Hospitality as a Horizon of Aspiration (or, What the International Refugee Regime Can Learn from Acehnese Fishermen)

McNevin, Anne; Missbach, Antje

doi:10.1093/jrs/fey014

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet, as compared to Malaysia, fewer Rohingya refugees have actually made it as far as Indonesia since the outbreak of the current crisis. Moreover, the fact that boat refugees repeatedly made it ashore alive owed less to the efforts of the Indonesian coastguard than the helping hands of Indonesian fishermen who have a long track record of rescuing refugee boats in distress (McNevin and Missbach 2018).…”

Section: Indonesia's Controversial Responsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Muslim Solidarity and the Lack of Effective Protection for Rohingya Refugees in Southeast Asia

Missbach

Stange

2021

Social Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Southeast Asia has the weakest normative frameworks for refugee protection of any region in the world apart from the Middle East. Only two out of ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have signed the 1951 International Refugee Convention. Nevertheless, the 2012 ASEAN Human Rights Declaration explicitly mentions the right to seek and receive asylum ‘in accordance with the laws of such State and applicable international agreements’ (ASEAN 2012). One of the litmus tests for this right has been the regional treatment of the Rohingya, a Muslim minority from Myanmar that faces forced displacement, discrimination, and large-scale state violence. Based on media content analysis and a scientific literature review, this paper sheds light on how ASEAN’s most prominent Muslim member countries, Indonesia and Malaysia, advocate on behalf of the forcibly displaced Rohingya. In particular, this paper focuses on competing forms of political interventions and shifting notions of Muslim solidarity. While Indonesia and Malaysia have been very vocal in bilateral, regional, and international forums to criticise the Myanmar government for their violation of basic human rights, both countries remain highly reluctant to offer sanctuary to Rohingya refugees, of which several thousand have attempted to reach Indonesia and Malaysia. This research finds that the notion of Muslim solidarity remains a symbolic rhetoric primarily directed at domestic audiences and the failure to render effective protection to refugees has rather increased over the last five years.

show abstract

Section: Indonesia's Controversial Responsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Muslim Solidarity and the Lack of Effective Protection for Rohingya Refugees in Southeast Asia

Missbach

Stange

2021

Social Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, scholars working within the law of nations tradition from Vitoria to Kant focus on the possibility of designing domestic and international laws of hospitality to regulate how states might welcome unplanned-for or uninvited foreigners who arrive at their borders (see Anderson-Gold 2001;Baker 2011aBaker , b, 2013Brown 2010;Cavallar 2002Cavallar , 2013Friese 2010;Onuf 2009Onuf 2013. Second, a critical vein of scholarship focuses on restrictive migration laws and border controls, and criticizes liberal democracies that adopt them for not going far enough to protect refugees and asylum seekers (see Allsopp 2012;Benhabib 2004;Benhabib et al 2006;Bessone 2015;Honig 2006;McNevin 2011;McNevin and Missbach 2018;Nyers 2006Nyers , 2018.…”

Section: Hospitalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As we will see, what vexes so many of the hosts we interviewed is the way in which the French state simultaneously evokes and yet denies hospitality to justify its position on refugees and undocumented migrants. As such, their civil disobedience adds a powerful voice to critical scholarship on hospitality by matching its rebuke of liberal democratic states for not honoring their own ideals (see Benhabib 2004;McNevin and Missbach 2018). Moreover, by providing concrete and quotidian assistance, our hosts enact and exemplify what support for a law of nations-a "minimal transcultural moral standard" for irregular migrants (Cavallar 2002, 75)-might look like on the ground amidst the deep pluralism of hosts and guests.…”

Section: Hospitalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Three Reasons for Hospitality: Care for Others, Care for the World, and Care of the Self

Taylor¹,

Lefebvre²

2020

Perspect. polit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We seek to answer a deceptively simple question: why do private citizens in liberal democracies offer hospitality to undocumented migrants? Through qualitative interviews with French citizens, we propose three reasons. The first is widely recognized in the scholarly literature: hospitality is offered out of a care and concern for vulnerable and precarious migrants. However, we uncover two additional reasons that are not acknowledged in studies on hospitality. One is the desire by citizens to uphold the basic principles and ideals of their own society (what we call “care for the world”). Another is the desire on the part of citizens themselves to become a different and better kind of person by practicing hospitality (what we call “care of the self”). We provide a multifaceted account of what motivates citizens to offer hospitality even in situations where it is outlawed by their own governments.

show abstract

“…Both the Indonesian and Malaysian governments were determined not to receive them and pushed them back to sea (Amnesty International, 2015). The Indonesian government relayed messages warning the Acehnese fishermen ‘not to engage in rescue operations, at risk of breaching state law, and to be wary of security risks that passengers on board the vessels might represent’ (McNevin and Missbach, 2018: 295). Despite this prohibition, the fishermen managed to bring the asylum seekers ashore.…”

Section: The Cases Of Indonesia and Malaysiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative paths to refugee and asylum seeker protection in Malaysia and Indonesia

Prabandari

Adiputera

2019

Asian and Pacific Migration Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores how refugees in non-signatory countries in Southeast Asia, particularly Indonesia and Malaysia, have some protection through alternative paths under international refugee law. These two countries provide forms of protection even if they are not States Parties to the Refugee Convention. These two case studies show that the governance of protection for refugee and asylum seekers is provided through alternative paths, even in the absence of international law and statist processes. These alternative paths offer a degree of meaningful protection, even if this is not tantamount to resettlement. Alternative paths of protection are initiated mainly by non-state actors. The states try to manage alternative protective governance to secure their interests by maintaining their sovereignty, on the one hand, and performing humanitarian duties on the other. In this regard, Indonesia and Malaysia have resorted to meta-governance to balance these two concerns.

show abstract

Hospitality as a Horizon of Aspiration (or, What the International Refugee Regime Can Learn from Acehnese Fishermen)

Cited by 18 publications

References 22 publications

Muslim Solidarity and the Lack of Effective Protection for Rohingya Refugees in Southeast Asia

Muslim Solidarity and the Lack of Effective Protection for Rohingya Refugees in Southeast Asia

Three Reasons for Hospitality: Care for Others, Care for the World, and Care of the Self

Alternative paths to refugee and asylum seeker protection in Malaysia and Indonesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About