Advertisement

Opportunistic Humanitarianism and Securitization Discomfort Along the Balkan Corridor: The Croatian Experience

Chapter

Abstract

Within the Balkan corridor Croatia combined state-driven ‘crisis management measures’ with humanitarian practices of immediate care and assistance provided by state, civil society, religious and humanitarian organizations, and new solidarity initiatives. While at the beginning majority of stakeholders were acting in humane/humanitarian and overtly supportive manner (‘humanitarian opportunism’), later on, with gradual closure of the corridor, radicalization and securitization of state discourses, rhetoric and politics took place, leading to ‘securitization discomfort’ among pro-refugee actors. Consequently, humanitarian organizations and initiatives came into ambiguous position of balancing in-between their mission/orientation to help and to foster solidarity, and innate motivation to challenge and circumvent securitizing politics.

Keywords

Croatia Refugees Crisis management Humanitarian opportunism Securitization discomfort Solidarity 

References

  1. ACAPS. (2016, January). The Balkan Migrant Crisis: An Introduction. www.alnap.org/pool/files/the-balkan-migrant-crisis.pdf.
  2. Agier, M. (2011). Managing the Undesirables: Refugee Camps and Humanitarian Government. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  3. AI—Amnesty International. (2015). Fear and Fences Europe’s Approach to Keeping Refugees at Bay. London. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur03/2544/2015/en/.
  4. Alexandridis, A., & Müge, D. (2017). Routes Change, Migration Persists: The Effects of EU Policy on Migratory Routes (Alsharq Forum Paper Series). Istanbul. http://sharqforum.org/2017/03/28/routes-change-migration-persists-the-effects-of-eu-policy-on-migratory-routes/.
  5. Aydın, Y. (2016). The Germany-Turkey Migration Corridor: Refitting Policies for a Transnational Age. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/germany-turkey-migration-corridor-refitting-policies-transnational-age.
  6. AYS—Are You Syrious? (2017). https://www.facebook.com/areyousyrious. Accessed 11 Dec 2017.
  7. Banich, S., Lukas G., & Adrienne H. (2016). Report on Systemic Police Violence and Push-Backs Against Non-SIA People Conducted by Croatian Authorities, Moving Europe Project 28, 2016. http://moving-europe.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/28.01.2016_Report-Police-Violence-and-Push-Backs.pdf.
  8. Barberić, J. (2015). Asylum in the Republic of Croatia One Year After Accession to the European Union. New Issues in Refugee Research (Research Paper No. 273). UNHCR, Policy Development and Evaluation Service. http://www.unhcr.org/research/working/54dca6ee9/asylum-republic-croatia-year-accession-european-union-jasna-barberi.html.
  9. Baričević, V. (2013). Europeanization of Asylum System and Refugee Protection: Croatian Asylum and Migration Policies. Ph.D. thesis, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana.Google Scholar
  10. Barnett, M., & Weiss, T. G. (2008). Humanitarianism. A Brief History of the Present. In M. Barnett & T. G. Weiss (Eds.), Humanitarianism in Question: Politics, Power, Ethics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bello, V. (2017). Europe and the Mediterranean Crises: Trapped Between Prejudice and Solidarity (Policy Report No. 04/01). Barcelona: United Nations University Institute on Globalization, Culture and Mobility.Google Scholar
  12. Belloni, R. (2007). The Trouble with Humanitarianism. Review of International Studies, 33, 451–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Beznec, B., Speer, M., & Stojić Mitrović, M. (2016). Governing the Balkan Route. Macedonia, Serbia and European Border Regime. Beograd: Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung Southeast Europe. http://bordermonitoring.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/5-Governing-the-Balkan-Route-web.pdf.
  14. Brekke, J.-P., & Brochmann, G. (2015). Stuck in Transit: Secondary Migration of Asylum Seekers in Europe, National Differences, and the Dublin Regulation. Journal of Refugee Studies, 28(2), 145–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.Google Scholar
  16. Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  17. Bužinkić, E. (2017). Dobrodošli vs. dobroprošli: krizna mobilizacija i solidarizacija s izbjeglicama u Hrvatskoj kao tranzitnoj zemlji. In E. Bužinkić & M. Hameršak (Eds.), Kamp, koridor, granica: studije izbjeglištva u suvremenom hrvatskom kontekstu. Zagreb: Institut za etnologiju i folkloristiku.Google Scholar
  18. Cantat, C. (2016). Rethinking Mobilities: Solidarity and Migrant Struggles Beyond Narratives of Crisis. Intersections: East European Journal of Society and Politics, 2(4), 11–32.Google Scholar
  19. Čapo, J. (2015). The Security-Scape and the (In)Visibility of Refugees: Managing Refugee Flow Through Croatia. Migracijske i etničke teme, 31(3), 387–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Coleridge, B. (2013). From Back Door to Front Door: Forced Migration Routes Through Macedonia to Croatia. Brussels: Jesuit Refugee Service Europe.Google Scholar
  21. Collyer, M. (2010). Stranded Migrants and the Fragmented Journey. Journal of Refugee Studies, 23(3), 273–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chimni, B. S. (2000). Globalization, Humanitarianism and the Erosion of Refugee Protection. Journal of Refugee Studies, 13(3), 243–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. De Genova, N. (2013). Spectacles of Migrant ‘Illegality’: The Scene of Exclusion, the Obscene of Inclusion. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36(7), 1180–1198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ECRE and AIDA—The European Council on Refugees and Exiles and the Asylum Information Database. (2016). Balkan Route Reversed: The Return of Asylum Seekers to Croatia Under the Dublin System. http://www.asylumineurope.org/sites/default/files/resources/balkan_route_reversed.pdf.
  25. Fassin, D. (2012). Humanitarian Reason. A Moral History of the Present. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  26. Funk, N. (2016). A Spectre in Germany: Refugees, a ‘Welcome Culture’ and an ‘Integration Politics’. Journal of Global Ethics, 12(3), 289–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Goldner Lang, I. (2013). Is There Solidarity on Asylum and Migration in the EU? Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy, 9(9), 1–14.Google Scholar
  28. Govt—Government of the Republic of Croatia. (2015a). Odluka o osnivanju stožera za koordinaciju aktivnosti povodom dolaska migranata u Republiku Hrvatsku. https://vlada.gov.hr/UserDocsImages/Sjednice/2015/253%20sjednica%20Vlade/253%20-%2013.pdf.
  29. Govt. (2015b, October 19). PM Milanovic Says Gov’t Has Refugee Crisis Under Control. https://vlada.gov.hr/news/pm-milanovic-says-gov-t-has-refugee-crisis-under-control/17952.
  30. Hameršak, M., & Pleše, I. (2017a). Winter Reception and Transit Center in the Republic of Croatia: An Ethnographic View of the Slavonski Brod Refugee Camp. Narodna umjetnost, 54(1), 101–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hameršak, M., & Pleše, I. (2017b) Zarobljeni u kretanju: o hrvatskoj dionici balkanskog koridora. In E. Bužinkić & M. Hameršak (Eds.), Kamp, koridor, granica: studije izbjeglištva u suvremenom hrvatskom kontekstu. Zagreb: Institut za etnologiju i folkloristiku.Google Scholar
  32. Harrell-Bond, B. (1999). The Experience of Refugees as Recipients of Aid. In A. Ager (Ed.), Refugees: Perspectives on the Experience of Forced Migration. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  33. Harrell-Bond, B. (2002). Can Humanitarian Work with Refugees Be Humane? Human Rights Quarterly, 24(1), 51–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. HRW—Human Rights Watch. (2015). Europe’s Refugee Crisis: An Agenda for Action. https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/11/16/europes-refugee-crisis/agenda-action.
  35. Huysmans, J. (2006). The Politics of Insecurity. Fear, Migration and Asylum in EU. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Kogovšek Šalamon, N. (2016). Asylum Systems in the Western Balkan Countries: Current Issues. International Migration, 54(6), 151–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Larsen, M., Demir, E., & Horvat, M. (2016). Humanitarian Responses by Local Actors: Lessons Learned from Managing the Transit of Migrants and Refugees Through Croatia (IIED Working Paper). London: International Institute for Environment and Development. http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/10795IIED.pdf.
  38. Lukić, V. (2016). Understanding Transit Asylum Migration: Evidence from Serbia. International Migration, 54(4), 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Malkki, L. (1995). Refugees and Exile. From ‘Refugee Studies’ to the National Order of Things. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 495–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Malkki, L. (1996). Speechless Emissaries: Refugees, Humanitarianism, and Dehistoricization. Cultural Anthropology, 11(3), 377–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. MoI—Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Croatia. (2015). Archive 2015: Reception and Accommodation of Migrants. http://stari.mup.hr/main.aspx?id=225851. Accessed 11 Dec 2017.
  42. MSF—Medecins Sans Frontieres. (2016). Obstacle Course to Europe: A Policy-Made Humanitarian Crisis at EU Borders, Brussels. http://www.Doctorswithoutborders.org/article/obstacle-course-europe-policy-made-humanitarian-crisis-eu-borders.
  43. Nyers, P. (2006). Rethinking Refugees: Beyond States of Emergency. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. OXFAM, BCHR and MYLA. (2017). A Dangerous ‘Game’: The Pushback of Migrants, Including Refugees, at Europe’s Borders. Oxfam, Belgrade Centre for Human Rights and Macedonian Young Lawyers Association. https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-dangerous-game-pushback-migrants-refugees-060417-en_0.pdf.
  45. Petrović, D. (2016). Izbjeglištvo u suvremenom svijetu. Od političkoteorijskih utemeljenja do biopolitičkih ishoda. Zagreb: Naklada Ljevak.Google Scholar
  46. Porobić, S., & Župarić-Iljić, D. (2017). Access to Asylum and Reception Conditions in Western Balkans: Focus on Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia. In M. O’Sullivan & D. Stevens (Eds.), States, the Law and Access to Refugee Protection: Fortresses and Fairness. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
  47. Rajaram, P. K. (2002). Humanitarianism and Representations of the Refugee. Journal of Refugee Studies, 15(3), 247–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. RWI—Refugees Welcome Initiative. (2017). http://welcome.cms.hr/index.php/en/about/. Accessed 11 Dec 2017.
  49. RWI and AYS? (2017, January 24). Report on Illegal and Forced Push Backs of Refugees from the Republic of Croatia, Zagreb. http://welcome.cms.hr/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/REPORT-ON-ILLEGAL-AND-FORCED-PUSH-BACKS-OF-REFUGEES-FROM-THE-REPUBLIC-OF-CROATIA.pdf.
  50. Šelo Šabić, S. (2017). Humanitarianism and Its Limits: The Refugee Crisis Response in Croatia. In M. Barlai, B. Fähnrich, C. Griessler, & M. Rhomberg (Eds.), The Migrant Crisis: European Perspectives and National Discourses. Münster: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
  51. Šelo Šabić, S., & Borić, S. (2016, April). At the Gate of Europe: A Report on Refugees on the Western Balkan Route. Zagreb: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. http://www.fes-croatia.org/fileadmin/user_upload/At_the_Gate_of_Europe_WEB.pdf.
  52. Škokić, T., & Jambrešić Kirin, R. (2017). The Shopping Center of Abnormal Normality: Ethnography of the Distribution Tent in the Refugee Camp in Slavonski Brod. Narodna umjetnost, 54(1), 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Squire, V. (2009). The Exclusionary Politics of Asylum. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Taste of Home. (2017). http://www.okus-doma.hr/en. Accessed 11 Dec 2017.
  55. The Guardian. (2015, September 18). Croatia ‘Will Not Become a Migrant Hotspot’ Says Prime Minister. Matthew Weaver. www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/18/croatia-refugees-zoran-milanovic-migrant-hotspot.
  56. Ticktin, M. (2014). Transnational Humanitarianism? Annual Review of Anthropology, 43, 273–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Triandafyllidou, A., & Dimitriadi, A. (2014). Deterrence and Protection in the EU’s Migration Policy. The International Spectator, 49(4), 146–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Valenta, M., Zuparic-Iljic, D., & Vidović, T. (2015). The Reluctant Asylum-Seekers: Migrants at the Southeastern Frontiers of the European Migration System. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 34(3), 95–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Watson, S. (2011). The ‘Human’ as Referent Object? Humanitarianism as Securitization. Security Dialogue, 42(1), 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Migration and Ethnic StudiesZagrebCroatia
  2. 2.Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)TrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations