Editorial
| Date | 01 August 2016 |
| Author | Howard Duncan |
| Published date | 01 August 2016 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12272 |
Editorial
The June 23 United Kingdom referendum on continued membership in the European Union stands
as but one example of the rise of nationalism in many parts of the world. Brexit captured a great
deal of attention in Western media, but so, too, has the rise of what are often termed ‘far-right’or
‘populist’political movements in much of Europe and elsewhere. Nationalism, a term of a no small
degree of vagueness, often connotes the idea of a nation defined by its founding people, an idea
that immediately categorizes people as either of the nation or not, as ‘us’or ‘them’. Accordingly,
many of the debates in this context concern migrants and migration, and the case of Brexit was no
exception. Membership in the European Union brings with it the responsibility to allow citizens of
member states to live and work on each other’s territory, but this obligation is portrayed by many
Euro-sceptics as a loss of sovereignty over the sensitive matter of who is allowed to enter the
nation and for what purpose. The connection between nationalism and migration is, for some, ulti-
mately a matter of sovereignty. But in other discussions, a harsher reality is evident, one wherein
nationalism is a direct expression of anti-immigration attitudes: migrants, whether in a country leg-
ally or not, whether as workers, family members, or refugees, are regarded not as part of the nation
but as ‘them’and therefore as unwanted and sometimes deeply so. Nationalism is, then, often
expressed through measures to control migration in the name of protecting the integrity of a nation
state. Regrettably, the interests of actual human beings can be harmed in the process.
The UNHCR grimly noted recently that there were now 65 million persons forcibly displaced
from their homes, the highest in history. This, together with the spectre of the closing of the
Dadaab refugee camp in Kenya, and the recent resurgence of migrant boat crossings from North
Africa to Southern Europe, will put even more pressure on governments, especially in European
states, to deal with migration, particularly refugees and those in refugee-like situations. In this issue
of International Migration, we begin with a look at some of the complexities of asylum-seeking.
One way of attempting to manage asylum-seeking has been to establish agreements with countries
of origin on returns, both voluntary and forced. Maja Janmyr looks at the effectiveness of Nor-
way’s agreements with Iraq and Ethiopia and finds them wanting. As complex as asylum policy is,
so too are the economics of providing asylum. Anjali Surijakumaran and Yuji Tamura do us a ser-
vice by offering explanations of the econometrics of asylum provision in ways that the rest of us
can hope to understand. The “new mobility”of which we often speak is revealed not only by
highly skilled economic migrants moving from one laboratory or corporate headquarters to another
but, as well, by some asylum seekers who, as persons with full human interests, often seek more
than safety. Vesna Luki
c takes us to Serbia to show the workings of contemporary transit asylum
migration. Also looking at asylum seekers’decisions regarding destinations are Marie McAuliffe
and Dinuk Jayasuriya, who asked 35,000 potential asylum seekers whether and why they preferred
some destination countries over others and found Australia to be widely preferred. Perhaps know-
ing this sort of thing, Australia introduced a number of deterrents to asylum seekers, and the team
of Fleay, Cokley, Dodd, Briskman, and Schwartz show that their attempts at dissuasion might have
considered more strongly the ways in which asylum seekers obtain information about potential des-
tinations.
People in refugee-like situations include those who are internally displaced, and they, like any
displaced person, must put a premium on finding housing for themselves and their families. Patricia
Garcia Amado explains the complexities of land tenure in countries in crisis and how tenure
Dr. Howard Duncan Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
doi: 10.1111/imig.12272
©2016 The Author
International Migration ©2016 IOM
International Migration Vol. 54 (4) 2016
ISSN 0020-7985Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial