UK Cities of Sanctuary - Welcoming the Stranger

As laid in bed ill for the last week and a half, I scrolled through my Facebook feed mindlessly passing the time in between naps. Amongst the doom and gloom posts covering the current state of political affairs in the US and memes related to eating Tide Pods, something caught my eye. A video shared by a friend on Facebook made me pause because of its relevance to our coursework.

Video found here

The video (linked above)featured Widden Primary School in Gloucester, England. The school was recently named a "School of Sanctuary" and has opened its doors to welcome refugees and asylum seekers, particularly refugees from Syria.  The school strives to be a safe place for not only students but their parents as well.  At the school, students and their parents are tutored in English. Currently, seven families with twelve children attend the school. 

Widden Primary seems unique in its "whole child" approach. The school has trained staff in post traumatic stress to deal with emotional and psychological scars brought about by the traumas the children have faced. The lessons go far beyond the classroom by emphasizing acceptance and embracing diversity. The city has also truly "welcomed the stranger" as well.  

I have learned that throughout the United Kingdom, communities have committed to taking in refugees and asylum seekers through a grassroots effort known as "City of Sanctuary". Cities which are economically disadvantaged (mostly found in the Northern region of England) are accepting refugees into their communities in exchange for governmental contracts which help bring much needed resources to the area. Because of the low cost of living, the communities  outside of London and larger cities, are able to provide housing at the governmental standard for refugees and asylum seekers. Initial impressions lead one to believe it is a mutually beneficial scheme. 

The UK's commitment to accepting refugees is perhaps even more impressive given that the program which began in 2014 as the UK's Vulnerable Person Resettlement Program has been expanded under the Conservative leadership of the British Prime Minister, Teresa May. This struck me as it is in stark contrast to the conservative leadership we have in the United States today which is vehemently anti-refugee. It seems that the United Kingdom has put party politics aside and despite its recent decision on Brexit which would tend to think it could have a "country first" agenda, it has made a strong commitment to accepting and relocating refugees.  So, why has the UK, who has also suffered incidents of terrorism at the hands of extremist groups been able to separate out the risk of so called "letting terrorists in" by accepting refugees from areas like Syria?  Why haven't they adopted stricter limitations and why are we not seeing more racist rhetoric from politicians?  I am perplexed and would like to dive deeper.....

________________________________________________
Refugees, U. (2018). UK sanctuary network offers vital backstop for refugees, asylum-seekers. [online] UNHCR. Available at: http://www.unhcr.org/uk/news/stories/2018/1/5a54af934/uk-sanctuary-network-offers-vital-backstop-for-refugees-asylum-seekers.html [Accessed 5 Feb. 2018].

McGuinness, Terry. "The UK Response to the Syrian Refugee Crisis", House of Commons Library Briefing Paper Number 06805, 14 June 2017 

abandoning reason and suspending sense

I hope to lay bare the ridiculousness of the issues we are dealing with in this course; how all these notions are at their heart built on fictions that people have bent over backward trying to maintain.

White lies can seem harmless, we make up an explanation, something simple, something neat, something that sounds agreeable.  We tell these white lies and like all lies, they stare back at us, their well meaning parents, and make us do and say things that we may have thought otherwise quite ludicrous.  We pull a tooth out from under a pillow and replace it with a coin, things that go bump in the night, clumsy lies in clean white smocks.  We told a tale to humour ourselves, but now it has us fishing in our pockets, rendering between the sheets what belongs to Caesar.  White lies are pleasant, they are spun like spider’s silk across the map, writing fiction so believably onto what is real.  A realist’s map would describe what is real; elevation, a road, a body of water, a cemetery, a swamp.  When the map is under the poet’s pen; the landscape may be crowded with myths and delusions; borders and boundaries.  

When we share a myth and all behave as if it is a reality, does that make it real?  If we repeat to ourselves our precious white lies long enough, will they, as Adolf Hitler declared, become true?  Are we past the part of civilisation's course when facts had to prove themselves under human scrutiny and the laws of nature held sway?  Have the leaders of the free world finally freed the world from all things cold and hard, have we escaped the glare of the enlightenment?

It helps to have consequences and symptoms, coins beneath pillows if you will, to make the fantasy jump off the page, to make the borders jump from being spider webs on otherwise trustworthy maps to being real, impregnable, however intangible, slashes on the face of the planet.  Who could doubt that the borders are real, provided such consequences garnered in crossing them?  So we tell the white lie that there is a line in the sand that separates I from you and we make the Isolation and yousolation seem real by sending you back to your side and bringing I back to I side.  You can stay in the third world, and I may stray into the world as I see fit.  Thus our mythical narrative goes, our shared fantasy, our white lie.  

Neo-Malthusians and the "Greening of Hate"

On the surface, neo-malthusians are concerned with population control and the environment. They believe population growth is exponential while food supply and resources are limited. These theorists have been around for hundreds of years, but in recent times, immigration has become a more pressing issue,  allowing neo-malthusians to take an anti immigration stance. They believe that migrants moving from poor countries to more industrialized countries will consume more and produce more waste,  and therefore be bad for the environment. 

First of all, many immigrants, especially refugees, do not flee to first world countries. They go to their home country's neighbors, which are often just as poor and undeveloped. Also, studies have shown that immigrants do not have a negative effect on the impact of the environment in the long term. They don't contribute much to the sprawl of cities and water/air pollution as many accuse them of, and they become active consumers and workers in the economy (Cangiano 4). 

So if immigrants are not bad for the environment, then why the anti-immigration stance? In recent years, white supremacist groups have begun to realize that they can use "concern for the environment" as a front when they try to push their agendas. Some believe that neo-malthusians are not all as concerned with the environment as they claim. The term that's been recently used is the "greening of hate" to describe a growing conservative anti-immigration movement that utilizes environmental concerns to further their ideas (Hartmann).

Personally speaking, I am someone who cares about the environment. I am a vegetarian, I recycle, but even if immigrants were somehow bad for the environment, I don't think it should matter if they're fleeing from persecution. Why should Americans be able to look at a refugee and think "you can't come here because if you consume like me, it will be bad for the environment." America has only 5% of the world’s population, yet we consume about 20% of its resources (Hartmann).Why can't Americans change their own consuming habits if the environment is the priority? 

Sources: 

Hartmann, Betsy. "An Environmentalist Essay on the Greening of Hate." Climate and Capitalism. 2010. 

http://climateandcapitalism.com/2010/08/31/the-greening-of-hate-an-environmentalists-essay.

Cangiano, Allesio. "Exploring ‘neo-Malthusian’ demographic rationales in migration policy-making."International Union for the Scientific Study of Population.

https://iussp.org/sites/default/files/event_call_for_papers/IUSSP%20-%20Exploring%20neo-Malthusian%20demographic%20rationales%20in%20migration%20policy-making%20-%20paper.pdf. 

The Face of a Refugee

Before taking a class that informed me of the actual definition of a refugee, displaced person, or asylum seeker, I often found myself thinking of a refugee as someone, or something, that they are not.  Growing up in a small town limits your views of the world, because all of the views are influenced by what your parents think and what your friends think.  So, as you can imagine, my view on the term “refugee” was very stereotypical.  I had always thought that they were coming to the United States to do harm.  I always heard, “Those ‘foreigners’ are taking all of our jobs,” but that is not the case either.  I am slowly but surely understanding what the face of a refugee actually and truthfully stands for.

The face of a refugee shows fear.  The face of a refugee shows sadness.  The face of a refugee shows a history of wrong doings that the world will never get to repay.  The face of a refugee exemplifies hope.  How hope can make people do miraculous things, such as seeking refuge in another area, state, or country.  A refugee, displaced person, or asylum seeker is just another normal person trying to live a normal life while they are awaiting the day to be repatriated to their homeland.  Imagine going through the pain of having to leave your native land due to conflict or other reasons, then seeking protection in a camp, like the ones sanctioned by UNHCR.  Imagine having to live every day with a hope of going back “home” slowly slipping out of view, or even worse, having to lose hope of being resettled into another country because the chances are so low.  These are the common realities of those seeking temporary refuge from their homelands.  They are likely never going to get back to their “reality” during their lifetime.  Put yourself in their shoes and it will open your mind up, just like it did mine.

References:

Prickett, Ivor. 2014. Syrian Kurdish refugees cross into Turkey near the town of Kobani, Syria.

UNHCR Website. http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2016/12/584036047/qa-1951-refugee-convention-relevant-today-time.html

Response: America on the Fence

    Since I have started this course on Refugees and Displaced Peoples, one thing has been in the back of my mind this whole time:  where does the U.S. lie in this opinionated scale concerning its involvement in helping and/or housing those in need? We all know that America has its own problems concerning displaced people – majority of Puerto Rico is still without electricity after Hurricane Maria and some have left the island and come to the mainland for the time being, my cousins among them. That is only the most recent example. Aside from those who are displaced, we also have an astoundingly high number of homeless people, a percentage of which are our own military veterans. One thing can be said of America with confidence – we try to take care of everyone else before we take care of our own.

   This sentiment seems to be a common thought that can be found in the minds of many citizens who are supporting the aid of refugees in other countries, most notably Syria. However, there is also the opposite sentiment that shows some citizens are not nearly as hospitable and are content with leaving Syrian refugees, among others, to fend for themselves regardless of the consequences.

   June 20^th, 2017 marked the sixteenth World Refugee Day acknowledged by the United States, and while our mobility has increased since the first World Refugee Day, it seems the public outlook of refugee aid has stayed relatively the same. With our new President in office, the numbers of aid versus abandon sentiments has come to a rigid standstill – those willing to help are determined now more than ever, while those against anything foreign-related are vigorously digging in their heels against even the mention of the words “aid” and “refugee” in the same sentence. As Maha Hilal said in her article with the U.S. News, “We’re taught to fear refugees while simultaneously applauding ourselves as a country that is (supposedly) tolerant of them”. Unfortunately, while this was written in June of last year, this notion has been one affixed to America for many years before and more than likely will be for many years after.

   Similarly, this notion can also be seen in the working of politics during this time of need. We have already discussed the pitiful amount of money that is allocated to refugee aid of any kind in the federal budget. That miniscule amount is then subdivided into the various governmental groups involved with the refugee aid, and ultimately when it is clearly divided, there is hardly anything given to any individual group to make much difference with anyone, anywhere. That is where groups like the Human Rights First nonprofit comes into play. Groups like these align themselves with others who want to help those in need, regardless of nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion or other. Human Rights First is known for provided pro bono legal assistance for asylum seekers as they are based in New York City and Washington, D.C. In their report published in February 2016, the Executive Summary beautifully describes the goals that all refugee organizations have as well as the mindset that permeates every individual involved:

“We believe that America can and should continue to provide refuge to those fleeing violence and persecution without compromising the security and safety of our nation. To do otherwise would be contrary to our nation’s traditions of openness and inclusivity, and would undermine our core objective of combating terrorism.”

Being a U.S. citizen means more than just taking pride in our country, but if that is all one wants to focus on then at the very least make sure you have a good reason to be proud of our country. Does our current treatment of refugees count as a source of pride?

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/world-report/articles/2017-06-20/on-world-refugee-day-examine-americas-role-in-the-refugee-crisis

http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/sites/default/files/HRFSyrianRefCrisis.pdf

x

Despite Trump Administration’s Anti-Refugee Rhetoric, Knoxville Continues to Welcome Refugees

                      President Trump’s disdain for immigrants and particularly of refugees is evident, which is why within the first few months in office, Trump implemented three executive orders concerning the state of immigrants and refugees, most notoriously, the order to ‘Protect the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States’, otherwise became known as the travel ban. This mandate suspends the entry of immigrants for 90 days and stops all refugees for 120 days from six Muslim-majority countries- Syria, Iran, Libya, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia. Trump’s refugee reform also capped entry to a mere 45,000 refugees while barring Syrian refugees indefinitely.^[1] Fortunately, Trump’s travel ban continued to be overturned and suspended, but he had to assert his power somehow. He declared implementation of a more vigorous and rigid vetting system, as though there wasn’t one to begin with. Natasha Hall, a former immigration officer with the Department of Homeland Security, gives detail to how grueling and calculating the vetting process is, “questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent. I’ve witnessed countless refugees break down crying in my interview room because of the length and severity of the vetting process. Then, four years after leaving Syria and three years registering as refugees, being told to go back. Go back where?”[2]

           
            Despite many restraints working against refugees, Americans continue to protest for immigrant and refugee rights. As Knoxville is my hometown, I am particularly proud to see the efforts in assisting refugees and understanding the harsh repercussions that awaits them back in their homeland. Knoxville saw a 35% increase of refugees in 2017 since 2014, hoping to reach a 44% increase by the end of 2017. Bridge Refugee Services resettled 245 refugees from Iraq, Democratic Republic of Congo, Russia, and Somalia.^[3] Drocella Mugorewera, a Rwandan refugee and now the Executive Director at Bridge Refugee Services, remains confident that the U.S. will be accepting of refugees no matter how unsympathetic the Trump Administration continues to be.

            Several Knoxville organizations have condemned Trump’s anti-refugee orders. Allies of Knoxville's Immigrant Neighbors, a group that advocates for immigrants' rights, speaks on the president’s remarks as "abhorrent" and “premised on the idea of white racial supremacy.” ^[4] Trump will continue to utilize fear tactics to incite nationalist ideas, but I believe the goodness of the American people will continue to fight against this as to not abandon our fellow brothers and sisters and give them the basic human rights that they so deserve.

---

[1] Trump, Donald J. “Executive Order Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States.” The White House, The United States Government, 27 Jan. 2017. (Supreme Court upholds Trump’s revised ban- current ban affects Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen.)

[2] Hall, Natasha. “Refugees Are Already Vigorously Vetted. I Know Because I Vetted Them.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 1 Feb. 2017.

[3] Scott, Mary. “More Refugees Than Ever Before Calling Knoxville Home.” WBIR Local 10 News, 2 Jan. 2017.

[4] Ohm, Rachel. “Rwandan Refugee in Knoxville Hurt but 'Not Surprised' by Trump Comments.” Knoxville News Sentinel, Knoxville, 12 Jan. 2018.

The Rohingya Crisis

The Rohingya Muslims, are a stateless minority group within Myanmar numbering nearly two million. The Rohingya are a distinct ethnic minority primarily in Bangladesh and Myanmar. In Myanmar, a primarily Buddhist country, the Rohingya are denied citizenship rights under the 1982 citizenship laws, and are excluded from the census data of the government. They are classified as ‘illegal immigrants,’ with no rights under the government.

Due to their lack of citizenship standing they are denied rights to land or property. Their homes, farms, and businesses may be taken by government agencies and distributed to ‘legal’ citizens of Myanmar. Many of their rights to healthcare, education, employment, and free movement are restricted by their government.

Since October 2016, nearly one million have fled to nearby Bangladesh. Mounting ethnic violence led to acts of atrocities from the Myanmar security forces. Mass migration of internally-displaced person led to a quasi-encampment being formed in the state of Rakhine. These displaced persons were also victimized by local populations and saw their temporary homes slashed and burned. As the violence mounted an estimated one million fled to Bangladesh for safety. Still yet, tens of thousands remain displaced with Myanmar continuously fleeing for safety. An ongoing persecution with killings, bombing, and arson in village has led to well-founded fears of persecution. 

Recently Myanmar and Bangladesh agreed to begin the repatriation of the Rohingya citing their well-founded fears of persecution were settled. Under this agreement 1,500 refugees would be repatriated a week. Under this ‘voluntary’ plan it would take nearly a decade to bring back 740,00 or more refugees to Myanmar. However, as no plans for maintain human rights and securing safety have been made many are beginning to question this repatriation of persons back to Myanmar. 

While some aid has made its way to Bangladesh the world's aid organizations have done very little to help the estimated 1.2 million refugees from the crisis. Furthermore, while the United Nations has condemned the attacks they have done little to nothing to help curb the atrocities taking place within the borders of Myanmar.  We must ask ourselves where the protections for these individuals are. 

I thought the class would enjoy this blog as well. It is a blog with Human Rights Watch on the crisis. There are some wonderful perspectives in the posts drawing on themes we will be learning in class. 
 
https://www.hrw.org/blog-feed/rohingya-crisis.

Citations

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41566561

https://www.hrw.org/tag/rohingya-crisis

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/rohingya-crisis 

https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/05/asia/rohingya-myanmar-explainer/index.html

Other resources: https://www.hrw.org/blog-feed/rohingya-crisis