A threat to cosmopolitan duties? How COVID-19 has been used as a tool to undermine refugee rights

Abstract

The outbreak of COVID-19 in early 2020 provided cover for some states to take strict and hostile measures against refugees and asylum seekers, thereby privileging self-regarding over other-regarding or cosmopolitan-oriented policies. The hostile measures, which have included detentions, pushbacks and other refugee deterrence actions not only appeared to shake the refugee system, but they increased the vulnerability of asylum seekers and refugees who continued to be exposed to torture, drownings at sea, trafficking and sexual violence. This development, which included a fine-tuning of some measures that had been hatched before the emergence of COVID-19, appeared to set back efforts to nurture the bonds of global human solidarity and expand moral and ethical boundaries beyond state borders. However, the international refugee regime continues and is supported by many states and other international actors that seek to emphasise cosmopolitan and other-regarding policies. The resilience of the refugee system underlines the fact that international society has a practical and moral basis to challenge exclusionist policies towards asylum seekers and refugees, prevent future harm that might result from asylum deterrence policies and develop more humane forms of international refugee governance.

Refugee Policy Amidst Global Shocks: Encampment, Resettlement Barriers and the Search for ‘Durable Solutions’

“…Yet, although consensus‐building thereafter resulted in the promulgation of the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) in 2018 to take these commitments forward, critical concerns have arisen regarding its implementation (Aleinikoff, 2018; Betts, 2018) including the obfuscation of structural imperialism through the depoliticization of refugee discourse (Abuya et al, 2021; Achiume, 2022; Chimni, 2018). It has become evident that over the years, governments in many countries have been gravitating towards xenophobic policies (Coen, 2021; Crawley, 2021), hardening borders and constraining – sometimes severely – both local integration and resettlement possibilities for refugees and conspicuously evading responsibilities to asylum seekers (Barnes & Makinda, 2021), in stark contrast with the inclusionary ideals espoused in the GCR.…”

Política exterior colombiana y performatividad: ¿Un 'buen miembro' del Orden Internacional Liberal?

“…Este impulso servía al proyecto colombiano de consolidarse como "buen miembro" del oil, al afirmarse como protector de aquellos que habían abandonado Venezuela, perseguidos por las injusticias de un régimen iliberal. Para acnur, socio primario en este proyecto, el caso colombiano era una rara oportunidad para presentar un avance en materia de protección internacional ante sus socios globales, ante un sinfín de críticas sobre su incapacidad para apoyar a miles de personas en necesidad -ya acentuadas durante la Covid-19(Barnes & Makinda, 2021). Para Colombia, ser presentada como un ejemplo de éxito marcaba una diferencia en términos de estatus en relación con su historia reciente.…”