The new refugees: for millions of refugees around the world, home is a ragged tent and hunger is the norm. Does anyone care?

It's one of the toughest places to live on earth: the Jalozai refugee camp on Pakistan's border with Afghanistan, where 80,000 Afghan refugees are crammed into the bursting seam of a dry riverbed. They sleep beneath flimsy sheets of plastic, eating seldom, often nibbling around the green mold of stale bread. Last winter, dozens froze to death; this summer dozens more died in the fierce heat.

The refugees fire fleeing drought and civil war in Afghanistan. The war pits rebels against the government, which has imposed a severe form of the Islamic religion upon the country.

But the Jalozai camp is only one refugee camp of dozens scattered around the world. More than 23 million people are considered refugees-people displaced from their countries by political turmoil and violence in places as far-flung as Sudan, Vietnam, Congo, Iraq, Somalia, and the former Yugoslavia.

Yet despite their huge numbers, critics say, refugees are slipping off the world's radar screen. A combination of political bickering and indifference on the part of rich nations has led to a severe funding crisis for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the agency that runs most refugee camps in the world. The money crunch comes as many nations, including the U.S., have expressed greater reluctance than ever before to intervene in trouble spots with military force.

"There's no reaction from the world," says Lionel Rosenblatt, president of Refugees International, an independent refugee aid group in Washington, D.C. "There's no focus and it's going to get worse. Bad men and bad leaders abound."

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

For refugees that means more violence against them in camps, more bad water, more hunger.

DANGER TO THE YOUNG

Children in particular are at risk. Of the world's current refugees, 10 million are under 18. And the UN has recently found that children are more likely than adults to suffer violence and sexual abuse in refugee camps.

The UNHCR depends entirely on voluntary donations from member countries to fund the world's refugee camps. It currently faces a yearly budget shortfall of $150 to $250 million.

The U.S., which provides 25 percent of the money, as well as Japan, Finland, and the Scandinavian countries have continued to pay their fair share. But the European Commission, which represents most European countries, has cut its annual donation from $200 million to $40 million.

The reason, officials say, is anger with the UN over its handling of a refugee crisis in the Yugoslav province of Kosovo in 1999. The UN, by its own admission, was slow to respond. But the European punishment couldn't come at a worse time, refugee experts say. In parts of Africa, the UN says it may need to cut staff by 40 percent.

UN officials say the European move is also making it harder to get contributions from other countries, which refuse appeals for aid by pointing to the cutbacks in Europe.

Critics say that the world's wealthiest nations will need to spend more to care for the stream of world refugees. But they also argue that the real solution lies in solving the political disputes that drive people from their home countries. Some refugee experts criticize the U.S. and European governments for failing to use military power to halt violence in troubled nations.

Experts say that a force of just 5,000 soldiers could have prevented an outbreak of ethnic violence in the African nation of Rwanda in 1994 that took 800,000 lives and created nearly 2 million refugees. UN officials say they must often watch helplessly as such situations careen out of control.

PREVENTION IS CHEAPER

"We know that if there is an early intervention we can save lives," says Panos Moumtzis, spokesman for the UNHCR. "Also, the cost is much less."

But the Bush administration, along with many other governments, is reluctant to commit troops and risk lives in troubled areas.

"The United States does not have the resources or the willpower to function as a global policeman," says Kim R. Holmes, an analyst with the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that echoes many Bush administration views. "The United States should not risk the lives of American troops unless vital national interests are at stake."

Where Refugees Come From

In 2000, the United Nations assisted more than 23 million refugees
and people displaced within their own countries. (Officials says,
however, that there are many more than the UN can track.) The
highlighted countries are the top sources of the world's refugees.
Beneath each name is the number of refugees from that country
currently receiving UN aid.

SIERRA LEONE                 357,008
SUDAN                        411,085
DEM. REP. OF THE CONGO       246,601
BURUNDI                      374,436
SOMALIA                      347,255
CROATIA                      289,928
BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA       214,437
ISRAEL                     1,211,480 *
IRAQ                         298,426
AFGHANISTAN                2,716,014
VIETNAM                      294,252

* NUMBER OF PALESTINIANS IN UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE CAMPS ONLY.

SOURCES: UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES, PROVISIONAL
STATISTICS 2000; AND UNITED NATIONS RELIEF AND WORKS AGENCY FOR
PALESTINE REFUGEES IN THE NEAR EAST.

The New Refugees FOCUS: More Than 23 Million Refugees Languish in Camps Around the World

TEACHING OBJECTIVES

To help students understand how war and economic devastation are forcing millions of people into refugee camps--and why developed countries have cut their aid to those who languish in often miserable camps around the world.

Discussion Questions:

* Why do people become refugees?

* What is responsible for the growing tide of refugees?

* What is most important when U.S. officials are deciding whether to admit refugees: their education, their ability to speak English, their job skills, or their fear of death or violence if they return to their homelands? Something else?

* What difficulties face those who wish to help refugees around the world?

CLASSROOM STRATEGIES

Before Reading: Have students study the photo of Afghan refugees in the Jalozai camp, on pages 22-23. Ask them to guess the ages of the young people huddled behind the fence. What might one infer about health conditions and privacy in the camp? After students study the photo and read the caption, tell them to assume they are in charge of an exhibit of news photos. What title would they give this photo?

Critical Thinking: Ask students to argue in support of one of two approaches to the refugee problem: Do they favor spending more money to care for refugees and to improve living conditions in their camps? Or, as United Nations refugee expert Panos Moumtzis advocates, would they favor early military intervention to prevent the violence that produces refugees in the first place?

Which course is more efficient, more cost-effective? Does funding refugee camps simply prolong refugees' misery? Does the U.S. have the right to endanger the lives of its military personnel in conflicts that do not threaten this country? Direct attention to the remarks of Kim R. Holmes, on page 23. Is there any middle ground? Could the U.S. become more involved in helping refugees--without becoming a global policeman?

Do any students suggest doing nothing to help refugees? If so, ask them to defend their position.

Web Watch: For the latest news about refugees, go to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees at www. unhcr.ch/. For other links on refugees, log on to upfrontmagazine.com

With reporting by New York Times correspondents BARRY BEARAK in Pakistan and BARBARA CROSSETTE in New York.