Rethinking Refuge: Processes of Refuge Seeking in Africa; An Introduction

G. Njung, Marcia C. Schenck, Jochen Lingelbach, Lazlo Passemiers, Magnus Treiber, Rose Jaji, Gerawork Teferra, Muna Omar, Y. Gez, L. Kroeker, Imomotimi Armstrong, Bruce Cadle, Yusuf Sholeye, Felipe Antonio Honorato, Silas Fiorotti
{"title":"Rethinking Refuge: Processes of Refuge Seeking in Africa; An Introduction","authors":"G. Njung, Marcia C. Schenck, Jochen Lingelbach, Lazlo Passemiers, Magnus Treiber, Rose Jaji, Gerawork Teferra, Muna Omar, Y. Gez, L. Kroeker, Imomotimi Armstrong, Bruce Cadle, Yusuf Sholeye, Felipe Antonio Honorato, Silas Fiorotti","doi":"10.2979/africatoday.69.1_2.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Examining the case of some nineteen thousand Polish refugees in British colonial Africa, this article challenges the Eurocentric historiography of the post–World War II international refugee regime. These Poles, after being hosted by the colonial governments first, eventually came under the mandate of emerging UN refugee organizations that treated Europeans as internationally recognized refugees everywhere in the world. In contrast, fleeing Africans (and Asians) did not fit this category. This distinction had more to do with imperialism and race than with any geographic limitation. Conceptually, the refugee regime rests on the differentiation of refugees and national citizens, while imperial rule differentiated between European citizens and colonized subjects. I want to complicate this by emphasizing that the international refugee regime emerged in a largely imperial world signified by a tripartition into citizen, subject, and European refugee.","PeriodicalId":39703,"journal":{"name":"Africa Today","volume":"69 1","pages":"1 - 109 - 110 - 13 - 133 - 134 - 14 - 161 - 162 - 189 - 190 - 213 - 214 - 237 - 238 - 254 - 255 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Africa Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2979/africatoday.69.1_2.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract:Examining the case of some nineteen thousand Polish refugees in British colonial Africa, this article challenges the Eurocentric historiography of the post–World War II international refugee regime. These Poles, after being hosted by the colonial governments first, eventually came under the mandate of emerging UN refugee organizations that treated Europeans as internationally recognized refugees everywhere in the world. In contrast, fleeing Africans (and Asians) did not fit this category. This distinction had more to do with imperialism and race than with any geographic limitation. Conceptually, the refugee regime rests on the differentiation of refugees and national citizens, while imperial rule differentiated between European citizens and colonized subjects. I want to complicate this by emphasizing that the international refugee regime emerged in a largely imperial world signified by a tripartition into citizen, subject, and European refugee.
反思避难:非洲寻求避难的过程;引言
摘要:本文通过考察英国殖民地非洲约1.9万名波兰难民的案例,对二战后以欧洲为中心的国际难民制度史学提出了挑战。这些波兰人在最初接受殖民政府的庇护后,最终接受了新兴的联合国难民组织的授权,这些组织将欧洲人视为世界各地国际公认的难民。相比之下,逃亡的非洲人(和亚洲人)不属于这一类。这种区别更多地与帝国主义和种族有关,而不是与任何地理限制有关。从概念上讲,难民制度建立在难民和国家公民的区别之上,而帝国统治则区分欧洲公民和被殖民主体。我想通过强调国际难民制度是在一个以帝国主义为主的世界中出现的,其标志是公民、主体和欧洲难民的三部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Africa Today
Africa Today Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Africa Today, a leading journal for more than 50 years, has been in the forefront of publishing Africanist reform-minded research, and provides access to the best scholarly work from around the world on a full range of political, economic, and social issues. Active electronic and combined electronic/print subscriptions to this journal include access to the online backrun.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信