Video summary
The panel titled "Borders, Human Rights, and Identity: The Global Governance of Migration" addresses migration as a complex transnational issue that demands international cooperation rather than isolated national responses. Central to the discussion is the stark contrast in how different crises are perceived and managed; for instance, while over four million Ukrainians received humanitarian support within Poland following Russia's invasion, similar movements from Belarus were met with hostility, illustrating how political narratives and identity shape treatment. Experts highlighted that the global refugee system is currently ill-equipped for 84 million displaced people, relying too heavily on volunteers and NGOs due to a lack of systemic governance. This structural failure is evident in legal barriers that prevent local authorities from managing refugee flows effectively, as well as in the psychological drivers where fear often supplants empathy, causing societies to prioritize their "in-group" over those seeking safety.
The conversation further explores how media bias and political rhetoric distort public perception, often focusing on immediate conflicts like those in Ukraine or Afghanistan while ignoring long-standing emergencies in regions such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Yemen, and Ethiopia. Politicians wield significant power in disseminating narratives that can rapidly shift public opinion from support to opposition, as seen in Poland's changing stance on Syrian refugees between 2015 and late that year. Additionally, the distinction between migrant smuggling and human trafficking is often blurred in practice; while smuggling involves a transactional crossing of borders, it frequently devolves into exploitation through debt bondage or abandonment, effectively becoming trafficking. The panel emphasized that criminalizing smugglers without providing empowering alternatives for refugees creates a cycle where new risks emerge, noting that many migrants are forced to use smugglers simply because no legal pathways exist for them to reach safety.
Despite the significant flaws in the 1951 Refugee Convention, particularly its exclusion of those fleeing generalized violence or economic crises like climate change, the consensus is against replacing it with a new treaty that might lead to more restrictive policies. Instead, the panel advocates for enforcing the existing convention while encouraging states to innovate through alternative visa schemes that grant work rights, citing examples from Colombia and Brazil. The session also addressed the grim realities in places like Libya, where refugees face impossible choices between returning home or suicide due to a lack of care, and questioned the ethics of humanitarian agencies operating within detention centers funded by the EU. Ultimately, the discussion concluded that while the historical definition of refugees remains rooted in Cold War-era liberal values excluding economic migrants, the future requires cooperative governance models that recognize the humanity of all displaced people without relying on archaic notions of territorial control or divisive identity politics.
Read the full video transcript
welcome to today's panel borders human
rights and identity the global
governance of migration as part of the
37th annual norris and marjorie benson
epic international symposium on problems
without passports my name is bree
mcgowan and i'm from family new jersey
i'm a senior studying international
relations and economics
today we will explore the prevalent
issue of global migration
by its very nature global migration
transcends borders and passports this
global issue reflects what kofi annan
describes as problems without passports
problems that are transnational and
require international cooperation to
address
when looking at this broad issue there
are many different lenses through which
we must analyze migration
for one we should look at the concept of
borders as as it applies to
international migration which includes
an analysis of the migrant journey as
well as the global governance of
migration
furthermore he must take into account
human rights which are often
pushed aside in conversations that
attempt to politicize migrants
lastly we must recognize the humanity of
refugees beyond the tendency to see
migrants as statistics and take into
account their needs as human beings
conversation conversations like these
are crucial to discuss
particularly due to the pressing
situation in ukraine
recognizing that four million ukrainians
have fled their homeland in just over a
month since russia's invasion in
addition to the continued and increasing
displacement of individuals due to
climate change
i hope to touch upon many aspects of
migration in our conversation today
i'd like to thank our panelists for
being here today
before i introduce each panelist i would
like to explain how the panel will run
each panelist will first give an initial
presentation of five minutes
next we will have a moderated discussion
among the panelists followed by a
student presentation on cyprus and its
refugee challenge
finally we will close with the question
and answer session with the audience
without further ado i would like to
introduce our first panelist dr patricia
sassenau dr sasnal is a political
scientist arabist and philosopher who
holds a phd in political science
she is head of research at the polish
institute of international affairs and
professor of migration at the college of
europe
she is an expert of the advisory
committee of the united nations human
rights council
member of the european council on
foreign relations
and the polish ombudsman offices expert
commission on migration
dr sasnell we are delighted to hear you
speak now
thank you very much
first of all i'd like to
thank the organizers and it's my first
time at tufts i'm really delighted to be
here and it's such a great company um i
i thought
should i right yeah
i i thought it would be most interesting
for you uh to hear about what's
happening with the refugees from ukraine
because i'm coming from poland and so
just to give you an idea how close uh we
are to the crisis i'm gonna say that i
was born in tarnov which is a
city a town in the south of poland and
there was a place initially in the first
week of war
shelled
just 300 kilometers so it's like what
180 miles from from the place that i was
born and it touches in poland right a
place in ukraine was shelled so it
touches on the on the issue of borders
how different it is
on the polish side of the border in
terms of security
uh the level of life um remember
poland's neighbor
member of nato and the eu
while on the other side of the border
all hell broke loose no security no
membership in international
organizations no security
guarantees
a humanitarian crisis
so
like briana said more than four million
people
from ukraine
fled
to neighboring countries most of them to
poland more than two million people uh
are now in poland uh but they also you
know refuge people flee to the closest
country
to the to the safest country nearby so
there's also refugeehood from ukraine in
slovakia moldova romania hungary
these are mostly the refugees in poland
are mostly women and children because
men between 18 and 60 cannot leave
ukraine because they need to fight right
so this also tells you about the uh
characteristics of this refugee hood um
there are and they came through land
crossings either by car or by train
because they cannot fly the the sky
skies are closed
um
and there are only 29 small reception
centers like official reception centers
in poland
um and so just to give you the
the idea about the scale of the crisis
if you think about the country that
hosts most refugees i mean per capita
turkey 3.5 million syrians today
they came 3.5 million over a time span
of years following the war in syria in
2011
whereas in case of poland you have more
than two million that came in a matter
of months on of a single month okay so
it just i hope it shows you the the
challenge um just two notes about the
wording that that i want to use uh i
want to talk about humanitarian crisis
rather than a refugee crisis
why because i don't want to give an
impression that uh this crisis is caused
by sort of refugees themselves because
it's caused by war
and i think um
what differentiates this crisis is
this clear cause of people fleeing and i
think it touches upon what amali tower
talked about yesterday that when it
comes to refuge climate refugees it is
very difficult to perceive the reason
why people flee that usually when you
talk to a person there are various
reasons right there's no work there's no
land to uh to cultivate
there's no food the shortage of water
so it's really really difficult to trace
back the cause effect uh
line whereas in this case in the social
imaginary social imagination you can see
what caused these people to flee they
they left because they were scared
because there's war
and it also has a bearing on the
attitude towards refugee hoot right that
the how we perceive the causes of people
who who flee
um and that's i think how i'd explain uh
this immediate automatic and
unequivocally positive uh reaction of
the polish and other european societies
to refugees from ukraine and why do i
talk about refugees from ukraine and not
ukrainian refugees obviously because
not all of them have a ukrainian
passport there are people of various
nationalities various
skin colors so
i i hope we'll touch upon that and the
identity thing in this refugee in this
humanitarian crisis a little later for
example students from india right they
also fled to neighboring countries the
students in ukraine
now big cities and smaller towns and
local communities are the ones that face
uh that or that better brunt of of this
crisis this is something about
governance right
no global or even regional governance
aspects are relevant here really apart
from financing so it has to be said that
the eu is the entity that immediately
gave 500 euros to member states to face
this challenge and this amount is to be
doubled
but
shelter
housing food basic needs
all this had to be satisfied by
volunteers
uh private people ngos local communities
businessmen
and the societal response is incredible
you know there's individual fundraising
random centers being set up to exchange
goods people are looking in in their
flats to find
things that they don't need that they
can share and this happened in all my
societal networks at work in my rowing
sport club
in my whatsapp groups everyone organized
you know to to help the people
and this is happening until now but
no
system
was in place to respond quickly enough
and on a scale that was needed to to
this crisis
and even though volunteers are doing the
act most they are short of resources to
professionally coordinate verify and
adjust this aid to the needs
refugees gather in railway stations in
big cities so for example the central
railway station in warsaw is an example
of this challenge food drink blankets
medicine all this has been distributed
by ngos and volunteers
even though city authorities could do a
lot and this is i i want you to pay
attention to that city authorities could
do a lot in warsaw
but the railway station is under the
legal supervision by the voiver's ship
the voiver chip is uh
a you a a a but this administrative unit
that is
governed from the central government
okay and the central government did not
do enough
so
nothing could be done because the
railway station is under their super
legal supervision but so the city could
not do anything structurally there in
the railway station it had to be
volunteers and ngos so socio about the
something about the problem between
local and central uh governance
but on the 12th of march a special bill
was adopted by the parliament it gave
legal stay for the period of 18 months
uh it can be prolonged for another 18
months so three years altogether to
everyone who came to poland after 24th
of uh february when the war started
started although only to people with a
ukrainian and ukrainian passport
uh they but they have right to work free
care you know we have free health care
in europe uh education and benefits um
there were two million ukrainians
working in poland prior to the war
so all together there are more than four
million ukrainians in poland at the
moment okay the people who had worked in
poland before the war started they were
not given the same rights with the bill
that the ukrainians who came when the
after the war started in on the 24th of
february they were granted legal stay it
was prolonged until the end of 2022
but no right to work nothing automatic
uh that that the bill gives to the to
the refugees from ukraine
um
so
uh
now even though you know on the global
scale because we're here also to talk
about global governance
organizations such as unhcr or iom they
have great expertise and they have a lot
of data actually they are almost
irrelevant in situations like these
in
they're on the ground i mean at least
initially when when the conflict and the
crisis uh break breaks out
um
refugees from ukraine do not apply for
asylum i think it's important to to
mention okay
because an asylum seeker enters a long
process procedure during which he she
cannot work
uh even though they are entitled to some
small benefits and and uh health care
plus the system in poland is not ready
to process tens of thousands of
applications not to mention you know
millions of them therefore formerly
refugees from ukraine are not asylum
seekers
do not apply for international
protection
um
now it has to be said that uh there is a
stark if i still have some time there's
a stark difference between how refugees
from ukraine now are treated and
refugees slash migrants from iraq or
syria
are treated at the polish belarussian
border okay you may remember that in the
summer of last year there was this
crisis that was instigated by the
belarusian regime and alexander
kashankar the the leader of belarus who
facilitated p
for people from iraq and syria and
lebanon to come to belarus and they
actually drove in cars the the
belarusian authorities people to the
border in poland to put pressure sort of
weaponizing migrants to put pressure on
the eu and poland uh to uh um
uh
you know to show the weakness of the of
europe and uh
try to get some leverage to to have
sanctions reduce or uh sanctions that
are
that have been put in place on on
belarus dr sesno in the interests of
time would you be able to yeah i'll just
wrap up i'll just wrap up this point
um but it tells you something about
identity right so
um poland in response to that crisis
then
uh put up a fence and the people were
not allowed to come in whereas and had a
totally different sort of rhetoric
narrative about the crisis
whereas today
uh there is you know an all-welcoming
approach and people are
allowed to everyone is welcome and they
have all uh uh
access to benefits and and legal
protection
um i hope we will be able to talk about
that later on because i think it's
important to to see what the political
consequences of that are thanks
thank you dr sasnow for your compelling
remarks we will be talking a bit about
identity uh in the moderated section of
the panel today
our next panelist is michael nikkenchuk
program director for trauma and violent
conflict at beyond conflict based in
amman jordan mr nickenchuck oversees
beyond conflicts research intervention
design and policy work that addresses
the role of chronic stress and trauma in
the genesis and
escalation of violent conflict and the
role of trauma healing and conflict
resolution efforts
prior to joining beyond conflict mr
nikkenchuk worked as an independent
neuroscience consultant for
international ngos as the emergency
response coordinator for the syria
crisis response for aquascope and in
community development programs with
reintegrated combatants in guatemala
mr nick and chuck we are keen to hear
your remarks now
thanks free um in full disclosure
heather asked me to do this last night
so my remarks are written on this little
piece of paper
um
i'm really eager to get to the moderated
section of this because this is such a
complex
and really infuriating topic
as it well should be i've spent the past
10 years of my life working with uh
refugees from syria
which is a very different situation than
what we're dealing with now with uh
refugees coming from ukraine for many
different reasons the nature of the
conflict is different it's farther away
no matter how badly syria escalates it
was never going to lead to a bomb a bomb
being dropped on a european city
fear is largely what drives empathy in
the brain
fear
not love
fear of this might happen to me
and years of neuroscience research has
shown that
humans are wildly capable of overcoming
their self-interest but they also are
first and foremost self-interested in
many states in many ways and even the
altruism that we pursue is largely to
protect our in-group out of love
for those who look sound and think like
us
when all of you define what is a human
what's your first point of reference how
are you defining what a human is
it's you
what you see in the mirror
and so everyone that extends farther
away from that even in your brain's
consideration from the time that you're
a child
receives less and less consideration of
their humanity the less that they talk
sound look and probably feel
like you do
i think of a young man named zakaria and
i have permission to use his name and
his story
in syria he was
conscripted
into service
he was sent a long way from his hometown
in daraa in south syria to derazor
he was given a gun put in his hand said
you're going to have to use this there's
a police officer wandering the streets
of derazor he started to see more and
more people from his own communities
recruited into different positions in
the military for this emergent conflict
that was really outside of his control
or outside of anything that was part of
his frame of reference just a few months
prior time he became discontent of not
wanting to be involved in a conflict
that he didn't choose to be a part of
very few people choose
war
very very few people it's almost always
men and it's almost always men in power
he didn't choose to be a part of this so
he left he did what many many other
people did
he went to jordan a place where he was
at least safe
but a place because they're not party to
convention at the convention on the
rights of the refugee from 1954 he was
perpetually in this
in the state of being an asylum seeker
which is different than being a
convention refugee it's not the same
right it's not the same framework yes
you are protected
to a degree but it is not a life that
any of you would want
and he
like many others
wanted a life wanted wanted what you and
i have so basically and one of the
reasons why the asylum and refugee
system is so complicated now and the
governance system is so complicated now
is because when you say refugee you are
met with suspicion first and foremost
and the browner you are the more male
you are and the more muslim you are the
more suspicion you're met with
the reality is when i think of of
families who have
tried to exaggerate the health condition
of their child
they're subject to so many interviews
and quote unquote extreme vetting
i would embellish my child's illness if
it could guarantee them a life that was
better than the one that i had
i would probably lie like that
i've not been in that position
would you lie to save your children
would you faint an illness to earn your
basic human rights would you know how to
navigate us every day asks you are you
worthy
are you worthy
of things that you and i take for
granted every single day
when this young man zakariya finally got
an opportunity to leave the zapati
refugee camp via a scholarship to mexico
to get finally a university education at
the age of 29.
he went through a complicated process to
get clearance to leave jordan to get a
visa to mexico
and when he arrived at the airport in
mexico
he was interrogated for 12 hours and put
in deportation proceedings despite
having a valid visa
through a series of media campaigns and
shedding light on this and basically
shaming the government into what was
happening on live tv on broadcast tv in
mexico city he was released after 13
hours
finally getting to the place that was
supposed to be his new home where he
felt wanted and from the moment he
arrived there
he felt completely unwanted
that is what the life of so many asylum
seekers is like going from place to
place knowing that you are suspect and
you are wanted but hoping that in some
way shape or form your children will not
have to go through what you went through
so we know that the system is broken in
so many ways shapes and forms it wasn't
designed
to accommodate 84 million people that
are currently forcibly displaced in need
of protection
the system wasn't designed for that
and no matter how much reform we do
we're gonna eventually keep prioritizing
you know smaller and smaller numbers and
i'm not suggesting that the system isn't
getting people to safety it absolutely
is the resettlement system for example
but okay we take a hundred thousand
ukrainian refugees in the united states
there are two million in poland right
now
we raise the cap to 125 000 in the
united states wonderful we should do
that
but i had a young refugee not that long
ago wondering if her rape was enough
to earn her one of those 125 000 spots
what would have had to have happened to
me to be considered worthy of my case
being expedited
so the urgency of the refugee is very
different than the urgency of our
politics
and until we close that gap we're not
going to be doing it right
and so i'm really excited to be able to
talk about the governance of that system
and the necessary reforms that can make
the system
equitable but also necessary
to meet the demand that is only going to
grow no matter how much deterrence we
put in place
because no matter what we do no matter
what fences we put no matter what holes
we shoot in boats
people will move
and they will continue to do so to find
a better life for their children
no matter what we do to them
until we recognize that reality we're
not going to be making the necessary
drastic and dramatic policy changes that
are going to prevent the loss of
unnecessary unnecessary loss of life
good
thank you mr
for your enlightening perspective on
this issue
we will now hear from dr karen jacobson
the henry j lear professor in global
migration at the fletcher school of law
and diplomacy who directs the refugees
and towns project at the feinstein
international center at tufts
dr jacobson's interests and areas of
expertise include refugee and migration
issues humanitarian assistance in
developing countries urban impact and
climate change and migration
from 2000 to 2005 dr jacobson directed
the alchemy project which explored the
use of microfinance to support people in
refugee camps and other displacement
settings
from 2013 to 2014 she led the joint idp
profiling service at the united nations
in geneva
she consults and works closely with the
unhcr and other un agencies and
international ngos
dr jacobson we are eager to hear from
you now
thanks thanks very much greetings
everybody
it's great to be here and i just have
really a few a few points that i want to
make
um you'll forgive me because i'm
actually just back and this is the first
point just back from uganda
where i suspect yesterday so i'm a bit
jet-lagged
so um but i want to talk a bit about my
experience in uganda because
it was um i think it's going to
illustrate a bit some of the the main
perspective i want to make here today
which is
that we tend to focus here in the us on
ukraine now just as a few months ago we
tended to focus on afghanistan
and what we do not focus on ever
is the experience i'm about to tell you
now about what happens in other parts of
the world that are not on our media all
the time so i was in uganda working with
unhcr on a project that's looking at the
impact of climate change on informal
settlements in
in in the capital kampala
as you know in formal settlements the
cities of the world today are mostly
populated by poor people who live in
informal settlements around the city
and so many of these these population of
this population
consists of migrants either from from
rural areas or refugees and internally
displaced people who
are fleeing
conflict and other
civil disturbance and are moving into
cities
and so these informal settlements are
where most of the world's refugees live
today they do not live in camps they do
not live in europe they do not live in
the u.s that's for sure they live in
africa in the middle east and south asia
that is where most of the world's
refugees live today but we don't ever
really talk about those refugees so i
was in uganda looking at kampala and
looking at these informal settlements
we're starting a research project there
and i went with unhcr down to the border
of the congo and uganda is an area in
the south west
where the borders of tanzania rwanda and
congo and uganda come together this is
one of the most conflict affected areas
in the world the eastern democratic
republic of the congo has is one of the
most protracted civil uh protracted
conflicts in the world
and the number of people who've been
killed and displaced in this area
exceeds anywhere else for a very long
time
and it's not as if this war is just
occasional so while we were down there
in fact we had gone to the border to
because we'd heard that refugees were
were coming across the border in
great numbers
and while we were down there at the
border
this was a very dramatic in fact i've
been in i've been working refugee areas
for a long time but i've never actually
been caught up in what is called a level
one emergency a level one emergency in
un speak occurs when there is active
conflict and more than a thousand people
coming across the border a day
and we were caught up in this emergency
because while we were down there we
heard gunfire and then mortar fire
mortars and people rushing across the
border and for the first time in my life
i had to run
with
i and my the u.n team i was worth had to
run with the refugees as we ran from
this gunfire that was occurring what's
happening in the drc is is the rebel
group called m23 is being supported by
rwanda
and the congolese government which is
fighting the rebel group is being
supported by uganda
so we have this complex conflict that's
happening here but what's happening is
in those two days that we were there 15
000 refugees came across the border
and there was act of shelling there was
active
um injuries and deaths and rapes as as
occurs always in these kinds of
situations and we were with these people
who were running
but then i you know two days later i'm
one day later when i was back in kampala
i'm searching for this in the news not a
sign no
not any sign anywhere that i could find
in the western media
of of this kind of this you know
admittedly um
yeah
short-term emergency but still that was
15 000 people in a day that was caught
up in shelling so
the point i'm trying to make is that we
focus on what the media gives us the
media has given us the ukraine now this
is not in any way to diminish what is
happening in the ukraine and the
displacement and refugees and terrible
events that is happening there but that
is all that people are reading about now
and similarly two months ago it was
exactly the same or three months ago
with afghanistan
we were only given what is happening in
afghanistan and the terrible things that
are happening there
so we only get what the media tells us
okay but we never get those
long-standing protracted conflicts the
drc there have been hundreds of millions
of people displaced and
tens of thousands and perhaps even
hundreds of thousands of people who've
been killed over the last few years we
never hear about this conflict
so um
so
yeah i mean even if we just focus on
level one emergencies okay where there's
active shelling and and
active conflict
armed conflict two other emergencies are
in place right now that we never hear
about we never hear about yemen which
has been an ongoing
conflict and war civil war for the past
10 years we never hear about ethiopia
anymore there was a brief little
and the second one is ethiopia we never
hear about that it was a brief little
little um
spate of coverage a while back but that
has been completely wiped off the off
the media map
so it's this is just the point i'm
trying to make is that yes there are
terrible things happening in europe but
there's also a huge amount of resources
going into the into the neighboring
countries and to into ukraine itself
and and and i think what we have to
think about here is in terms of the
response to refugees because one of the
things that we need to understand is
what's going to how do countries who
receive refugees that is the neighboring
countries
how do they respond to those refugees
and as we've heard poland has responded
relatively positively to these refugees
but poland's history here when we look
back at how it responded to other
refugee movements is not quite so great
as i'm sure you would agree with me
because it and so what does it depend on
this this this response
in one respect i would say it depends on
two things the first thing it depends on
that is on how well refugees are
received by the host country the first
thing it depends on is how long these
people stay
if they stay a relatively short time the
response is always very is usually very
sympathetic and people are helped and
assisted there's a lot of media
attention that stays on them and so
there's a lot of a lot of good stuff
that happens but the longer people stay
the more that response tends to decline
in terms of its positiveness
and so so the temporariness of a refugee
population is a big determinant
determinant of how
how how good that response is to them
the second thing the second factor
that might determine their response to
refugees
is as you might guess
relates to two things race
and religion
and as has also been mentioned
if you are white and christian
and you're in europe the response is
going to be a lot better than if you're
not white and not christian as we have
seen in other in other situations
but as the point has also been made in
in countries where most of the world's
refugees are i.e in african and south
asian and middle eastern countries
what determines their response to
refugees in those countries
well in those countries it's not really
an issue of race and religion although
sometimes it is
in those countries we i think are back
to this issue of how long people stay
and in if we if we look at syrian
displacement the number of refugees who
are in turkey
in lebanon and jordan and iraq
those are the countries that have
absorbed the most iraqi refugees and
what we're seeing now is this first
factor coming into play which is how
long are refugees there in a country
like lebanon which has received per
capita the most refugees
per capita not in actual numbers
lebanon's response to refugees is now
becoming extremely negative and there is
push there is a pressure on refugees to
return to syria now even though in the
beginning which was back in 2012
that
revenant was fairly responsive to them
so i think one thing we have to think
about in looking at look at all of this
i'd like to may just recap my two points
one is
it's not yes ukraine is in the news now
as afghanistan was a few months ago
but we have to think about these
long-standing conflicts and
long-standing displaced populations who
are really struggling and have no
resources uganda has 1.5 million
refugees in it this is a poor country
and the funding for this refugee program
has been diminishing over the past two
years and why because donors say to
unhcr uganda's doing fine
you know they're supporting these
refugees they're doing fine
we're cutting the program because we
have other important and other important
emergency to attend to and that's where
the funding is going is to ukraine so
yeah i think it's really important to
recognize that there are it's not that
we should go beyond these these
emergencies and to look at what happens
over time
and uh and uh yeah i guess i'll stop
there thanks
thank you dr jacobson for your
intriguing remarks
last but certainly not least we have mr
peter tinty who is a writer researcher
and photographer covering conflict
security human rights and organized
crime with a particular focus on the
sahel in latin america
mr tinchy's writing photography and
analysis have appeared in the new york
times the wall street journal the
atlantic foreign policy vice and world
politics review mr tinty is currently a
lecturer at the committee on
international relations university of
chicago and carries out research for a
variety of research institutes
international organizations and
non-governmental organizations
he is the author with tuesday retino of
migrant refugee smuggler savior savior
excuse me and was part of the team for
foreign policy awarded the robert f
kennedy book and journalism award new
media category without further ado mr
tinte we are excited to hear from you
now
thanks very much adriana i just wanted
to start my timer because i have a
tendency to go over so
a little bit of holding myself
accountable here uh first of all thank
you so much for
inviting me to participate and thanks to
my fellow panelists who really set the
stage here for some of the
topics i wanted to discuss and that i
hope will come up during the the
moderated portion of this panel and also
with
questions from the audience
very briefly i want to go over what i
would identify and
perceive as kind of the key themes when
it comes to the ways in which
states are responding to
um the global
uh what's been called the refugee crisis
or migrant crisis i'm very much putting
that in air quotes because i would
posit that it's not really a crisis of
refugees or migrants it's a policy
crisis
and at the heart of much of this
is the
um refugee convention which mr nick and
chuck referenced
that in principle
states and i won't go into the legalese
but grants the right for people to seek
asylum and this um right to seek asylum
can be is predicated on the idea that
anyone who is fleeing their own country
for lack of protection about whether
it's war
uh a natural disaster political
persecution based on their race
ethnicity religion
potentially political affiliation
increasingly more and more states are
including
things like
lgbtq status as reasons to grant people
asylum or at least gives people the
right to seek asylum now that's in
principle and many states are
signatories to this convention
not all and there are some key omissions
here
however in
practice
most states even those who are
signatories to the convention
have basically set up
a system in which they say
you have a right to claim asylum
if you can get here
please don't come
uh now they don't say the please don't
come part they just implement policies
a suite of policies that make it very
difficult for people to seek asylum
through formal channels
um so that's kind of the overarching
system of how we've gotten here uh some
of the key kind of trends i want to just
highlight and then i can expand upon
during q a people would like
one is there's this very key trend of
border externalization
that is states primarily in the global
north but really particularly north
america
and um much of europe is seeking to
extend its border capacity border
surveillance capacity either through
building walls through partnerships with
um transit countries to make sure that
asylum seekers um or people who might
just put under the broad category
without editorializing on whether or not
they should be granted asylum as
irregular migrants right just preventing
people from reaching
in the first place
um another key trend
i think is instrumentalization of
migrants and migrant flows uh or
weaponization if that's a word you
prefer in which we've seen states like
with the case of belarus
increasingly use the specter
of migrant flows as a bargaining chip
within within bilateral and multilateral
relations belarus is only one example
the morocco spain relationship has very
much recently been uh shaped by
migration
uh the basically the eu's posture
towards north africa and the sahel is
very heavily shaped by the desire to
limit
um mixed migration flows in these
countries and to also encourage these
countries to harden and and
militarize their own borders in the
service of making sure that migrants and
asylum seekers don't reach european
borders and of course we've seen this in
the ways in which the us government has
interacted with
governments in this hemisphere whether
the whether it's the mexican government
as well as various central american
governments
just recently
the director of homeland security um my
argus was was touting a new partnership
with costa rica and costa rica is going
to help the us uh the euphemism that we
all love to use is manage mixed
migration flows um
another key trend here i think is uh
surveillance
um just the use of biometrics within the
humanitarian sphere and also the ways in
which um where
governments some private organizations
are constantly kind of cataloging and
determining who is
this this eternal debate or quest for
determining who's a refugee who's not
good migrant bad migrant
collecting data
quantifying people and trying to kind of
take a technical approach to this is
very much a trend um that i think is
only
starting to really emerge but i think is
potentially quite dangerous and is going
to have some some potential um negative
repercussions okay i've gone over my
time uh i'll take 30 more seconds if i
can just to um
touch on two more issues
the other
key trend that
is emerging within these these
conversations but is is not really um
has not
really had a coherent
has not manifested itself in a way is
this talk of having to engage the root
causes of migration and the drivers of
migration and that has usually just come
in the form of bilateral aid and
attempts at economic development but
there is a broader question there of why
is migration something that needs to be
addressed at the root cause level why is
it inherently a bad thing
there's a very much mixed
mixed conversation going on of are we
talking about forced displacement or are
we just talking about migration and the
ways in which
in our modern world people want to live
work move and build communities that are
that are global i'll stop there but
thank you very much for your
for for your time
thank you mr chinti for sharing your
thoughts on this issue and thank you
again to all of the panelists for your
remarks we will now move into the
moderated discussion on global migration
focusing on a number of key issues in
this regard i'd like to begin by
touching upon the issue of human
trafficking often discussed uh in
talking about global migration
human trafficking is a major concern
around forced migration
and i'm asked i want to ask um
what are the intervention points to
prevent people from being taken
advantage of and what are the ways that
states can de-securitize their
approaches from border security to
detainment and in thinking about the
millions of individuals namely women and
children who have fled ukraine and have
been welcomed into neighboring countries
what role does identity play in refugee
treatment and news coverage and i'll
have any panelists wishes to begin and
then we can jump in wherever we see
necessary
um i'm happy to jump into that first
question because it's something that uh
i end up having to discuss a lot
based on
a lot of my work and research has been
on migrant smuggling networks and the
um the processes by which migrants uh
asylum seekers will use actors who we
typically identify as smugglers to
overcome these borders and to often
reach asylum um
both
according to international law
there's a clear difference between
migrant smuggling and human trafficking
um there are different
crimes according to international law
um
again don't need to get into the
legalese of it but when it comes to
migrant smuggling that is more it's a
willing buyer willing selling their
willing seller scenario is i'm paying
you for the service of taking me across
this border um it's not inherently
exploitative although exploitation often
becomes a part of these arrangements
and it of course has to
requires crossing a border whereas human
trafficking doesn't have to be across
the border it can be internal and it is
inherently exploitative right these are
when we think of forced labor debt
bondage schemes the kind of typical
scenarios that we can think of that
would fall under
human trafficking um
in terms of how to combat human
trafficking
i might just change
tweak the
the question just a little bit because
one thing i would love for people in
this room to understand and and take
away from
my little intervention here is that
migrant smuggling and human trafficking
are often conflated
and that is often
a result of people not necessarily
knowing the difference or using the
terms interchangeably or these terms can
translate very awkwardly
some language is the word for
trafficking and the word for smuggling
is the same word right so it can be
tricky but oftentimes governments are
using
or will seek to leverage the universal
disgust for human trafficking because
there's really no one who supports human
trafficking
in order to promote policies that are
really
designed to limit
irregular migration flows and so
when people say we need to build a wall
to fight human trafficking no no you're
building a wall to prevent
migrants from entering the country
irregularly
when you when
many
policies and agendas that are pursued
often
under the guise of fighting human
trafficking
probably deserve more scrutiny as if
that's the real motive behind it um and
of course
the policy responses to fighting human
trafficking versus combating migrant
smuggling
should be different um the last anecdote
i'll just leave is
we can talk about the scourge of migrant
smuggling and the dangers that smugglers
um
might expose migrants to but the
question is not who's putting migrants
on boats it's why are migrants getting
on boats in the first place
um
and
in the case of germany for example
which very notably and honorably took in
over a million syrian refugees when that
decision was made
99 of the refugees who were granted
asylum
in germany used smugglers in order to
reach germany there was no legal path to
getting there if there had been
smugglers would not have been necessary
in the first place
it was for years there's this idea that
because of the the protocols that there
is a difference between trafficking and
smuggling and legally as you say there
is that's put out in the protocol
however
i would say that
this distinction between traffic
trafficking and smuggling is not so
clear
and in fact when we look at who's being
smuggled and how the smugglers work the
exploitation and the horrific treatment
of migrants is the same whether you're
being trafficked or migrant uh smuggled
and there's really not much difference
because the same kinds of dead bondage
and other kinds of financial problems
that are involved in being smuggled are
the same as being as whether you're
being trafficked or smuggled and there
is some interesting work out now in the
last few years that is really taking on
this issue that there is a distinction
between trafficking and smuggling and
saying people who are being smuggled
awesome jacobson can you just move your
microphone a little closer just so we
can hear you feel better so this is this
that people who are being smuggled are
struggling and suffering in exactly the
same ways as people who are being
trafficked
and your example actually of of how
people get to europe which is absolutely
true that everyone who moves nowadays
has to be smuggled because there's no
flight you can get on because of the
visa regimes
everyone who's been smuggled is in great
danger it's not if you pay that smuggler
at the head at the beginning of your
journey that's no guarantee that you're
going to be delivered there safely not
at all
smugglers i have no interest it's a
completely transactional um
exchange that's happening and it's and
smugglers are there to make a profit and
if that profit involves abandoning you
in the middle of the of the
mediterranean that's what happened or in
the middle of the sinai desert or in the
middle of the sahel that is what happens
and so these are smugglers these are not
good guys who are helping people get to
europe these are
businessmen who have no compunctions
about about abandoning and
kidnapping people and converting a
smuggling experience into a traffic
experience we have many examples of how
our people pay their dues to their
smuggler and then get trafficked and
kidnapped along the way so i i agree
with you that there's this distinction
but actually
it's a distinction without really much
of a difference
yes of course um yeah i want to go back
to the identity part of the of your
question but i just want to say that i
get
i
draw a conclusion from what mike said
that the less time you have to prepare
the better the presentation
but cannons and peaches were also great
to dominate yours but um
so on the identity thing and that women
and children other make up the majority
of refugees from ukraine and they are
the most vulnerable of course also in in
terms of um
migration migration flows in general but
also of course minorities people of
color
so
there's a natural positive attitude
this is something maybe cultural maybe
eurocentric that when it's a woman
and then a child your attitude is good
but the more male you are the more black
the more muslim like mike said and karen
the attitude is uh different and this
goes actually
for everyone i mean across the west um
which is not the case in the south uh in
the global south
uh so um what i want to say actually
about poland and touching on what karen
said
that in 2015 when the refugees
slash migration crisis although it is a
it was a policy crisis happened in pola
in uh europe and syrians were coming to
uh to europe
indeed the polish attitude was um
so
what if you looked at the pulse
service done in 2015. in april when
polls polish people were asked
are you in favor of accepting syrian
refugees the majority would say and i
think it was something like close to 70
percent would say yes and then a
political debate prior to elections
parliamentary elections happened
uh and in that debate the rightist party
that is now in government took up the
issue of the refugees vilified them and
you know this was the devil that we need
to
be afraid of this was their rhetoric and
they won the elections and when the
polls were done in november that year
after the elections 51 percent of of the
people polled say that they were against
accepting refugees
why i'm saying this is because karen
pointed to two reasons
about the quality and the of the
response to refugeehood that's the time
that they stay and uh the race really
identity religion but that's the third
one
this is the political debate this is
about the power of politics this is the
about the power of politicians about the
ideas that they disseminate and put into
our heads
we as people do not have an opinion
about everything i have no idea if a
river should be naturally should be
artificially regulated or it should be
let loose a particular river i should i
cannot have an opinion about that
because i'm not a specialist but a
politician has an opinion about
everything and we learn from them and we
take opinions from them
so by saying this and i'm this is not
new i mean
wrote about it
not such a long time ago but it's about
the power of politics it's part of
culture it is part of what we have in
our heads so it's up to the politicians
really
to
have an employee a narrative
that is not divisive
that is compassionate and that also
stirs
sort of legality you know
it's something about the geneva
convention that we
uh
that people know that refugees and
migrants
are not good or bad
these are large movements and mixed
movements of people groups of people
that have all vicissitudes of you know
characteristics in them
this is a small interjection here to
add to just dump some gas on whatever
fire was happening here earlier
um smugglers are the bad guys no
question about that like 100
absolutely yes it's disgusting the
activities that they force people to do
when they encourage a 15 year old syrian
boy to burn off his fingertips and the
woods in hungary not knowing how that's
going to affect him the rest of his life
when he's taken to a police station for
a misdemeanor in berlin and seeing he
doesn't have fingerprints he's assumed
to be some sort of part of an organized
criminal network so he can't get his
prints taken
that was a decision forced on him by a
smuggler in the woods of hungary at some
point they are the bad guys 100 percent
but
the decision-making that a refugee goes
through being a refugee is possibly
among the top most disempowering
experiences that a human can go through
because literally every choice is taken
from you where you can take a is a
choice that you don't even have anymore
because your latrines are assigned to
you in a camp
where you can live where you can rent
where you can walk what you can what you
can wear
very few decisions are yours
and so we have to think
the the necessary criminalization
of endangering refugees whether it's
because it's through trafficking or
smuggling or the other many ways that we
that we
put refugees at risk those should be
criminalized absolutely because those
are behaviors that are against every
possible framework of human ethics and
human rights and the law
but at the same time we cannot keep
criminalizing those things without
offering a more empowering route to
decision making for refugees and
migrants
because whatever we criminalize there
will be it's like whack-a-mole
something else will pop up and we're
just creating riskier profiles of
possible decisions for people and i have
i'm thinking of a whether it's
my my friend
muhammad who was sitting on the on the
border of belarus in poland the sixth
time he tried to go through he went
through being chased after by german
shepherds released by the polish
military and had to hide in the swamp
where he got frostbite and had to get
some of his toes amputated at a hospital
in berlin
you know these are decisions that people
are making there's an element of agency
here
and so how do we increase that agency
while also criminalizing incredibly
dangerous dehumanizing uh criminal
enterprises and behaviors it's an
incredibly tough balance and i applaud
folks like dr jacobson and peter for and
then of course doctors hasn't for trying
to tackle those things through different
policy regimes
[Music]
yes of course
uh yeah
totally not perceiving this as a fire
but by any stretch no wonder your points
are are very well taken uh both of you i
just um
and i don't even want to use the term
push back against uh this idea that it's
a distinction without real difference i
think this this will be very context
specific um in the case of say turkey uh
close from turkey degrees for example
there were
some of the actors that that are
smugglers and regardless of whether
they're good people or bad people
um there were things like
qr codes that could be given out to the
person who purchased a place on a boat
and the money wouldn't get released
because there was an escrow system
because there were there's consumer
protections now that wasn't because
these smugglers are good people it's
because they had a lot of competition
with other smugglers and so they had to
meet the demand there was a market um
for smuggler services and the actors who
wanted to meet that demand and operate
within that system
uh baked in these kind of consumer
protections in order to get clients
um
that's just
different right than those who would
have been operating along a similar
route but whose pure goal would have
been
one-off exploitation for the sake of
making money or ripping someone off
and
the distinction of smuggler
one other component of this is that in
some of these contexts
the kind of term or idea smuggler has
more or less had to be manufactured and
i'm thinking of the case of the sahara
desert and really niger where
these
actors who had been transporters for
decades and their
role in society and their occupation was
transporting people across the desert
from egypt to libya these were this was
not clandestine but it was irregular it
wasn't particularly legal it wasn't
illegal it just wasn't really something
people paid much attention to
but when europe decided that it's very
important that they work with the
nigerian government to stem flows
through niger into libya for onward
passage to europe
there were new laws passed that now
determined that these people were
smugglers so it is
it's complicated that's awesome yes can
i respond to that yes of course i
totally agree with you peter and it's so
great that you're making this point
about context and because it is this
whole idea of smuggling is very
complicated it's not like swanglas are
all 100 bad guys not at all like he was
saying they're long traditions of
smuggling in the sahara and elsewhere
where people it's just a livelihood that
people do and then you you pay your guy
and you get across and it's fine and
then then there's the other end of the
spectrum where these guys are really bad
guys
it's a whole range and a very much
context dependent so it's not like
there's just you know some simple way to
think about i really agree and your book
is really excellent on these on these
details then secondly could i just say
that to to um
patricia i love that you're adding this
third dimension because of course it is
so much about the politics and the
politicians who are determining
the co the context for how refugees are
received and and you you illustrated it
beautifully with how in the beginning
the polls were yeah let's take them on
the syrians and then the politicians
change everyone's mind with their
skillful rhetoric we have had some
extensive experience of this in our own
country
of where a politician can literally
change people's minds about migrants and
and call people who come from mexico a
long-standing you know ally and partner
and call them criminals and rapists and
change people's minds about how we see
migrants so i totally it's it's probably
the most important factor i would say
yeah thank you
thank you everyone for your marks going
off of the discussion of how politicians
can change people's minds when we treat
refugees and migrants as statistics and
political talking points we can easily
miss the suffering and trauma that
accompany displacement
so my question is two parts how might we
effectively address these challenges
across borders and with consistency and
how could global governance evolve to
better address contemporary migration
issues in this regard why don't we start
with mr nick and chuck if you're ready
trauma yeah yes
um
yeah here's
less passion more science on this one i
promise um
you know we've we've learned so much
about how to deal with um
the trauma of returning peoples of
veterans and forced migrants over the
past decades i mean the did you know
that the first time that we heard the
notion of post-traumatic stress disorder
was actually quite late it didn't make
its way into the diagnostic and
statistical manual until 1983 until the
third iteration of the dsm which is the
american psychiatric association's
diagnostic manual before that it had
been labeled since the days of world war
one of course as shell shock and these
other terms that were used mostly for
folks that were in active combat
settings and returning to their
homelands
however the first mention of the
symptoms associated with post-trauma
responses or disruptions in the psyche
and the body after trauma are actually
from 5000 bc in the ramayana in ancient
hindu texts
so for across civilizations we have had
so many different efforts to try to
capture
what happens to the brain body and
behavior after we go through these
life-altering or life-threatening
experiences and the modern
classifications of that are actually
quite new when we look at the breadth
and
time spent of human history
um
not every person that lives through a
war is quote unquote traumatized
it doesn't mean that it doesn't deeply
affect you but from a clinical
definition as far as symptom
presentation
maybe
between 35 to 42 based on current
meta-analyses around 35 percent of
refugees will go on to develop some sort
of stress-related disorder as a result
of their experiences of conflict and
migration however
the one thing that's changing
dramatically as we've seen is that the
notion of of the lifespan the life cycle
of being a refugee is different
a lot of the systems and policies and
mechanisms that we have in place to
address refugee trauma
rest on the assumption that the trauma
was the war the trauma was the thing
that forced you to migrate in the first
place while ignoring largely the
potentially traumatic nature of forced
migration experiences and long-term
acculturation and adjustment issues as a
migrant or a refugee in a new place
there is a great study that came out in
2019 that was focusing on syrian and
iraqi adolescents in germany
that was looking at those who had clear
traumatic memories from the war in syria
and early adolescence and those who had
such
similar memories but also traumatic
experiences including potential
violations and assaults along the route
of coming to germany and upon arrival to
germany in collective shelters and
accommodations and the those who had the
greatest level of post-traumatic stress
symptoms were actually those who are
exposed to traumas in their new country
of asylum not in the country of origin
where the quote unquote big traumas the
big t traumas took place
so i think we need to reframe also how
we consider the life cycle of refugee
trauma and refugee stress
moving away from exclusively a
trauma-focused model and more to a
stressed focused model that is
appreciative of the complexities of the
traumatic experience that forced
migrants go through and not only does
the global mental health system have to
change to accommodate that and create
better programs as a result that don't
require the divulgence or the um
the specificity of one or two traumatic
events in war i think we also need
policy frameworks that recognize for
example in an asylum interview
which can be very intimidating it is
perfectly logical and normal that
someone isn't going to recall the dates
and times of events i've been privy and
translated for different asylum
interviews where the person feels quite
interrogated and a lot of shame that
they can't remember the details of what
time of year a certain event happened
which is a necessity for having a
completed and believable asylum file as
having clear recall of when and where
things occurred yet because of the
intensity of that stress and trauma the
person might not be able to physically
recall that for a number of clinically
proven scientifically validated reasons
because of what happens to your
hippocampus your amygdala and certain
parts of your limbic circuitry as a
result of stress
so we also have to have not just better
mental health programs for refugees but
also asylum and you know refugee status
determination processes that are more
inclusive and
cognizant of the effects of trauma on
migrants so it's a policy question as
much as it is just a medical or program
question
would anyone else like to add on to that
um just maybe two sentences i'm in no
way am i an expert on this so i really
not a scholarly comment but um
i would recommend to you to the students
uh to look at the at the work of the
special rapporteur i mean when we talk
about global governance migration uh the
special rapporteur on the human rights
of migrants uh felipe gonzalez morales
on the coveted migration nexus
and there's a stress on the on the
health
uh
aspect of of migration so it's a good
report and also encourage you to
having listened to mike
encourage you to read if you haven't
done so yet
the rest of the earth by franz fanon who
was a psychiatrist and
also a fighter although he never took up
a gun
on the site of algerians uh being french
against the french
and the the last part of the book is
about the trauma of the of the colonized
um
so i guess it also somehow relates to to
what mike said because it's a
fantastic book and you have to know it
doctor jacobson or mr timmy do you have
anything to add
i'm okay there
no i'm fine
great in the interest of time it seems
we have time for just one more moderated
question i hope we can continue and
build upon these conversations in the
audience q a section which will happen
very short uh shortly
the last question
the very concept of refugee hood seems
to call into question citizenship and
sovereignty as it exists in our world
today
is there a need to reconceptualize
borders and or the idea of citizenship
i know it's a big question but i'm sure
many students are curious your thoughts
um yeah i can actually start um because
this is something that i
kicked off with i mean that the border
between poland and uh
and ukraine and and sovereignty so we're
in the i think we think about
sovereignty in those very archaic uh
terms the sort of 19th century uh
sovereignty concept you know it's a
control over territory borders and
people
but i'm asking myself what
control does italy have
over
large swags of land that are burning
because of climate change
what sovereignty
does
germany have over apple the company when
it comes to gathering data and actually
the strength of finance and all that
and and and then
what sovereignty does uh
say
um
iran have over the border with
afghanistan when you have an influx of
people people coming in and this is
something about migration so i have i
think we have this phenomena
migration climate change large
corporations
uh
there are probably more that
uh forced us to reshape the concept of
sovereignty and sovereignty is actually
about interconnectedness and cooperation
in my uh mind and i'm coming from the
european union and you know the european
union itself
reinvents the concept of uh sovereignty
it's about
one plus one making three not two right
it's about synergy so you have a group
of countries that have sort of given up
although it's a very bad word
part of the sovereignty in order to form
a larger entity that has greater
sovereignty
right
uh in order to face uh global challenges
so and in terms of borders you know this
henley passport index henley right
passport index that indexes the strength
of a passport the nationality of your
passport and
and it shows you how easy it is for you
to cross borders with with with a
with a passport and on top so the
easiest it is for people to travel if
you have a
passport from singapore japan germany
italy and the worst for you
you will never get a visa to the us if
you have a syrian iraqi
afghani passport so i i think this index
is an interesting tool to look at
because it tells a lot
[Music]
okay i'll go
should we do we need to reconceptualize
borders
i think it's fun exercise to think about
how we can reconceptualize borders it's
an academic exercise uh what you need to
do is to go down to any border where
there is a migrant crossing and you will
have no
no doubt about the power
and and continuation of national borders
when we talk about we should we
conceptualize borders we sitting here as
students and academics and whatnot we
can have a lot of fun doing that when
you talk go to the reality of the ground
bearing in mind what you said about that
there are you know corporations and and
and yeah sort of conceptual yeah i mean
definitely corporations and yeah who who
who transgress these borders but we're
on the on the ground when you talk about
migrants coming into a border
those borders are very solid well
protected and and and enforced by by
let's face it the host population
i in my class that i teach we have a
one class that looks at i my class on
global migration one one of our classes
has a debate on open borders
should we have open borders okay
should we allow all the migrants who
want to come in all those poor refugees
and poor migrants who are struggling and
having such terrible experience should
we just open our borders and let
everyone cross
and and not have to let them have visas
and not and not and not to hold them
back
and let's just bring everyone in who
wants to come in well let me ask you
this how many of you thinks we should
have open borders to the us
how many of you think we should just
drop all our immigration and let anybody
come in who wants to all of those
refugees sitting in ukraine should we
just bring them over to the u.s two
million of them and what about all the
rest should we should we bring them in
how about 40 million refugees should we
bring them to the us
should we just drop our borders and
bring them
i ask you this would you do you all
think we should do that
and if you do should they come to your
community
should they come and should they put up
their tents and their houses and so
forth in your high schools
because that's what we have to think
about
the politicians for all their problems
are are telling us what their people are
telling them which is no we do not want
all these these refugees and migrants
and everyone else in our backyards
yes we'll rather have them in someone
else's country
but not in ours so yes we think that we
can reconceptualize borders but i ask
you this are you willing to have a
million people come into your community
and then if you are are you willing to
increase your taxes so you can support
them are you willing to have them come
into your schools and your health
centers
and your farms and take over your your
jobs if that's all the case then great
go to your politician tell him or her
that you want open borders but i can
guarantee you it's not going to happen
because you and the rest of everyone
else living in the countries of the west
are not going to agree with that
maybe you are because we're all
progressive and
liberal thinkers but most of the people
in the u.s and most of the people in
western europe are going to say no
so i don't think we can talk about
reconceptualizing but
nothing is going to happen
yeah mr trinty
yeah i
i think one thing
to keep in mind is that we constantly
are reconceptualizing borders
um these are not
you know
as real as they are in terms of on the
facts on the ground
conceptually they're not natural i mean
in some cases there are natural borders
due to oceans seas uh
rivers or or mountain ranges but
um we have we are constantly
reconceptualizing
uh how we manage a border who can cross
who can't i mean these are very dynamic
political processes that have been going
on for quite some time um
you know
what airports you can enter when you
connect why you can fly to certain
places these are these are constantly
shifting
policies um so
i don't think we should necessarily
accept kind of a
fade accompli that you know these are
just facts on the ground and they'll be
there um the question of open borders
though of course the the
the
there's the conceptual and and moral
imperative of whether or not it should
be done and then the real political
challenge that it would pose
um
i think we do need to
then at least acknowledge
um
what it what border maintenance
means i mean it's a projection of power
it's incredibly violent process
of determining who gets to be on what
side of the wall
so it's not a politically neutral
stance
and it's one that i think when we talk
about why populations move what are the
drivers of force displacement and what
role
states who like to have very restrictive
um
border regimes play in exacerbating some
of these mass movements um what their
obligations are to accepting people who
may be on the move as a result of their
foreign policies or
um various economic systems that have
been put in place
so when we talk about rethinking borders
i just want to make sure that there's a
enough space there for understanding
that it doesn't need to be a kind of
open border or closed border dynamic
there's there's
a lot that can be negotiated and
reconceptualized even accepting uh if
should you choose to that there's a
nation-state system states have
sovereignty over their borders
thank you to all of the panelists for
your remarks
before i move into the audience q a we
will hear a brief presentation
on cyprus and its refugee challenge from
tough students ian boldeston meg grieve
and emma jennings of the middle east
research group's recent fact-finding
trip to cyprus
[Music]
i'll be sorry
[Music]
um
[Music]
and i'm the trip coordinator um for the
middle east research group and we over
spring break we're lucky enough to go to
cyprus um there were eight of us there
and three of us were um completing
research on different refugee issues um
and so emma's gonna start and tell us a
little bit about the um history of
cyprus and
uh the refugee situation there and then
ian's gonna talk about his research and
then i'm impossible
yes so cyprus is a very interesting case
for migration because of the 1974
invasion by turkey
so cyprus has two major ethnic
populations there are greek cypriots and
turkish cypriots and so the invasion
wound up splitting the island along
ethnic lines so since 1974 there have
been large movements of greek cypriots
who had lived in the north to the south
and turkish the brits who lived in the
south to the north so that has really
influenced the ways that people
in cyprus view refugees migrants asylum
seekers coming in now which ian will
talk about more in his research um there
are also two british sovereign base
areas on cyprus to just kind of
complicate who has territorial control
wear
um
which
is seen as both a legacy of british
colonialism and
as a security buffer to turkey so there
are kind of mixed views on those things
in cyprus
and then more on my research personally
i'm focusing on the different regional
and domestic influences
um political influences on the creation
of refugee policy in the republic of
cyprus so the south um because
the cyprus problem as they call it there
um
is the issue of reunification between
the north and the south and kind of got
territorial governance since the south
doesn't exercise territorial control
over the north and um
the largest
the reason i'm focusing on regional
politics as well as domestic politics is
because
the most common pathway for refugees
asylum seekers migrants to get to the
republic of cyprus is actually through
turkey into the north and then over the
u.n buffer zone into the south um which
has led to a
a lot of rhetoric from government and
the politicians in the republic of
cyprus that turkey is sending these
people to destabilize our government and
our people they're not cypriots they're
going to destroy our way of life that
typical kind of xenophobic rhetoric
but that has really started to impact
the way
that migrants refugees asylum seekers
because they're often all lumped
together
in the way in the implementation of
policy there
are treated and viewed within
communities and the way that they're
leveraged as political tools for
domestic gain of political parties and
politicians in cyprus
um so yeah that's a pretty basic
overview uh yeah
thanks yeah so my research
um was kind of focusing in on the impact
of partition policy and
uh cypriot refugee attitudes on the
management
and experiences of migrants coming or
refugees coming from abroad so
because i kind of was initially
motivated to do this because
of the unique large population of
displaced people as a result of the 1974
split that emma described and
i was kind of curious to
try and investigate if
these people who see themselves as being
displaced in refugees is kind of a large
part of their identity the way that they
relate to their conditions in their
country would this make them more
empathetic um and kind of more
um welcoming to refugees coming from
abroad and kind of like the politics in
general the island the answer which i'm
still kind of fleshing out is pretty
complex and there's there's multiple
different answers basically
um
what i learned is that
a lot of them kind of view themselves as
refugees but refugees in a bit of a
different way than
refugees coming from abroad and so
there's kind of a disconnect between
that and
some see
as
kind of
the the issue of reunification as
needing to take precedence over then
helping people um from abroad
and i think as well sort of the history
of the island as well in terms of
colonial influences and have been such
sort of a small member a small country
at that sort of crossroads
of the eastern mediterranean can kind of
lead to
narratives that
uh can kind of frame
large potentially large inflows of
migrants from abroad as kind of an
existential threat
but at the same time there are
many
separate refugees who are involved with
different community organizations
and sort of migrant support groups as
well
on the island but overall kind of
political affiliations uh media
discourses as well kind of take
precedence over
um
attitudes as or attitudes being
influenced um by their refugee attitudes
so yeah
um and then my research was focusing on
uh education for refugee students um and
i was interested in this because after
cyprus joined the eu um cyprus changed
from more of a transitional country
where people would come stay for a
couple weeks and then go to europe into
a place where people would come and stay
for many years they would bring their
families and so there's a growing number
of students who needed to be educated
and there was a shift in 2003 from a
monocultural education system
um to an intercultural education system
but
there's been a huge gap in the policy
that has been created and the
implementation of this policy which is a
lot of what i looked at
one example that sticks out to me is
something called the zones of
educational priority which are
areas where their high number of refugee
students
and so the government gives these
schools extra funding extra resources to
teach students greek
things like that but one effect of this
policy was that um greek cypriot parents
no longer wanted their kids to go to
these schools because they were seen as
special or different um and so they took
these their kids out of the schools um
and sent them to other schools with more
greek cypriot students and so it just
became schools with only refugee and
migrant students
and so it's just one of many examples
where the policy that was created has
actually created more problems for the
refugees
students instead of helping them
[Music]
thanks to all the panelists for talking
about your uh different experiences
working with this topic um
just briefly i think it also relates a
lot to our research what you guys are
talking about like externalization of
borders and securitization of migration
has really influenced all of our
research and is a very important topic
for us all to talk about not just in
cyprus but in the global system so
thanks everyone for attending as well
[Applause]
thank you merge for that wonderful
presentation
i would now like audience members who
have questions for the panelists to come
up to the microphones on either side of
the auditorium
i would request that you keep your
remarks to a short question directed at
one panelist without any additional
comments in the interest of time please
try to keep it under one minute and
please introduce yourself thank you
was super interesting my name is nicole
i'm from argentina i'm a visiting
student at the tillett program
so in argentina we have a very flexible
migration laws our constitution states
that basically any foreigner has the
same rights as a citizen and we've
received many migrants especially from
venezuela and neighboring countries so
my question is
reading a book a few years back exodus
by volcollier
um my question is how can we still
manage to keep the migrants identity but
also try to adapt them not adopt them
but to be part of the society and not
losing their identity so
that's my question
anyone like to begin
dr jacobson
we have a project called the refugees in
towns project that looks at the
integration of refugees i think we have
to make a big distinction between
integration and assimilation in the old
days
america and other countries wanted to
assimilate migrants that is to make them
the same as them to make them into
americans whatever americans were yeah
now we don't talk about assimilation
anymore we talk about integration and
that is how can people retain their own
identities as as
national identities religious ever
identity
and yet still be part of this of a
community a host society that i think
what you've hit on is a really important
issue
and you know praise to argentina for
keeping its its visa regime relatively
progressive and and enabling that is
great south american countries are doing
really well on that not all at most
um so yeah i think that's a really
important thing and we don't really
have
a
a formula for how this is done but
we know two things that when we talk
about integration it's it's both coming
from the host
society the host population who wants to
enable people to become part of that
town or community
and it must come from the migrants and
refugees so it's a two-way process a
relational process in which both sides
are trying to
achieve
something that works for
for the town or whatever it is so it's a
really important issue and i think
really interesting because it it um
varies a lot you know some countries are
better at it or some even some towns
it's not necessarily a national
i think it's so i encourage you all to
to participate and come and and
create case studies for our refugees in
townsford we'd love to have something
from argentina
thank you so much
angeles
hi my name is angelus i'm a political
science student from greece
thank you very much for your input on
our symbolism
um
firstly i take the chance to say that
migration
uh
isn't a new phenomenon borders are so i
will put
my question uh you mentioned
instrumentalization
so we see putin uh
is bombing urban cities causing the
refugee flows to towards western
european
countries
so
can we say that
migrants can be used also as a hybrid
war tool and
uh another
question
how do we deal with uh leaders like
putin an erdogan
the european union is giving money to
turkey to to hold the refugees in its
territory but
then we see
erdogan um
using migrants as a threat to our
european union saying that if you don't
if you if you do something that i don't
like i will release the refugees and i
will cause a huge political turmoil um
that's my question
thank you
i can take that from that
um thanks angela so
i think we need to differentiate a
hybrid threat
uh in in the case of the war in ukraine
is just a sort of a collateral
effect
right but
putin did not uh
stop this war to cause an influx of
migrants to
the eu he caused it because he wants
ukraine
in his sphere of influence
um he thought they would welcome him and
the russians with roses
uh
but in the case of belarus this was i
think this was part of some kind of a
hybrid threat
instrumentalizing migration but then on
the other hand the the narrative and the
rhetoric that we had in poland put too
much emphasis on this hybrid
aspect rather than looking at the people
who were really coming in because
they were not artificial uh refugees
they really did flee from uh
from places where it's really hard to to
live and they wanted to to go to a
better place so that's the different
side and how to deal with uh putin and
i think we should i mean at least the
european union relies on on some kind of
values and the credibility rests on
values if we if we try to there's always
this tension between values and security
usually there is if we try to stick to
the values rather than uh really be
scared all the time
and there's research that shows that if
we opened all borders
there wouldn't really be such big
flows of people
um but that that may be different with
climate change and all and all this uh
does this book open borders
uh mike clements i think is his name so
yeah i think just sent us his own values
i mean for the sake of time i need to
stop here because it's such a big topic
but um
yes
sorry just very quickly i think
one you know what to do about actors
like erdogan or i mean in the case of
libya before his downfall gaddafi was
very much counted on to do the dirty
work of not allowing vibrant and he very
much knew that was the game and would
use very racist rhetoric to say
uh you know italy price goes up
otherwise more africans are coming
towards the coast um
these arrangements exist in a lot of
contexts
uh spain morocco being another one
i think we should just always be careful
when
a refugee or migrant flow subsides to
just kind of never confuse that what a
solution has been found it just means
for now the relevant actors have agreed
to
to collaborate or cooperate um and i
just say that because the the roots to
the canary islands from so west africa
to the canary islands which are part of
spain that was a migration crisis back
in 2008 2009
it went dormant due to all sorts of
bilateral agreements that were reached
between spain and morocco spain and
mauritania in spain and senegal and
there were some papers written about how
well this is a potential model for other
states to use because there's a whole of
government approach there's uh
development aid there's security
cooperation
and then the roots reopened two years
ago um and suddenly the sustainability
of this whole government approach seemed
a lot more ephemeral than maybe uh some
of the people who were cheerleaders of
it would have acknowledged at the time
thank you thank you in the interest of
time we'll have the last four questions
asked uh back-to-back and then we'll
have the panelists respond in whatever
order they see necessary
and panelists please keep your responses
uh brief as possible
hello my name is joseph lim i'm a
student for the epic colloquium um and
i'm conceiving a project to help north
korean refugees um the factory is
fleeing the country
the uniqueness of uniqueness of the
situation is china's defined them as
legal
economic migrants instead of refugees
deporting them back into north korea
where the refugees are sent into
political prison camps for forced labor
and the uniqueness of this situation is
although i agree with mr
um mike
um
uh regarding that smugglers um are
sometimes do evil conducts like
sexually exploiting some of their own um
the migrants underneath their
um
influence i agree with professor
jacobson that
um
there are
um they are the only actors that are
able to help the defectors flee to
embassies or find out slum in other
countries and so my question was
are there strategies and tools for even
defectors who there is a
disproportionate asymmetric power for
them to
have leverage even over these smugglers
for them to
i guess find roots and ways for them to
seek islam
are there case studies that show that
they were able to use
some tools and strategies to get out of
those situations
thank you
[Music]
hello i'm nazarino cantos i'm with the
argentine delegation
and this is something that i asked mrs
tower yesterday
but
i would like to hear more opinions on
this topic
how do we protect somebody that is being
victimized with the financing of the
country of the com or continent of
destination
are you even reading about the outlaw
ocean project uh you probably know it
um
the project
in the new yorker and in libya
there are migrants and caches and
incomes
that are being
[Music]
tortured and killed by paramilitary
groups that get money from the eu
for the european union
and how we protect these people or how
do we punish the global
so good morning my name is felipe i'm
part of the brazilian delegation and i'm
a law student from the university of sao
paulo and i wanted to know
if you think that the legal framework of
refugees that date back from the
after the second world war is sufficient
nowadays mainly considering the
difference between the flow of
migrations in the different parts of the
world like
from the middle east but also like it's
really different when you see the
migration flows like in venezuela to
brazil and other
south american countries
i think
hello
my name is janis i'm from greece i am a
senior of international relations in
athens
i was thinking about the refugee crisis
that happened in europe and
like as an example i thought about the
maurya camp that was built for 3000
people and ultimately before the fire
was hosting 13 000 people
and we had stories from that count that
even 10 years old children were
attempting suicide and i was thinking
that how the european convention of
human rights is interpreted in
situations like this and how the right
to dignity is secured when it is
violated or which is the regulation that
even
the european justice the court of human
rights or other institutions about human
rights can do things in situations like
this thank you
all right we could have someone jump in
and then we kind of bounce off of each
other to try to answer these four
questions so whoever feels ready
i'll go with the uh
a brazilian question okay that was uh
which was illegal whether the 1951
convention is still relevant so this is
a big question that's out there
because as you know it was it was it was
devised in 1951 to protect refugees from
the second world war and was expected
that that need would disappear in in the
1950
and in fact the un unhcr's mandate has
been renewed every five years since then
and continues to be so but even even the
u.n
itself debates whether this
a very important treaty it's a treaty
document so for all the countries that
have signed and ratified it they have to
implement this treaty it's really
important so the question is as you say
it was designed to address the second
world war displays people after the
second world war
um
is it still relevant well it was changed
as you know there's a protocol that
takes away the the constraints the
temporal and geographic constraints to
europe and makes it relevant to the
whole world so that's that's good
even though some countries like turkey
have only signed the 1951 convention not
the protocol so it only thinks of
refugees as people who are in europe
which is sort of interesting now to
think about how it's going to think
about ukrainian rep people from anyway
but the issue around this it's been
widely debated as to whether we should
take apart that treaty and start again
right let's come up with a more relevant
treaty one that does include people
displaced by climate and disaster with
the current refugee convention does not
include persecution as a result of
climate and disaster
it does include people who are displaced
by war
because the current 1951 convention does
not include people who are displaced by
war it only includes people who are
persecuted on an individual basis right
so if you are running away from because
you're a villager shell you're not
you're not in this you don't get asylum
for that right
so is there a way to improve this
convention that's a big huge important
issue and to be honest the answer that
most people come up with is if we change
this treaty if we change this convention
if we say okay scrap it and start again
what will happen is something worse
or something more restrictive more
aggressive because the current climate
for migration globally is not a
progressive let's let's let everyone
let's let's let more people be defined
as ref not at all
it will become much worse and it will
give countries an opportunity not to
sign this not to ratify this new
convention
so everyone agrees that for all its
problems and for all its and there are
many well i mean i in my class on on
refugee law spends hours debating the
problems with this convention
but for all its problems
if we if we if we abandon it and come up
with something new it'll be worse for
the refugees
and so so the issue is so no one wants
to touch it because you touch it it's
gonna get it's gonna create problems
[Music]
briefly uh the question about libya from
angelo cena i'm sorry i forgot your name
about the um
the
symbolia
i remember being in moriah twice in 2019
and in 2016.
um
it's it's really
the most convenient thing that a refugee
can do for its host government is to is
to either go back home or kill himself
that's the sad truth because no one will
care
alan kurdi when he washed up on the
beach people cared for about two weeks
and we talked about ukraine we talked
about
prior to that afghanistan
no one will care
no one cares if if lebanon you know if a
refugee is forced out of lebanon back
into syria no one will ask you're no
longer lebanon you just solved a small
problem for them
and syria is a black hole of media so no
one's going to ask what happened to you
um
the reality is that there's a
a
problem in the policy where we don't
actually because we're so scared of
migrants and refugees right now it's
really difficult to take a critical look
at sort of the chain of causality of how
different deterrence policies and lack
of integration are actually forcing 10
year olds to want to kill themselves
so we're not at a place i think that
where the the general public has the
capacity to really critically to
meaningfully debate that topic
because there's still such a tremendous
fear
around migrants and refugees and
no question that whatever policies we
develop now are probably going to be a
hell of a lot less welcoming than things
that were developed after the second
world war why because the second world
war affected
power holders
and right now mass migration is not
affecting power holders as it was after
world war ii
so in many ways we should we should
honestly just continue to encourage and
the the enforcement of of the convention
and of having innovative visa schemes as
well it's not all about getting
convention status as a refugee you know
many venezuelans are in colombia
or in brazil or different places not as
asylum seekers or convention refugees
but under different levels of flexible
visa policies that allow them the right
to work so i think it's going to be up
to states to innovate both in in
in putting their money where their
ethical mouth is and creating
alternative schemes that hopefully can
be at least friendly towards neighbor
countries and countries that there's
some level of
cultural
political you know short-term and
short-term stays type of things so i
mean i
hope that we can see more alternative
schemes that aren't exclusively reliant
on large conventions and enforcing those
[Music]
i think that in the interest of time
we're going to have to conclude the
panel um
for today
okay um
okay so if any of the panel panels want
to answer any of the other two questions
feel free to do so now
i can take a crack at the libya the
north korea question in the libya
question so with the north korea
question
yeah i'm not really going to answer your
question directly because that's just
out of my realm of expertise but when
you said what do migrants do to
um i guess maybe mitigate the
relationship with smugglers or or move
more safely across various borders
uh one thing to
to keep in mind and you know many of
these these people are coming from
incredibly situations of extreme
vulnerability
uh unimaginable vulnerability as as mr
naked chuck has has very like eloquently
described um and sorry mike my dad okay
sorry mike as mike has um has has
described um
and yet within within these contexts
there's still degrees of agency when
trying to move right but migrants are
all and asylum seekers are
very
oftentimes
not always and it can depend on the
roots and and various contexts but
oftentimes are very
um
active in trying to figure out what is
the best route how can they mitigate
risk
communicating with other with each other
and communicating with people who've
already done the journey um trying to
sometimes there are very kind of
informal systems of vetting of smugglers
right
i went with this guy and it worked i
went with this guy and he you know
robbed and beat me don't use this guy so
this can often be a very and again it's
not directly answering your question
about north korea but the process of
movement is a very social
process in which entire communities are
often involved in helping facilitate
those journeys um just going to the eu
libya question about these um
um with these detention centers
i mean we could spend a whole
a whole panel just on those
i think the
a lot of humanitarian agencies
and
ngos and governments that are directly
involved in helping implement these
programs have a lot to answer for
and there's really a question
of how we even got to a place where
there are prisons being run
by militias that are receiving funding
from either the european union or
individual european member states
and additionally
uh are receiving
are also working with the humanitarian
community and deriving some sort of
legitimacy and their actions through
that
and that's a very complicated question
but there are definitely questions that
need to be asked about some of the
incentives here
organizations like iom they need to find
projects they need to find justify their
programming and and find opportunities
to be active in the field and that can
oftentimes lead to like very
interesting arrangements in how they
work and very tough moral dilemmas of
like should we be
even present in this
uh
particular context
are we harm are we reducing harm and
helping migrants and or are we
potentially like aiding and abetting a
pretty nasty system um that's something
that i don't think has received nearly
enough scrutiny um and and definitely
deserves more attention
do you like to add yeah so on libya i
mean let's assume
would it be better if the eu was
completely not present in libya and it's
a country torn by war there are five
centers of
authority
uh
there is a terrible situation the
country is almost non-existent right and
so in these circumstances you're trying
to navigate and finance something
uh at least i think there's there are
audits
and uh
after a period of time there will be an
audit of the official funding like
there were audits previously for example
with aid to egypt
a european court of audits found that 51
percent of uh funds given to egyptian
authorities organizations could not be
accounted for there was not a single
receipt so the money was either
embezzled or the system is such that you
just just do not get a receipt for
something so i think at least in this
situation
and i'm not saying that you know
externalization of
of the issue is a good thing but at
least there is a mechanism for
to audit and monitor the thing and once
this is done i
i hope we hope because of the noise in
the media this will not be repeated and
just a word about the geneva convention
i i just wanted to echo what karen said
and just tell you
that this perhaps something that you
might not know that when the then the
when the convention was negotiated
you know this was the cold war
so there were two camps right there was
the soviet
uh
socialist camp and the in the liberal
western camp and there were two opposing
views i mean just to make to make the
story simple
uh who is a refugee so the western camp
wanted a refugee or refugeehood to be to
be based on
individual expressionist
values right liberal values
while the socialist camp wanted the
refugee to be someone
you know but based on the socialist
values someone who doesn't have money
and
now let's and the the western idea won
right so that that's in the convention
so let's think for a minute what would
it be wouldn't it be an interesting idea
for for a refugee to be someone who's
who's uh uh traveling for for better
life because of poverty right this is
something that we have today and this is
something that we have in the in the
language some people we call labor
migrants
uh if they are for example a filipino uh
a uh house uh uh aid in lebanon and some
people we call expats if they are german
uh i.t specialists in in in singapore uh
so
i mean just uh as a story i i think i'm
right about that i'm not completely sure
about what what happened prior to 1951
are there any other comments from our
panelists
great
thank you to our panelists for providing
a nuanced insight into the global
governance of migration among other
issues
also a big thank you to our audience for
being so engaged with the panel
next we will have expert-led small group
discussions happening at 2 30 p.m in
various locations on topics of human
trafficking preventing and responding to
food insecurity and global supply chains
inequity and the apparel industry
and the responsibility to protect sorry
um check out the program for more
information about location
after that we will reconvene for our
final panel at 4 30 pm here in acn
auditorium on development finance and
trade in the context of globalized
inequality again thank you everyone for
your participation here today
you