It's been awhile since an update but that's mostly because for the past two weeks, my parents were here visiting me in Ecuador which was awesome. We had a great time together and it was nice to show off the diversity of this small country. We spent a few days in Quito touring around the old historical center and visiting churches and museums. We also spent a few days in a beautiful old colonial town in the south called Cuenca and were able to see some pre-Incan ruins. And, we got to spend a few days in an Eco Lodge in the middle of the Amazon basin...which was everyone's favorite part of the trip. The Amazon is incredible, there are really no words to describe how it feels to be out in the middle of the jungle there.
In the past few weeks I also heard the incredible news that I will be going to grad school next year! I got into Oxford for the Forced Migration Program which will give me a masters in one year. I'm still waiting to hear back from the American University in Cairo so I'm not final on my decision. It kind of depends on what kind of money (or any kind of money) the two schools can offer me.
Now it's back to work on my research. Since I only have about 3 months left (and one week I'll be in Peru and Alex will be here for 2 weeks), it's time for me to start writing up my results. That is exciting but also intimidating at the same time. Hopefully something worthwhile will come out of my work here...
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
The Danger of Reading Too Far into Labels
I'm reading Samantha Power's "A Problem from Hell: America in the Age of Genocide" right now and she talks a lot about the significance of the word "genocide" as opposed to other words/phrases used to describe systematic killings like "ethnic cleansing" or "civil war." Governments and organizations are hesitant to label a conflict a "genocide" because once the term is used, there is a moral obligation/pressure to militarily intervene in the conflict. The fact that the term "genocide" even exists (thanks to Raphael Lemkin) is such a powerful victory in human rights. It is incredibly important that a term exists to describe that level of systematic killings. On the other hand, if too much emphasis is placed on that one word (which has almost become like a "buzz" word when discussing conflicts), governments can in turn downplay or ignore a conflict by denying it genocide status. Furthermore, severe conflicts that don't necessarily fit into the parameters of genocide status thus receive less media attention and interest.
Since 1998, 5.4 million people have died as a result of the war in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It is the world's deadliest conflict since World War II. And yet there is almost no media coverage nor is there a huge international push for conflict resolution in the country.
Again, the fact that the term "genocide" exists to express conflicts like 1994 Rwanda is paramount, but it is equally important to also look beyond labels and terms to the central situation.
In my opinion, the same applies to the term "refugee." The creation of the definition of a "refugee" after WWII was again an incredible moment in the history of human rights. To give such a status to people who have been forced to flee their country because of violence or persecution is extremely important. However, placing so much emphasis on that one term (which has also become a very popular "buzz" word in the media) creates a level of exclusion to other people in need of international protection. UNHCR's (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) mandate (and thus funding) is ONLY for refugees, aka those who have actually been awarded a refugee visa. There have been some instances where it has elected to expand its mandate like in Colombia, where UNHCR is trying to help the over 3 million internally displaced people. Most international organizations that focus on helping refugees follow this mandate and thus only help those with refugee status or those in the process of applying for refugee status. There are millions more internally displaced people worldwide (some estimate over 25 million) that, as a result, fall out of their designation.
I was talking to a friend the other day about internally displaced people in Colombia and she said "oh but I guess you're just interested in the status of refugees." I'm not. I'm interested in the status of any person that has been forced to flee from their home because of violence or threats, whether or not they have had to actually cross a border, and whether or not they have received an actual refugee visa. I believe those people should still qualify for international protection and be addressed by international aid. The 200,000+ Colombians here in Ecuador without status are by far the most vulnerable and in need of protection/aid, and yet they don't qualify according to UNHCR's mandate. The solution that UNHCR and many of its partners have put forth is to try and register them in Ecuador en masse over the next couple years. That way, they would qualify. But that doesn't necessarily seem like the only right solution to me. What about the tens of thousands of Colombians that have already been denied refugee status because of lack of documents (many have to flee at a moment's notice and thus don't bring the necessary documentation with them to Ecuador) or because they accidentally answered some of their interview questions incorrectly? Once denied, they have about a one in a million shot of getting approved on an appeal. What about the Colombians that are too afraid to register themselves in Ecuador because they feel like they still face threats here? Why should 200,000 people in need of help have to wait in order for them to qualify bureaucratically for aid? In the end, a refugee is a refugee, and while I can understand that registration is necessary for legalization in Ecuador, they should still qualify for aid and some kind of protection before they get the visa or even if they were denied for unfair reasons.
I had a meeting with Jesuit Relief Services (an international organization that works on behalf of refugees and migrants) two weeks ago in Quito. The director told me that the organization has taken a respectful stance against UNHCR policy. To them, a person in need of international protection is a person in need of international protection, regardless of what visa or papers they have or do not have. This is the only organization I have come across so far in Ecuador operating on behalf of refugees that shares this opinion. I really respect the work they are doing here; I have met a lot of Colombians that were denied for refugee status that told me that JRS has been the only organization to really help them.
I understand that realistically, this is the only way that UNHCR feels it can operate internationally. There has to be some line drawn, because a refugee truly does deserve special status and protection. And there must be a process to determine refugee status. But looking at the situation here in Ecuador and sitting and talking with some of the people who have been denied really makes me believe that some kind of adjustments can and must be made.
Since 1998, 5.4 million people have died as a result of the war in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It is the world's deadliest conflict since World War II. And yet there is almost no media coverage nor is there a huge international push for conflict resolution in the country.
Again, the fact that the term "genocide" exists to express conflicts like 1994 Rwanda is paramount, but it is equally important to also look beyond labels and terms to the central situation.
In my opinion, the same applies to the term "refugee." The creation of the definition of a "refugee" after WWII was again an incredible moment in the history of human rights. To give such a status to people who have been forced to flee their country because of violence or persecution is extremely important. However, placing so much emphasis on that one term (which has also become a very popular "buzz" word in the media) creates a level of exclusion to other people in need of international protection. UNHCR's (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) mandate (and thus funding) is ONLY for refugees, aka those who have actually been awarded a refugee visa. There have been some instances where it has elected to expand its mandate like in Colombia, where UNHCR is trying to help the over 3 million internally displaced people. Most international organizations that focus on helping refugees follow this mandate and thus only help those with refugee status or those in the process of applying for refugee status. There are millions more internally displaced people worldwide (some estimate over 25 million) that, as a result, fall out of their designation.
I was talking to a friend the other day about internally displaced people in Colombia and she said "oh but I guess you're just interested in the status of refugees." I'm not. I'm interested in the status of any person that has been forced to flee from their home because of violence or threats, whether or not they have had to actually cross a border, and whether or not they have received an actual refugee visa. I believe those people should still qualify for international protection and be addressed by international aid. The 200,000+ Colombians here in Ecuador without status are by far the most vulnerable and in need of protection/aid, and yet they don't qualify according to UNHCR's mandate. The solution that UNHCR and many of its partners have put forth is to try and register them in Ecuador en masse over the next couple years. That way, they would qualify. But that doesn't necessarily seem like the only right solution to me. What about the tens of thousands of Colombians that have already been denied refugee status because of lack of documents (many have to flee at a moment's notice and thus don't bring the necessary documentation with them to Ecuador) or because they accidentally answered some of their interview questions incorrectly? Once denied, they have about a one in a million shot of getting approved on an appeal. What about the Colombians that are too afraid to register themselves in Ecuador because they feel like they still face threats here? Why should 200,000 people in need of help have to wait in order for them to qualify bureaucratically for aid? In the end, a refugee is a refugee, and while I can understand that registration is necessary for legalization in Ecuador, they should still qualify for aid and some kind of protection before they get the visa or even if they were denied for unfair reasons.
I had a meeting with Jesuit Relief Services (an international organization that works on behalf of refugees and migrants) two weeks ago in Quito. The director told me that the organization has taken a respectful stance against UNHCR policy. To them, a person in need of international protection is a person in need of international protection, regardless of what visa or papers they have or do not have. This is the only organization I have come across so far in Ecuador operating on behalf of refugees that shares this opinion. I really respect the work they are doing here; I have met a lot of Colombians that were denied for refugee status that told me that JRS has been the only organization to really help them.
I understand that realistically, this is the only way that UNHCR feels it can operate internationally. There has to be some line drawn, because a refugee truly does deserve special status and protection. And there must be a process to determine refugee status. But looking at the situation here in Ecuador and sitting and talking with some of the people who have been denied really makes me believe that some kind of adjustments can and must be made.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)