Refugees in International Relations
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
Refugees lie at the heart of world politics. The causes and consequences of, and responses to, human displacement are intertwined with many of the core concerns of International Relations. Yet, scholars of International Relations have generally bypassed the study of refugees, and Forced Migration Studies has generally bypassed insights from International Relations. Refugees in International Relations therefore represents an attempt to bridge the divide between these disciplines, and to place refugees within the mainstream of International Relations.
Drawing together the work and ideas of a combination of the world's leading and emerging International Relations scholars, Refugees in International Relations considers what ideas from International Relations can offer our understanding of the international politics of forced migration. The insights draw from across the theoretical spectrum of International Relations from realism to critical theory to feminism, covering issues including international cooperation, security, and the international political economy. They engage with some of the most challenging political and practical questions in contemporary forced migration, including peacebuilding, post-conflict reconstruction, and statebuilding. The result is a set of highly original chapters, yielding not only new concepts of wider relevance to International Relations but also insights for academics, policy-makers, and practitioners working on forced migration in particular and humanitarianism in general.
durable, long-term solutions UNHCR became more homeland-oriented and proactive (Barnett 2002; Hammerstad 2000: 396). The agency provides care for refugees on location and emphasizes international presence to encourage potential refugees to stay. Because refugee resettlement is no longer seen as a viable option, UNHCR’s repatriation policy, rendered obsolete by the Cold War, came back into force (Chimni 1999: 4; Loescher 2001: 280; Turton 2003a: 13, 14). In addition, UNHCR now includes IDPs within
al. 2008). Following the Second World War, the basis of the current international refugee regime was created in order to protect and find solution for those displaced in Europe by the War (Loescher 2001). The regime set out a more formally institutionalized and multilateral basis for international cooperation than its inter-war predecessor. It was based on two core elements: a treaty and an international organization. The 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees set out the definition of a
presence of these refugees and other foreigners (Maluwa 1995: 657). The indirect threat to security that long-staying refugees can pose to host states is a key concept that has been lacking in both the research and policy consideration of refugee movements. In these cases, refugees alone are a necessary but not a sufficient cause of host-state insecurity. It is not the refugee that is a threat to the host state, but the context within which the refugees exist that results in the securitization
States may be part of the problem, but they remain an essential part of the solution (Haddad 2008: 94–5). They are the source of the system, the locus of responsibility, and the focus of pressure for change. The road to a common humanity, on this account, lies through national sovereignty. Indeed within the solidarist image there is a consolidation and hardening of the boundary that separates political communities from each other and citizens from non-citizens. There may be a degree of greater
society writers have long been sceptical of the claims made by the powerful to speak in the name of universal principles of global justice. Instead the focus has been increasingly on the political institutions through which negotiation over moral claims might take place and on the need for dialogue and deliberation (Hurrell 2007, ch 12; Linklater 1998). But any claim about the importance of dialogue raises the issue of who is to participate and how: in particular how are those whose rights are