The Contemporary Securitization of Borders and the New Policies of States - Essay Example

? The Contemporary Securitization of Borders and the New Policies of s in North America and Europe that Attempt to Link Asylum-seekers and Refugees with Terrorism and/or National Security. Customer Inserts His/Her Name Customer Inserts Grade Course Customer Inserts Tutor’s Name 19 April 2012 SUMMARY The governments of North American and European policies are scrutinizing the background of each individual attempting to link asylum-seekers and refugees with terrorism and threats of national security. First, the United States has reduced its welcoming smile to refugees and asylum seekers because of the September 11, 2001 Bin Laden -orchestrated attack on the United States. Second, Second, Consequently, laws controlled the influx of refugees and asylum seekers. Third, Germany issues its own version of anti-refugees and asylum seekers statutes. Fourth, emphasized the problems of the refugees and asylum seekers grew in magnitude after the end of World War II. Fifth, some host countries have not fully given the refugees and asylum seekers their deserved rights and liberties. Sixth, the key to the strict refugees and asylum seekers policies is protection from terroristic and other acts that may disadvantage other residents of the host country. Seventh, international refugee law defines a refugee as: having a well grounded fear of being persecuted one or more discriminatory grounds. The reduction of protection for the refugees and asylum seekers is grounded on self- preservation. INTRODUCTION Refugees and asylum seekers are realities of the cruel world. The research centers on the difficulties faced by the refugees and asylum seekers. The research includes the moves to improve the lives of the refugees and asylum seekers in their host countries. North American and European policies are currently attempting to link asylum-seekers and refugees with terrorism and threats of national security, violating related international refugee laws. BODY The governments of North American and European policies are scrutinizing the background of each individual attempting to link asylum-seekers and refugees with terrorism and threats of national security. First, the United States has reduced its welcoming smile to refugees and asylum seekers because of the September 11, 2001 Bin Laden-orchestrated attack on the United States. There is an increasing trend of host democratic governments turning their backs on the implementation of the Universal Humanitarian Principles. After the September 11, 2001 attack, many laws were enacted to reduce the rights as well as the liberties of the refugees and asylum seekers and also the citizens entering the host countries. A vivid example is the establishment of extra-judicial refugees and asylum seekers detention camps. Of the recent abuses was headlined in the abuses of the American soldiers, including the abuses committed by the American soldiers on Cuban and Haitian refugees and asylum seekers held in a prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, near Cuba. Likewise, abuses of the Soldiers managing the refugee and asylum seeker camps on Manus Island, Papua New Guinea as well as the Island Republic. Consequently, many democratic governments have reduced their focus on implementing the rights and liberties of refugees and asylum seekers (Wilson 659). Many of the refugees and asylum seekers arrive in foreign country because they could no longer bear living in their home country. The refugees and asylum seekers escape from their home country taking with them the agony of losing their home, social status, friends, and identity. Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states “Everyone has the right to seek and enjoy in other country’s asylum from the sufferings received in their home countries. However, the refugees and asylum seekers do not know what will happen to them on their journey towards the host country (Wilson 641). To understand the sudden turnaround in terms of offering rights and liberties to refugees and asylum seekers, the focus should first look at the refugees and asylum seekers historical trends. In the United Kingdom alone, refugees and asylum seekers included the Chileans in 1973. Next, the United Kingdom government saw boatloads of Vietnamese refugees and asylum seekers a few years later. In 1988, the refugees and asylum seekers reached 4,000 persons. In 1989, the refugees and asylum seekers reached 11,640 persons. In 1989, 11,640 refugees and asylum seekers arrived in the United Kingdom. In 1991, 44,840 refugees and asylum seekers reached the shores of the United Kingdom. Within a few years, the refugees and asylum seekers became a major source of immigrants into the United Kingdom. Second, laws controlled the influx of refugees and asylum seekers. Consequently, the United Kingdom government’s House of Commons drafted, approved, and implemented statues to reduce the number of refugees and asylum seekers starting in 1992. The new law set guidelines for the immediate rejection of certain types of refugees and asylum seekers by setting guidelines on the quick removal of all rejected refugees and asylum seekers. Further, the Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act was approved for immediate implementation in 1993. Next, the Asylum and Immigration Act was approved in 1996. The 1996 act mandated disallowing some refugees and asylum seekers access to social security benefits and legal remedies in the host country, United Kingdom. The disallowing portion the new anti-refugees and asylum seekers act was created to discourage the refugees and asylum seekers from trying their luck in the United Kingdom. Further, the United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum Act of 1999 focused on the immediate removal of all unqualified refugees and asylum seekers (Schuster 131). Similarly, Germany issues its own version of anti-refugees and asylum seekers statutes. In 1992, the German government Leader, Helmut Kohl expressed alarm over the increasing influx of refugees and asylum seekers into Germany. The influx greatly affected the booming economic, social, and political stability in Germany. Faced with terrorists’ attacks in 1977, Helmut Kohl warned the general citizenry of the many dangers of accepting refugees and asylum seekers within its borders. The influx of refugees and asylum seekers could threaten one of the best economies in Europe, German economy. The refugees and asylum seekers could disrupt the Federal Republic of Germany society’s balance in terms of constitutional rights, welfare, national makeup, and social market sectors. Consequently, the German Government implemented restrictive policies to reduce the number of refugees and asylum seekers entering the German republic every year. The law focuses on the possible threats committed by refugees and asylum seekers on the German society (Shuster 180). To reduce the probability that innocent and “good” refugees and asylum seekers are given protection from unnecessary punishment in the name of the United States’ counter-terrorism efforts, The United States law making body, Congress, implemented strict refugee and asylum seeker laws to protect its territories from the refugees and asylum seekers’s entry (Pickering 148). With the advent of the September 11, 2001 hijacking of four passenger airplanes and the use of the planes as battering rams against known symbols of United State power, a significant (Newman31) change of the average American citizen’s picture of a refugee or asylum seekers. The traditional concept of security and sovereignty were suddenly being questioned in terms of the safety and security of the home country’s citizens and properties. The September 11, 2001 incident refocused the nations’ attention on the contribution of the refugees and asylum seekers to terrorist organizations and terrorist activities. With the new picture, the refugees and asylum seekers are now being considered as threats to the national security of their new nation. Consequently, many innocent refugees and asylum seekers have to needlessly suffer from abuses of their rights to be treated as a human person. To resolve the deadlock, the host governments must go the extra mile to resolve the current standoff. Fourth, Liza Schuster (97) emphasized the problems of the refugees and asylum seekers grew in magnitude after the end of World War II. There were massive displacements of refugees and asylum seekers who could not return to their home of origin. In addition, many of the refugees and asylum seekers refused to return home to their home country for one major reason or another. Consequently, many of the refugees and asylum seekers became residents of the nations where they do not belong. Consequently, the leaders of the European Union governments were too tied up with resolving the problems of their own citizens. The European citizens’ problems bordered on rehabilitating their property and lives from the aftershocks of the world war that ended in 1945. With the European governments’ time tightly squeezed to serve the large citizen’s clamor for help, the estimated 30,000,000 refugees and asylum seekers had to wait for their host country’s governments to resolve the safety and security needs of the refugees and asylum seekers, especially the Jews sent to the German camps for extermination. The refugees and asylum seekers had to wait for positive action on their plight within the regional, national, and international levels. John Wilson (187) reiterated that a majority of the psychotherapists insist psychotherapy will bring many positive rehabilitating results if the patient feels safe with the environment where the psychotherapist tries to offer professional help. The psychotherapists believe that immediate psycho therapeutic help must be immediate extended to the traumatized refugees and asylum seekers. One of the major hindrances to a successful psychotherapy session is comprehension the home cultures of the refugees and asylum seekers. The psychotherapists found it an uphill battle to understanding the different cultures of the refugees and asylum seekers in their land. Using an interpreter may have some disadvantages because the interpreter may not convey the sentiments of the refugees and asylum seekers 100 percent. The therapists have difficulty understanding the language and culture of the different refugees and asylum seekers. On several occasions, the psychotherapist may wrongly focus on the culture and sentiments of the interpreters, not the patients. There is a contemporary securitization of borders and the new policies of states in North America and Europe that attempt to link asylum-seekers and refugees with terrorism and/or national security. Specifically, the Patriot Act of 2001, the REAL ID Act of 2005, and the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) have placed huge hindrances to the protection of refugees and asylum seekers within in the United States territory. The hindrances prevent the harmless refugees and asylum seekers from being protected. For example, victims who were often by armed rebels were barred from United States protection for offering some support to the terrorists. Fifth, some host countries have not fully given the refugees and asylum seekers their deserved rights and liberties. Some Afghans fighting against the Soviet Union during 1980s as well as the rebellious Iraqi soldiers fighting against the Iraqi leadership of Saddam Hussein were also classified as members of terrorist groups. Refugees who had to give money and other support to the terrorist groups are also classified as terrorist supporters in the United States. Other acts of similar nature also occurred in other countries where refugees and asylum seekers are kept. Sixth, the key to the strict refugees and asylum seekers policies is protection from terroristic and other acts that may disadvantage other residents of the host country. The United States’ priority to protect its citizens and its territories from terrorists, especially those who are members of Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda terrorist network, is a strong hindrance to protect the peace –loving refugees and asylum seekers. With the popular will to quash all forms of terrorism, there ahs been an increasing trend of decreasing humane protection to refugees and asylum seekers. Instead many of the deterrence statutes led to conditions of deprivation and confinement of the refugees and asylum seekers (Wilson, Broken Spirits: The Treatment of Traumatized Asylum Seekers 13). The world of the refugees and asylum seekers is characterized by broken spirits coupled with silent cries and unspoken loneliness. Extracted from their home country, the refugees and asylum seekers try their best to find a greener pasture in other countries in desperation and mercy. The seemingly greener place is another place where the strangers live in a foreign land with a completely strange or unfamiliar culture and government policies. The refugees and asylum seekers are victims of wars, political upheavals, and unacceptable acts of corrupt, war-ravaged, or repressive government leaders, often endangering the lives of the refugees and asylum seekers (Wilson 109). International refugee law. Seventh, M. Alborzi (312) mentioned international refugee law defines a refugee as: having a well grounded fear of being persecuted one or more discriminatory grounds. The refugees and asylum seekers are described as persons who are outside one’s home country and is unable or, due to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, are refuse to return to their home country (. The refugees and asylum seekers have three basic elements. One of the three basic elements is they are outside their country of origin or outside the country of their former habitual residence. Second, the refugees and asylum seekers are unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted. Third, the refugees and asylum seekers feel that their persecution feared is grounded on one or more discriminatory grounds. The grounds are race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion (Simeon 147). Specifically, Flora Goudappel (37) insists the International Refugee Law contained in Article 3 Convention against Torture, Article 7 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 3 European Convention on Human Rights are some of the international laws that protect the rights of the Iraqi refugees who were forced to abandon their home country to flee the unbearable persecution of the current government, including not returning the refugees and asylum seekers to their abusive home country. The Iraqi refugees and asylum seekers decided to try their luck in Iraq because they decided to finally put a stop to the current persecutions, violence, human rights violations, and other glaring violations of international humanitarian law by their home government during the past several years of oppressive targeting certain groups or individuals in the home country. The United Nations set up the International Refugee Law in order to setup a series of protective measures on the rights and liberties of refugees and asylum seekers, especially in Iraq. The law includes the cooperation of international humanitarian agencies and many humanitarian activities to uplift the lives of the disheartened Iraqi refugees and asylum seekers. Further, Anne Bayefsky (69) proposes the International refugee law focuses on the right of refugees and asylum seekers to enter countries of their choice to find a greener pasture compared to the dried up lands of their home countries. The law also centers on the quantity of refugees and asylum seekers entering the host nations. The law includes the protection of refugees and asylum seekers during their stay in the host country. Finally, the law also includes the responsibilities of other nations to share in the burden of caring for the needs of the refugees and asylum seekers as well as the allowable number of refugees and asylum seekers entering each host country 312). Since there has been no improvement in the current status of refugees and asylum seekers under the strict monitoring eyes of Iraqi soldiers, especially the uncontrollable mass influx of refugees and asylum seekers venturing into the borders of Iraq. Iraq’s turning a cold shoulder on the plight of the Iraqi refugees and asylum seekers forces its neighbors to force Iraq to tow the line in terms of humane treatment of the refugees and asylum seekers. Lastly, Erika Feller (44) theorizes the reduction of protection for the refugees and asylum seekers is grounded on self- preservation. The home government wants to ensure its survival. To survive, the home government must weed out the terrorist or dangerous elements from entering the host country’s shores. Accepting refugees and asylum seekers, who are later found to be obsessed with bombing public places in establishments in compliance with their faith or other terrorist oaths, may endanger the lives and properties of innocent civilians living in the host country, including the United States. The mass influx of refugees and asylum seekers has brought the controlling and monitoring of the refugees and asylum seekers to unprecedented levels. Soft laws, including the Internally Displace Persons statute, have been established to ensure more benefits and rights are granted to the refugees and asylum seekers in their host country (Foster 111). In the United States, Cubans and Haitians fled to the United States to flee the persecutions of their home country (Hathaway) 92. Conclusion. Based on the above discussion, refugees and asylum seekers are realities of the cruel world. The atrocities and abuses committed against many refugees and asylum seekers must be resolved. The host nations strive to protect its citizens and their properties reduced the number of refugees and asylum seekers and increased the abuses on the refugees and asylum seekers living within the watchful eyes of the host country’s peace keeping forces. Indeed, the North American and European policies are currently trying to link asylum-seekers and refugees with terrorism and threats of national security, violating related international refugee laws, in order to prevent future September 11, 2001 attacks. Works Cited Alborzi, M. Evaluating the effectiveness of International Refugee Law. New York: Martinus Nijhoff Press, 2006. Print. Bayefsky, Anne. Human Rights and Refugees. New York: Brill Press, 2006. Print. Foster, Michelle. International Refugee Law and Socio Economic Rights. New York: University Press, 2007. Print. Fuller, Erika. Refugee Protection in International Law. New York: University Press, 2003. Print. Goudappel, Flora. The Future of Asylum in the European Union. New York: Springer Press, 2011. Print. Hathaway, James. Reconceiving International Refugee Law. New York: Martinus Press, 1997. Newman, Edward. Refugees and Forced Displacement: International Security, Human Vulnerability, and the State. New York: U.N. University Press, 2003. Print. Pickering, Sharon. Refugees and State Crimes. New York: Federation Press, 2005. Print. Schuster, LIza. The Use and Abuse of Political Asylum in Britain and Germany. London: Frank Cass Press, 2003. Print. Simeon, James. Critical Issues in International Refugee Law. New York: University Press, 2010. Print. Wilson, John. Broken Spirits: The Treatment of Traumatized Asylum Seekers. New York: Brunner Press, 2004. Print. Wison, John. The Treatment of Traumatized Asylum Seekers, Refugees, War and Torture Victims. New York: Brunner Press, 2004.Print. Read More