Escape from Violence: Conflict and the Refugee Crisis in the Developing World

395 Pages·1989·30.89 MB·English

by  Aristide R. Zolberg

ESCAPE FROM VIOLENCE
This page intentionally left blank
ESCAPE FROM VIOLENCE
Conflict and the Refugee Crisis
in the Developing World
Aristide R. Zolberg
Astri Suhrke
Sergio Aguayo
New York Oxford
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
1989
Oxford University Press
Oxford New York Toronto
Delhi Bombay Calcutta Madras Karachi
Pctaling Jaya Singapore Hong Kong Tokyo
Nairobi Dar es Salaam Cape Town
Melbourne Auckland
and associated companies in
Berlin Ibadan
Copyright © 1989 by Oxford University Press, Inc.
Published by Oxford University Press, Inc.,
200 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016
Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without prior permission of Oxford University Press.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Zolberg, Aristide R.
Escape from violence: conflict and the refugee crisis in the
developing world / Aristide R. Zolberg, Astri Suhrke, Sergio Aguayo.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographies and index.
ISBN 0-19-505592-6
1. Refugees—Developing countries. 2. International relief—
Developing countries. I. Suhrke, Astri. II. Aguayo, Sergio.
III. Title.
HV640.4.D44Z65 1989
362.8'7'091724--dc19 88-25156
CIP
2468 10 9 7 5 3 1
Printed in the United States of America
on acid-free paper
PREFACE
Widely perceived as an unprecedented crisis, the number of refugees originating in the
developing world since the 1970s has generated urgent concern throughout the West. Such
concern is an ambiguous mixture of compassion for the plight of the unfortunates who have
been cast adrift and of fear that they will come pouring in. But not only does that fear
constantly threaten to undermine the exercise of compassion, it also shows that the affluent
countries of the West will neither admit all who seek entry nor give sufficient relief to those
who find havens in the developing world itself. This is equally true of neighboring countries
in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, which in fact bear the brunt of the crisis.
This book seeks to foster a more critical and realistic understanding of the refugee
phenomenon, so as to clarify the obligations of the more fortunate of the world toward
others in great need, and the ways in which these are best implemented. We shall attempt
to explain why the developing world today is producing so many refugees; why they
sometimes come in a flood and sometimes in a trickle; where they go; and why they
sometimes return and sometimes do not.
This is the first attempt to provide a comprehensive, theoretically grounded expla-
nation of refugee flows. Social scientists who analyze the causes and consequences of
international migrations generally exclude refugee movements, because they believe that
the two types of population movement are fundamentally different.
It has long been recognized that migration is governed by social and economic forces
that themselves are somewhat regular and thus are amenable to theoretical analysis. By
contrast, however, refugee flows are unruly in that they result from events such as civil
strife, abrupt changes of regime, arbitrary governmental decisions, or international war,
all of which are generally considered singular and unpredictable occurrences. This is
reflected, for example, in the differing articles, "Migrations" and "Refugees," in the
International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (1968). The first consists of sections by
a sociologist and an economist, who review theories seeking to explain population move-
ments generally; the second consists of two sections: one, on "World Problems," was
written by a political scientist specializing in international law and organization, and was
focused on the development of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees; another was on "Adjustment and Assimilation" of refugees.1
Vi PREFACE
When concern over refugees began to mount in the late 1970s, the only analytic
framework dealing with such movements was Egon F. Kunz's "Kinetic models," which
are, however, formalistic and very abstract.2 Several publications followed, but it is
noteworthy that in the two special issues of journals devoted to the subject, one ignores
the question of causation altogether, and the other devotes only one article to it—inci-
dentally, a preliminary formulation by A. R. Zolberg of the approach used in this book.3
Indeed, the assumption in this book is that refugee flows, like other international
population movements, are patterned by identifiable social forces and hence can be
viewed as structured events that result from broad historical processes. Although the
flows are irregular, the events that trigger them are themselves manifestations of persis-
tent trends in the developing world. A further step toward their analysis is to map both the
different situations that produce refugees and the characteristics of the flows and to
organize them into typologies. We have done this here by surveying the major refugee-
producing regions and discussing in more detail a variety of case studies. On the basis of
our findings, we demonstrate that different types of social conflict give rise to different
types of refugee flows and that the patterns of conflict are themselves intimately related
to more general economic and political conditions, not only in the countries from which
the refugees originate, but also in the world at large.
This emphasis on conflict patterns differs from that on typologies in political science,
which generally focus on types of political regime. Our approach is more suitable in this
case, however, because in the developing world, regimes come and go (e.g., civilian or
military, democratic or authoritarian), whereas the conflicts that produce this instability
are themselves enduring. The use of conflict patterns also makes it possible to analyze a
given country as a field of social activity within which a number of distinct conflicts are
taking place at the same time, possibly generating diverse types of refugee flows con-
currently.
We attribute considerable weight to factors external to the country in which the
refugees originate, thereby challenging the prevailing "internalist" view of the root
causes of such flows—that the crucial factors are internal to the state of origin. In contrast
with this, our regional studies indicate that usually the causes are more complex and
include numerous instances of egregious external intervention. Beyond this, the internal
factors themselves often are part of patterns of social change determined by a combination
of closely intertwined external and internal processes. In addition, as we shall show, the
refugee and immigration policies of outside countries and organizations play a poorly
understood but significant role in triggering the flows and shaping their course.
Why then has the internalist conceptualization dominated both scholarly and public
discourse about refugees? Because international law is founded on the notion that the
world is divided into a finite set of states with mutually exclusive jurisdiction over
segments of territory and clusters of population, there is a tendency to assume that social
causation can also be located precisely within or among particular states. For reasons that
will be elucidated in Chapter 1, this has generally suited the purposes of the receiving
countries of the West, which collectively also shaped the international institutions that
deal with refugees and that in turn operate under political constraints that foreclose
attribution of responsibility for causing the flows. The research literature also reflects
these conventional legal assumptions and diplomatic obfuscations, a neglect that has
contributed to the inadequacy of proposals to deal with the "refugee crisis."
We therefore hope that the reconceptualization proposed here, simultaneously struc-
tural and transnational, will not only stimulate further discussion among academic spe-
PREFACE Vii
cialists but will also spill over into the policy arena so as to broaden the terms of reference
of the current debates. To some extent, this began to happen even before the publication
of this book. Initial efforts were summarized by Charles B. Keely, who as far back as
1981 commented that "the structural analyses of Zolberg and Suhrke reduce the feeling
of helplessness and support an approach to refugee policy and programs that departs from
recent practices."4 We hope to have lived up to his generous characterization. Another
encouraging sign is Leon Gordenker's Refugees in International Politics (1987), which
is concerned primarily with the scope and limits of the international "refugee system"
but which devotes some attention to "the novel nature of recent refugee incidents" as well
as their "causal elements" and, in so doing, takes into account some of our earlier
formulations.5
The term refugee is ambiguous and has given rise to protracted controversies, and
thus, before analyzing refugee flows, we must identify as precisely as possible the
category of persons with whom we are concerned. Although few question that "ref-
ugees" deserve special care, even a perfunctory survey of the contemporary scene will
reveal widespread disagreement within and among countries on the criteria for determin-
ing refugee status. And even when the criteria are agreed on, the very nature of social
reality renders it difficult to objectify them so as to provide unambiguous guidance for
officials. Our first chapter is therefore entitled "Who Is a Refugee?" We answer the
question by retracing the European historical origins of contemporary legal definitions and
practices and then assessing them in the light of current realities. We then provide a
definition that is both realistic and theoretically valid, as well as firmly grounded in
humanitarian concern.
This is followed by a number of detailed regional studies, covering most of sub-
Saharan Africa, Asia, and Latin America, from approximately 1960 to the present (Part
Two, Chapters 2 to 8). The only major region not covered is the Middle East, which lies
outside our collective competence. We do, however, refer at various points to the Pa-
lestinians, because their case is historically important to the development of international
institutions and because, at a more analytic level, it is relevant as a distinctive pattern of
response by the refugees to their predicament. Each of the chapters is constructed around
case studies selected either because of their intrinsic importance to the region in question
or because they provide special insights into the relationships with which we are concerned.
From a social science perspective, these regional studies are designed to validate our
hypotheses, but they also are meant to serve a practical purpose. The public's fear of
refugees is closely related to the notion that flows have rapidly increased in recent years
and will probably continue to do so in the future. Although nobody can comfortably
predict future numbers, a more precise identification of those patterns of social conflict
that are characteristic of different regions of the developing world, together with an
assessment of their incidence and bearing on the generation of refugee flows, can yield
sober projections more useful for decision makers and the concerned public.
These studies provide the foundation for the more general analyses presented in Part
Three. Our examination of the relationships between social conflict and the formation of
refugee flows is elaborated in Chapter 9, in which we also assess the likely incidence of
various patterns. Finally, in Chapter 10, we discuss the policy implications of our findings
for individual states and international organizations.
Keely's comments, published in 1981, reveal the long period of gestation required to
complete this study. In fact, he identified theoretical affinities in the work of Suhrke and
Viii PREFACE
Zolberg even before they decided to collaborate. They became acquainted in 1981 while
preparing papers for a "state of the art" conference organized by Mary M. Kritz of the
Rockefeller Foundation.6
Suhrke came to the subject by way of research on ethnic conflict in Southeast Asia
and takes this opportunity to thank Charles Morrison, at the East-West Center in Hono-
lulu, who in 1979 as a staff member in the U.S. Senate, was instrumental in commis-
sioning research on the impact of the Indochinese refugees on the ASEAN countries. As
one of the few academic experts on Southeast Asia on the U.S. East Coast, Suhrke was
asked to conduct the study.
Zolberg, a former Africanist, came to refugees by way of research on the role of
states in determining and controlling international population movements and takes this
opportunity also to thank Gerhard Casper of the University of Chicago Law School, who
involved him in that subject (with the promised book still to be completed).
In 1982, Zolberg and Suhrke drew up a formal research proposal, focusing on Asia
and Africa, which obtained generous funding from the Ford and Rockefeller foundations.
Special thanks are due also to Paul Balaran (Ford) and again Mary M. Kritz, who not only
recommended approval of the project but also urged that it be broadened to cover Latin
America. On the advice of Patricia Weiss Fagen, the original duo enlisted Sergio Aguayo,
who was writing a book on Central American refugees.7 As is evident from any "before"
and "after" comparison, inclusion of the Latin American refugee experience led to a
revision of the theoretical arguments previously developed on the basis of Asia and Africa
alone. The resulting work is therefore genuinely the output of a trio.
Our research began in late 1983. Over the next two years, we proceeded along two
tracks, carrying on research on our respective case studies while simultaneously elabo-
rating the common framework, which at times took on the air of a flying circus (with a
bow to Monty Python). Although our grant did not allow us to do extensive field work,
Suhrke and Aguayo were able to take advantage of various opportunities to make firsthand
observations.
In March 1984, Suhrke and Zolberg presented a preliminary version of the frame-
work of this book, based on case studies of Ethiopia and Afghanistan, at the Center for
Migration and Population Studies, Harvard University (Oded Stark, director).8 Following
especially constructive comments from Myron Weiner, they prepared a revised version for
delivery at the American Political Science Association meetings the following fall, where
they benefited further from the insights of Crawford Young and Art Hansen. In the
summer of 1984 the trio embarked on a combined research and lecture tour in Western
Europe. Particularly stimulating were the seminar discussions organized by Barbara Har-
rell-Bond, director of the Refugee Research Center at Oxford University, and the late
Hedley Bull; Goran Melander at the University of Lund; and Catherine de Wenden at the
Centre d'Etude des Relations Internationales in Paris. Other helpful visits included the
British Refugee Group (London), the Refugee Documentation Center (Bonn), the Peace
Research Institute (Frankfurt), the Office of the UNHCR (Geneva), and the Independent
Commission on International Humanitarian Issues (Geneva), whose report parallels the
theme of this book.9
It was at this time that the transnational emphasis—stimulated by closer examination
of the Latin American experience—emerged as a major theme. This new orientation led
to a substantial recasting of the original framework and was formulated in a point paper
prepared for a special issue of the International Migration Review, edited by Dennis
Gallagher, director of the Refugee Policy Group in Washington, D.C.10
PREFACE ix
We further had occasion to discuss our approach in a seminar at the Colegio de
Mexico (Mexico City) and to observe refugee settlements in the state of Chiapas. We are
grateful to our hosts, who must remain anonymous. Further versions were presented at
various scholarly conferences, and a final, memorable week was spent in a mountain
retreat, hammering out the last version of the framework, and preparing a detailed outline
of this book.11
Its completion was delayed by the difficulties of long-distance coauthorship. The
regional chapters were written separately but subjected to mutual criticism; the analytical
chapters were outlined collectively but written by Zolberg (1 and 9) and Suhrke (10). With
additional assistance from the sponsoring foundations, we were able to meet for final
workshops in the spring and fall of 1987 and to present our draft manuscript to colleagues
at an invitational conference convened at the New School for Social Research in New
York City.
All three authors acknowledge their special gratitude to forbearing spouses who put
up not only with repeated absences but also, even more patiently, with recurrent visits
from one or the other coauthor dropping by for yet another protracted round-the-clock
working session. Vera Zolberg bore the brunt of this with unswerving kindness and good
humor, often at the expense of her own work. A few good friends also provided moral
support at critical junctures, as well as hospitality; among them Christine Birnbaum,
University of Paris XIII—Villetanneuse, deserves special mention. Finally, we also thank
our respective institutions, the Graduate Faculty of the New School for Social Research,
which managed the grants and provided additional research assistance; the School of
International Service, American University; and the Colegio de Mexico.
Throughout, our project also benefited from the suggestions of an advisory group
whose participants included at various times Senator Dick Clark (former U.S. coordinator
for refugees); Richard Day (Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugees, U.S. Senate);
Arthur Dewey, deputy assistant secretary, Bureau for Refugee Programs, U.S. Depart-
ment of State; Patricia Fagen (then Refugee Policy Group); Dennis Gallagher (Refugee
Policy Group); Albert Hirschman (Institute for Advanced Study); Philip Johnston
(CARE); Charles Keely; David Martin (University of Virginia Law School); Doris
Meissner (then executive associate commissioner, U.S. Immigration and Naturalization
Service); Michael Posner (Lawyers' Committee for International Rights); Zia Rizvi (then
regional representative, UNHCR Regional Office); Saskia Sassen-Koob (City University
of New York); Ambassador Walter Stoessel; Dale Swartz (National Immigration Refugee
and Citizenship Forum); Julia Taft (consultant); Jerry Tinker (Subcommittee on Immi-
gration and Refugees, U.S. Senate); and Jennifer Whitaker (Council on Foreign Rela-
tions). Aguayo and Zolberg also profited from contact with the project on Latin American
and Caribbean Immigration and U.S. Foreign Policy conducted by Christopher Mitchell
at New York University.
Beyond these collective acknowledgments, Sergio Aguayo wishes to thank Laura
O'Dogherty, Mexican Academy of Human Rights; Rodolfo Stavenhagen; Maria Moore;
Alfredo Witsschi (UNHCR); Gordon Hutchison, Belela Herrera, Felipe Tomic, and Eli-
zabeth Odio of Project Counseling Service for Latin American Refugees; colleagues at La
Jornada, especially Carlos Payan and Carmen Lira; Dr. Roberto Gomez Alfara and Rene
Morin of SEDEPAC; Juan Juarez, refugee from Guatemala; and colleagues at El Colegio
de Mexico.
Astri Suhrke expresses her gratitude for the patient assistance of the refugees and
those aiding them during her fieldwork in South and Southeast Asia since 1979, partic-