弹性政治背后:欧盟对黎巴嫩境内叙利亚难民反应的局限性

IF 1.4 Q3 DEMOGRAPHY
Lyla André
{"title":"弹性政治背后:欧盟对黎巴嫩境内叙利亚难民反应的局限性","authors":"Lyla André","doi":"10.1093/rsq/hdac029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Syrian crisis that began expanding in 2012 has sent millions of refugees into neighbouring countries and beyond and proved to be a testing ground for the European Union’s new approach to humanitarian crises. Focused on European Union-funded educational programmes carried out in response to the Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanon, this article argues that the European Union’s approach has nevertheless negatively impacted refugees’ lives because of its embeddedness in the international regime of resilience that has gained ground in the field of refugee protection. Indeed, while the resilience regime appears to be a continuation of the neoliberal system of rule, it in fact represents a paradigmatic shift that implies political and moral retreat from donors’ responsibility. Applied to refugee management, the agenda of “resilience” thus contradicts the rationale for burden-sharing that previously involved a “shared responsibility” between external donors and the hosting State. Based on Kratochwil’s praxis approach, this article therefore aims to empirically expand upon the recent literature centred on “resilience” and “self-reliance” in the field of refugee management. In doing so, it demonstrates how neoliberal features of resilience further hinder refugees’ lives as these features entail a total separation from an adequate rights-based approach.","PeriodicalId":39907,"journal":{"name":"Refugee Survey Quarterly","volume":"21 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Behind the Politics of Resilience: the Limits of the EU’s Response to Syrian Refugees in Lebanon\",\"authors\":\"Lyla André\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/rsq/hdac029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Syrian crisis that began expanding in 2012 has sent millions of refugees into neighbouring countries and beyond and proved to be a testing ground for the European Union’s new approach to humanitarian crises. Focused on European Union-funded educational programmes carried out in response to the Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanon, this article argues that the European Union’s approach has nevertheless negatively impacted refugees’ lives because of its embeddedness in the international regime of resilience that has gained ground in the field of refugee protection. Indeed, while the resilience regime appears to be a continuation of the neoliberal system of rule, it in fact represents a paradigmatic shift that implies political and moral retreat from donors’ responsibility. Applied to refugee management, the agenda of “resilience” thus contradicts the rationale for burden-sharing that previously involved a “shared responsibility” between external donors and the hosting State. Based on Kratochwil’s praxis approach, this article therefore aims to empirically expand upon the recent literature centred on “resilience” and “self-reliance” in the field of refugee management. In doing so, it demonstrates how neoliberal features of resilience further hinder refugees’ lives as these features entail a total separation from an adequate rights-based approach.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39907,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Refugee Survey Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"21 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Refugee Survey Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/rsq/hdac029\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Refugee Survey Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rsq/hdac029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2012年开始扩大的叙利亚危机已将数百万难民送往邻国和其他国家,并被证明是欧盟应对人道主义危机新方法的试验场。本文关注欧盟资助的教育项目,以应对黎巴嫩的叙利亚难民危机。本文认为,欧盟的做法对难民的生活产生了负面影响,因为它植根于难民保护领域的国际弹性制度。事实上,虽然复原机制似乎是新自由主义统治体系的延续,但它实际上代表了一种范式转变,意味着在政治和道德上逃避捐助者的责任。因此,适用于难民管理的“复原力”议程与以前涉及外援和东道国之间“共同责任”的分担负担的理由相矛盾。基于Kratochwil的实践方法,本文旨在从经验上扩展最近在难民管理领域以“弹性”和“自力更生”为中心的文献。在这样做的过程中,它证明了新自由主义的弹性特征如何进一步阻碍了难民的生活,因为这些特征需要与充分的基于权利的方法完全分离。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Behind the Politics of Resilience: the Limits of the EU’s Response to Syrian Refugees in Lebanon
The Syrian crisis that began expanding in 2012 has sent millions of refugees into neighbouring countries and beyond and proved to be a testing ground for the European Union’s new approach to humanitarian crises. Focused on European Union-funded educational programmes carried out in response to the Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanon, this article argues that the European Union’s approach has nevertheless negatively impacted refugees’ lives because of its embeddedness in the international regime of resilience that has gained ground in the field of refugee protection. Indeed, while the resilience regime appears to be a continuation of the neoliberal system of rule, it in fact represents a paradigmatic shift that implies political and moral retreat from donors’ responsibility. Applied to refugee management, the agenda of “resilience” thus contradicts the rationale for burden-sharing that previously involved a “shared responsibility” between external donors and the hosting State. Based on Kratochwil’s praxis approach, this article therefore aims to empirically expand upon the recent literature centred on “resilience” and “self-reliance” in the field of refugee management. In doing so, it demonstrates how neoliberal features of resilience further hinder refugees’ lives as these features entail a total separation from an adequate rights-based approach.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Refugee Survey Quarterly
Refugee Survey Quarterly Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: The Refugee Survey Quarterly is published four times a year and serves as an authoritative source on current refugee and international protection issues. Each issue contains a selection of articles and documents on a specific theme, as well as book reviews on refugee-related literature. With this distinctive thematic approach, the journal crosses in each issue the entire range of refugee research on a particular key challenge to forced migration. The journal seeks to act as a link between scholars and practitioners by highlighting the evolving nature of refugee protection as reflected in the practice of UNHCR and other major actors in the field.
×
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