2015 HIST 2360 Refugee and Migration Course Lectures

2015

HIST 2360

Refugee and Migration Course Lectures

for the

Webster University, Thailand Campus

Dr. Rachael M. Rudolph

Lecturer and Researcher

School of Arts and Sciences

Department of International Relations

[email protected]

Refugees and Migration 1: Introduction to the Course

The HIST 2360 Refugees and Migration course is divided into three parts. The first part

explores the actors, conceptual boundaries, causes and theories of human migration. Lessons

therein learned provide the foundation for situating in context and analyzing the material covered

in the second and third parts of the course. The domestic, regional and international laws

pertaining to refugees and migration and the roles and responsibilities of national governments

and the international community toward refugees, asylum seekers and illegal migrants are

examined in the second part. The lectures provided and the material read are supplemented with

class discussion and students’ research on refugee and migrant communities in Africa, Asia,

Europe, the Americas and the Middle East. Knowledge gained there from provides the

background for the final part’s more narrow focus on camp conditions, camp security, and

refugee programs for integration, relocation, rehabilitation and repatriation.

The course assignments are a combination of three research papers and three presentations. In

the first paper and presentation, students examine the nature of selected refugee or migrant

communities, the living conditions, and the causes for human migration in selected countries

within Africa, Asia and the Middle East. The second paper and presentation examines the camp

conditions in more detail, but paying particular attention to camp security and rights afforded to

the communities by the camp, the national government and the international community.

Students can also narrow in on a particular aspect of camp security rather than discussing it

generally. Potential areas of focus can include but are not limited to the nature of patrols, the

formal and informal courts established for violation of camp rules, the presence or impact of

smuggling and trafficking, or domestic and/or sexual violence. The area of focus selected,

however, should be of interest to the student. The very last assignment and presentation are

concerned with integration, repatriation, and relocation programs in the selected countries in the

selected regions.

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. This page was also

used when I ran the course in the spring of 2014. All the materials for the spring 2015 course

will be demarcated by the academic year. Thus, if it is not in an album denoted with the 2015 it

is not relevant to this semester’s course. In addition to the FB page, students will find course

lectures on my personal blog, which is http://mental2musings.blogspot.com/.

Refugees and Migration 2: Introduction to Refugee Studies, the Actors, and the

Development of the International System of Refugee Protection

As will be recalled from last week, the course is divided into three parts. The first part will be

covered over the next two weeks. It will explore the actors, conceptual boundaries, causes and

theories of human migration. This week’s lecture introduces students to refugee studies; defines

the actors and differentiates them from other categories of internationally protected persons; and,

provides an overview of the development of the international system of refugee protection. The

material covered today provides a foundation for what is covered next week. Next week looks

more closely at human migration and theories on migration.

I. Introduction to the Study of Refugees

Prior to delving into the phenomena to be covered over the course of the semester, students need

to be aware of the field of refugee studies and how it evolved. Refugee studies did not become a

field of study until the 1980s. Its roots, however, extend to the 1920s. Academics from varying

disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, history, geography, psychology, economics, law,

political science and international relations conducted studies on migratory movements of

individuals displaced from the world wars. Their work would provide the foundation upon

which the field of refugee studies would draw from and build on.

The existing literature can be broken into three temporal periods—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 this period can divided into two temporal periods—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. The post-Cold War 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 found in the studies

conducted. The questions posed were: which refugees should be studied; who is a refugee; what

causes refugee movements; and, what are the best solutions to the refugee problems? The

answers to these questions vary temporally and spatially. The common assumption is, however,

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 thereto 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 identifies 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 and through the material read and the research conducted

students will capture the definitional variance over time and space and the impact it has 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.

Since the intent here is for students to capture this variance over time, a set definition will not be

adopted and used in the course. It is recognized that we must start from somewhere, however.

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, which can be accessed

through the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpwqK3B2ac8.

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 to the evolution of the UNHCR. 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.

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 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.

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, and cultural transfer. International migration is a complex

phenomenon. We will delve into this deeper over the course of the semester because of the

growing trend among states to view refugees as nothing more than ordinary migrants.

III. Development of the International Refugee Protection System

The selected text for the course deals specifically with refugees, asylum seekers and the rule of

law in comparative perspective. It examines the development of the international refugee

protection system; the specific laws and systems developed in selected countries; and, the rights

afforded to refugees at the national and international level. The chapter assigned for this week

dealt specifically with the development of the international refugee protection system and the

individual rights and state responsibilities that evolved under the regime. What is covered here

in class lecture is an overview of the development of the international refugee system. Students

are still responsible for the material assigned to be read, even if it was not incorporated into

lecture. We only have three hours per session; it is impossible to cover everything within that

short period of time. That which is assigned yet not covered is just as important. The material

covered in the first part of the course provides the foundation for what is to follow.

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. 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. These were discussed

previously, thus they are not heretofore redefined. The Convention and Protocol 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, off-shore processing, restrictive application of refugee definitions, and the

application of third safety country concepts. These are 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 therein were also the loss of protection and a lack of rights granted

to individuals as result of greater conceptual complexity. All of which was provided here today

as a foundation will be covered in more detail throughout the remainder of the course.

Refugee and Migration Lecture 3: Theoretical Lenses and Approaches and the Levels of

Analysis for Examining Origins, Causes and Effects of Migration

The previous lecture sought to examine refugee studies, define and differentiate the actors, and

provide an overview of the international refugee protection system. We covered everything

other than the overview of the international refugee protection system. This week’s lecture will

begin with that and then move on to an overview of the theoretical lenses and the levels of

analysis that attempt 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 herein

drawn are for the purpose of capturing a glimpse of what is used to explain the phenomenon

under investigation. The lecture today will conclude with a brief overview of the first

assignment. Students should also be cognizant of the coming due date for the first assignment,

which is February 6, 2015. Please see the course syllabus or the FB Course Assignment Photo.

The link to the assignment photo is as follows:

https://www.facebook.com/refugeesandmigration/photos/pb.681430681907920.-

2207520000.1422437978./914640721920247/?type=1&theater. Student presentations on the

research findings will occur on February 12, 2015.

I. Review of the International Refugee Protection System

Temporal categorization of the international refugee protection system corresponds to those

previously discussed. The periods used by Kneebone (2009) are the post-WWII period, the Cold

War period, and the post-Cold War period. Witnessed over these temporal periods were the

broadening of the refugee classificatory system; the articulation of some basic rights to refugees;

the actions undertaken by states that impinged on the basic rights; the intervention of politics in

the refugee protection system; the rise of regional initiatives; the problem of IDPs and the

neglect thereof within the international refugee protection system; the decline of ideological and

material support for refugees; and, finally, the emergence of a trend to treat refugees equivalent

to that of migrants. These evolutionary changes impact the refugee communities. They also

shed light on the increase in IDPs in some and migration in other areas. We will come back to

the impact of the changes after examining the theories and causes of migration and the student

presentations on the selected refugee communities in the selected regions.

II. Theoretical Lenses and the Levels of Analysis: From Migration to the Origins,

Causes and Effects

Students will recall from the previous lecture that human migration 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

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 herein 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.

III. 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.

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.

IV. Research Assignment: Comparing Refugee Communities in Africa, the Middle

East and Asia

The material covered over the last two weeks provide a framework for determining what to focus

on and assessing the selected refugee communities in the selected regions in the first assignment.

As will be recalled the first assignment is due on February 6, 2015. The instructions provided in

the course syllabus are as follows:

Select 3 refugee communities to examine—one from Africa, one from the Middle

East, and one from Asia.

Examine the nature of the communities, their living conditions, and the causes for

migration.

Analyze them utilizing the concepts and frameworks covered.

Discuss the observed similarities and differences across the communities.

Assess the strengths and weaknesses in the existing theoretical approaches given

the research findings.

Students should:

Recall the temporal periods of refugee studies and the evolution of refugee

migrations when pondering the selected refugee communities in the selected

regions;

Recall the existing studies conducted on the selected refugee communities in the

selected regions;

Recall the national, regional and global variance in defining refugee and

migratory movements;

Recall the changes in the international refugee protection system; and,

Recall the levels of analysis, the origins and causes, and the effects of migration.

The research assignment should be short and concise.

Lecture 4: Refugees, Asylum and the Rule of Law in the United States

The US refugee and asylum system did not really develop until after WWII. Prior to WWII,

Americans were reluctant to accept refugees. For example, according to Kneebone (2009), 83

percent of Americans opposed admitting Jewish refugees prior to and at the start of the war.

Only a few thousand were admitted before the start of the war. Many more were admitted during

and immediately after the war. Their admission resulted in the passage of the displaced person

legislation being in 1948. In spite of its passage, the United States did not ratify the Refugee

Convention and the 1967 Protocol until 1968.

The United States continued to admit refugees, particularly those coming from the former Soviet

Union and other Soviet-allied countries. Admission outside of having domestic legislation

dealing with refugee and asylum seekers resulted in the US government’s use of a series of ad

hoc legislation. In particular, the government used a statutory device called Parole. It permitted

the temporary admittance of individuals on humanitarian grounds. Then, in 1965, a statute

enabled the admittance of up to 6 percent of general immigrant visas to those who were fleeing

persecution in either a “communist-dominated” country or a country in the Middle East.

Pressure on the system and officials would continue due to having inadequate legislation. Then,

in 1980, the Refugee Act was finally passed. A refugee was therein defined as someone who has

been or will be persecuted or who holds a well-founded fear of persecution on the account of

race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, whether

or not the person is outside his or her country of nationality of habitual residence (Kneebone:

131). It should be noted that the 1980 Refugee Act amended the Immigration and Nationality

Act and, thus, incorporated US obligations under the Refugee Convention into domestic law;

defined a refugee; created a program for the permanent resettlement of refugees from overseas;

added provisions for granting asylum; and, added a non-refoulement provision.

The Refuge Act set the parameters for the admittance of refugees and asylum seekers and the

parameters for adjudication. The parameters for adjudication will not be herein discussed. Each

year the US president, in consultation with Congress, sets the number of overseas refugees to be

admitted, as well as the sub-ceilings for particular regions or countries. The Secretary of

Homeland Security then determines the actual numbers to be admitted within the limits set by

the president and approved by congress. Asylum is available for those who met the refugee

definition; who do not fall within the various criminal and security exclusions; and, who receive

the favorable exercise of administrative discretion. Status can be revoked if an individual no

longer meets the requirements or because the country conditions have changed. Let us take a

short detour to watch clips on refugees and asylum in the United States—Refugee in America:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ0Ks_q6hIs; and, Asylum in the US 101 (Parts 1-4):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-OPG0vu6Xk.

The United States has not implemented the non-refoulement obligations under the Refugee

Convention. Instead, the US Congress created a provision called “withholding of removal,”

which prohibits the return of refugees or asylum seekers to their home countries that have been

denied status and stay. They, however, must meet certain requirements. If granted temporary

status under this provision, the individuals are not per se permitted to remain in the US. They

will be held until a third country can be located. Temporary protected status is granted if the

individual hails from a country or area wherein there is ongoing armed conflict and return would

pose a serious threat to the personal safety; an environmental disaster has substantially but

temporarily disrupted living conditions; or, extraordinary and temporary conditions prevent safe

return.

In conclusion, politics continue to drive the admission of certain categories of refugees and

asylum seekers. It also drives the denial of rights to refugees and asylum seekers. Some of the

US practices raise concern over human rights, namely those of interdiction on the high seas; the

use of the criminal justice system for deportation in cases wherein the individuals entered

illegally; denial of access to the courts; improper investigation of claims (particularly in cases of

individuals caught and detained on the high seas); detention of individuals in detention facilities;

and, discrimination of certain categories of individuals. Let us end with two stories—one on

asylum seeker: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM_495qrMI4; and, the other on

undocumented illegal immigrant children held in US detention centers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZOczdFib4Y. There is need for policy reform in the area

of the US practices. The US is not alone, however. Security practices within refugee camps and

detention centers across the globe will be our focus when we return from Spring break.

Lecture: An Overview of the UNHCR

The first part of the course was concerned with human migration and refugees. We learned of

and talked about both migration and refugees theoretically and, then, examined communities

living across the globe. Through an examination of the refugee communities across the world,

patterns in the reasons for migration, the nature and composition of the refugee communities, and

the conditions of refugee camps could be identified. The trips to the unofficial refugee villages

in Thailand over the next couple of months provide on-the-ground experience and knowledge.

The lessons learned inform what will be covered in the second part of the course.

The second part of the course is concerned with camp security and refugee programs for

integration, relocation, rehabilitation and repatriation. Both camp security and the refugee

programs for official refugee camps are the primary responsibility of the United National High

Commission for Refugees (hereinafter “UNHCR”). An overview of the UNHCR is, therefore,

needed. Students should ponder its role and function and what is to be provided in relation to

what was learned in the first part of the semester and also what will be learned when visiting the

non-UNHCR run refugee villages. Next week’s class will cover camp security. Please note that

the second research assignment on camp security across the globe is not due until April 20, 2015.

An Introduction to UNHCR

The UNHCR was created in December 1950 but began 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. Thus, it is purely a humanitarian and non-

political organization. The roots of the organization are, however, 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.1 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.2 The IRO

was replaced by the UNHCR in 1951. The UNHCR initially had two main and closely related

functions. They were 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 government.

1 Students should recall the migratory patterns discussed in the first part of the semester. 2 Students should recall the variance in refugee classification by the international community in the 1951 Refugee

Convention and the amendments that occurred in the 1967 Protocol.

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. The emphasis on

empowerment for self-reliance occurred began in the post-2001 period. All of the functions,

roles and activities of the UNHCR are concerned with ensuring accountability.

Conclusion: 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. It highlighted some key temporal developments. Those temporal developments

corresponded to its expanded mandate and functions. We will talk more specifically on the

UNHCR programs over the course of the next couple of weeks. After we have concluded an

examination of the programs and their operation across the globe, the information presented here

will be reassessed. It will be reassessed within the context of something raised in the first part of

the semester, namely the gap between international and national laws and the protections and

provisions of assistance to refugee communities.

Lecture: 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. Their obligation is

irrespective of whether they are signatories to and have ratified the Refugee Convention.

International laws outside of the rights and obligations enshrined in the Refugee Convention

such as the Law of Armed Conflict, the UN Charter and human rights law reinforce the idea that

states are obliged to provide protection to those residing within its borders, particularly those

who are fleeing from conflict and persecution. What is not per se clear is the nature and type of

protection to be provided. The international community and states hosting refugees must be

prepared to protect against increases in violence and exploitation in the camp; to reduce and

eliminate fear and instability in the communities where the camps are located; and, to prevent the

worsening of the existing humanitarian crises. Camp protection and camp security are, therefore,

important.

A failure to provide security and to ensure there is protection of refugee rights has far greater

consequences for a community, country, region and global community. This lecture is,

therefore, concerned with the protection of refugees through the provision of camp security. In

particular, it introduces student 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). Class will end today 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. What responsibilities do we have as actors within civil society? How do we, as actors

within civil society, balance that internal struggle to provide assistance and to also ensure there is

adequate protection for refugees? Students who went on the first trip to the refugee village will

also share their experiences.

Refugee Security: Types of Camp Protection and the Role and Responsibility of Security

Actors

Refugee camps are to remain civilian and humanitarian in nature. In order for them to remain

civilian and humanitarian in nature, camp protection must be provided. There are three common

types of camp protection. They include 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. A majority of the refugee camps operated by UNHCR utilize international

peacekeepers. Whether or not they are used and the type of protection adopted depend on the

agreement between the UNHCR and 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 often works in tandem

with the authoritative structure of the camp.

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.

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 their being perceived to be antagonistic; 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

their having authority matters, as well as the type of security plan adopted. Attacks also increase

with time, particularly in the absence of, or the existence of, a security plan and security forces.

Studies conducted found there are a higher number of attacks in camps where security is

predominantly provided by the government (variance in IDP versus Refugee), but that more

generally protected camps are attacked less. They also found that there is an increase in attacks

in the first 5 years and a decrease in the number of attacks thereafter.

In conclusion, an absence of camp security leads to instability; it leads to a breakdown in law and

order. A breakdown of law and order usually occurs at the very beginning; it usually occurs with

the initial influx of refugees. Absent from most assessments of the vulnerability of camp

security is the human security component. The education and socioeconomic conditions of the

refugees, the trauma and lack of programs to help, and the integration programs available within

the communities where the camps are located matter to camp security. Over the next couple of

week we will examine the programs for integration, rehabilitation, repatriation and relocation.

Camp security will then be once more revisited.

Conclusion: Key Components for the Research Assessments on Camp Security across the

Globe

There are some key components students should ponder when examining camp security in the

selected refugee camps across the globe. First, are the selected camps UNHCR run? If they are

not run by UNHCR, do they at least have an agreement therewith for the provision of assistance?

What are the host governments’ laws on the protection and provision of aid to refugee

communities living within their border? Are the host governments signatories to and have they

ratified the Refugee Convention? Second, what are the conditions of the camps? The conditions

were discussed in the previous research assignment. Here students need to delve deeper into the

issues within the camps. Are the camps’ conditions conducive to penetration armed actors,

criminal elements, traffickers, and/or other elements seeking to exploit those who are confined to

the camp and have limited opportunities for the future? Third, what is the type of security

provided in the camp? Who is responsible for security? Is there variance in term of whether

there are existing government or international peacekeepers present or if security is only

provided by the Refugee Community? What are size, composition and mandate of force?

Fourth, 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 change of command? Fifth, who is

responsible for determining the validity of the charges? What courts are available? Sixth, what

are the determinants of camp security within the selected refugee camps? Finally, 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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLqyW2CUNo8&list=PLkJcTrIJzWtyxQjPPz

BiUkppc8poaCDaL

Lecture: Local Integration of Refugees

The previous lecture discussed camp security. One of the issues therein raised was the role of

integration of refugees into host communities. Today’s lecture is concerned with local

integration. Local integration is one of three policy options available in attempting to resolve the

issue of protracted refugees.3 The other two options are resettlement and repatriation. We will

talk about both resettlement and repatriation following Songkran Break. Class time during

Songkran week should be spent finishing both the research paper and PowerPoint on camp

security. Students will give a 10 minute presentation of their findings on April 30. There will

only be 10 minutes allotted, thus the presentations must be concise and based only on the

findings. There will be NO exceptions.

An Overview of Local Integration

Local integration is one of three policy options available for dealing with protracted refugees.

Protracted refugees refer to situations where refugee communities have been living in host

countries for more than five years.4 Local integration refers to the settlement of the refugee

community in the host country. Examined herein are the aspects of local integration, the

obstacles to local integration, and the conditions when local integration may be appropriate.

Students should keep in mind that integration tends to be a least favored policy options for many

countries. This is despite the advantages it has for long-term solutions to the issues countries

face with hosting refugees and community, human and socioeconomic development.

The process of integration involves three aspects, namely legal concessions, economic progress

and cultural adjustment. 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 therein exist. 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 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

3 Hansen, F., J.J. Mutabaraka, and P. Ubricao (2008). “Repatriation, Resettlement, Integration: A study of the three

refugee solutions,” The Niapele Project: 1-26. 4 Hansen, et.al. supra note 1.

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

host population. Finally, it is appropriate where there is the potential for complete legal

integration of the refugee community into society.

Local integration is most successful when refugee communities share a language, culture or and

ethnic origin with the host country. It also becomes a more viable policy option with the size of

the refugee community is small. Let us end this section with a clip on “Where Integration

Works,” which is sponsored by the Qatar Foundation. It can be accessed by the following link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awOEf_id6gI.

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.5 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 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; and, finally, what are some

programs and initiatives that might facilitate social and cultural integration. Let us end class

today with a clip, titled “Refugee Integration: A new lease on life.” It can be access via the

following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtdxPPMkRAE.

5 Fielden, A. (n.d). “Local Integration: an under-reported solution to protracted refugee situations,” The UNHCR,

Research Paper N. 158: 1-21.

Final Lecture: The 4Rs Framework—Repatriation, Resettlement, Reintegration,

Rehabilitation and Reconstruction

Over the course of the semester we have examined refugee communities and their conditions, the

origins, causes and effects of migration, and camp security. Local integration and, indirectly,

reintegration were discussed in the previous lecture. This lecture touches once more on

reintegration but also introduces repatriation, resettlement, rehabilitation and reconstruction.

Repatriation, resettlement, rehabilitation and reconstruction are policy options and programs

available to states in the transitory and peace-building periods following the cessation of

hostilities. They are introduced in the context of the 4Rs Framework of the UNHCR’s

Handbook. The final research paper is to examine what is outlined here in selected countries and

communities across the globe. It is due on May 8, 2015.

An Overview of the 4Rs Framework: Defining Concepts and Articulating the General

Principles

The 4R 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. Each of them are herein briefly

introduced.

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

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.