spring 2016 lectures on refugee and migration
TRANSCRIPT
1
Spring 2016 Lectures on Refugee and Migration
Dr. Rachael M. Rudolph
Lecturer and Researcher
Webster University Thailand
2
Lecture 1: Introduction to Refugees and Migration
This year’s course will be different from the past. In the past, we focused on refugee
communities across the globe. Students will still be exposed to refugee communities across the
globe but the main foci for exploration are the Afghan and Syrian refugees. Both communities
have been neglected in the past. There has been greater emphasis of late on the Syrian refugees
because of the global crisis but the Afghan refugees are still neglected. Students will explore the
communities; the causes for and effects of migration, the conditions of the camps, communities
and states where they find either temporary or permanent living arrangements; and, the national,
regional and international laws to assess their rights and the programs/options available to them.
Lecture is designed to provide the conceptual and theoretical framework needed for the
investigation into and analyses of the communities. After such a thorough examination, students
will decide whether to either design an awareness campaign for the purpose of bringing global
attention to the communities or design a global action plan. Our class is small, so there will be
more freedom to play.
Students will have a total of four homework assignments, one literature review assignment, and
one final project. The four homework assignments and the literature review are designed to
prepare students for the final project. The final project can either be group-based or individual-
based. We will decide as a class following spring break. The grade distribution for the course is
as follows:
Homework/In-class Assignments 40%
Literature Review 30%
Final Research Project 25%
Attendance 5%
Students should take note that the grade book used in Connections/World Classroom does not
allow me to alter the percentages as allocated above. This means that at the end of the course
students should multiple the grade received in the designated column in the grade book by the
percentage allocated to get the final grade.
All the materials for the course can be found on Webster World Classroom and the course
FaceBook page, which is https://www.facebook.com/refugeesandmigration. In the albums,
students will find the 2016 albums to be used for this semester. Past course materials are located
in the other albums, including student research papers. Students should feel free to look at and
review what other students have done, but they should keep in mind that the past assignments are
different from what we will be doing this semester. The previous papers though provide a
valuable source for learning lessons from other refugee communities. For the students who do
not use FB, lectures will also be posted on my personal blog at:
http://mental2musings.blogspot.com/.
3
Lecture 2: Introduction to Refugee Studies, the Actors, and the Development of the
International System of Refugee Protection
The material covered today provides a foundation for the lecture on human migration and
theories on migration. However, before beginning the lecture I want us to watch two short
clips—one on Syrian Refugees and the other on Afghan refugees. They are both from 2015.
Here are the links: 1) Smuggled from Syria to Greece—the story of one family
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPnxc4vvKZk&feature=youtu.be&a; and, 2) A Story of
Refugees from a war the world wants to forget
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T09fQ7mr5bM. With these stories in our mind, let us now
turn to introducing students to the study of refugees; the classification of actors, namely refugees,
internally displaced persons, asylum seekers and migrants; and, an overview of the development
of the international system of refugee protection.
I. Introduction to the Study of Refugees
Although Refugee Studies did not become a field of study until the 1980s its roots extend back in
to the 1920s. It is scholarship written in that period that forms the foundation of the field. It can
be broken into three temporal periods, namely the period between WWI and WWII, the post-
WWII or Cold War period, and the post-Cold War period. Demarcating the literature temporally
allows us to capture the evolution of the field and to contextualize the legal, political and
practical developments.
Studies in the first period focused primarily on European refugees. The primary emphasis on the
European refugees is what led to academic debates on classical versus new refugees. It should be
noted that although the European refugees were the main focus there were other studies
conducted on the displacement of individuals in other areas such as Asia, Africa, the Middle East
and Latin America. The Cold War period would see the increase in the studies of refugees in the
other areas.
Studies conducted on refugees in the second period are further distinguished by the pre-and post-
1960 periods. In the pre-1960s period, studies primarily focused on refugees flowing from the
former Soviet Union. It is interesting to note here that there was the shift in emphasis from those
migrating as a result of conflict to those migrating for economic reasons, at least in the Eastern
European context. Conflict though was still the main reason for migration in other parts of the
world. Between the years of the 1960s and the 1970s, the studies shifted their focus to refugees
and internally displaced persons from the decolonization that was occurring in Africa, Asia and
the Middle East. Finally, studies in the third or final period saw studies on refugee communities
that corresponded to the foreign policy priorities of countries where the academics were living
and/or of the country from which they hailed. Greater emphasis was placed on internally
displaced persons in this period.
A common set of research questions transcended the temporal periods. They are as follows:
Which refugees should be studied; who is a refugee?
What causes refugee movements?
4
What are the best solutions to the refugee problems?
The answers vary temporally and spatially, however. A common assumption is that refugees
constitute a complex phenomenon. Before we turn to classifying or, rather, defining the actors to
be discussed over the course of the semester, let us watch a short clip on the Carliean (Finland)
refugees in WWII. The link to the clip is as follows:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAGT6IQTB4Q.
II. Classifying the Actors: Refugees, Internally Displace Persons, Asylum Seekers
and Migrants
Classifying actors or defining them is not an easy task. As will be learned over the course of the
semester, who is a refugee, an internally displaced person, an asylum seeker and a migrant will
vary internationally, regionally and nationally. The variance can be explained, in part, by the
interpretation of the meaning given by international and/or regional conventions. It can also be
explained by temporal and spatial changes. The existing literature in the field of refugee studies
posits that the definitions are either narrow or broad. Those that are narrow tend to be legalistic
in nature and hail from the fields of international politics and law whereas those that are broad
tend to hail from the fields of anthropology, sociology and developmental studies. The latter
category of definitions tends to blur the line between refugees, immigrants and other types of
migrants such as economic migrants. Over the course of the semester students will capture the
definitional variance over time and space and its impact on individuals fleeing conflict or the
conditions within their home countries to communities living in a third country. We will also see
how national interpretations change over time and space.
Refugees and IDPs. Let us start first by accepting that a refugee is someone who has
been forced to leave his or her country. Then, let us turn to a clip to hear what it is to be a
refugee. The clip can be accessed through the following link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpwqK3B2ac8. An internally displaced person is someone
who is forced to flee but who is not able to cross an internationally recognized border. Let us
watch a short clip on internally displaced persons in the DRC, which can be accessed through the
following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UI6jKU8cRU. It should be noted that the
problem of IDPs was not recognized by the international community until the 1990s. In
particular, it was the UNSC resolution authorizing foreign allied intervention in Iraq to protect
the Kurds in 1991 that brought attention to and raised the plight of internally displaced persons.
The IDP issue and its lack of legal recognition in international, regional and national conventions
and laws are of major concern for the global community, particularly since the number of IDPs
increases as there is a decline in ideological and material support for refugees.
Refugees and Asylum Seekers. The term refugee and asylum seeker are often confused,
conflated or used interchangeably. An asylum seeker is someone who claims to be a refugee but
whose claim has yet to be verified. National asylum systems are established to determine the
status of the individual and to decide whether he or she qualifies for asylum or any other form of
international protection. The UNHCR Refugee Convention does not afford the right to asylum
but it is presupposed. It is derived from the clause, “the right to seek and to enjoy in other
countries asylum from persecution.” The right not to be refouled also provides support for the
5
right to asylum. The non-refoulment obligation holds that an individual cannot be returned of if
his or her life or freedom would be threatened. The principle is supposed to apply irrespective of
whether an individual meets the strict refugee definition.
Migrants. A migrant differs from a refugee, an IDP and an asylum seeker. Human
migration is defined as a physical movement by human beings from one to another geographical
area. Movement refers to both inside and outside the country and it can be voluntary and
involuntary. Whether it is within or outside of the country or whether it is voluntary or not
matters for the classification of the type of migrant. A migrant is defined as an individual who
has resided in a foreign country for more than one year irrespective of the causes (voluntary or
involuntary) and the means (regular or irregular) used to migrate. An immigrant is someone who
has voluntarily left his or her country. An emigrant is someone looking to leave his or her
country voluntary. Let us turn to a short story of Italian migration to Australia. The clip can be
accessed through the following link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGJGEdCFVtA.
Migration has both positive and negative effects, which can include but should not be limited to:
The loss of skilled workers and intellectuals
Knowledge transfer
Job opportunities
Reduction in unemployment
Increased flows of remittances and foreign exchange
Cultural transfer.
III. Development of the International Refugee Protection System
Kneebone (2009) categorizes the development of the international system of refugee protection
by the post-WWII period, the Cold War period, and the post-Cold War period. The post-WWII
period begins with the 1951 Refugee Convention, which was intended to deal with the European
refugee problem. It also established the UNHCR. The 1967 Protocol expanded the classification
of a refugee by removing the temporal and geographical limits of the status of refugees.1 The
Convention and Protocol sought to implement the basic right to flee persecution; to seek and
enjoy asylum; and, to seek to enshrine the right against refoulment. They also provided a
hierarchy of basic rights to refugees, which range from the rights to life and liberty to social and
economic rights. Some of the basic rights include:
The right against refoulment and discrimination;
The provision of adequate protection to protect against refoulment;
The right to free access to the courts of law in the territory of the contracting state; and,
Freedom from detention.
The author specifically highlights certain actions taken by states which impinge upon the right
thereto afforded. Some of those actions include non-entry measures, interception, interdiction,
1 The 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol can be accessed by the following link:
http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49da0e466.html. Time will be allocated following lecture the theories and causes of
migration for a discussion on the evolution of the UNHCR.
6
off-shore processing, restrictive application of refugee definitions, and the application of third
safety country concepts. These will be discussed in more detail over the course of the semester.
The Cold War period corresponded to those refugees who were migrating from the former Soviet
Union and decolonization in Africa and Asia. It should be noted that in this period there was a
conflation by some activists, policymakers and academics on the defining of political and
economic refugees and political and economic migrants. The 1951 Convention was drafted in
the period of the flow of refugees from the wars in Europe, thus there were temporal and
geographical limitations. The 1967 Protocol lifted those restrictions. It recognized the global
nature of the problem; the universality of the rights of refugees; and, the possibility of global
solutions. What it did not do, however, was grant the UNHCR the powers needed to deal with
the new flows of refugees. Consequently, regions and national governments were left to fill the
void. It was in this period that we saw the rise of regional agreements to deal with refugees.
Please see the OAU Convention as an example, which can be accessed through the following
link: http://www.unhcr-centraleurope.org/pdf/resources/legal-documents/international-refugee-
law/1969-organization-of-african-unity-convention-governing-the-specific-aspects-of-refugee-
problems-in-africa.html. The OAU Convention is important to read because it illustrates the
attempt to address the definitional problem left by the UN Refugee Convention and Protocol.
The post-Cold War period saw the rise of IDPs and a developing awareness of forced migration.
Refugees, IDPs, asylum seekers and migrants and the relevant international and regional
conventions and domestic laws are discussed over the course of the semester through the
exploration of the communities and countries covered across the globe.
IV. Conclusion: From Evolution to Conceptual Complexity
This lecture introduced students to the evolution of the field of refugee studies; defined the
actors, namely refugees, IDPS, asylum seekers, and migrants; and, provided an overview of the
development of the international system of refugee protection. The evolution of the literature
and the international system of refugee protection highlight the temporal development of the
field, the definition of the actors, and the rights and protections granted under international law.
The temporal periods covered were the post-WWII period, the Cold War period, and the post-
Cold War period. Highlighted were also the loss of protection and a lack of rights granted to
individuals as result of greater conceptual complexity.
7
Refugee and Migration Lecture 3: Theory and the Levels of Analysis for Examining
Origins, Causes and Effects of Migration
Lecture three is seeks to provide students with an overview of the theoretical lenses and the
levels of analysis used to explain the origins, causes and effects of migration. The theoretical
lenses and approaches found within the existing literature fall into two categories, namely those
focusing on origins and causes; and, those focusing on the effects. Each of these categories is
discussed separately and within the context of the levels of analysis. There are three levels of
analysis—micro, macro and meso levels of analysis. Although the presentation here makes it
seem as if the theoretical field is well-defined and clear cut it is not. The boundaries drawn are
for the purpose of capturing a glimpse of what is used to explain the phenomenon under
investigation. The lecture concludes with an overview of the second homework assignment,
which is due on February 23, 2016. Assignments submitted between February 24 and March 2
will be considered late, whereas those submitted after March 3 will NOT be accepted.
Theoretical Lenses and the Levels of Analysis: From Migration to the Origins, Causes and
Effects
Human migration, as will be recalled from Lecture Two, refers to the involuntary or involuntary
physical movement inside or outside a country by human beings. When one migrates,
irrespective of the individuals’ classification, there are changes in residence, changes in
employment, and changes in social relations. These common phenomena are examined in the
theories of migration. Theories of migration focus mainly on the origins and causes, effects of
migration, and/or migration policies. They are further demarcated by the micro, meso and macro
level of analysis. Micro-level approaches fall into the individual level of analysis. Meso-level
approaches fall into the middle level of analysis; they also often connect the micro and macro
levels of analyses. Macro approaches focus on the systemic/structural level of analysis. They
tend to concentrate on interactions and relations. An overview of the focus and assumptions
articulated at each level of analysis are provided, with first the theories and approaches focusing
on the origins and causes and then the effects of migration and migration polices being
examined.
Theories and approaches at the micro-level of analysis are concerned mainly with the role of the
individual, human capital and the reasons for migration. They assume that migration is an
individual calculation based on a calculation of the positive and negative factors; that migration
is an investment in the human agent, which has both costs and benefits; and, that migration
increases with time, which is driven by growing economic disparities between developed and
developing countries, by education and training, and by technological process. An increase in
migration may be therefore explained, in part, by the phenomenon itself.
Theories and approaches at the macro-level of analysis are concerned with migration patterns.
Migration is viewed as a system of multiple flows between origin and destination—flows of
persons, goods, services and ideas. It is, thus, a circular phenomenon embedded in a system of
interdependent variables. The variables include market forces, sociopolitical forces, power
dynamics, geography, information and continued feed-back, social and family networks,
monetary transfers and flows of money, relationship between internal and international migration
8
flows, urban phenomenon, and dependency on low-or-unskilled workers and wages. The system
and the circular flows are the focus, depending though of course on the theory and approach
adopted.
Theories and approaches wherein which the micro and macro-levels of analysis collide examine
both migrant communities and migration patterns and their evolution. Migrant community
characteristics provide a means to explain the volume of migration, migration schemes and
counter-streams. Migration patterns, it is posited, have evolved due to other demographic
transitions; the linkage between the historical development of migration patterns, their social and
economic significance, and the various phases in the development of capitalism and
globalization; and, the personal contacts and sources of information about the situation at
destination.
Theories and approaches at the meso-level of analysis are mid-level explanations of the
phenomenon under investigation. The two dominant approaches are the gender and network
approaches. The gender approach is concerned primarily with female migration, the trajectories
thereof, and their geographical mobility; the gender division of labor among the communities;
and, female migrant exploitation and trafficking. The network approach examines the various
stakeholders that facilitate network operation. It is therein assumed that migrants are actors of
change; that the existence of migration networks lead to the creation of social capital; and, that
social capital increases the probability of future migration. The main concerns are the linkages
between the places of origin and destination; the linkages between actors and structural forces;
and, the linkages between networks and the migration feedback loop.
Effects of Migration and Migration Policies: Theoretical Lenses and Levels of Analysis
Theories and approaches examining the effects of migration and migration policies can also be
demarcated by the levels of analysis similar to the way in which the theories and approaches
examining the origins and causes were examined. The discussion here, however, is categorized
by effect type, namely the economic, political and social effects of migration. Migration policies
are only briefly presented here, as we will return to them after covering the domestic, regional
and national laws on week seven.
Theories and approaches examining the economic effects of migration are focused on all three
levels of analysis. There is greater concentration at the micro and macro levels of analysis,
however. The micro-level of analysis is focused on the specific types of effects experienced by
the migrant/non-migrant communities; the degree or extent of the effects; and, the ethnic
enclaves and geographical concentration of migrant communities. The macro-level of analysis is
focused on the structural impact of immigration and migration; the impact on the economic
structure of the host and home countries; and, the types of immigration such as skilled/unskilled
labor, and irregular and temporary migrations. The meso-level of analysis is focused on the
linkages between emigration, development and/or the relationships between and within in the
emigration and/or sending regions; the impact and effects of the types of migration on
development (temporary versus permanent); the role of migrants as agents of change in the
development process; and, the actual and perceived images of migration and its impact on
development.
9
Theories and approaches examining the political effects approach migration from two angles,
namely refugee movements and the effect of migration on diversity and identity. They are
concerned with the case of refugee movements and refugee migration in the global context; the
type of migration, namely whether it is legal or illegal and voluntary or involuntary; the factors
of migration such as the internal versus external effects, the determinants of persecution, the
impact of external refugee politics on the host country, and the decision to grant refugee status;
the domestic political effects from the impact migration has on the host country; and, the
political identities of and the relations between minorities and majorities. Many of the political
effects are connected to and traverse the theories and approaches seeking to explain the social
effects of migration. Those theories and approaches are concerned primarily with the migrant
and non-migrant communities and home and host countries. Their main foci are the social, racial
and ethnic impact of migration; social cohesion and conflict; issues of identity, discrimination
and citizenship; and, the role of multiculturalism.
Finally, theories and approaches focusing on migration policies seek to both inform and provide
justification for migration policies, particularly either for inclusion or exclusion. They are primarily
concerned with the role of national sovereignty in migration policies; the freedom or restriction
of movement; the impact on citizenship laws, their scope and expanse; the scope of legal rights
for migrant communities and protections; the responsibility for managing migration and the
protection of rights; immigrant access to societal, legal, economic and political benefits; and, the
criminal laws in the host country. These theories and approaches and concerns are revisited and
examined in more detail when we cover the domestic, regional and international laws on
refugees and migrants. We will also discuss in that week in more detail the rights afforded to
both refugees and migrants.
Conclusion: Homework Assignment 2—Writing Afghan and Syrian Refugee Narratives
(60 Points)
The previous homework assignment was designed to introduce students to the Afghan and
Syrian refugee communities. In this homework assignment, students will research on and write
about the refugees’ narratives. Content to be used for this assignment can and should be open-
source. All material used should be cited properly. Please follow the format and instructions
provided below.
1. Introduction
a. Please introduce the refugee communities to be covered in the essay.
b. Define what is meant by narratives to your reading audience and what specifically
you will focus on when capturing the narrative of the refugee communities.
c. Stipulate the temporal period covered for each and explain the temporal variation.
It is not sufficient to only capture narrative of the year 2015. There should be
selected coverage over the duration of the conflict. Explain the method of
selection.
10
d. Conclude the introduction with a thesis statement.
2. Narratives of Afghan Refugees
a. Provide a short overview of what is to be covered in the narrative.
b. Articulate the narrative.
c. Analyze the narrative.
3. Narratives of Syrian Refugees
a. Provide a short overview of what is to be covered in the narrative.
b. Articulate the narrative.
c. Analyze the narrative.
4. Conclusion
a. Restate the thesis statement.
b. Summarize the findings.
c. Discuss the similarities and differences in the narratives examined.
d. Discuss the importance of narratives and why they should be examined and
learned.
11
Lecture 4: The UNHCR and Filling the Gap in the Domestic and International Laws
We have talked of the gap between domestic, regional and international laws pertaining to
refugees, IDPs and asylum seekers and how the interpretation of those laws impact their rights
and the protection provided (or the lack thereof) since the beginning of the semester. Through
assignment four and the literature review, students will focus on and target this gap by first
exploring the academic literature on refugee and asylum systems; and, then, by exploring the
refugee and asylum systems in the countries identified as strategically significant for the present
global refugee crisis. Those countries selected include Canada, Germany, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey,
the United Kingdom and the United States. The European Union is also a significant regional
body for the present crisis, so after discussing the UNHCR in general we will end class by
listening to a lecture delivered in 2013 by Judith Kunim, UNHCR Director of Europe
Operations, on the European asylum system. The link to the selected clip is as follows:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_Cthb21UpU.
We will revisit this lecture and the European system after students have completed homework
assignment four and the literature review. The European system for refugees and asylum seekers
was once heralded as being the most advanced and far more powerful than the protection system
outlined in and formed from the basis of the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocols. Now it is
under strain and there is talk, far and wide, of its potential collapse, with certain European states
condemning Germany and segments of their population rejecting the humanity displayed by
leaders such as Angela Merkel and the German people who opened their hearts to welcome with
open arms individuals fleeing from scenes of death, destruction, torture and hopelessness. The
irony of the reaction is that many within the population of the states and its leaders have
championed human rights and the ideal of humanity. Could Noam Chomsky be correct when he
suggested that we are witnessing the birth of a new world that cares little for humanity and
human rights? The actions across the globe by ordinary individuals who are reaching out to
those in need suggest otherwise but only time will tell. What is in jeopardy at the present though
is a system that has provided assistance to and protection for millions across the globe, and
because of that we will now turn to a discussion of the UNHCR.
An Introduction to UNHCR
The UNHCR’s roots are derived from the League of Nations. The League of Nations emerged
from the Paris Peace Conference in 1917, which brought an end to WWI. Its principle mission
was to maintain peace. In 1921, the first High Commissioner for Refugees was appointed to the
League’s first refugee organization. The League would actually establish a succession of
organizations and agreements to deal with new refugee situations as they emerged. Their
purpose was to introduce the Nansen Document, which was the forerunner to the Convention
Travel Documents; to enable thousands to return home or settle in other countries; and, to
implement and oversee the protection of refugees.
When the United Nation’s replaced the League, the International Refugee Organization (IRO)
was created to protect and repatriate the refugees who were previously recognized. The IRO
was replaced by the UNHCR in 1950/1951. The UNHCR was created in December 1950 but
12
began its operation in January 1951. Its operating assumption is that refugees do not have access
to the legal and social protection that a properly functioning government is supposed to extend to
its citizens, thus it is incumbent upon the international community to provide such protection. It
has two main and closely related functions, which are to protect refugees; and, to promote
durable solutions to their problems. Providing material support was not one of its functions at
the time of its creation. Material support was seen to be the responsibility of the states.
Between the years of 1952 and 1954 the UNHCR’s role, functions and activities would expand.
The initial functions, as will be recalled, were to protect refugees and to promote durable
solutions. Providing protection included quasi-diplomatic and consular protection to refugees
and ensuring the refugees were afforded basic human rights and an adequate standard of
treatment. Promoting durable solutions encompassed finding permanent solutions for persons
within its competence. Added thereto in this period was the provision of humanitarian assistance.
This corresponded to the establishment the UN Refugee Fund and an emergency assistance fund
to assist the neediest cases.
The model employed by the UNHCR focused on care and maintenance rather than on
empowerment for self-reliance. The UNHCR Care and Maintenance Model facilitated a
perception that the systems and services for refugees were parallel to, separate from, and in many
cases better resourced than those available to the local population. This perception weakened the
notion of state responsibility imbued in the Refugee laws and conventions. Emphasis was placed
on empowerment for self-reliance in the post-2001 period. All of the functions, roles and
activities of the UNHCR are concerned with ensuring accountability.
Striving for Accountability for Operational Efficiency
Accountability is a principle which requires public authorities to explain their actions and to be
subject to scrutiny. It is defined by the UNHCR as a commitment to deliver results for
populations of concern within a framework of transparency, agreed feasibility, delegated
authority and available resources. There are three overarching dimensions to UNHCR’s
principle of accountability: accountability to those providing funding; accountability to legal
mandates; and, accountability to persons of concern. Attaining accountability requires the
establishment, therefore, of a system to ensure the responsible use of financial, political and
material means provided to the agency and the use of the authority invested in and its staff.
The UNHCR’s system of accountability comprises two principle and complimentary
mechanisms: results-based management and global needs assessment. Results-based
Management is the method used to enhance accountability. It employs the software Focus,
which allows the agency to streamline monitoring, analyses and reporting. Global Needs
Assessment compliment Focus. It emphasizes planning, maps the total needs of populations of
concerns and development plans and the needed budgets. It allows the UNHCR to
depict/simulate likely consequences of unmet needs of protected populations; and, to prioritize
activities across the organization.
In conclusion, the lecture today provides a general overview of the origins and evolution of the
UNHCR. The UNHCR and its programs will be revisited over the next couple of weeks. We
13
will spend the next three weeks on camp security and the Four “Rs” Framework. Once they have
been examined, then we will revisit and reassess the present global crisis and the strain placed on
the refugee and asylum systems at the domestic, regional and international level.
14
Lecture 5: From the Right to Protect Refugees to the Provision of Camp Security
Refugee protection is a mandated responsibility for the UNHCR. National governments also
have a responsibility to protect the refugees living in their borders, irrespective of whether the
Refugee Convention has been signed and ratified. Their responsibility is based on rights
enshrined in the Law of Armed Conflict, the UN Charter, and human rights law. A failure of the
national governments and international community to provide security and ensure the basic
protection of refugee and migrant rights has far greater consequences for the global community.
The global community must be prepared to protect against increases in violence and exploitation
in the areas where refugees and migrants are living; reduce and eliminate fear and instability in
the communities where the camps are located; and, prevent the worsening of the existing
humanitarian crises in the camps. Camp security is, therefore, the focus of this lecture. In
particular, the lecture introduces students to the three common types of camp protection (Institute
for Human Security, 2008); the role and responsibilities of security forces (Volger, 2006); and,
the determinants for camp security (International Human Security, 2008; Volger, 2006; and
Jacobsen, 1999). Today’s class concludes with a discussion on camp security in unofficial or
illegal refugee camps/villages and how to balance human rights and the provision of
humanitarian aid with the need to ensure and provide security for those living within the borders
of a state and in the camp.
Refugee Security: Types of Camp Protection and the Role and Responsibility of Security
Actors
Although the type of protection adopted in a refugee camp typically depends on the agreement
between the UNHCR and the host government there are three common types of camp protection
that exist. They are protection provided by government forces, protection provided by
international peacekeepers, and self-protection by refugee communities. The government forces
providing protection can take the form of regular or paramilitary and/or the police force.
International peacekeepers are typically deployed to provide security at IDP and UNHCR
refugee camps located in conflict zones (depending on the agreement UNHCR signed with the
host government). Refugee communities are active participants in the provision of camp
security, irrespective of whether the UNHCR or the host government provides adequate security
measures. A refugee committee typically works in tandem with the authoritative structure of the
camp. Students should keep in mind the variance in the type of actor and the types of protection
because for the remainder of the lecture the generic term “Security Forces” is adopted.
Security Forces are charged with the enforcement of the camp rules and restoration of order
(Volger, 2006). They are expected to report civil, administrative and criminal cases to the Camp
authorities/officials/judiciary. The chain of command typically entails reporting to the Camp
Committee, and the District Officer (if national/paramilitary present) or the UNHCR. This will
depend on who is responsible; the agreement between UNHCR and the host government;
whether the host government is a signatory to and has ratified the Refugee convention (or other
related convention if not a signatory); and, the national laws governing the protection of
refugees.
15
Security forces are generally responsible for the transmission of more serious cases to the
country’s authorities. Symbolic protective forces do not ensure a camps protection. Security
forces should be present, armed and trained, and able to control and monitor. They must have
authority to handle the problems that arise within the camps. Problems highlighted in the
existing literature typically pertain to physical safety of the camp and its residents and the
breakdown of law and order within the camp (Jacobsen, 1999).
The physical safety of the camp and its residents are threatened when there are external attacks
or raids on camps; violence and intimidation inside and/or outside of the camps and their
surroundings; and/or, a breakdown of law and order. The breakdown of law and order gives rise
to crime and other associated problems. Attacks inside the camp correspond to the breakdown in
law and order, the conditions of the camp, the psychological ailments of the camp residents, and
political disputes arising from the external conflict. External attacks or raids on the camp are
often a product of perceived antagonism; giving assistance and protection to enemies; the camps
falling under the control of political and military elements; and/or, the intentional targeting of
camps as a political or military strategy to weaken or demoralize opponents, to reduce host
government support for refugees, or to ethnically cleanse opponents (Institute for Human
Security, 2008; and, Volger, 2006).
When assessing actual attacks it is found that most occur at night. At night aid workers, camp
personnel and higher officials depart. Only the camp security forces are present. This is why
security forces having authority matters, as well as the type of security plan adopted. Attacks
also increase with time, particularly in the absence of a security plan and security forces.
Studies conducted found that there are a higher number of attacks in camps where security is
predominantly provided by the government (though there is variance in IDP versus Refugee
camps), but that more generally protected camps are attacked less. They also found that there is
an increase in attacks in the first five years and a decrease in the number of attacks thereafter.
In conclusion, when assessing camp security there are some key components students should
ponder. First, they should ponder who is responsible for security. Are the selected camps
UNHCR run? If they are not run by UNHCR, then is there at least an agreement therewith for
the provision of assistance? Second, student should ponder the security laws of the host country
and its relationship with the refugee communities (differentiating the legal and illegal camps).
What are the host governments’ laws on the protection and provision of aid to refugee
communities living within the border? Are the host governments signatories to and have they
ratified the Refugee Convention? What about the other existing international or regional
conventions pertaining to the protection of rights of migrants, refugees or stateless persons?
Third, students should ponder the conditions of the camps, its proximity to the native
community, and the nature of the relationship or degree of interaction between the native
community and the refugee community. Are the camps’ conditions conducive to penetration of
armed actors, criminal elements, traffickers, and/or other elements seeking who can exploit those
who are confined to the camp and have limited opportunities for the future? Fourth, students
should ponder the internal dynamics of the camp, the nature and degree of interaction between
the communities therein living, and the type and nature of security present. What is the type of
security provided in the camp? Who is responsible for security? Is there variance in terms of
whether there are existing government or international peacekeepers present or if security is only
16
provided by the Refugee Community? What are the size, composition and security forces?
What authority do they have in carrying out security tasks? Are they able to carry a weapon?
Can they arrest and charge violators? What is the chain of command? Fifth, students should
ponder the nature of the criminal justice system and the rights afforded and access granted to the
refugee/migrant communities. Who is responsible for determining the validity of the charges?
What courts are available? Finally, students should ponder the rights versus security debate.
How can we balance human rights and the provision of humanitarian aid with the need to ensure
and provide security for those living within the borders of a state and in the camp? Camp
security is important because in its absence there will instability and a greater breakdown in law
and order within the area wherein refugee/migrant communities are residing. A breakdown of
law and order usually occurs at the very beginning; it usually occurs with the initial influx of
refugees/migrants. We will revisit today’s lecture over the next couple of weeks when
examining integration, rehabilitation, repatriation and relocation programs for refugees.
17
Lecture 6: From Camp Security to Local Integration of Refugees
The previous lecture introduced students to the three common types of camp protection, the role
and responsibilities of security forces, and the determinants for camp security. An issue raised
and briefly touched on in our discussions on camp security was the importance of integration of
refugees into the first and third countries generally and, more specifically, into the host
communities of said countries. According to Fielden (2008) and Hansen, Mutabaraka and
Ubricao (2008), local integration is one of three policy options available in attempting to resolve
the issue of protracted refugees. Today’s lecture, therefore, focuses specifically on the local
integration process. The three types of policy options will be discussed in the coming weeks.
Local Integration: The Concept and its Importance
Local integration is one of three policy options available for dealing with protracted refugees.
Local integration refers to the process of settlement of the refugee community into the first and
third country. Protracted refugees refer to situations where refugee communities have been
living in host countries for more than five years (Hansen, Mutabaraka and Ubricao 2008: 1).2
Although the issue of protracted refugees has plagued host countries in Africa it is a relevant
topic of discussion in the present global refugee crisis. It will be quite some time before the
Syrian refugees can return their home country. Syria will need to be rebuilt in order to provide
homes for all the displaced. They cannot be forcibly repatriated. As the international
community should have learned from the issue of protracted refugees across the globe, forcible
repatriation of refugee communities will increase the political, social and economic instability of
the country still at war (albeit at a lower intensity and contained to a specific area) and hinder the
transition from the phase of unstable to stable peace. We should learn from Africa, particularly
as countries contemplate sending Afghan refugees back to Afghanistan and Syrian refugees back
to Turkey.
Before discussing the process of integration let us pause to watch some selected clips on
internally displaced and refugee communities in Africa.
2014 Documentary—In the Central African Republic—Suitcase or Coffin?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pchXGbK_uCE.
2014 UNHCR Clip—Central African Republic: Torn Communities
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fb1eZshADVQ
2015 Short Clip (2:44-4:05)—Uganda: Rebel Christian Terrorize Civilians:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTI9ZZXmnWs
2014 Documentary—Growing Up in Africa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TltNEG1SjoM
2014 Documentary—The Displaced: Nigerians Turned into Refugees in their
own country https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPuXCw5TCLE.
Given all that we have covered so far and the research that has been conducted on the Afghan
and Syrian refugees, students should ponder and discuss the lessons we can learn from Africa for
2 Hansen, F., J.J. Mutabaraka, and P. Ubricao (2008). “Repatriation, Resettlement, Integration: A study of the three
refugee solutions,” The Niapele Project: 1-26.
18
the current global refugee crisis. We will return to this following the lecture on the process of
integration.
The Process of Integration and its Obstacles
The process of integration involves three aspects, namely legal concessions, economic progress
and cultural adjustment (Fielden 2008: 1-21). First, a country must adopt legislation and provide
a legal framework for integration. This entails both increasing their rights and providing
residency status or some other form of status that enables them to remain permanently in the host
country. The rights need to include access to public services, the right to employment, and the
capacity to purchase and sell property. Second, a country must facilitate self-reliance or self-
sufficiency within the refugee communities. Initiatives such as promoting integration into the
local labor market, facilitating land access, recognizing academic or profession credentials, and
the concession of legal rights contribute to self-sufficiency. Finally, a country must facilitate
social and cultural integration of the refugee community. This is difficult because it entails
programs and initiatives targeting both the refugee community and society within the host
country.
Discrimination and stereotypes associated with the refugee community within the host country
must be addressed. Integration depends on breaking down and overcoming the prejudices that
exist within both the refugee and host communities. Refugee communities must also be able to
find a balance and/or harmony between the past and the present. That is, they must also find
their identity within the host country in order to make integration successful. Tolerance, non-
discrimination and diversity are keys for success. Local integration, however, is not easy.
There are several identified obstacles found in the literature on the studies conducted on local
integration. First, there is the perception that refugees are a temporary inconvenience because
they rely heavily on government and international assistance. Reliance on aid is, in part, the
problem of states not wanting to facilitate self-sufficiency among the refugee communities.
Second, there is the perception that refugees are a threat to national security. Refugee
communities are commonly perceived to be associated with criminal networks and, thus, will
bring crime and violence into the country. There is also that fear of refugees developing armed
networks within the country in order to engage in operations in the environment where the
conflict continues to persist. Third, public opinion is a driving factor in the success of local
integration. If there is not acceptance among the public, then the adoption of such a policy is
unlikely. Fourth, the feeling of not belonging among the refugee communities hinders the
possibility of integration. The feeling of not belonging can be a product of the host country’s
policy on restricted movement and the prohibition against normal, regular employment. It could
also be a product of where the refugee camp is located, particularly if it is placed in a far, remote
area. Fifth, a lack of knowledge and acceptance of the refugee community among the power
networks within the host country hinders integration. Finally, discrimination limits integration.
In spite of the obstacles, there are certain conditions that have been identified for when local
integration is appropriate. First, local integration is appropriate where there is participation and
willingness of the host government. Second, it is appropriate where there is adequate foreign aid
or opportunities for self-sufficiency. Third, it is appropriate where there is willingness among the
19
host population. Finally, it is appropriate where there is the potential for complete legal
integration of the refugee community into society.
Conclusion: Local Integration and Empowerment of Refugee Communities
Successful local integration requires the establishment of a legal process, an economic process, a
social and cultural process.3 When evaluating actual or possible integration in the selected host
countries where refugees are living, students should look at each of those dimensions. Students
should ponder the following:
What perceptions exist of the refugee community among the host population?
What are the prevalent stereotypes and other forms of discrimination that exist in both
the refugee community and the host country?
What can be done to overcome the negative perceptions and the existing discrimination?
What is the host government’s position and is political will present?
Are the opportunities for sustainable living?
What types of initiatives and programs facilitate economic sustainability?
Is cultural and social adaptation possible given the perceptions and levels of
discrimination?
What would need to change and why?
What are some programs and initiatives that might facilitate social and cultural
integration?
We will return to what was covered today in the lecture on the “Four Rs Framwork.”
3 Fielden, A. (2008). “Local Integration: an under-reported solution to protracted refugee situations,” The UNHCR,
Research Paper N. 158: 1-21.
20
Final Lecture: The 4Rs Framework—Repatriation, Resettlement, Reintegration,
Rehabilitation and Reconstruction
The previous lecture introduced students to the concept, importance and process of integration
and its obstacles. Today’s lecture builds on that material by introducing students to the concepts
and processes of repatriation, resettlement, rehabilitation and reconstruction but within the
context of the UNHCR’s 4Rs Framework. Completion of the 4R’s Framework brings to an end
the lectures for the spring 2016 semester. Our remaining two weeks following lecture will be
spent discussing the issues raised over the course of the semester, the policy options available to
countries in the present global refugee crisis, the lessons to be learned from the past and Africa in
particular, and how to bring awareness to and facilitate better protection for Afghan and Syrian
refugees and IDPs. Final assignments (either the awareness project or policy recommendations)
should be submitted to World Classroom no later than May 6, 2016. If students decide to do a
video clip rather than a written project, then please bring me the USB before uploading to
YouTube. There should be absolutely NO content submitted online and/or with a live link until
it has been reviewed and approved by me.
An Overview of the 4Rs Framework: Defining Concepts and Articulating the General
Principles
The 4Rs Framework adopted by the UNHCR emerged in 2003. It has four general guiding
principles. First, the planning, programming and implementation should be country-driven and
bottom up. Second, intervention must address both protection and durable solutions. The
government should show strong commitment to and assume ownership of the entire process.
Third, the 4Rs should be developed from and be an integral part of the transitional recovery
strategy of the government/transition authority. Finally, it should form part of the existing
longer-term development mechanism and instruments. The framework and its principles were
derived from the historical practices employed. The historical practices employed include
repatriation, reintegration, rehabilitation, and reconstruction.
Voluntary repatriation is the solution of choice for a vast majority of refugees. It implies the
restoration of national protection and, through reintegration, the ability to maintain sustainable
livelihoods, access basic services, and fully reintegrate into communities and countries of origin.
The core components include physical safety, legal safety, material safety, and reconciliation.
Timing is essential in repatriation.
Reintegration refers to the ability of returning refugees to secure the political, economic, legal
and social conditions needs to maintain life, livelihood, and dignity. Political conditions refer to
full participation in the political process. Economic conditions refer to the access to productive
resources. Legal conditions refer to the access to legal processes. Social conditions refer to
access to services.
Reintegration must be integrated within broader protections and intervention strategies and
reflect regional priorities. It must go hand-in-hand with rehabilitation and reconstruction.
Rehabilitation is the restoration of social and economic infrastructure destroyed during conflict
21
in areas of return to communities to pursue sustainable livelihoods. Reconstruction is the
reestablishment of political order, institutions and productive capacity to create a base for
sustainable development.
Resettlement is an option for those who do not want or who are unable to return following the
cessation of hostilities. Resettlement is defined as “the planned use of resettlement in a manner
that maximizes the benefits, directly or indirectly, other than those received by the refugee being
resettled. Those benefits may accrue to other refugees, the hosting state, other states or the
international protections regime in general.” It was a policy preference by states when the
UNHCR was created.
States increasingly looked to the UNHCR for guidance on resettlement after the 1980s. In the
mid-1990s, the UNHCR developed regular multilateral consultative processes, strengthened its
resettlement management capacity, and articulated resettlement policy and criteria. The release
of the Resettlement Handbook was a product of these efforts. A Working Group on
Resettlement was also created in 1995, which invited the participation of non-governmental
organizations and set the foundation for future collaboration. The areas of collaboration included
sharing information on needs and priorities, addressing operational issues, developing joint
strategies to respond to specific populations in need of resettlement, and building consensus for
resettlement.
Resettlement depends upon the willingness of a country’s acceptance of the refugees. The list of
countries willing to accept refugees is short. It includes Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria,
Canada, Chile, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Japan,
the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Paraguay, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, United
Kingdom, Uruguay, and the United States. There are some other challenges too that hinder
resettlement as a viable policy option. First, successful resettlement depends on the ability of the
refugees to be integrated into the host country. This means that a minimal level of education is
required. Second, refugees sometimes resort to violent and non-violent collective action against
UNHCR staff due to a lack of understanding of the process and why there is such a delay in the
processing. They blame the UNHCR when, more often than not, the cause for delay or even
denial is because of the host country. Third, resettlement can lead to tension within host
communities. As a durable solution, resettlement was questioned after the turn of the century. It
is now used strategically.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the present global refugee crisis calls into question and shakes the foundation of
the international refugee and asylum protection systems. The EU refugee system, which had
been highlighted as one of the most advanced, is also under strain. Many countries who were
once leading global advocates for human rights have turned their backs on and built barriers to
individuals fleeing the horrors of war. They have faulted and criminalized refugees for seeking
refuge.
Is it the fault of refugees that the protection systems are inadequate; that there are gaps in the
domestic, regional and international laws; and, that they are seeking refuge from the onslaught of
22
war and conflict? Why are individuals and countries blaming the men, women and children for
leaving when given the reversal of the situation they would do the very same. In fact, many of
the ancestors of individuals who are living in countries which are closing their borders have in
fact fled conflict. Turning the back on the other, closing the eyes to the inhumanity of the
actions of policymakers far and near, seeking to blame others rather than taking charge to
alleviate the human suffering of the many who are fleeing war and conflict, criminalizing the
actions of those who do extend a helping hand, and remaining silent to the injustice of the entire
situation are just downright embarrassing and shameful behaviors in the 21st century.
What does the future hold for all those children? Is not each and every individual and leader
who engages in such behavior teaching the young to fear and hate the other? The actions taken
by some sure are not teaching tolerance nor compassion; they are not teaching how we can all
live in a world together as one humankind. They are teaching fear, prejudice and hatred, which
are three of the core components of most deep-seated conflicts. Such actions, therefore, are
sowing the seeds not of conflict; they are definitely not planting peace. I will end this semester’s
lecture on the oft quoted phrase by Martin Luther King, “we must learn to live together as
brothers or perish together as fools.” Let the leaders be the fools! The people need not be; if
they act, eventually those in the halls of power will follow suit.