{"title":"Beyond Simply ‘Return’: How IDP Mobility, Agency and Self-Identification Contradict the Underpinnings of Refugee Policy","authors":"Elliot Lodge","doi":"10.12982/cmujasr.2018.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"By framing ‘repatriation’ and ‘return’ as the most common of the three ‘durable solutions’, the global framework for managing people in situations of protracted displacement accounts only for the limited mobility of individuals with refugee status back to the locality they fled. By its very nature, it places unrealistic efforts at achieving sustainable outcomes on broader processes of peace and resettlement, that are assumed to provide appropriate conditions for return, but rarely do so. The Internally Displaced People (IDPs) of Ee Tu Hta in Karen State, Myanmar, are a vivid representation of how this system fails to understand, let alone engage, with common experiences of mobility. After more than a decade of international assistance, the camp has faced a cessation in humanitarian food aid and as a result people are making strategic choices on how to sustain livelihoods for themselves and their families. While there are elements that are specific to this particular example, a glance at similar situations, both in Asia and beyond, suggests that people termed as ‘displaced’ are often in continuous movement both within and across national boundaries and, even while staying in a fixed location, their agency, political association and sense of place undermines the assumptions of the structures designed to manage the ‘displaced’. This research explores the experiences of people in Ee Tu Hta vis-à-vis these assumptions. In doing so, the research questions the viability of a system that assumes that displaced people seek to return home in large numbers. ASR: CMU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (2018) Vol. 5 No.1 55","PeriodicalId":40330,"journal":{"name":"ASR Chiang Mai University Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ASR Chiang Mai University Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12982/cmujasr.2018.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
By framing ‘repatriation’ and ‘return’ as the most common of the three ‘durable solutions’, the global framework for managing people in situations of protracted displacement accounts only for the limited mobility of individuals with refugee status back to the locality they fled. By its very nature, it places unrealistic efforts at achieving sustainable outcomes on broader processes of peace and resettlement, that are assumed to provide appropriate conditions for return, but rarely do so. The Internally Displaced People (IDPs) of Ee Tu Hta in Karen State, Myanmar, are a vivid representation of how this system fails to understand, let alone engage, with common experiences of mobility. After more than a decade of international assistance, the camp has faced a cessation in humanitarian food aid and as a result people are making strategic choices on how to sustain livelihoods for themselves and their families. While there are elements that are specific to this particular example, a glance at similar situations, both in Asia and beyond, suggests that people termed as ‘displaced’ are often in continuous movement both within and across national boundaries and, even while staying in a fixed location, their agency, political association and sense of place undermines the assumptions of the structures designed to manage the ‘displaced’. This research explores the experiences of people in Ee Tu Hta vis-à-vis these assumptions. In doing so, the research questions the viability of a system that assumes that displaced people seek to return home in large numbers. ASR: CMU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (2018) Vol. 5 No.1 55
通过将“遣返”和“返回”作为三种“持久解决方案”中最常见的解决方案,管理长期流离失所情况下人员的全球框架只考虑到具有难民身份的个人返回他们逃离的地方的有限流动性。就其性质而言,它把实现可持续成果的不切实际的努力放在更广泛的和平与重新安置进程上,这些进程被认为为返回提供适当的条件,但很少这样做。缅甸克伦邦(Karen State)伊图塔(Ee Tu Hta)的国内流离失所者(IDPs)是一个生动的例子,说明这一制度无法理解,更不用说参与到共同的流动经历中了。经过十多年的国际援助,该难民营面临着人道主义粮食援助的中断,因此人们正在就如何维持自己和家人的生计做出战略性选择。虽然这个特殊的例子有一些特定的因素,但看看亚洲和其他地区的类似情况,就会发现,被称为“流离失所者”的人往往在国界内外不断流动,即使在固定的地方,他们的机构、政治联系和地方感也破坏了旨在管理“流离失所者”的结构的假设。本研究探讨了在Ee Tu Hta的人的经历-à-vis这些假设。在这样做的过程中,研究对一个假设流离失所者寻求大量返回家园的制度的可行性提出了质疑。ASR: CMU社会科学与人文学报(2018)第5卷第1期55