英语论文网

ime has recently marked its fiftieth anniversary; Oskar Schindler was in effect a smuggler of Jewish refugees, and Eritreans in the diaspora have been working towards their homeland since the beginning of the struggle for independence from Ethiopia in 1961. While some critics appear to have dismissed transnationalism almost out of hand on the basis of this argument alone (Vertovec 2003), the above findings instead support those who suggest that at least there is a new intensity about transnational processes (Al-Ali and Koser 2002). The international refugee regime is certainly under greater threat today than at any time in its history (Loescher 2001); human smuggling has evolved into enormously profitable transnational businesses (Salt and Stein 1997); and advances in technology and travel have shrunk distances between migrants overseas and their home countries. Similarly, these empirical case studies have largely reinforced warnings against generalisations about the scale, reach and impact of transnational processes (Faist 2000; Guarnizo and Smith 1998; Portes et al. 1999). The extent to which states in Europe have abrogated their responsibilities towards refugees varies greatly*some Bosnians eventually were granted refugee status, others were summarily deported. Clearly not all asylum-seekers and refugees are smuggled. And on the whole far more evidence of transnational activities was found among Eritreans than Bosnians. It is also worth reiterating that across all three ‘scales’ of transnationalism, significant differences have been found not just between different ethnic groups, but also between individuals on the basis of gender, age, class, status and legality. The State ‘Under Assault’? One critical question that arises from calls to incorporate forced migrants more centrally in the study of transnationalism is what (if anything) is special or different about forced migrants as compared with voluntary migrants in this context? Variations are, after all, found amongst both on the basis of economic, political, social and cultural characteristics. Both are also embedded in economic ties, kinship
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 249 and a multitude of other social fields. The answer may lie in the role of the state. While many of the interactions between refugees and transnationalism may be more widely applicable to other migrants (as discussed in the preceding section), arguably they have a unique relationship with the state (Hein 1993). The preceding analysis makes it clear that, in the asylum context, there is little sign of states being ‘threatened’ or ‘undermined’ by transnationalism. Many states in the industrialised world now fairly regularly renege on obligations to the international refugee regime. While human smuggling may breach national borders, it exposes asylum-seekers to significant vulnerability and evidence of association is increasingly used as a reason for deporting them. And conditions in host states can significantly affect the extent to which asylum-seekers and refugees can maintain contacts with friends and family in their home countries. Far from being ‘under threat’ from transnationalism, states are creating, shaping, hindering and transforming transnational practices. Two more conceptual reflections on the relationship between transnationalism and the state arise from these observations. One concerns the extent to which it really is necessary to distinguish different state contexts. In ot