|
Article Excerpt
Abstract
This paper utilizes an analytical distinction between three modes of social belonging to explain the ambiguous resettlement experiences of refugees granted a temporary protection visa (TPV) in Australia. Findings from two qualitative studies indicate that the dominance of a public discourse that depicts asylum seekers as "illegals" inhibits their sense of belonging at the national level. Yet belonging has been facilitated locally through relational networks within communities and the establishment of associations based on cultural or legal categories. Importantly, these successes have provided a basis from which to contest the continued lack of recognition faced by TPV refugees within a nationalistic public discourse.
Resume
Cet article fait appel a une difference analytique entre trois modes d'appartenance sociale pour expliquer l'experience ambigue de la reinstallation vecue par les refugies qui obtiennent un TPV (<< visa de protection temporaire >>) en Australie. Les conclusions de deux etudes qualitatives indiquent que la dominance d'un discours publique representant les demandeurs d'asile comme des << clandestins >>, bloque leur sens d'appartenance au niveau national. Au niveau local cependant, l'appartenance a ete facilitee a travers des reseaux de relations l'inteieur des communautes et l'etablissement d'associations basees sur les categories culturelles ou legales. Ce qui importe encore plus c'est que ces succes ont fourni une base a partir de laquelle il est maintenant possible de contester le manque de reconnaissance confrontant les refugies TPV dans l'environnement cree par un discours publique nationaliste.
Introduction
The introduction of the temporary protection visa (TPV) in Australia has had important repercussions for the resettlement experiences and citizenship status of refugees. Having already spent considerable time in transit, refugees issued a TPV are forced into a continued state of limbo by the policy of mandatory detention. Once finally released into the Australian community, their visa status provides few settlement services and even fewer rights. Despite these hurdles, many such refugees have developed a sense of belonging at the local level and, according to the goals of many refugee resettlement policies, might be considered "integrated." This sense of belonging is, however, continually contested at the level of public discourse where political rhetoric justifies the temporary protection offered to such refugees by representing them as "illegals" or "queue jumpers." In making sense of this ambiguous outcome, the paper builds on growing awareness that we need to understand social integration and belonging as far more complex and multi-faceted than resettlement policies and programs typically acknowledge. This is particularly the case for "unauthorized" asylum seekers who are subject to greater stigmatization than refugees accepted through conventional offshore programs.
To this end, the first section of the paper draws upon Calhoun's distinction between relational networks, cultural or legal categories, and discursive publics as modes of social belonging that represent citizenship? Doing so allows us to deconstruct traditional understandings of belonging and integration in a way that provides an explanation for the ambiguous resettlement experiences of refugees granted a TPV and living in the state of Victoria, Australia. The second section of the paper maps out the political context in which temporary protection policies were introduced in Australia, as well as the specific entitlements and restrictions that accompany the TPV. This draws attention to a dominant public discourse, which contests the ability and right of refugees on TPVs to belong. The third and final section of the paper explores the experiences of refugees on TPVs, as documented in two qualitative research studies undertaken by the authors. In this discussion, emphasis is placed on both the continuing effects such a negative public discourse has had upon refugees on TPVs and the successes achieved by a Melbourne community-based organization in facilitating a sense of belonging amongst refugees on TPVs at the local level. Consequently, this sense of belonging and partial security has provided the support needed to challenge the continued lack of recognition confronting refugees due to dominance of a public discourse that demonizes and devalues them.
Extending the Debate around Integration and Belonging
The notion of refugee integration is not easily defined, although this term usually refers to a long-term process that results in refugees being able to participate in all aspects of the host society where they now live, without having to give up their own cultural identity. (2) The refugee studies literature demonstrates that the integration process is one complicated by numerous variables. A distinction is commonly made, for example, between economic and cultural or social aspects of integration. Typical refugee programs, not surprisingly, tend to concentrate their often meagre resources on the former because the functional issues of housing, employment, and education are regarded as the fastest means for integrating refugees within the community. (3)
There is, however, widespread recognition within the literature that successful resettlement also requires attention to be paid to the cultural and social needs of refugees, which are multiple and complex. Berry, Kim, and Boski for example, have identified that cultural adaptation involves physical, biological, cultural, and social change within refugee individuals, (4) while Liev has developed an integrated model indicating that refugees adapting to a host society experience stress at the individual, familial, group, or organizational levels. (5) Nevertheless, Bihi highlights that many models of refugee integration focus predominantly on psychological interpretations of displacement. (6) This can lead to the misunderstanding that refugees are unable to adjust because of previous suffering, when policy and program failure may be a major contributor to their ill- adjustment.
Korac's comparative research in the Netherlands and Italy provides compelling evidence that the official resettlement policies adopted by different countries have a significant impact on integration, not only in relation to the functional concerns of housing, employment, and education, but also in regard to the social participation of refugees in wider society, which influences their sense of identity, belonging, recognition, and self-respect. (7) She documents how refugees in the Netherlands were unable to overcome a sense of detachment from their host society that developed during prolonged stays in asylum centres, despite receiving relatively high degrees of formal assistance with employment and housing. They were thus largely unsuccessful in establishing closer ties with Dutch citizens. In contrast, refugees in Italy received minimal assistance through self-help systems established within refugee and migrant networks. As a result, they became not only more self-sufficient, but also better integrated into Italian society. Although experiencing considerable difficulties with housing and work in their initial phase of resettlement, in addition to remaining clustered in predominantly low-paying jobs, most of the refugees in Italy felt a greater sense of belonging than those living in the Netherlands.
These ambivalent results led Korac to conclude that spontaneous and individualized encounters between refugees and host society members help avoid negative, hierarchical perceptions of the "other" and encourage a mutual process of learning and shifting from which both groups can gain. (8) Yet, refugee assistance programs often treat refugees as having "immature social identities" in need of cultural and social re-education. This has resulted in language acquisition and cultural adaptation being used as the key indicators when assessing levels of integration. Korac argues that strategies for building the kind of "bridging social capital" which provides refugees with a sense of rootedness and wider belonging are more useful than those that regard integration as one-way...
|
