International Refugee Regime Research Articles

A refugee history perspective

This article draws upon ongoing research in refugee history and specifically a close examination of confidential individual case files in the archives of the UNHCR to explore aspects of the cultural representation of refugees in different sites of population displacement in the modern world. Reflections by Roland Barthes and Abdulrazak Gurnah FBA provide the starting point to consider visual culture and cultural representation in efforts to assist refugees, such as the UN campaign for World Refugee Year in 1959–1960. No less significant have been the efforts by refugees themselves to make themselves heard in relation to the international refugee regime. The article ends with a plea for scholars and refugees to engage in the co-production of knowledge about population displacement and its consequences. (This article is published in the thematic collection `The arts and humanities: rethinking value for today—views from Fellows of the British Academy’, edited by Isobel Armstrong.)

The International Refugee Regime and the Liberal International Order: Dialectics of Contestation

Abstract The international refugee regime finds itself in a delicate balance between two conflicting principles of the liberal order: the particularism of sovereign states and the universalism of human rights. This article proposes a theory of endogenous contestation, rooted in the dialectic of law, propelling liberal aspirations, and politics, vindicating sovereign control. In doing so, we identify three shifts in the international refugee regime. Following 1945, legal consolidation in a propitious geopolitical context engendered a phase of regime expansion. The provisional “triumph” of liberalism in the early 1990s bolstered the regime’s geographical and normative clout but fueled political backlash. This set the stage for a new phase of regime contestation, where liberal democracies adapted political practices to ostensibly uphold the asylum norm while precluding access to it. The article concludes by exploring whether this subversion signals a gradual evolution or a fundamental shift in the nature of the liberal refugee regime.

How do states challenge international regimes? The case study of Poland and the international refugee regime.

How do states challenge international regimes? The case study of Poland and the international refugee regime.

Saudi Arabia and the International Refugee Regime

Abstract As a non-signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, Saudi Arabia is often portrayed as a State that refuses engagement with the global legal norms and supporting institutions focused on the protection of refugees. This article contends that this is not the case, and closely examines Saudi Arabia’s relationship with the international refugee regime by asking what was Saudi Arabia’s role in the drafting of the main refugee protection instruments, and what is its approach – past and present – to acceding to the 1951 Convention? How does Saudi Arabia engage with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) – on the global plane but also through UNHCR’s activities in the country? Drawing on hitherto unresearched material from the UNHCR archives pertaining to the years 1962–94, as well as interviews with key government and UNHCR actors, this article argues that Saudi Arabia engages substantively with the international refugee regime. It discusses how Saudi Arabia participated in the drafting processes of the main refugee protection instruments and shows that accession to the 1951 Convention appears to have been seriously considered at certain junctures. The article also explores Saudi Arabia’s relationship with UNHCR. In addition to focusing on Saudi Arabia’s role in the UNHCR Executive Committee, it looks more closely at UNHCR’s activities in the country, identifying three phases of UNHCR involvement – establishment (1987–97), expansion (1998–2005), and consolidation (2005–). It finds that UNHCR’s approach to Saudi Arabia is characterized by pragmatism rather than by principle, and that Saudi Arabia has been able to influence the way UNHCR implements its mandate in the country, as well as beyond. Importantly, Saudi Arabia is a gatekeeper for UNHCR operations in the Gulf region and in Muslim-majority countries more generally. Similarly, UNHCR is an important vessel for Saudi Arabian humanitarianism.

Empirical Consequences of Normative Inadequacies: The Principle of Temporary Refuge and Protection Gaps

The article aims to propose an alternative analytical framework for examining the currently observable ineffectiveness of the international refugee protection regime. The described framework places the principle of temporary refuge and its inherent ambiguities at the centre of the analysis. To that effect, the scope and content of the principle of temporary refuge is considered with the particular focus on the presumable obligations of third states (i.e. states other than the recipient state) stemming from the principle. The analysis then turns to consideration of some of the examples of contemporary practice of temporary refuge in an attempt at framing it as one of the sources of a poor state of functioning of the international refugee regime. The paper also links the identified phenomenon to the concept of protection gaps as it was already outlined in the literature in order to clearly demonstrate the relationship between the content and contemporary practice of temporary refuge and inadequacies of the international refugee regime visible at the global level.

Restrictive North versus Permissive South? Revisiting Dominant Narratives on the Evolution of the Refugee Regime

The evolution of the international refugee regime is ostensibly driven by three ongoing processes: the proliferation of protection frameworks, growing restrictiveness in the Global North, and the liberalization of asylum in the Global South. Insights from the novel SACOP dataset, which provides original information on asylum policies in 195 states from 1951 to 2021, question these widely shared assumptions. Essentially, the data reveals the persistence of non-regulation in refugee protection in North Africa and Asia and highlights the global spread of restrictive policies. These findings oppose the view that the Global North and South are moving in opposite directions regarding refugee protection.

Lost in data translation: A critical review of datasets on refugees

AbstractQuantitative data are the backbone of the international refugee regime. Academic researchers and international organizations have been drawing attention to the problems of refugee data that obscure refugee vulnerabilities. Despite these efforts, the limitations of quantitative refugee data, particularly with regard to gendered aspects of refugee vulnerabilities, have often been overlooked. This article aims to address this issue by examining the major limitations of quantitative refugee data. It focuses on the question of “What are the major limitations of quantitative refugee data regarding gendered aspects of refugee vulnerabilities?” By conducting a systematic review of 67 datasets from international organizations, nation‐states, and independent data collectors, it argues that there are five fundamental problems with the data: (1) lack of disaggregation, (2) lack of cross‐tabulation and inability to harmonize datasets, (3) inconsistent periodization frequency, (4) lack of sex and gender diversity measurement, and (5) survivor bias. This article highlights the importance of critically analysing the data that informs theories and decisions regarding refugee vulnerabilities.

China’s and Japan’s winding path to the Refugee Convention: State identity transformations and the evolving international refugee regime

AbstractIn the early 1980s, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Japan joined the international refugee regime. This timing similarity is puzzling due to the stark differences between the PRC as a communist and authoritarian state versus Japan as a prime example of capitalist development and democratization. Moreover, although both signed the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Refugee Protocol without major reservations, neither of them has fully implemented these treaties. Discussions regarding the PRC’s and Japan’s engagement with the international refugee regime tend to start with the beginning of the Indochina refugee crisis in 1975. However, this article shows that the early decades of their interaction with the international refugee regime are of crucial importance for a full understanding of the timing and form of accession to the international refugee regime. Although the Southeast Asian refugee crisis played an important role as a trigger, it was the changing character of the international refugee regime and the transformations of state identity in both countries that set the ground for the signing of the refugee-related conventions.

The role of developmental ‘buzzwords’ in the international refugee regime: Self-reliance, resilience, and economic inclusion

Buzzwords play an important role in setting up the scope and direction of aid policies. Alongside the growing focus on development-led approaches in the international refugee regime, three buzzwords – self-reliance, resilience, and economic inclusion – have achieved particular prominence in recent refugee policy-making. Drawing upon a review of policy documents and multi-sited empirical research in Sub-Saharan Africa, this article gives a detailed analysis of how these buzzwords intersect with one another and elucidates the roles they play in shaping development-oriented approaches to refugees. While this trifecta is painted with positive connotations, empirical research shows that developmental approaches underpinned by these buzzwords can have detrimental effects on both refugees and hosts. Building upon this analysis, it offers a theoretical approach to understand the current mainstreaming of developmental support within the international refugee regime from a lens of ‘reframing’, which is a strategy to redefine social problems and thereby control discourses around their solutions. The study shows that as a discursive apparatus, this triad of buzzwords is instrumentalised by policymakers to reframe the absence of solutions for ‘displacement crisis’ as ‘development opportunities’ in order to protect the damaged global refugee system. In so doing, such buzzwords play a crucial role in redefining the responsibility of refugees and their hosts in undertaking neoliberal development, while simultaneously reducing the ambit of responsibility of the international refugee regime. By analysing these popular buzzwords as a set, the article contributes to a deepened understanding of the ways in which these innocuous words are embedded in a broader ‘ideological project’ informed by the political and economic incentives of the global policymakers. It also sheds light on the possible wider consequences of the current mainstreaming of development-led approaches for refugee rights and protection issues.

The Responses of Pakistan and Turkey to Refugee Influxes: A Comparative Analysis of Durable Solutions to Protracted Displacements

This research aims to study how Turkey and Pakistan (the world’s largest refugee hosting countries) have reacted to and managed protracted refugee challenges. In the context of Pakistan, the study explores the Afghan refugee influx since the late 1970, while for Turkey the focus is on the Syrian refugee inflow since 2011. While cognizant of contextual differences (time and space) between these two countries, we aim to comparatively explore policies, best practices, and short and long-term solutions developed to protracted displacement issues in each country. To do this we intend to comparatively explore the role of institutional environments and the international refugee regime in resolving protracted refugee issues in a chronological sequence. First, we investigate how each state’s “open-door policies” toward the first influx of refugees evolved into ad-hoc solutions in the course of protracted displacement. Second, we comparatively assess multilevel integration approaches and solution strategies at the macro (states and their cooperation with countries of origin and inter-governmental organizations such as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and International Organization for Migration (IOM)), meso (interventions/implementations), and micro levels (civil society and refugee-led initiatives). Third, we examine how refugee policies in each country are negotiated with national and international humanitarian and refugee agencies, including regional organizations and countries of origin. Theoretically, this article is grounded on a macro structural approach (state’s international humanitarian obligations and responsibilities), refugee diplomacy (state’s use of diplomatic tools, process administering refugees), and management theories.

“You Can’t Go to War Over Refugees”: The Bangladesh War of 1971 and the International Refugee Regime

Abstract This article examines the 1971 refugee crisis between India and Pakistan and discusses its enduring lessons for the global refugee regime. The crisis, which drove an estimated ten million refugees into India within a space of nine months, led to a war between the two countries. The events of that year had significant geopolitical consequences. It led to the break-up of the Pakistani state, created the new country of Bangladesh, and involved the United Nations in one of its earliest, and largest, refugee repatriation campaigns. Yet, the case has received little attention in the refugee studies literature. Based on extensive archival research of the records of the US, British, and Indian governments, and of the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, this article examines why and how the refugee crisis escalated into an interstate war. The study links the India–Pakistan case to ongoing challenges confronting the international refugee regime, particularly from the perspective of first-host countries. The 1971 crisis reminds us that refugee governance norms and practices must include more critical considerations of the conditions necessary to resolve forced migration situations.

Global Compact on Refugees: Bridging the Gap between International and Domestic Refugee Regime in India

Global Compact on Refugees: Bridging the Gap between International and Domestic Refugee Regime in India

The Ukrainian refugee crisis: Unpacking the politics of pet exceptionalism

AbstractThe rescue of pets soon became part of the humanitarian narrative of the attack on Ukraine. The open‐door policy on companion animals from Ukraine—a high‐risk country for rabies—in terms of regulatory modifications and the provision of services could be described as one of ‘pet exceptionalism’. While the influx of pets and the response to it has significance for the international refugee regime, there has been scant scholarly engagement with the movement of pets across borders during emergencies. To bridge academic knowledge gaps and suggest policy lessons, the article discusses how the management of the Ukraine pet influx fits with existing regulatory regimes and policy priorities governing companion animals, and the tensions involved. Drawing on a 6‐month desk study (March–August 2022)—the article considers the events, interactions and policy choices which shape how companion animals are received. Using the UK and Norway as examples, it suggests that the aim of the resources and procedures directed at caring for pets and helping owners is pragmatic—to safeguard biosecurity and enforce regulations while also protecting animal health and psychosocial well‐being. The term ‘pet civic consciousness’ is used to consider the notion of pets as family members, and how trust in government and understandings of biosecurity and regulatory requirements are filtered through cultural and linguistic lenses. The article identifies biosecurity, juridification, resource allocation and ethical issues of fairness across refugee populations and the intrinsic value of companion animals as central topics for future discussion.

Rethinking self-reliance and economic inclusion of refugees through a distributive lens: A case study from Uganda

ABSTRACT This article examines trends in Uganda’s refugee protection model based on self-reliance and economic inclusion. It does this through a lens of distribution. While self-reliance and economic inclusion are increasingly centralised in the international refugee regime as tools of empowerment that benefit both refugees and their hosts, policymakers largely fail to consider the distribution and availability of local resources in promoting these ideas. Between 2013 and 2018, Uganda experienced a steep rise in the number of refugees within the country. Notwithstanding the global celebration of the Ugandan refugee policy, the empirical data demonstrate an increasingly demanding situation for refugees’ economic lives and ensuing difficulties in pursuing self-reliance. Implementing the Ugandan model without distributive thinking risks detrimental effects even for neighbouring host populations, who are also resource poor. Based on the perspectives of both refugees and host people, the article advances a debate about the efficacy of Uganda’s self-reliance and inclusion policies and concludes by pointing to the risks of framing the current Ugandan model as a ‘success’ for Africa’s refugee protection.

"They crossed the sea on dry land". The Jews of Libya in Italian Displaced Persons camps and the international refugee regime in the aftermath of the Second World War (1948-1949)

The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 significantly reduced the number of Jewish displaced persons in Italy's DP camps. However, it also marked the beginning of an unexpected movement of some eight thousand Jews who, between 1948 and 1949, travelled to Italy from Libya, seeking international assistance to resettle in Israel. This article explores the reasons for which the Jews of Libya illegally attempted to reach Italy's DP camps, the role Jewish and Zionist organisations played in this process, and the reaction of international humanitarianism to the ensuing emergency. It argues that a Eurocentric vision, intrinsically rooted in the international refugee regime of that time, deprived the Jews fleeing from Libya of the status of displaced persons.

Refugees in the Imperial Order of Things: Citizen, Subject, and Polish Refugees in Africa (1942–50)

Examining the case of some nineteen thousand Polish refugees in British colonial Africa, this article challenges the Eurocentric historiography of the post–World War II international refugee regime. These Poles, after being hosted by the colonial governments first, eventually came under the mandate of emerging UN refugee organizations that treated Europeans as internationally recognized refugees everywhere in the world. In contrast, fleeing Africans (and Asians) did not fit this category. This distinction had more to do with imperialism and race than with any geographic limitation. Conceptually, the refugee regime rests on the differentiation of refugees and national citizens, while imperial rule differentiated between European citizens and colonized subjects. I want to complicate this by emphasizing that the international refugee regime emerged in a largely imperial world signified by a tripartition into citizen, subject, and European refugee.

Saving Brown Women from Brown Men? “Refugee Women”, Gender and the Racialised Politics of Protection

Abstract White feminist scholarship in the Global North has drawn attention to the challenges facing women seeking protection under international refugee law (IRL). Whilst these efforts have improved outcomes for some women, they have largely failed to reconfigure the ways in which gendered experiences of persecution are conceptualised and represented. Drawing on postcolonial feminist scholarship, this article suggests that white feminist scholars have been largely complicit in a script that essentialises the experiences of women originating from the Global South. Where gender is taken into account, women from the Global South are typically understood and represented through a neo-imperial frame as disempowered, helpless “victims”, or as “Exotic Others” who need to be rescued from their “backward” cultures. The framing of “Refugee Women” as a homogenous and undifferentiated category ignores the complex intersections of race and gender shaping both women’s experiences and the racialised politics of protection. Moreover, because white feminist approaches have a colonial “blind spot”, they ignore the ways in which the international refugee regime is deeply entangled with the history of colonialism. In so doing, they replicate and reinforce racialised representations of Black and Muslim men as perpetrators of violence against women.

UNPACKING TEMPORARY PROTECTION OF REFUGEES: FAILURE OF DURABLE SOLUTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES

Temporary protection has been discussed, promoted, and implemented in different regions (Southeast Asia, Europe, Middle East) since 1970s as a practical response for large-scale refugee movements. Nevertheless, despite its wide usage and implementation, what is meant by temporary protection is not clear, and frequently debated in policy and academic circles. The attempts to standardize/improve temporary protection frameworks dominate the studies on temporary protection. Rather than solely focusing on what is temporary protection or what it should be, this article makes a novel contribution to the literature by asking a neglected question: how and why has the category of temporary protection been developed in the contemporary international refugee regime and with what consequences? By focusing on the policy guidelines, soft-law instruments, and existing literature on temporary protection, it shows that temporary protection has been developed in a top-down manner focusing solely on the state interests. The failure of durable solutions framework in international refugee regime and inherent uncertainties of temporary protection are intrinsically related to each other and their relation is taken as key to unpack the development and consequences of temporary protection regimes. This article concludes that temporary protection both creates and maintains uncertainty as a refugee management strategy which speaks to state interests in the context of the failure traditional durable solutions framework.

Imperial Refugee Management. Moving Greek Refugees Through the British Empire and into the Belgian Congo (1942–1945)

ABSTRACT During the Second World War, 2,700 Greek refugees lived in camps in Eastern Belgian Congo and Ruanda-Urundi. They had escaped from the German Nazi occupation and famine conditions on the Aegean Islands. Their movement through Turkey, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Kenya, Tanganyika and Uganda was part of a more extensive network of refugee hosting and transfer, orchestrated by British officials in Cairo and guided by strategic interests in London. This article uncovers this overlooked episode and situates it in the broader history of the thousands of European refugees who found refuge in the Middle East and Africa. It argues that this was part of a more extensive system of imperial refugee management with implications for the history of the British Empire and the international refugee regime. Adding to the historiography of the empire’s war effort, it uncovers the contribution of Africans to hosting distressed European refugees. It further highlights the importance of imperial rule in the emergence of the post-war international refugee regime. Due to the racism of the colonial division of labour and society, European refugees in Africa enjoyed a comparably comfortable situation. The imperial refugee regime cared well for its white subjects, housing them in some of the most privileged refugee camps of the world.

Beyond the humanitarian savior logics? UNHCR's public communication strategies for the Syrian and Central African crises

Forcibly displaced people often face restrictive migration policies and stereotypical discourses. Therefore, this study analyzes UNHCR's public communication strategies towards the Syrian and Central African crises. Through a comparative-synchronic multimodal critical discourse analysis (MCDA) of UNHCR's (international) press releases (N = 28), news stories (N = 233), photos (N = 462) and videos (N = 50) of 2015, we examined its main representation and argumentation strategies. First, we found that UNHCR primarily represents forcibly displaced people in its press releases and news as victimized and/or voiceless masses, reproducing humanitarian savior and deservingness logics. However, stories, photos, and videos frequently portray them also as empowered individuals. This can be partially explained by media logics and political and private sector discourses and agenda-building opportunities. Moreover, UNHCR mainly voices pity-based and post-humanitarian Self-oriented solidarity discourses, and links protection to states’ (perceived) interests. Finally, these discursive strategies respond to dominant migration management paradigms and the increasingly neoliberalized, political realist international refugee regime (IRR).