Ragıp Soylu's stark warning in his recent Middle East Eye commentary cuts to the bone: with escalating tensions around Iran — protests raging since late 2025, whispers of U.S. or Israeli strikes, and a regime teetering on the edge — a full-blown explosion could unleash a refugee wave unlike anything we've seen. Ninety million Iranians won't just hunker down in the region or spill into Turkey; they'll head for Europe, overwhelming borders and systems already strained. And his jab at Ursula von der Leyen — prioritising "yoga camps in India" over crisis leadership — highlights a perennial failure: Western elites fiddling while potential firestorms brew. But this isn't new; mass immigration from war zones is the "usual" human response to chaos, a tragic pattern that's defined modern history. I will unpack why it keeps happening, why it's sensible to brace for it, and why ignoring it (as Soylu accuses the EU of doing) only makes the fallout worse — especially when parallels hit home in places like Australia, where unchecked inflows are already accelerating social strains.
War-driven migration isn't some anomaly; it's baked into humanity's survival instinct. When bombs fall, regimes crack down, or economies implode under conflict, people don't stick around for the rubble — they flee. History is littered with examples. Post-World War II, Europe saw 12 million displaced Germans alone, redrawing maps and fuelling decades of tension. Vietnam's fall in 1975 sent over 1.6 million "boat people" scrambling across seas, many to Australia, reshaping demographics and sparking debates over integration that echo today. Afghanistan's cycles — Soviet invasion in the '80s, Taliban resurgence post-2001, and the chaotic 2021 U.S. withdrawal — pushed millions into Pakistan, Iran, and beyond, with Europe absorbing waves that strained welfare systems. Syria's civil war from 2011 onward? Over 6.8 million refugees, mostly to Turkey (3.6 million), Jordan, and Lebanon, but hundreds of thousands trekked to Europe in 2015-16, triggering Brexit backlash and far-Right surges. Ukraine's invasion in 2022 displaced 6 million externally, mostly to EU neighbors, testing solidarity pacts to their limits. Each time, the "usual" script plays out: initial humanitarian outpouring, followed by resource crunches, cultural clashes, and political blowback.
Why does this pattern persist? Simple: war destroys the basics — safety, jobs, food, futures. In Iran's case, ongoing protests (sparked by economic woes but morphing into anti-regime fury) have already killed thousands, with arbitrary detentions and a deepening humanitarian mess. Add potential escalation — U.S. strikes on nuclear sites, Israeli retaliation, or internal collapse — and scenarios get grim. As the BBC outlines, regime change could spark civil war, ethnic insurgencies (Kurds, Baluchis rising), and a power vacuum, sending millions fleeing. Neighbours like Turkey are already fortifying borders, fearing a refugee influx that could empower Iranian Kurds and create a volatile "Kurdish zone" from Iran to Syria. Europe? It's the endgame destination for many, via treacherous routes through Turkey and the Balkans. Soylu's point: without EU initiative — like bolstering diplomacy with Tehran or pre-emptive aid to stabilise the region — this could dwarf the Syrian crisis, with Gulf states dreading energy disruptions and everyone eyeing a nuclear program's fallout in chaos.
The "usual" consequences are predictable yet ignored. Host countries face immediate overload: Turkey already hosts 3.6 million Syrians and millions of Afghans; another wave from Iran could buckle its economy. Europe, post-2015, saw asylum systems crash, with Germany taking in over a million, leading to integration headaches, crime spikes in some areas, and political earthquakes (AfD's rise, Merkel's fall). Socially, it's a double-edged sword: migrants bring skills and vitality (think Iranian doctors enriching host societies), but rapid influxes without planning erode cohesion — tensions over housing, jobs, and culture flare, as seen in UK's post-Syrian migrant polls showing cross-ethnic opposition to more arrivals. Economically, short-term costs soar (UNHCR pegs refugee hosting at billions annually), though long-term gains can emerge if integration works. But leadership often fails here: Soylu's dig at von der Leyen echoes broader critiques — EU focus on green deals or symbolic trips while neglecting border realities. It's the same myopia that lets wars fester, then acts surprised by the human tide.
Down under in Australia this "usual" dynamic is playing out without direct war proximity, but with similar strains from global flows. Post-Afghan and Ukrainian intakes, plus record net migration (424,000 annually under Albanese), we're seeing housing crunches, service backlogs, and social decline accelerating. It's not racism to question sustainability; it's survival, as ethnic minorities themselves oppose unchecked levels. An Iranian crisis could indirectly spike boat arrivals or asylum claims here, amplifying debates. The lesson? Proactive policy — diplomacy to prevent wars, fair but firm borders, integration focus — beats reactive chaos.
In the end, mass immigration from war is "usual" because humans prioritise life over lines on maps. But as Soylu warns, pretending it won't happen — or yoga-ing through warnings — invites disaster. Europe, Australia, the world: time to lead, not lag. Brace for Iran's potential storm, but better yet, help douse the flames before they spread.
https://michaeltsnyder.substack.com/p/no-deal-with-iran-an-apocalyptic