After
interpreting a comprehensive definition of the term “refugee” from the UNHCR,
it is clear that the term describes something more than the individual emotional
or physical state of a displaced person. The state of "refugee" must
be a recognized entity outside of the mind of an individual; it is a label that
is determined by greater powers in the international system. It is a term that
prescribes a two-way relationship between the outside international community
that houses the refugees and the refugees themselves. Before reading the UNHCR
account, I did not consider the effect of refugees on the international system,
only taking into account the uncontrollable circumstances that have created the
heartbreaking desperation driving the actions of refugees. While reading
the article, I was actually surprised that a formal, application process
determined the right of a person to adhere to the label of “refugee”. In some
ways, the demand for an application process is nothing more than another way to
isolate and weaken vulnerable populations. It is understandable that the
international community does not want stable persons taking advantage of the
protections and resources specifically available for refugees in need, yet the
international organizations, distinctively removed from all crisis situations
that produce refugees, do not have the direct experiential knowledge that
enables them to properly determine which populations deserve special
protections. No matter how proper the UNHCR’s motives are, their authority to
determine “refugee status” will always come from a safe office space away from
the emotional turmoil that is driving people out of their homes.
One
aspect of the UNHCR’s definition that I would like to incorporate into my
original (possibly too poetic) statement, “in essence, a refugee is a wandering
soul” is the idea that a refugee is both a person with little power and a
person with great power in numbers. The UNHCR noted that foreign governments
and systems could collapse if they receive an influx of refugees in a small
period of time. It is interesting to think that a group of disparaged,
displaced persons could have a profound impact on the powerful members of the
international system; recognizing this impact is an essential part of analyzing
the definition of “refugee” because it evolves a refugee from something to pity
into a relevant and incremental aspect of the international system at large.
Questions:
What are ways in which the volunteers can disrupt
educational/racial/religious/socio-economic privilege while communicating with
refugees? How can we replace feelings of guilt/pity with a sense of equal
commodity? Is help always appreciated or can it (or perhaps, should it) be resisted?
You're asking really good questions, Aly. I think there is a need to be wary when interacting with refugees to prevent that sense of guilt or pity. It is also important to ask whether help is honestly needed or if we, as volunteers, are just getting in the way of their personal healing process. Great post!
ReplyDeleteTaylor