Figure 1. A recently-arrived refugee from Afghanistan waiting for medic support at a temporary camp in Germany in 2021.
Amid Europe’s picturesque landscapes, where history narrates the emergence of Western civilisation, its foundational values of equality, democracy, and revolution undergo a transformation — from being the crowning glory of the “civilised” man to mere justifications for the oppression of the “other”. Simultaneously, another narrative unfolds—a story of human struggle, resilience, and hope. It is a story woven by the desperate tales of asylum seekers, individuals compelled by the threat of persecution and conflict to embark on dangerous journeys in search of safety and sanctuary. This journey starts from a crisis driven by conflict, persecution, poverty, and climate change in regions such as the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Asia.
Accordingly, before launching into the deconstruction of these events and their eventual consequences, it is essential to note that the focus here is on asylum seekers and refugees responding to violence — physical, mental and emotional, in the ‘sovereign space’ of the nation-state. Therefore, it ultimately becomes a question of security — an ambiguous, contested, and controversial concept and discipline (Krause 2018), wherein what one person, group, society, or state perceives as a threatening source of insecurity, another may not (Krause 2018). This concept is referred to as the relativity of security, prompting fundamental questions of whose security, from whom or what, by what means, for what purpose, and by which security actor. The answers to these inquiries can vary significantly based on the perspective one adopts— whether it is the refugee, the refugee’s country of origin, the host country, a neutral bystander, international organisations, or even NGOs. Therefore, this blog post attempts to explore the journey of security from a comprehensive viewpoint, shedding light on the unique experiences of often marginalised groups through critical lenses such as the feminist and postcolonial approaches. Moreover, not only will such an approach shift the focus from the mainstream accounts of security and securitisation, but it will also unveil the inherent discursive biases present in the narrative.
To that effect, with a focus on the refugee crisis in Europe, this essay seeks to analyse the influx of a variety of refugees and asylum seekers from the conflict-ridden, insecure area of Afghanistan in search of safety and sanctuary and how they were either rehabilitated or deported. Now, even though there might be an attempt to look at refugees as a homogenous category, it is crucial to understand that even in the singular categorisation of a ‘refugee’ or an ‘asylum-seeker,’ multiple identities or an intersection of identities are at play — whether it be race, religion, gender, nationality or even sexual orientation. This intersectionality poses an entirely different challenge to each refugee seeking to belong.
Accordingly, if the contemporary situation of the refugee crisis in Europe is taken into account, although Europe moved swiftly to welcome millions of predominantly White, Christian refugees from Ukraine after Russia’s 2022 invasion, European countries now seem focused on keeping others out (Townsend 2023), through a blatant process of ‘othering’ — continuing to deny Iraqi, Afghani and Palestinian asylum-seekers a legal right to stay. Such a stance not only reads into the history of colonialism but also neo-colonial tendencies in practice today. Further, it also allows us to investigate one of the simplest insights of feminist IR, which is also one of the most devastating: that the war/peace dichotomy is gendered, misleading and potentially pathological (Shepherd 2009).
As citizens flee Afghanistan, transitioning from subjects of a sovereign nation-state to refugees, a profound shift unfolds when the host country, such as the United Kingdom, positions itself as the referent object. Viewing refugees as potential threats to its civilization, economy, and overall safety, the UK alters the narrative, regarding itself as the entity under threat (Krause 2018). However, this dichotomy fails to hold in the context of Europe, where the now stateless individuals risk their lives to reach safety, armed with nothing but the courage in their hearts and the clothes on their backs. Moreover, considering the fact that the root causes of the current situation of conflict-ridden Afghanistan lies in its president being hand-picked by the US, effectively setting up a “Karzai” regime and sponsoring the Mujahidin with $3 billion in aid to assist the United States’ war against the Soviet Union (Barkawi 2004). To that effect, the problems that exist here— unstable regimes, communal tensions, and the rise of militant groups, among others -- do not exist in a vacuum and are a direct cause of Western intervention in the first place. Therefore, such an analysis also seeks to essentialise violent actors and violated victims, or in realist terms where the masculinized United States, sought to “rescue” the feminised Afghanistan (Shepherd 2009).
Figures 2, 3 & 4. The Women of Afghanistan
Furthermore, the positionality of women in this entire narrative cannot be taken lightly either. Women’s experience of violence to date remains invisible and discounted in asylum law and practice (Gerard 2014). Whether it be the problems women face at the border, which are again very specific to their gender, or their position rooted in the social dynamics of the institution of family, narratives such as the global victimisation of women or structural femicide simultaneously work to ghettoise the experiences of women while also swamping their needs and experiences in a ‘mainstreaming’ environment. Moreover, due to such marginalisation, women are given less power, fewer resources and are a lower priority than “mainstream” human rights bodies (Gerard 2014). In the case of Afghani women, not only do these problems ring true, but they are also often exacerbated due to the intersectionality of the identities they imbue (Shepherd 2009).
Similarly, in understanding violence against women, it is also essential to underscore how a focus on war and peace can neglect to take into account the politics of everyday violence: the violences of the in-between times that international politics recognises neither as ‘war’ nor ‘peace’ and the violences inherent to times of peace that are overlooked in the study of war (Shepherd 2009). Accordingly, the capacity of the Refugee Convention to protect women’s rights has been questioned since women’s particular experiences of persecution have remained invisible or absent in readings of the Convention. Consequently, with more attention being given to these gaps in the discourse of knowledge, gender-based persecution (GBP) has gradually arisen internationally as a term to describe acts of violence that are only or usually perpetrated against a person (usually women) because of their sex or gender and which the state has either failed to provide protection against or has itself perpetrated (Gerard 2014).
In conclusion, the critical approaches of feminist and postcolonial theory provide an effective lens to view this relativity of security and practices of securitisation. Primarily because not only are postcolonialism and gender co-constituted, but feminist work is also part and parcel of the colonial project — where both theories work together to not only explain the world but also change it (Parashar 2016).
References:
Krause, Keith, and Michael C. Williams. 2018. “Security and ‘Security Studies’: Conceptual Evolution and Historical Transformation.” In The Oxford Handbook of International Security, edited by Alexandra Gheciu and William Curtis Wohlforth. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Shepherd, Laura J. 2009. ‘Gender, Violence and Global Politics: Contemporary Debates in Feminist Security Studies’. Political Studies Review 7 (2): 208–19.
Parashar, Swati. 2016. ‘Feminism and Postcolonialism: The Twain Shall Meet’. Postcolonial Studies 19 (4): 463–77.
Barkawi, Tarak. 2004. ‘On the Pedagogy of “Small Wars”’. International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-) 80 (1): 19–37.
Townsend, Mark. “Afghans Who Fled Taliban to UK “Set to Be Made Homeless at Christmas.”” The Observer, 29 Oct. 2023, www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/29/afghans-who-fled-taliban-to-uk-set-to-be-made-homeless-at-christmas.
Gerard, Alison. The Securitization of Migration and Refugee Women. United Kingdom, Taylor & Francis, 2014.
McPherson, Melinda. Refugee Women, Representation and Education: Creating a Discourse of Self-Authorship and Potential. United Kingdom, Taylor & Francis Limited (Sales), 2017.
O’Carroll, Lisa. “EU Accused of “Staggering Neglect” after Just 271 Afghans Resettled across Bloc.” The Guardian, 31 May 2023, www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/31/eu-accused-of-staggering-neglect-after-just-271-afghans-resettled-across-bloc. (Figure 1)
Sajjad, Tazreena. “Where Do Afghanistan’s Refugees Go?” JSTOR Daily, 25 Aug. 2021, daily.jstor.org/where-do-afghanistans-refugees-go/. (Figure 2)
ALTINISIK, SERAP . “[Opinion] Time for EU to Be a Real Ally of Afghan Women.” EUobserver, 25 Aug. 2021, euobserver.com/opinion/152714. (Figure 3)
MacGregor, Marion. “Being an Afghan Women Is Enough to Get Refugee Status, Says EU Agency.” InfoMigrants, 30 Jan. 2023, www.infomigrants.net/en/post/46446/being-an-afghan-women-is-enough-to-get-refugee-status-says-eu-agency. Accessed 17 Mar. 2024. (Figure 4)
Comments