled Ukraine since Russia's invasion. A similar number fled Syria during its civil war. More Venezuelans have fled their country than Syrians or Ukrainians.

The regional impact has been enormous. The vast majority of Venezuelan migrants have been received by Latin American countries, which have shown remarkable generosity. However, infrastructure, public services, health care and education systems are under strain. This is the largest migration outflow in Latin American history, and its consequences are still unfolding. Moreover, the regime that relies on repression and illicit economic activities to remain in power has allowed organized criminal groups to expand beyond our borders. One example is Tren de Aragua, which has been designated as a terrorist entity in Canada. This organization has expanded its operation in at least nine countries across the Americas, engaging in murder, extortion and human smuggling.

Let me be absolutely clear: The vast majority of Venezuelan migrants are honest, hard-working people. We are the first to demand that members of this criminal organization and others face justice. These groups were also a source of insecurity that forced many Venezuelans to flee. It is essential not to generalize. A few criminals must not overshadow the sacrifice and dignity of millions.

I would also like to address the current situation in Venezuela. Since the July 28, 2024, presidential elections, at least 600,000 additional Venezuelans have fled the country, for the largest outflow directly linked to political repression. Poll watchers, volunteers and opposition members were threatened and persecuted. As the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has stated, Venezuelans are living under a state of terrorism.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Could you wrap it up, please? The time is almost up.

[David Smolansky]

Despite this, hope has returned for millions of Venezuelans under the leadership of President-elect Edmundo González and Nobel Peace Prize laureate María Corina Machado. Many feel renewed optimism following the January 3 military operation in Venezuela that ended with the capture of Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores.

I will end with this: Protection remains essential. The Speaker of the legitimate National Assembly, Jorge Rodríguez, has stated that Venezuelans under asylum or refugee status would not qualify for the regime's so-called amnesty. The international community will understand that the only sustainable way to stop forced displacement from Venezuela and encourage millions to go back is the full restoration of democracy and freedom.

Thank you so much for this opportunity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you.

Now I'd like to invite Dr. Einat Wilf to take the floor for five minutes, please.

The floor is yours.

[Einat Wilf, Author and Teacher of Zionism, As an Individual]

Thank you so much, and thank you for this opportunity to testify before the subcommittee.

What I would like to do today is raise a very strong red flag at the possibility of mass displacement of Jews around the world as a result of rising anti-Zionism. One thing we know—I'm sure you know the history going back to the Israelites, the Hebrews and the Judeans—is that we have a long history of mass displacement of the Jewish people that comes not from war, not from problems of starvation, but from ideology. The case of Jewish displacement frequently follows ideology.

Since World War II, which is when most people know, the largest displacement of Jews happened in the Arab world. Nearly one million Jews were forced out of Arab countries from Morocco to Afghanistan, ending the existence of Jewish communities that predated the Arab and Islamic conquests of the Levant and North Africa. There has been a mass displacement of Jews from Iran with the rise of the Islamic Republic. There has been a mass displacement of Jews from the Soviet Union and from eastern Europe.

All of these displacements have taken place under the ideology of anti-Zionism. All of these places have claimed, in real time, to have nothing against Jews and to only be against Zionists, but that was merely the respectable, updated way to push out Jews once anti-Semitism, in its 19th- and 20th-century racialized form, had been discredited by the Holocaust and World War II. The replacement, created by the Soviet Union after World War II, has allowed the Arab world, Iran, the Soviet Union and eastern Europe to displace en masse millions of Jews; to strip them of their dignity, their homes and their assets; and essentially to engage in one of the lesser-known en masse acts of ethnic cleansing of Jews after World War II from the Arab world, the Islamic world and the Soviet Union and eastern Europe.

We are now seeing the rise of anti-Zionism and its insertion into the west. We see a rise in Canada, in the U.S., in Europe and in Australia. I want to raise the red flag to say the following: Everywhere in the world—you will find no exception—wherever anti-Zionism was allowed to become a dominant, respectable institutional ideology, two things happened. The first is that the environment turned hostile to Jewish life, both individually and collectively, even as those countries claimed—as Canada claims today—to love Jews and have nothing against Jews, only against Zionists. What happened next is that the Jews were gone because the playbook everywhere in the world—from the Arab world to Iran, the Soviet Union and eastern Europe—was that first they claimed to have nothing against Jews, but they demonized and criminalized Zionism, which I know Canada is now planning to do under the guise of anti-Palestinian racism. Wherever Zionism was demonized and criminalized, ultimately, Jewish life became impossible and Jews had to flee.

I'm using this testimony to take the long history of Jewish displacement and raise the flag that if you allow anti-Zionism to become institutionalized, legislated and respectable in Canada, your Jewish community will be gone.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you, Dr. Wilf.

Now I would like to invite Madame Amali Tower to take the floor for five minutes, please.

[Amali Tower, Founder and Executive Director, Climate Refugees]

Thank you, Chair.

Good afternoon and thank you to the committee for this kind invitation.

Last year, 117 million people globally were displaced. This year, that number is expected to rise by 6.7 million, to 130 million people displaced due to conflict, climate change, declining funding and major policy shifts.

This is forecast amidst declining foreign assistance. More than 30% of humanitarian funding has disappeared over the past two years. This has severely impacted migration, asylum and refugee protection systems in refugee host countries. Overseas development assistance is being reduced by $62 billion this year.

We generally think of human displacement as happening to people far from our borders. At a time when global displacement and antimigration policies are on the rise, Canada can take measures to help people in its immediate vicinity right now.

When the Taliban regained control of Afghanistan in 2021, I was called to help evacuate thousands of Afghans. Now, resettled Afghan refugees in the United States are being targeted for removal. Canada can protect Afghan refugees, a majority of whom supported Canada and NATO-led forces, through bypassing safe third country agreements to allow Afghans in U.S. detention or facing removal to enter Canada. Canada can expand special immigration measures for Afghan refugees, especially by resuming its visionary private sponsorship program.

Instead of border fortresses, Canada can fund humane and knowledgeable border programs based on international legal obligations to welcome asylum seekers fleeing U.S. deportation. Canada can be a better partner to Central and South American countries whose citizens are on the move but cannot stay in the U.S. To this end, if passed, Canada's Bill C-12 would be detrimental to refugee protection, leaving refugees and asylum seekers even more vulnerable to the U.S. immigration system.

Since my first time working in Palestine, I have wondered how much more the world expects Palestinian refugees to survive. As recommended locally, Canada should reopen and transform the temporary resident visa program for Gaza. Canada can also open its doors to refugee and displaced students in Gaza with scholarship initiatives. Canada's resumption of aid to UNRWA is welcomed, as is the leadership shown. More is needed, though, as is pushing back against Israel's ban of 37 aid agencies in Gaza.

Conflicts are at record highs, and Gaza and Sudan exemplify the human toll. More than 12 million people have been displaced from Sudan. Globally, 2.5 million refugees will need resettlement this year. I have been privileged to witness the intergenerational gift that resettlement is, not just for refugees but for receiving countries as well. Instead of lowering immigration targets this year, Canada should redouble its refugee admissions targets. Canada must also introduce new mobility pathways for climate-displaced people.

The Center for Climate and Security—I serve on its advisory board in D.C.—notes that over 40% of NATO member states, including Canada, identify climate-driven migration as a key concern in their national security strategies. Since 2016, there have been 250 million people internally displaced by climate-related disasters. Despite this, protections are scant, and less than 1% of climate finance goes to fund adaptation in conflict and climate-vulnerable countries; the outlook for loss and damage finance is even worse.

Canada plans to double current military spending to $81 billion while cutting $2.7 billion in foreign assistance. Instead of slashing budgets, Canada must redouble its foreign assistance and lead partners to do the same.

In Davos last month, Prime Minister Mark Carney said, “Collective investments in resilience are cheaper than everyone building their own fortresses”, and I couldn't agree more.

Canada sits on the board of the fund for responding to loss and damage at the UNFCCC and can champion resilience by supporting grants-based, rapid, community-access climate finance to populations increasingly displaced by climate change. Canada, which has championed participation, must now push for the inclusion of refugees, migrants and displaced persons to meaningfully participate in the UNFCCC's consultative forums and ensure that the fund is responsive to frontline communities. Canada must scale its own pledge of $16 million, which is far below its obligations as a historic carbon emitter, and mobilize resources through innovative taxes and levies.

Many are also fighting for their right to stay. I interviewed dozens from such communities in Guatemala's dry corridor region and in Kenya, who told me their deepest wish is to be able to afford a life at home, which climate change and rising inequality are making impossible. Scaling and disbursing public climate finance now is integral to decreasing displacement.

Canada has an opportunity to fill the U.S. void in international co-operation and lead other countries to follow suit. Long known for its welcoming policies and pioneering initiatives, Canada can step into a bigger leadership position internationally when it comes to addressing displacement and shaping climate policy. That time is now.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you, Ms. Tower.

I would now invite Dr. Kawser Ahmed to take the floor for five minutes, please.

[Kawser Ahmed, Executive Director, Conflict and Resilience Research Institute Canada]

Mr. Chair and honourable members of the committee, thank you very much for inviting me to appear before you today.

I teach at the University of Winnipeg and lead the Conflict and Resilience Research Institute Canada.

Since 2017, we have researched and engaged in policy work on the Rohingya forced displacement in Myanmar and Bangladesh. We are currently implementing a Global Affairs Canada-funded project on charting a path to lasting peace in Myanmar, under Indo-Pacific strategy programming.

Our scholarship and practice focus on South and Southeast Asia, including both internally and externally displaced persons, as well as cross-border refugees. Across contexts, our work aligns with a consistent finding, which is that forced displacement is driven primarily by political unrest with escalation into armed conflict, often compounded by military rule, repression and systemic exclusion.

Policy responses to mitigate displacement tend to follow five pathways: bilateral arrangements, multilateral coordination, sanctions and other levers, United Nations and regional mediation, and justice and accountability. Each can matter, but each takes time. However, the danger is protracted displacement, in which the status quo hardens, families languish in camps and return becomes less feasible with each passing year.

Third country resettlement remains vital for protection, especially for the most vulnerable, but it cannot resolve mass displacement. It cannot substitute for addressing political drivers that cause the displacement in the first place.

Our current work, therefore, emphasizes that durable solutions require addressing at least one root cause rather than merely managing the symptom. In the Myanmar conflict, which we believe is replicable in other cases, we advanced a five-pronged approach.

First, we identify credible alternatives to indefinite war by mapping the incentives that keep parties fighting and the conditions that could move them toward a peace deal.

Second, we outline a reconstruction pathway. Conflict destroys institutions and infrastructure. Without an actionable recovery plan, peace becomes a slogan rather than a viable choice.

Third, we strengthen regional engagement, particularly through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN. Canada is an ASEAN dialogue partner, and the ASEAN-Canada strategic partnership can and will create opportunities to support regional conflict diplomacy and implement peace intervention.

Fourth, we build coalitions of like-minded civil society groups to advocate for conflict resolution in the region and co-create channels of influence.

Fifth, we urge investment in capacity building, with help from diaspora communities, among displaced people languishing in the camps—where they are now—and link it with the reconstruction pathway, so that when return is possible, it is sustainable.

There is then the concept of humanitarian diplomacy, which I'm a big advocate of. It connects protection to development and peacebuilding, reduces long-term dependency and can create space for dialogue for peace.

Finally, what can we do as a country?

First, Canada can further engage its consulates and diplomatic presence in sustained, practical capacity building. I'm not saying this is not happening. However, my observation is that these things are occurring piecemeal and not within a broader Canadian approach to dealing with forced displacements and sustainable capacity building for the displaced.

Second, we suggest that token resettlement is not a realistic long-term primary solution. Thus, Canada should consider building a framework of humanitarian diplomacy with willing partners like Qatar. The greatest justice you can give to the displaced is a door back to where they belong. Every return is thus a defeat for those who drove them out.

Third, Canada should intensify engagement with regional powers in the ASEAN. In that effort, Canada should also build on working channels in the Canada-China relationship through issue-based engagement on humanitarian access and reconstruction.

Fourth, Canada can leverage its civil society and research ecosystem as a peace asset. The Oslo back channel and the Aceh peace process show how sustained non-governmental facilitation can open channels, build trust and support peace implementation.

Mr. Chair, my core message is this: Humanitarian assistance is essential, but it is not a substitute for a political and development strategy for internally and externally displaced persons, particularly in the case of the Rohingya.

If Canada wants fewer protracted crises and fewer generations stranded in limbo, our policy must match compassion with sustained conflict resolution capacity at the root of the conflict.

Thank you once again, and I welcome any further questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you, Dr. Kawser Ahmed.

I now invite Madame Anne Kathrin Schaefer to take the floor for five minutes, please.

[Anne Kathrin Schaefer, Deputy Director, Department of Humanitarian Response and Recovery, International Organization for Migration]

Chair, honourable members, thank you for the opportunity to appear here today.

The International Organization for Migration, IOM, is the United Nations system's agency dedicated to migration. We work closely with governments and partners worldwide to save lives, reduce vulnerabilities and support practical solutions for internally and externally displaced persons and the communities that host them. At the outset, allow me to note that IOM's intervention here today is provided on a voluntary basis.

Displacement today is both unprecedented in scale and changing in character. At the end of 2024, 83.4 million people were living in internal displacement across 117 countries; this is the highest level recorded. Nearly 45% of those displaced by conflict and violence were in just two countries: Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Displacement has become increasingly protracted. Across major crises, nearly half of internally displaced persons have remained displaced for more than five years, generating profound human, social and economic consequences for affected states and communities. Protracted displacement reshapes demographics, deepens socio-economic fragility and places sustained pressure on public services, often in regions that are already vulnerable. Evidence consistently shows that areas affected by internal displacement experience lower income levels, reduced educational attainment and shorter life expectancy. Children represent a growing share of displaced populations; this share increased from 28% in 2018 to 40% in 2024.

These trends highlight a critical reality. Solutions must be designed from the onset of a crisis and be grounded in the lived realities of displaced populations rather than being constrained by short-term emergency cycles.

Root causes of internal displacement are converging. Conflict and violence remain the primary drivers while climate- and disaster-related hazards increasingly act as risk multipliers. Most IDPs displaced by conflicts live in countries with high or very high climate vulnerability. Fragile governance, economic contraction and services collapse deepen the pressures that force people to move or that prevent them from rebuilding their lives. Understanding and addressing internal displacement fundamentally depend on robust and interoperable data systems to inform evidence-based interventions.

IOM's displacement tracking matrix, the DTM, represents the world's largest source of primary data on displacement. Active in more than 90 countries, it delivers thousands of assessments each year, tracking population movements, locations, vulnerabilities, access to services, housing conditions, protection risks and future intentions. This evidence base enables the global community to develop solutions that are tailored to needs, localized and focused on highest-needs populations—or, as presented in the “Global Humanitarian Overview”, hyper-prioritized populations.

Complementing this operational data, IOM's progress report and global profiles for internal displacements analyze displacement environments over time. For example, IOM's last report highlighted that a clear majority—approximately 60%—of internally displaced persons expressed the intention to remain and pursue solutions through local integration. However, they consistently faced barriers in doing so. These tools help identify the structural barriers to solutions, including inadequate housing, limited livelihood opportunities, lack of documentation and persistent safety constraints. Together, these systems enable governments and the United Nations to cost, sequence and monitor solutions and strategies, helping to shift displacement responses from reactive crisis management toward measurable, nationally led long-term solutions.

When national protection systems are overwhelmed and safe options within countries are limited, people cross borders in search of safety. External displacement—people crossing an international border in search of safety—remains a distinct yet interconnected phenomenon from internal displacement. Unlike IDPs, who remain under the authority and responsibility of their own government, externally displaced people require international protection frameworks, asylum systems and cross-border coordination. Resettlement remains one of the most durable and impactful solutions for people facing protracted displacement. It is a protection tool that offers safety and stability to refugees who cannot return home, and it contributes to global solidarity at a time when needs are rising.

It is also important to note that risks along major migratory routes are acute. Since 2014, IOM's missing migrants project has recorded more than 80,000 deaths and disappearances, with over three-quarters occurring in crisis-affected countries, underscoring how conflict, disasters and state fragility push people into dangerous cross-border movements.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Could you wrap it up, please?

[Anne Kathrin Schaefer]

As a system, we strive to move beyond displacement management in order to focus on resources and solutions. With coherent and sustained support, countries can translate policy commitments into measurable outcomes, ensuring that solutions are safe, voluntary and dignified.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you, Madame Schaefer.

I would now like to invite Madame Ndeye Dieynaba Ndiaye to take the floor.

[Ndeye Dieynaba Ndiaye, Founder, Professor of Law, Observatory on International Migration, Refugees, Stateless Persons and Asylum]

Mr. Chair, honourable members, good afternoon.

Thank you for inviting us today to present a small part of what we do at the Observatory on International Migration, Refugees, Stateless Persons and Asylum, or OMIRAS. It's a research group at the Université du Québec à Montréal, or UQAM.

Displacement of people is an integral part of humanity. Wars and conflicts, social inequalities, poverty, climate change, serious human rights violations, persecution, rape and violence against women, among other causes, are all things that push women, men and children onto migration routes. Only 3.6% of the world's population live in a country other than their country of origin. The migrant population accounts for 3.6% of the eight billion people in the world right now.

The cradle of humanity, Africa has recorded mass displacements of peoples who spread to other continents several million years ago. Migration is an ancestral practice that has taken many forms. In the west, the 19th century was marked by significant European emigration. There are a number of examples, including France and Ireland. I would also like to quote Paul Rivet, who told us that, in 1919, there were more than 5 million Italians abroad, including some in South America. In 1921, Canada also had a fairly split population. This included English, Irish, Scottish and French people. Asians have always experienced displacements to the west, especially during the Vietnam War and the First Indochina War, among others.

This is to say that migration is a social fact rooted in human traditions. Immigration is not a problem; it's a social fact. Currently, immigration is characterized by a kind of prioritization that places nationals from countries in the global south at the bottom. They have difficulty accessing immigration, unlike nationals from countries in the global north, who can move around the planet quite easily.

Our research group argues that Canada has one of the most organized and structured immigration systems in the world. A legal framework and institutions are the foundation of migration governance that is functional but, at the same time, unrealistic, because it considers the status of migrants to be static rather than evolving and dynamic. The non-linear nature of migration trajectories and the changes on the ground make it necessary to review our migration policy so that it can better address challenges and issues.

Temporary migration offers some short and medium-term solutions, but the solution would lie in gradual and long-term programming, that is, at least 10 years, that incorporates needs based on demographics, the economy and the provision of services that accompany integration into host societies.

Another example is the management of the irregular migration crisis. Before the 1990s, migration was circular and mostly legal, because it was facilitated by open and inclusive migration policies. A historical comparison offers conclusive results on the link between border closures and irregular immigration, corroborated in the 2018 Marrakesh compact, which guides states to develop safe and orderly migration to better contain irregular migration.

Canada, like the rest of the world, is facing migration movements. The many issues and challenges, compounded with controversy, sometimes discredit its immigration policy. The 2017 crisis, marked by migration flows mainly from the United States-Canada border, helped bring irregular migration back to the forefront of immigration policies. While health and social services were working at full capacity to provide solutions, the issue of the distribution of asylum seekers and migrants, financial issues related to their care and the issuance of work permits—in short, the division of responsibilities between the two levels of government—dominated not only the national stage, but also the international stage.

Canada has also had a policy of outsourcing migration and asylum management for a number of years. Pushed to the borders of the global south, migration flows are controlled and managed in third countries. As—

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Could you wrap it up, please? The time is up.

[Ndeye Dieynaba Ndiaye]

I'll finish very quickly.

With regard to this practice of outsourcing, there are examples in the document that show that Canada is intervening on African soil to prevent asylum seekers from arriving on Canadian soil.

I'm available to answer your questions, given that my colleague already addressed the issue of climate migration earlier.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you.

We will now begin the first round of questions and answers.

I invite Mr. Majumdar to take the floor for seven minutes.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Thank you.

Thanks very much to our panellists, who have described the very difficult challenge of forced displacement and mass displacement.

Dr. Wilf, I'll start with you.

The story of communism and colonial uprisings over the last 70 years resulted in regimes for dealing with the question of refugees. Two principal regimes emerged, one of which is specialized for one group of people in the world. In your excellent testimony, you described how Jewish displacement over the same period resulted in the migration pressures that we now have to deal with today as anti-Zionism.

Let me ask you this, if I may, Dr. Wilf: In the context of the international regimes governing how refugees are dealt with and trying to bring resolution to disputes around ill-defined borders, what's your assessment of these two regimes, and how would you suggest the world focus on building long-term peace?

[Einat Wilf]

Essentially, after World War II, the world organized itself to deal with the massive refugee issues taking place. Broadly speaking—and this is still in many ways the case—many of the refugee situations, certainly after World War II, were the direct result of the fall of empires, of the end of various empires and colonial rules, and the rise of nation-states—when they were lucky. When they were less lucky, their borders were not drawn through a process of self-determination but through colonial drawing.

Through the creation of new borders, tens of millions of people became refugees. Generally, all of them got the message that even though they may have lost their homes and livelihoods, they were expected to move on and to settle wherever they have settled: in new places, in new countries and maybe in third countries. The main message to refugees, the one that actually created a world of peace, was that it's tough and it's tragic, but you move on.

The refugee convention was based on the ideas that people ultimately can and should be resettled, that there's no right for people to go back home as such and that what matters is individuals' finding protection in new countries rather than reclaiming a particular home. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees is essentially charged with carrying out that form, and this is the smart and successful form of refugee settlement.

The one that is basically bizarre was established by UNRWA, the UN Relief and Works Agency. It was not bizarre to begin with. It was established as a temporary mechanism—which it still is.

In order to settle both the Arab and Jewish refugees from the war of 1948, the Jewish refugees who were ethnically cleansed from Jerusalem, from Gaza, were settled by Israel, and the Jews who were ethnically cleansed from Judea and Samaria were settled by Israel, but the Arab refugees, who were supposed to be settled within 18 months by UNRWA—even though they got citizenship in the Kingdom of Jordan—essentially hijacked UNRWA and took it over to ensure that they are not settled. They understood, as was the message in the world, that settling refugees is the way that you end wars. They understood that if the Arab refugees from the war they had just waged, with the purpose they had declared to ensure the Jews had no sovereignty anywhere in the land...it meant they would have to admit they were defeated in the war in their goal of preventing Jewish statehood, and they would have to live with the idea of a Jewish state, which they found shameful and unacceptable.

UNRWA remains today, after 76 years, a temporary, hijacked organization that abides by its own invented rules, which are not the international regime's. As a result, you have a bizarre situation: People who have received Canadian citizenship, one of the most coveted citizenships in the world, remain registered as Palestinian refugees by UNRWA. For all other refugees in the world, if you receive Canadian citizenship, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees is thrilled to remove you from the refugee list and to list you as having found a home.

UNRWA has basically maintained itself as an organization for the purpose of perpetuating an endless intergenerational refugee registration, even though, by every international standard, they're not refugees. They're Jordanian citizens who were born in Jordan or they live in Gaza and under the Palestinian Authority—even by their own telling, they live in Palestine, and they can't be Palestinian refugees and live in Palestine.... Also, some of them, as I've said, have Canadian citizenship.

Therefore, UNRWA is a unique regime that actually hijacks and uses the word “refugees” for people who, by any proper international standard, are not refugees. They're citizens. Many of them are middle class or wealthy. They enjoy the citizenship of some of the best countries in the world, yet for political purposes, they've hijacked a refugee regime to continue a war against Jewish sovereignty.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

This might explain why the German chancellor recently decided to no longer fund UNRWA.

David Smolansky, my last question is for you in my very brief time. Secretary Rubio had testified to how regimes in Venezuela, Cuba and Iran used forced displacement of people to hide their operatives. Very briefly, can you please provide your views on how that is executed?

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Answer quickly, please, because the time is over.

[David Smolansky]

The most important information gathered after the military operation on January 3, which ended with the capture of Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, proved that there are Cubans in Venezuela who are not exactly attending people who are suffering from the humanitarian crisis but protecting a dictator. During that operation, 32 agents from Cuba were killed.

We have also learned that over 26 years, Venezuela sent an estimated $63 billion in oil in exchange for a sophisticated, repressive apparatus in which, according to victims and dissidents, Cuban agents have participated under—

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

We have exceeded one minute. Please try to finish.