Special Issue "Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times"

A special issue of Social Sciences (ISSN 2076-0760). This special issue belongs to the section "International Migration".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 December 2020) | Viewed by 46342

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Dr. Linda Briskman
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Social Work and Community Welfare, Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia
Interests: drop community welfare
Dr. Lucy Fiske
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Social and Political Sciences, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo NSW 2007, Australia
Interests: human rights; refugees; asylum seekers;women’s rights

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

With 70 million people displaced globally, seeking and gaining safety and security is increasingly constrained.  This leaves people dislocated by war, persecution, climate change and other disasters outside the protection of states and living with profoundly limited civil, political, economic and social rights.

Newly emerging conditions have created increased exceptionalism for asylum seekers and refugees including the following:

  • The spread of Covid -19
  • Impenetrable border protection measures
  • Counter-terrorism discourse and practice
  • Rise of the far right
  • Environmental catastrophes

Papers are sought from across the globe and topics may include but are not limited to the above crises.

We welcome abstracts of no more than 300 words and brief biographical statements of up to 100 words by Friday 29 May. Notification of acceptance will be provided by 12 June. Final papers are due on 31 December for peer review.

Prof. Linda Briskman
Dr. Lucy Fiske
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Social Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Displaced persons
  • Covid-19
  • Environmental refugees
  • Border protection

Published Papers (16 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Editorial

Jump to: Research

Editorial
The Impossibility of Home: Displacement and Border Practices in Times of Crisis
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(10), 400; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10100400 - 18 Oct 2021
Viewed by 1117
Abstract
We launched the call for papers for this issue in March 2020, as the coronavirus pandemic was spreading rapidly around the globe, disrupting lives and stalling movement as country after country went into lockdown, and death tolls starkly revealed racial and economic inequalities [...] Read more.
We launched the call for papers for this issue in March 2020, as the coronavirus pandemic was spreading rapidly around the globe, disrupting lives and stalling movement as country after country went into lockdown, and death tolls starkly revealed racial and economic inequalities within and between nations [...] Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)

Research

Jump to: Editorial

Article
New Vulnerabilities for Migrants and Refugees in State Responses to the Global Pandemic, COVID-19
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(9), 342; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10090342 - 14 Sep 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1919
Abstract
This article examines the global pandemic, COVID-19, through the lens of responses to vulnerable migrants, asking what state responses mean for the future of human rights values and for humanitarian interventions. The responses of the Australian state are developed as a case study [...] Read more.
This article examines the global pandemic, COVID-19, through the lens of responses to vulnerable migrants, asking what state responses mean for the future of human rights values and for humanitarian interventions. The responses of the Australian state are developed as a case study of actions and policies directed at refugees and temporary migrant workers through the COVID-19 pandemic. The theoretical framing of the article draws on racial capitalism to argue that the developments manifest during the ‘crisis times’ of COVID-19 are in large part a continuity of the exclusionary politics of bordering practices at the heart of neoliberal capitalism. The article proposes that a rethinking of foundational theoretical and methodological approaches in the social sciences are needed to reflect contemporary changes in justice claims, claims that increasingly recognize the multi-species nature of existential threats to all life. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
Guilty When Innocent. Australian Government’s Resistance to Bringing Home Wives and Children of Islamic State Fighters
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(6), 202; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10060202 - 31 May 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1650
Abstract
Currently there are 20 Australian women and 47 children being held in the Al-Roj camp in Northern Syria, who are the family members of Islamic State fighters. The Australian government argues that it is both unsafe for government officials to rescue those held [...] Read more.
Currently there are 20 Australian women and 47 children being held in the Al-Roj camp in Northern Syria, who are the family members of Islamic State fighters. The Australian government argues that it is both unsafe for government officials to rescue those held in the camp and unsafe for Australia to repatriate these women and children. This security rhetoric is commonly understood as Australia’s abandonment of its citizens and their entitlements to protection and repatriation. This paper argues that the Australian government is condemning its citizens to a condition of statelessness and displacement, simulating the following conditions under which refugees and asylum seekers are forced to live: murder, violence, deprivation of adequate food and shelter, disease, and the potential hazards of the COVID-19 infection. Rendering its citizens to a condition of statelessness and displacement constitutes both punishment meted out on those deemed guilty by their presence in Syria, and provides the Australian government the opportunity to revoke the citizenship of women and children. Three Australian women who travelled to Syria have already been stripped of their Australian citizenship. This paper explores the conditions and methods by which the Australian government has erased the entitlements, protections and certainty of citizenship for Australian Muslim women and children. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
Muslim Solidarity and the Lack of Effective Protection for Rohingya Refugees in Southeast Asia
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(5), 166; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10050166 - 08 May 2021
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2379
Abstract
Southeast Asia has the weakest normative frameworks for refugee protection of any region in the world apart from the Middle East. Only two out of ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have signed the 1951 International Refugee Convention. [...] Read more.
Southeast Asia has the weakest normative frameworks for refugee protection of any region in the world apart from the Middle East. Only two out of ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have signed the 1951 International Refugee Convention. Nevertheless, the 2012 ASEAN Human Rights Declaration explicitly mentions the right to seek and receive asylum ‘in accordance with the laws of such State and applicable international agreements’ (ASEAN 2012). One of the litmus tests for this right has been the regional treatment of the Rohingya, a Muslim minority from Myanmar that faces forced displacement, discrimination, and large-scale state violence. Based on media content analysis and a scientific literature review, this paper sheds light on how ASEAN’s most prominent Muslim member countries, Indonesia and Malaysia, advocate on behalf of the forcibly displaced Rohingya. In particular, this paper focuses on competing forms of political interventions and shifting notions of Muslim solidarity. While Indonesia and Malaysia have been very vocal in bilateral, regional, and international forums to criticise the Myanmar government for their violation of basic human rights, both countries remain highly reluctant to offer sanctuary to Rohingya refugees, of which several thousand have attempted to reach Indonesia and Malaysia. This research finds that the notion of Muslim solidarity remains a symbolic rhetoric primarily directed at domestic audiences and the failure to render effective protection to refugees has rather increased over the last five years. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
Climate Crises and the Creation of ‘Undeserving’ Victims
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(4), 144; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10040144 - 19 Apr 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1856
Abstract
This paper explores how advanced liberal democracies respond to climate migrants in ways that reflect colonial logics and practices. With a focus on the Pacific, it reflects on three constructions of climate crisis victims. First, as savages—those incapable of adapting or thriving under [...] Read more.
This paper explores how advanced liberal democracies respond to climate migrants in ways that reflect colonial logics and practices. With a focus on the Pacific, it reflects on three constructions of climate crisis victims. First, as savages—those incapable of adapting or thriving under catastrophic environmental threats and who need to be saved by ‘the West’. Secondly, as threats—the hordes who will threaten white civilization and who must be sorted, excluded, detained and deported. Thirdly, as ‘non-ideal’ victims—those undeserving of full legal protections but who may survive under hostile conditions in receiving states. These political and policy responses create systemic harms and injustice for those who struggle under or must flee environmental degradation, and they function to ensure that those most to blame for climate crises are prioritized as having least responsibility to take action. The paper concludes with consideration of socially just responses to those most affected from climate harms. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
Direct Provision, Rights and Everyday Life for Asylum Seekers in Ireland during COVID-19
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(4), 140; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10040140 - 15 Apr 2021
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2801
Abstract
This article considers the impact of COVID-19 on international protection applicants in the Irish asylum system. It presents a critical reflection on the failings of direct provision and how the experience of COVID-19 has further heightened the issues at stake for asylum seekers [...] Read more.
This article considers the impact of COVID-19 on international protection applicants in the Irish asylum system. It presents a critical reflection on the failings of direct provision and how the experience of COVID-19 has further heightened the issues at stake for asylum seekers and refugees living in Ireland. In Ireland, international protection applicants are detained in a system of institutionalized living called direct provision where they must remain until they receive status. Direct provision centres offer substandard accommodation and are often overcrowded. During the pandemic, many asylum seekers could not effectively socially isolate, so many centres experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. This article examines these experiences and joins a community of scholars calling for the urgent end to the system of direct provision. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
On the Streets of Paris: The Experience of Displaced Migrants and Refugees
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(4), 130; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10040130 - 02 Apr 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1753
Abstract
In the wake of the demolition of the “The Jungle” at Calais, northern France, in October 2016, more than three thousand asylum seekers, refugees and other informal immigrants at any given time live in informal tent cities throughout the city’s northern areas. These [...] Read more.
In the wake of the demolition of the “The Jungle” at Calais, northern France, in October 2016, more than three thousand asylum seekers, refugees and other informal immigrants at any given time live in informal tent cities throughout the city’s northern areas. These makeshift camps appear to manifest a central issue in the French asylum system, that is applicants after making a claim for protection, and awaiting a hearing or decision, receive next to no formal support (financial, or residential) and are largely left to fend for themselves.Not all of the camp residents are asylum seekers wanting to stay in France. Some are migrants (or asylum seekers) en route to the United Kingdom; others are refugees who received French protection, with no housing. Between 2015–2017 there were multiple outbreaks of scabies in these tent cities leading to sanitation workers refusing to work in their vicinity. The current Covid-19 crisis has, moreover, further exacerbated concerns about the health of the unhoused asylum seekers and migrants in Paris - unaccompanied minors, in particular. This article will consider the repeated displacement, or dispersal, of this population in terms of the changing “politics of immigration”and policing in France under President Emmanuel Macron. In order to present the broader social context, it will also describe current events in Paris, including Macron government’s legislation relating to asylum/immigration, policing and more, amid the Covid-19 health crisis. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
The Border Harms of Human Displacement: Harsh Landscapes and Human Rights Violations
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(4), 123; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10040123 - 30 Mar 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1925
Abstract
Building on the work of critical migration and border studies, particularly the scholarship on the suffering of displaced people through border-related violence, the article focuses on bordering practices and human rights violations relating to the Syrian civil war. It advances the argument that [...] Read more.
Building on the work of critical migration and border studies, particularly the scholarship on the suffering of displaced people through border-related violence, the article focuses on bordering practices and human rights violations relating to the Syrian civil war. It advances the argument that during peoples’ fragmented journeys to seek safety and protection within and outside of Syria, which are often punctuated by stops and starts, they encounter one or more of three kinds of bordering practices—hardening of borders, expansion of borders, and pushbacks—that can injure them and violate international human rights and often the principle of non-refoulement. The article refers to these encounters as the “border harms of human displacement”. The analysis emphasizes the experiences of people on the move and the cruelties and spatial violence they endure. The latter include lengthy periods of walking and running, travel across hazardous lands and seas, family separation, state restrictions, and mistreatment by border authorities. Yet, in response to such difficulties, they continue to assert their agency by negotiating bordering practices and harsh landscapes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
The Polish Paradox: From a Fight for Democracy to the Political Radicalization and Social Exclusion
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(3), 112; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10030112 - 23 Mar 2021
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2112
Abstract
Poland has gone through a series of remarkable political transformations over the last 30 years. It has changed from a communist state in the Soviet sphere of influence to an autonomic prosperous democracy and proud member of the EU. Paradoxically, since 2015, Poland [...] Read more.
Poland has gone through a series of remarkable political transformations over the last 30 years. It has changed from a communist state in the Soviet sphere of influence to an autonomic prosperous democracy and proud member of the EU. Paradoxically, since 2015, Poland seems to be heading rapidly in the opposite direction. It was the Polish Solidarity movement that started the peaceful revolution that subsequently triggered important democratic changes on a worldwide scale, including the demolition of the Berlin Wall, the collapse of Communism and the end of Cold War. Fighting for freedom and independence is an important part of Polish national identity, sealed with the blood of generations dying in numerous uprisings. However, participation in the democratic process is curiously limited in Poland. The right-wing, populist Law and Justice Party (PiS) won elections in Poland in 2015. Since then, Poles have given up more and more freedoms in exchange for promises of protection from different imaginary enemies, including Muslim refugees and the gay and lesbian community. More and more social groups are being marginalized and deprived of their civil rights. The COVID-19 pandemic has given the ruling party a reason to further limit the right of assembly and protest. Polish society is sinking into deeper and deeper divisions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
No One Smiles at Me: The Double Displacement of Iranian Migrant Men as Refugees Who Use Drugs in Australia
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(3), 85; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10030085 - 02 Mar 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1467
Abstract
Drawing on relevant sociological and feminist theories namely a social constructivist and intersectional framework, this article explores ways in which migrant Iranian men as ‘refugees’ ‘who use drugs’ navigate the complex terrain of ‘double displacement’ in the Australian contemporary context. It presents findings [...] Read more.
Drawing on relevant sociological and feminist theories namely a social constructivist and intersectional framework, this article explores ways in which migrant Iranian men as ‘refugees’ ‘who use drugs’ navigate the complex terrain of ‘double displacement’ in the Australian contemporary context. It presents findings from a series of community based participatory and culturally responsive focus groups and in-depth interviews of twenty-seven participants in Sydney, Australia. Results highlight the ways in which social categories of gender, language, class, ethnicity, race, migration status and their relationship to intersubjective hierarchies and exclusion in Australia circumnavigate and intervene with participants’ alcohol and other drugs’ (AOD) use and related harms. The article argues that there is a need to pay greater attention to the implications of masculinities, power relations and the resultant material, social and affective emotional impacts of displacement for refugee men within Australian health care responses. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
Disrupting State Spaces: Asylum Seekers in Australia’s Offshore Detention Centres
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(3), 82; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10030082 - 01 Mar 2021
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 6624
Abstract
The Australian government has spent over a billion dollars a year on managing offshore detention (Budget 2018–2019). Central to this offshore management was the transference and mandatory detention of asylum seekers in facilities that sit outside Australia’s national sovereignty, in particular on Manus [...] Read more.
The Australian government has spent over a billion dollars a year on managing offshore detention (Budget 2018–2019). Central to this offshore management was the transference and mandatory detention of asylum seekers in facilities that sit outside Australia’s national sovereignty, in particular on Manus Island (Papua New Guinea) and Nauru. As a state-sanctioned spatial aberration meant to deter asylum seekers arriving by boat, offshore detention has resulted in a raft of legal and policy actions that are reshaping the modern state-centric understanding of the national space. It has raised questions of sovereignty, of moral, ethical and legal obligations, of national security and humanitarian responsibilities, and of nationalism and belonging. Using a sample of Twitter users on Manus during the closure of the Manus Island detention centre in October–November 2017, this paper examines how asylum seekers and refugees have negotiated and defined the offshore detention space and how through the use of social media they have created a profound disruption to the state discourse on offshore detention. The research is based on the premise that asylum seekers’ use social media in a number of disruptive ways, including normalising the presence of asylum seekers in the larger global phenomena of migration, humanising asylum seekers in the face of global discourses of dehumanisation, ensuring visibility by confirming the conditions of detention, highlighting Australia’s human rights violations and obligations, and challenging the government discourse on asylum seekers and offshore detention. Social media is both a tool and a vehicle by which asylum seekers on Manus Island could effect that disruption. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
The Politics of Refugee Protection in a (Post)COVID-19 World
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(3), 81; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10030081 - 27 Feb 2021
Cited by 12 | Viewed by 4695
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic is not a “great equaliser” as some have claimed, but rather an amplifier of existing inequalities, including those associated with migration. Perhaps not surprisingly, it is refugees, often the most marginalised of all migrants, who have had the most to [...] Read more.
The COVID-19 pandemic is not a “great equaliser” as some have claimed, but rather an amplifier of existing inequalities, including those associated with migration. Perhaps not surprisingly, it is refugees, often the most marginalised of all migrants, who have had the most to lose. Refugees and displaced populations living in crowded and unhygienic conditions have often been unable to protect themselves from the virus, face increasing economic precarity and often find themselves excluded from measures to alleviate poverty and hunger. The threat to refugees comes not only from material (in)security, but from increasing exclusion and exceptionalism associated with the politics of protection. Evidence from the first nine months of the pandemic suggests that some governments, in Europe and US but also the Global South, are using COVID-19 as an excuse to double-down on border closures and/or dip into their migration policy toolboxes to demonstrate the robustness of their response to it. Refugees are increasingly prevented from accessing the international protection to which they are potentially entitled or used (alongside migrants more generally) as scapegoats by populist leaders exploiting the pandemic for political mileage. Some states have used the pandemic to push through controversial policies that further limit access to protection and/or institutionalize the marginalization of refugees. In this context, it seems likely that COVID-19 will accelerate the course of history in relation to refugee protection, rather than changing its direction. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
Dismantling the Deadlock: Australian Muslim Women’s Fightback against the Rise of Right-Wing Media
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(2), 71; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10020071 - 13 Feb 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3145
Abstract
In Australia, as in other multicultural countries, the global Islamophobic discourse linking Muslims to terrorists to refugees results in the belief of an “enemy within”, which fractures the public sphere. Muslim minorities learn to distrust mainstream media as the global discourse manifests in [...] Read more.
In Australia, as in other multicultural countries, the global Islamophobic discourse linking Muslims to terrorists to refugees results in the belief of an “enemy within”, which fractures the public sphere. Muslim minorities learn to distrust mainstream media as the global discourse manifests in localised right-wing discussion. This fracturing was further compounded in 2020 with increased media concentration and polarisation. In response, 12 young Australian Muslim women opened themselves up to four journalists working for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). They engaged in critical journalism research called Frame Reflection Interviews (FRIs). The process gave journalists important knowledge around the power dynamics of Islamophobia and empowered participants to help shape new media discourses tackling Islamophobia. This paper proposes that the FRIs are one method to rebuild trust in journalism while redistributing risk towards the journalists. These steps are necessary to build a normatively cosmopolitan global public sphere capable of breaking the discursive link between refugees and terrorism and fighting back against the rise of the far right. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
Managing Expectations: Impacts of Hostile Migration Policies on Practitioners in Britain, Denmark and Sweden
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(2), 65; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10020065 - 10 Feb 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2887
Abstract
The acknowledgement that asylum systems across Europe are “hostile environments” for migrant groups has increased in academic and practitioner consciousness, particularly in the aftermath of the 2015 refugee reception crisis. However, although the impacts of socio-political hostilities on migrants are well documented, little [...] Read more.
The acknowledgement that asylum systems across Europe are “hostile environments” for migrant groups has increased in academic and practitioner consciousness, particularly in the aftermath of the 2015 refugee reception crisis. However, although the impacts of socio-political hostilities on migrants are well documented, little has been written about the implications of border restrictions on practitioners working with refugee populations. This article expands the focus of hostilities to consider the variable impacts of intensified bordering practices on this group. Based on qualitative research which included 74 interviews undertaken across Britain, Denmark, and Sweden (2016–2018), it outlines the experiences of practitioners working with refugee populations. It highlights that increasingly restrictive or punitive approaches to immigration have had multiple negative effects on practitioners working in this sector. This has potential for longer term negative impacts on practitioners, but also—importantly-refugee populations who require various forms of legal aid, or social and psychological support. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Article
Im/Mobility at the US–Mexico Border during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(2), 47; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10020047 - 01 Feb 2021
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 4640
Abstract
In March 2020, the United States government began a series of measures designed to dramatically restrict immigration as part of its response to the global health crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic. This included Title 42, which deported asylum seekers immediately and prevented [...] Read more.
In March 2020, the United States government began a series of measures designed to dramatically restrict immigration as part of its response to the global health crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic. This included Title 42, which deported asylum seekers immediately and prevented them from applying for asylum. These measures worsened an already precarious situation at the US–Mexico border for an estimated 60,000 asylum seekers who were prevented, by the Trump administration’s ‘Remain in Mexico’ (aka MPP) policy enacted in January 2019, from remaining in the United States while they awaited their asylum hearings. In-depth interviews, participant observation, and social media analysis with humanitarian and legal advocates for asylum seekers living in a camp at the border in Matamoros, Mexico reveal that COVID-19’s impacts are not limited to public health concerns. Rather, COVID-19’s impacts center on how the Trump administration weaponized the virus to indefinitely suspend the asylum system. We argue that the Matamoros refugee camp provides a strategic vantage point to understand the repercussions of state policies of exclusion on im/mobility and survival strategies for asylum seekers. Specifically, we use the analytical lenses of the politics of im/mobility, geographies of exclusion, and asylum seeker resilience to identify how COVID-19 has shaped the im/mobility and security of the camp and its residents in unexpected ways. At the same time, our research illustrates that camp residents exercise im/mobility as a form of political visibility to contest and ameliorate their precarity as they find themselves in conditions not of their choosing. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
“There We Are Nothing, Here We Are Nothing!”—The Enduring Effects of the Rohingya Genocide
Soc. Sci. 2020, 9(11), 209; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci9110209 - 16 Nov 2020
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3564
Abstract
Debates continue as to whether crimes committed against the Rohingya in Myanmar amount to genocide. This article will address this question, framed in the broad context of the Rohingya victimisation in Myanmar, but also the narrow context of the Rohingya refugee lived experience [...] Read more.
Debates continue as to whether crimes committed against the Rohingya in Myanmar amount to genocide. This article will address this question, framed in the broad context of the Rohingya victimisation in Myanmar, but also the narrow context of the Rohingya refugee lived experience in Malaysia. The authors contend that the Rohingya are victims of genocide, and this is in part evidenced by the destruction of the Rohingya culture, including through assimilation (and therefore loss of group identity) in refugee destination countries, such as Malaysia. This analysis is based on the consideration of theories of genocide process and definition, international law, and qualitative data collected during extensive anthropological fieldwork by one of the authors with urban refugees in peninsular Malaysia. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Rights and Displaced People in Exceptional Times)
Back to TopTop