Athaliaaaaaaaa
- Gabrielle Bartolini
- Jun 11, 2019
- 10 min read
I haven't written anything since Bath because, well, nothing too significant or positive has happened since then, it's been another tough week, but as always, it gets better. TMI but . . . [Most of my problems (and I am way more open about this than anyone really should be but I am trying to get rid of a stigma) have to do with my body image, the food I'm eating, my progress working out, etc. but most are me also projecting my stress and things out of my control onto things I can control like my food . . . but we are getting better I promise]
Regardless, I need to move on, let it go, and start focusing on the good!
So I'll start with my tutorial on Tuesday. It went well, to an extent. My tutor has identified exactly what I need to do to take my essays to the next level. Her advice: more analysis. Which is so important to hear because I already knew that's what my paper was lacking but now I'm positive it is what will take me from an o.k. essay to a great one.
Thursday we had class in the Old Library of University Church. It gave us a beautiful view of the Radcliffe Camera (pictured below). I will admit that I was not paying full attention in class. The week had me exhausted and dull. I was present but elsewhere. I spent parts of class doodling the Eiffel Tower and the beaches of El Salvador, or daydreaming of coffee. Luckily for me, just below our classroom, and accessible during break, was The Vault and Garden an endearing cafe, which made me an Oat Milk Flat White with the non-dairy milk at no extra cost. The baristas were friendly (which is odd for people here at Oxford) and brightened my day. This kept me happy, awake, and attentive during my second half of class.
Friday was another tired day, but used well, to catch up on sleep and watch a documentary for my tutorial "The Trouble With Aid" a good watch about humanitarian mistakes and struggles when providing aid to countries with large migrant populations (the link for anyone interested: https://vimeo.com/81133030).
Saturday was relatively relaxed as well, did some work, ran a bit. In the evening we went to go see Handel's oratorio "Athalia". It was a beautiful performance. The stars were dressed in either Black or Navy. The star singing Athalia wore a dazzling diamond necklace that glimmered in the light. The orchestra played intricate 18th Century style instruments. The choir of ages ranging from early twenties to late sixties were dressed in black suits or long black dresses and had heavenly voices. I was impressed by the 13 year old boy who sang as a star in the show. His voice was high and angelic.
Here's a few shots from the theater:
As much as I appreciated the show, three hours is a long time for me to sit. Especially without food, or gum, or coffee, or water. After the show we went to Wine Cafe for a recap and bonding time.
Sunday the group ventured to Blenheim Palace. It also, was a beautiful experience. Much like the theater production, I could only appreciate it for so much time. So, when my professor made it a requirement to stay for the hour-long organ concert, I was less than excited. Regardless, the palace was massive, decorated beautifully with treasures resembling the ones I might find in my grandparent's home, portraits decorating the walls, rooms with elegant color schemes, and countless books. I can't forget to mention the expansive gardens that I did not get the chance to explore.
My tutorial from LAST week
Preserve the Human Dignity of Refugees, Promote Self-Settlement.
Introduction
When people migrate in search of refuge it is common for them to be placed in housing separate from locals. Organized areas migrants are grouped into by host governments, or by international aid agencies, when called refugee camps, are characterized by their “size, density, dependence on external aid, and the level of control[GB1] exercised over inhabitants by national or international authorities”[1]. Refuge seekers are grouped into camps because of the convenience to international agencies to have individuals who need aid all in one place, and the preference of host governments to separate refugees from locals. Preventing refugee integration and self-settlement puts their psychological and physical well-being at risk. It infringes upon individuals’ agency and their dignity as human beings. Therefore, refugee warehousing should only be used as a final measure for resettling refugees in host countries. [GB2]
Aid Agencies
To begin, we must examine why refugee camps are widely used as havens for fleeing individuals. The prevalence of these camps can be accredited to the way they serve as a convenience for aid agencies. Aid agencies prefer to house people seeking refuge in camps because it makes facilitates identification and monitoring populations in need, determining particular needs, and distributing aid[2]. Agencies can also attract donor funding more easily where refugee camps exist. Donors provide funding to visible populations in need. Refugee camps demonstrate such populations very clearly. When migrants are integrated within the host country’s population, they often go “unseen”, meaning that if they self-settle among locals they could become “indistinguishable” [3]. It is more difficult for donors to identify refugees integrated with the local population as people in need of assistance. Additionally, if they are not in refugee camps, refuge seekers likely will not receive any aid, since only spatially segregated sites receive assistance from international donors; urban, self-settled refugees receive neither international aid or local aid.[4]
Host Countries
Host countries often see refugees settling freely as a security threat[5]. They fear conflict following migrants in from their countries of origin, but also fear “potential conflicts between refugees and locals”[6]. One conflict in particular host countries want to avoid is an imbalance in the populations of natives to migrants residing in border areas. Hosts fear the rise power conflicts, compromising “security and stability of local communities”[7]. The host countries also fear the “political and security implications of the pattern of refugee settlement”[8]. This concerns hosts because, refugee resettlement camps tend to be located near the frontier between the country of origin and the host. This leaves the camp “more vulnerable to armed attack,” compromising the safety of refugees, locals and NGO personnel[9].
Host countries also fear refugees becoming an economic burden[10]. They are seen to be purposeless, passive, recipients of aid, who do not earn their[11]. The host countries see these individuals competition for the natives at jobs, for land, and dependents of the state.
“Self-settlement is regarded by all sub-Saharan African countries as an unacceptable option” with the main reason, among others, being “to prevent refugees from integrating into host communities”[12].This goes proceeds from the idea of refugees and their hosts wanting to keep their respective identities. Just because they migrate and live in a different place for so many years, does not mean that their nationality has changed.
The Down Side of Refugee Life
Life in a refugee camp can be quite dangerous physically and psychologically for the inhabitants. One commonly cited concern with refugee camps is the way overcrowding facilitates the spread of illness[13]. Another major concern is the prevalence of violence. One reason such violence exists is because of the proximity of camps to the origin country’s border. This proximity can make it easy for groups committing persecution, or instilling fear, to continue to threaten the population from the camps[14]. Outside groups are not the only threat. Within the camp, differences in opinion can spur physical fighting[15]. Even the people running the camps can be a threat to the refugees. The refugee camps for Rwandan refugees in Tanzania and Zaire were often controlled by people who were responsible for the genocide in the first place[16].
Along with the physical challenges that being in refugee camps presents, the psychological trauma of being confined to a refugee camp can be quite destructive. For one, they live in detachment from reality, unwilling or unable to accept that which they cannot change[17]. This causes “emotional and psychological disturbance, including “restlessness, irritability, and loss of concentration”. [18]
The women in refugee camps tend to assume domestic roles, which many of them were used to from life back home. The men, on the other hand, whose former jobs are often characterized by bringing in the household’s income, are left purposeless in the camps. Often their only purpose is to help the wife with the cooking and fetching water[19]. The sense of uselessness they bear triggers them to act violently toward their wives. And the wives sometimes feel that they have good reason to “despise and undermine” their useless husbands, provoking more conflict, sometimes even leaving him for another[20].
Aside from domestic conflict, the psychological trauma of being trapped for such an extended time in a refugee camp has been observed to make residents absentminded[21]. This type of forgetfulness ranges from something small, like misplacing objects, to forgetting the day of the week, the month or the year, to talking to oneself, to sleepwalking, and disappearing[22]. When they disappear, a search is conducted briefly but after a day or two, they are forgotten. All these absentminded refugees have a few things in common: “anxiety . . . the inability to make decisions” they “are unwilling to spend one more day in the camp, they do nothing about it” and they are all male[23].
On the Contrary
In order to not just prove that the housing in the camps is detrimental to the refugees despite the benefits seen by the aid agencies and the host countries, I must also acknowledge arguments against to the supposed benefits.
For one, the convenience and access that international organizations claim is only available with the presence of camps, is not always as convenient as it appears. Especially during the Rwandan refugee crises, camps often were “no-go zones” for international agencies due to poor road quality leading to inaccessibility of the land[24]. Additionally, military and paramilitary personnel, some of whom were responsible for the Rwandan genocide, would divert the aid to not actually benefit the refugees[25]. Let it be stated that refugees are placed in spatially segregated sites, not to be accessible but to be separate from the rest of the population.
Security is a major claim that host countries bring up to justify having refugee camps. They bring this up not just in relation to their own population but also to the refugees. The problem is that these sites, as already stated are sites of recurrent violence. In the instance of Ethiopian refugee camps in Walda, “each moonlit night was a night of agony as refugees are disturbed by the sounds of heavy gunfire” the next morning, there would be several deceased[26]. Just to reiterate, not only is there internal conflict among refugees, but the accessibility to the border promotes the occurrence of conflict between refugees and the oppressors they are fleeing. Keeping the refugees separate from host countries’ natives can also spur additional violence, as it increases tensions between the refuge seekers and the locals. The natives sometimes perceive the refugees to be in better conditions than they actually are[27]. They see them receiving food, medical care, and other aid from international agencies, and not working for their benefits[28]. This causes tensions and often violence between refugees and the locals who see them as earning an undeserved share.
Host countries often claim that allowing refugees to self-settle will create a burden on the economy. It is arguable, however that allowing refugees to self-settle among locals could actually benefit the host country’s economy. For one, there is the potential for international agencies to invest in local infrastructure, instead of camps[29]. Refugees also come with skills, they are not useless. In themselves they have human potential that could diversify and stimulate the economy[30]. Many migrants have even proved this potential to self-sustain. A study from Uganda showed that many refugees who received permission to live and work outside of refugee settlements successfully sustained themselves without aid[31].
Conclusion
A UNHCR representative put it well, he said that the idea of moving away from refugee camps “is to give people a meaningful choice and the opportunity to live a more dignified life”[32]. I tried to go into my research with an objective perspective on refugee camps. Regardless, the information I found led me back to my original perspective, that refugee camps should only ever be used as a last resort, and as a very temporary measure for providing haven to refugees. Warehousing of should be used sparingly because of their detrimental effects on the overall wellbeing of refugees and their self-sufficiency in their new countries. However, it is very unlikely that they will be eliminated all together because of host countries’ and aid agencies’ dependency on them.
Bibliography
Black, R. (1998) ‘Putting people in camps’, Forced Migration Review, 2: 4-8.
Crisp, J. and Jacobsen, K. (1998) ‘Refugee camps reconsidered’, Forced Migration Review, 3:
28- 30.
Feyissa, A. and Horn, R. (2008) ‘There is more than one way of dying: An Ethiopian perspective
of the effects of long stays in refugee camps’ in D., Hollenbach (ed.) Refugee Rights:
Ethics, Advocacy and Africa, Washington DC, Georgetown University Press. 13-26.
Kagan, M. (2013) ‘Why do we still have refugee camps?’
Kibreab, G. (2007) ‘Why Governments Prefer Spatially Segregated Sites for Urban Refugees’,
Refuge 24(1): 27-35.
M., McClelland, M. (2014) ‘How to build the perfect refugee camp article’, New York Times.
Morris, T., and Ben Ali, S. UNHCR Reviews Its Urban Policy: An Air of Complacency?.
Siegfried, K. (2014) ‘Alternatives to Refugee Camps: Can Policy Become Practice?’ IRIN
news.
Smith, M. (2004) ‘Warehousing Refugees: A Denial of Rights, A Waste of Humanity’, World
Refugee Survey 2004, pp.38-56.
[1] Black, R. (1998) ‘Putting people in camps’, Forced Migration Review, 2: 4-8.
[2] Ibid. 5.
[3] Kibreab, G. (2007) ‘Why Governments Prefer Spatially Segregated Sites for Urban Refugees’,
Refuge 24(1): 32.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Smith, M. (2004) ‘Warehousing Refugees: A Denial of Rights, A Waste of Humanity’, World
Refugee Survey 2004, pp.45.
[6] Black, R. (1998) ‘Putting people in camps’, Forced Migration Review, 2: 6.
[7] Smith, M. (2004) ‘Warehousing Refugees: A Denial of Rights, A Waste of Humanity’, World
Refugee Survey 2004, pp.44.
[8] Black, R. (1998) ‘Putting people in camps’, Forced Migration Review, 2: 6.
[9] Crisp, J. and Jacobsen, K. (1998) ‘Refugee camps reconsidered’, Forced Migration Review, 3:
29.
[10] Smith, M. (2004) ‘Warehousing Refugees: A Denial of Rights, A Waste of Humanity’, World
Refugee Survey 2004, pp.46.
[11] Ibid. 44.
[12] Kibreab, G. (2007) ‘Why Governments Prefer Spatially Segregated Sites for Urban Refugees’,
Refuge 24(1): 29-30.
[13] Black, R. (1998) ‘Putting people in camps’, Forced Migration Review, 2: 5.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Feyissa, A. and Horn, R. (2008) ‘There is more than one way of dying: An Ethiopian perspective
of the effects of long stays in refugee camps’ in D., Hollenbach (ed.) Refugee Rights:
Ethics, Advocacy and Africa, Washington DC, Georgetown University Press. 18.
[16] Crisp, J. and Jacobsen, K. (1998) ‘Refugee camps reconsidered’, Forced Migration Review, 3:
27.
[17] Feyissa, A. and Horn, R. (2008) ‘There is more than one way of dying: An Ethiopian perspective
of the effects of long stays in refugee camps’ in D., Hollenbach (ed.) Refugee Rights:
Ethics, Advocacy and Africa, Washington DC, Georgetown University Press. 17.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Ibid. 18.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Ibid.
[24] Black, R. (1998) ‘Putting people in camps’, Forced Migration Review, 2: 5.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Feyissa, A. and Horn, R. (2008) ‘There is more than one way of dying: An Ethiopian perspective
of the effects of long stays in refugee camps’ in D., Hollenbach (ed.) Refugee Rights:
Ethics, Advocacy and Africa, Washington DC, Georgetown University Press. 15.
[27] Smith, M. (2004) ‘Warehousing Refugees: A Denial of Rights, A Waste of Humanity’, World
Refugee Survey 2004, pp. 40.
[28] Ibid.
[29] Siegfried, K. (2014) ‘Alternatives to Refugee Camps: Can Policy Become Practice?’ IRIN
news.
[30] Ibid.
[31] Ibid.
[32] Kagan, M. (2013) ‘Why do we still have refugee camps?’
[GB1]Lets go beyond the thesis, make a stronger argument; follow your gut;
What are you thinking about when you read?
CHALLENGES
General argument that goes into the more specific one
Synthesize for self.
Focus more on the analysis! You have a lot of information, nothing to support it!
“migrant” lose rights; use “forced migrant” or “refugee”
[GB2]What turns this into an argument is a why. Maybe switch the order of this.
Refugees & Actors are both helped and harmed. What coexists?
Comments