Depoliticization and (re)politicization tactics in refugee governance in Lebanon: comparing Western and Gulf donors’ interventions

Abstract

ABSTRACT This research compares the role of depoliticization and (re)politicization tactics in Western and Gulf donors’ responses to Syrian arrivals in Lebanon. It builds on assemblage theory and its practice-oriented, contingent and hybrid conception of governance. On the one hand, it shows that the depoliticization of the United Nations and Western donors’ interventions has been critical to forge and maintain this governance arrangement; yet discursive repoliticization has given local actors the authority to redefine some of its modalities. On the other hand, the example of Gulf donors challenges the idea that politicization in governance exists only as a resistance strategy towards depoliticized narratives; politicization is also a tool of governance, which shapes refugee policies in the same capacity as depoliticized practices. This research gives insight into the role of depoliticization and (re)politicization in authority relations in assemblages; and it provides empirical grounding to the idea that power is multiple, situated and subject to erosion. The methodology is based on a series of interviews with representatives of the international community, Lebanese officials and civil society actors, field visits, and the analysis of a wide range of documentation and media sources.