University Of AALBORG
FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Department Of Political Sciences
The Global Refugee Studies (GRS)Programme
Apparent Involuntary Repatriation
An analytical study of the reasons given by the assisted Iraqi returnees, who regretted their decision
to repatriate and came back to Denmark.
By
Kojo Yeboah Francis
Supervisor:
Anja Kublitz
Date:
28th June 2013
Voluntary repatriation, among the UNHCR’s “durable solution”, is seen as the most preferred one, for solving problems with
refugees in exile. However, experiences encountered by the refugees while in exile, among others, may be credible obstacles to
achieving successful voluntary repatriation. This study analyzes the reasons why the Iraqi refugees unwillingly repatriated to Iraq,
despite their legal status as refugees in Denmark, as told by them, in interviews conducted by 2 master students from the Roskilde
University of Denmark in 2006.
Preface
This thesis is in partial fulfillment of the award of a master’s degree in Global Refugee Studies at the faculty of Social Science,
Department of political sciences, at the Aalborg University, in Denmark in June 2013. I would like to thank all those who assisted
me to be able to write. Even when my sincere gratitude, naturally goes to my supervisor, Assistant-professor Anja Kublizt, it should
equally be shared with Vagn Klim Larsen from DRC (Dansk Flygtningehjælp), for making it possible to access the main data used in
this paper.
Abstract
In the contemporary European migration context, the alienation of minorities, due to geo-identity creation and
enhancement, especially by the ‘new right’ Gingrich (2006), is achieved through the construction of ‘ethnic identity’
and ‘cultural differences’ that creates the “we” and “them” divide, and has had tremendous, sometimes adverse
effect on immigrants and refugees.
In this thesis, I argue that the politics by the V-K government and the support from the far right-wing, the Danish
Peoples’ Party, which drew soaring criticisms, was driven by the notion of “Otherness”. I therefore use the concept
of “otherness” to underpin the analysis of the reasons given by the Iraqi refugees on why they repatriated. The
thesis is based on some of the answers given by the Iraqi refugees who gave up on their repatriation and came back
to Denmark, in interviews conducted in 2006 by two students from the Roskilde University in Denmark. The objective
is to analyze the reasons why the refugees did choose to repatriate in the first place, even when, according to them,
they didn’t willfully want to.
The thesis uses database articles and books, expert’s views, political discourses and rhetoric as well as newspaper
articles in the analysis of the answers given in the interviews.
The paper concludes that restrictive policies, or ill-treatments that make refugees feel uncertain about their future in
exile as well as having the feel of being different, or belonging elsewhere than the host country as a result of, for
instance, isolating them from the local populace, placing them under economic hardship, depriving them from
reuniting with their spouses, and exempting them from the local workforce, may not be favorable for easy and right
decision-making on voluntary assisted repatriation.
Key words: otherness, political discourse, geo-identity, voluntary assisted repatriation, unwillingly, voluntarily,
uncertainty, restrictive policies, rational decision-making, restrictive policies, economic hardship, local workforce,
isolating and spouses.
Acronyms and abbreviations
AVRR
Assisted Voluntary return & Reintegration
B
The Radikale venstre
DRC
Danish Refugee Council
EU
The European Union
GRS
Global Refugee Studies
IOM
International Organization for Migration
JP
Jyland Posten
K
The conservative party
NGO
Non-Governmental Organization (s)
O
The far right-wing populist Danish Peoples’ party
S
The Social Demokrats
SF
The Socialistiske Folkeparti
UNHCR
United Nations High Commissioner for refugees
UK
The United Kingdom
V-K-O
The coalition government: Venstre, Konservativ
V
The Liberal Party, ‘venstre’
& Danske Folkeparti
Table of Contents
Preface……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….2
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..2
Acronyms & Abbreviations…………………………………………………………………………………………………3
Chapter 1:
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………….6
Thesis outline………………………………………………………………………………………………..9
Purpose of Study & Formulation…………………………………………………………….……...9
Research Question………………………………………………………………………………….………9
Chapter 2: Background of Study
2.1. Why the study………………………………………………………………………………….….……….10
2.2 Repatriation in Denmark: Administration & Practice…………………………..……..…10
2.3 The Repatriation of the Iraqi refugees………………………………………………………..…11
2.4 Fortrydelsesretten…………………………………………………………………………………………14
Chapter 3: Methodology & Limitation
3.1 Case Selection……………………………………………………………………………………….……...15
3.2 Source of Data……………………………………………………………………………………………….15
3.4 The Method Used………………………………………………………………………………………….16
3.5 Analysis strategy……………………………………………………………………………………………17
3.5 Situating the use of narratives, Discourses & Storytelling………………………………18
Chapter 4: Theoretical framework
4.1: Theories build-up………………………………………………………………………………………..19
4.2: The concept of “Othering” or “Otherness”………………………………………………….20
4.3: Definition & Application of Otherness
4,4 Theorists of Othering…………………………………………………………………………………….20
4.5 Application of theory to the Danish political Debate……………………………………..21
Chapter 5: The Analysis
5.1: The Danish State and refugees and immigrants….…………………………………………23
5.2:
Political Discourses & ‘Othering’………………………………………………………………….30
5.2.2: Social ‘Othering’………………………………………………………………………………………….38
5.2.2a: “The family reunification law”……………………………………………………………………40
5.2.2b: “The 24 year old law”………………………………………………………………………………..43
5.2.2c: “Isolation from the local population”…………………………………………………………45
5.2.2d: “Exclusion from the work force”………………………………………………………………..47
5.2.3: Cultural ‘Othering’………………………………………………………………………………………49
5.2.4: Religious ‘Othering’…………………………………………………………………………………….55
5.2.5: Media ‘Othering’…………………………………………………………………………………………58
Chapter 6: Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………..62
Recommendation………………………………………………………………………………………………………………63
Perspectives………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………63
References…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………65
Appendices:
Appendix 1: The 12 reasons given by the Iraqis on why they return to Denmark……………….80
Appendix 2: The number of repatriated refugees from Denmark 2000-2006………………………80
Appendix 3: The number of people repatriated from Denmark 2006-2011…………………………80
Appendix 4: The number of refugees who have used the return right since 2008……………….80
Appendix 5: The interviews………………………………………………………………………………………………..80
Tables & Figures
Table 1…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….13
Figure 1…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………......12
Chapter 1
Introduction
In Denmark, between the years 2001 and 2010, the V-K government, made up of the Liberals (Liberal
party-venstre) and the conservatives (Det Konservative Folke parti) took over power and had migration
as one of the main political agendas. As an election promise; migration, immigrants and refugees became
not only the cornerstone of the politics at the time, but also objects of political grandstanding and fiery
debates. Most of it all was the fact that, in order to again majority in parliament, the V-K government
had to lean on the far right-hand Populist Party, the Danish peoples’ party, whose vote, almost always for
the ten years reigning period, was needed by the V-K government to surpass the threshold to passing the
annual fiscal budget. And as a strategy to gain policy influence, the Danish people’s party continually
used the needed support, to lure the government into enacting the party’s harsh aliens acts, the type of
politics, they had labeled as “a war to protect ‘our’ Danish values from ‘theirs’”.
”Dansk Folkeparti bestemmer tempoet og krydrer finansloven med en håndfuld udvalgte værdipolitiske markeringer. De har næsten
altid islam, udlændinge og danske værdier som fællesnævner” (Ritzaus Bureau; 04/03-2008).
”Dansk Folkeparti har, siden V-K-regeringen kom til verden, gang på gang brugt finansloven til at føre værdikamp og komme med
krav, som strengt taget ikke har meget med finansloven at gøre”. (Ritzaus Bureau: 23/09-2009).
Put differently, the Danish Peoples’ party found the then existing migration legislations too lenient and
punitive and therefore aimed their politics at ‘revamping’ the immigration system with harsher and
tougher laws, and even made an attempt to rid people from non-western countries of coming to
Denmark. For example, the party saw the immigration of non-westerners as costly for Denmark as they
also blamed them for being responsible for the economic problems or meltdown in 2008 and hence made
attempts to either reduce or stop non-westerners, particularly Muslims, from accessing Denmark 1. The
intention behind the politics was explicitly spelt out by the current leader of the party in 2009:
Ikke flere muslimer til Danmark: ”Det handler om assimilation, hvis samfundet skal fungere. Om at folk med anden etnisk
baggrund entydigt skal tilpasse sig danske traditioner. tørklæder være forbudt i offentligheden, 24-års-reglen var afløst af en 28års-regel, og Danmark ville primært modtage flygtninge fra den vestlige kulturkreds, mange indvandrere ville blive tvangsflyttet
væk fra ghettoer, og muslimer stillede helst ikke spørgsmål til indholdet af pølsehornene ved den lokale byfest”.
“Det, der sker lige nu, er, at mange af de danskere, som betaler en høj skat for at finansiere gildet, har fornemmelsen af, at
pengene mere eller mindre bliver spildt på nogle folk, der er kommet hertil, og som ikke ønsker at blive en del af det danske
samfund”, (DF's magtfulde gruppeformand Kristian Thulesen Dahl, 21/07-2009).
All in all, by always having immigrants and Muslims as their political targets, the Danish People’s party,
insisting geo-identity and claiming that Denmark is for ethnic Danes, the indigenous people of the land
11
Ritzau bureau 05/08-2010
(Kvaale, 2011), constantly saw immigrants and refugees in the country as intruders, invaders and
parasites on the Danish welfare state (Olwig et al., 2011).
I owe to mention that, there was a consistent expression of intolerance for immigrants and Muslims,
Hervik, (2012), has asserted “the impasse between the newcomers in Denmark and the native Danes regarding
multiculturalism, has been plagued by unwarranted combination of neo-racism, neo-nationalism and political populism” Hervik,
(2012; 224).
The writer was referring to the intolerance to ‘external cultures’ and the deliberate
“essentialization” of the minority cultures by both the Danish media and the right-wing politicians.
Collectively, these political maneuvers seem to point to the fact that, the Danish politicians aided by the
media (ibid; 224), didn’t want certain kinds of people in their country. The politics was preformed and
involved with all aspects of migration in Denmark, refugee issues, asylum evaluations, family
reunifications, and many others, as one of the main politicians in the V-K government reveals:
”Under valgkampen i Danmark luftede Venstres retspolitiske ordfører, Birte Rønn Hornbech, en idé om at gøre det sværere for
udvalgte grupper, eksempelvis somaliere, at få familiesammenføring” (Information, 28/11-2001).
I argue in this paper with lucid examples such as the laying down of strict criteria for obtaining residency
and many others, that refugees, like regular immigrants largely felt uncertain and unwelcome in Denmark
in these periods.
In sense, if refugees in exile do not experience that they are welcome by the host country which has
given them protection, this troubled and discomfort feeling of dejection in their ‘new’ home, cannot be
seen as being different from the circumstances in their own country, which might have caused their fleet.
More saliently, this, unfortunately can lead them to making wrong decisions on repatriation, in much the
same way as it is also significantly troubling, when refugees are compelled to return to countries they
once had ‘ran’ away from, simply because their repatriation had not be voluntary but “induced”.
‘Dansk Folkeparti har sat sig nye mål for stramninger i udlændingepolitikken i forbindelse med dette efterårs finanslovforhandlinger.
Der skal gang i hjemsendelserne af afviste asylansøgere, ulandsbistanden skal tages fra lande, der ikke vil tage imod deres egne
borgere, og der skal oprettes asylansøgningscentre så tæt som muligt på de lande, asylansøgerne kommer fra” (Ritzaus Bureau;
18/09-2004).
It is common knowledge that the convention, of the essence, the ‘refugee’ plight, rests completely on the
politics of the receiving country, it’s therefore unequivocally political. In other words, if the politics of the
host country seem to disfavor the presence and the welcoming of the refugees, asylum to refugees
becomes worthless.
The opposite is proven true. Humane treatment of refugees based on humanitarian grounds, may help
decisions on willful repatriation, as Said (1984; 159, cf Malkki, 1995) frames it; ’exile’ connotes “a readily
aestheticizable realm”, whereas ‘refugees’ connotes “a bureaucratic and international humanitarian
realm”. Therefore, the situation of refugees in exile, however political, is also deeply humanitarian.
This understanding seems to sit well with the far right parties, the so-called the ‘new right’ parties’
entrance and influence in the contemporary Europe, perhaps due to security reasons. And as Ferris
(1992), had observed, the previous perception of immigration as a humanitarian issue is being eroded by
notions of security threats. Not surprisingly, refugees connote a security threat, refugees, like other
immigrants collectively, are seen as a burden on states’ economy, in the case of Denmark, as a threat to
the existence of the social welfare and national homogeneity (Olwig et al., 2011: 3-4). This assumed
threat, I think, partly explains why we see countries derogating from the obligations in the convention.
As Black, et al., (1999) have noted, the increase in political interest in repatriation runs parallel to the
increment in the restrictions on the granting of refugee status. And all the while, when it comes to talking
about a good future solution for refugees, most governments, if not all in the stable, worthy democracies,
tacitly or otherwise, share the same ‘denominator’—namely repatriation.
These forms of planned repatriation defer, as it sometimes, is purely involuntarily or through a “push” on
the refugees to ‘go home’, a tendency Stepputat (2004; 5), sees as highly detrimental to successful
repatriation. Ghosh (2000; 1-4) illustrates the push-pull2 factors and explains the causes of involuntary
repatriation explicitly in both social and economic contexts. As reported by the Amnesty International
(2004), the outcome of such ‘pushes’ include, for instance, fleeing due to the violation of their human
rights and fundamental freedoms, such as economic, civic, social, cultural rights, as well as ethnic
intolerance, in both home country and in exile; (Amnesty International, 2004; 5).
Contrary to forced or coercive deportation, assisted voluntary return and reintegration ought to be
dignified and of integrity, as it must also depend on self-identification, self-determination and selfwillingness among the refugees. The opposite is believed to yield unintended outcomes, because even
when certain refugees persuasively would nod yes to repatriation, there are some who will never
repatriate regardless of the substantive support offered them, Roger, (1994; 31) observed that even
when all the relevant conditions for repatriation was in place, there were still some refugees who declined
it.
The 73 Iraqi refugees who were interviewed by students from the Roskilde University cited reasons why
they gave up on the repatriation and why the repatriation failed and mentioned also their reluctance to
the process. It is arguable that the refugees might have had other intentions than what they have
expressed in the interview; I owe, therefore, the authenticity and credibility of this data to the University
of Roskilde. My intent, then, with this writing, goes with what seems to have been implied by the Iraqi
refugees, that, they, the refugees, said yes to repatriation, during their stay in Denmark, was better than
any other alternatives the Danish authorities ( sagsbehandler—Danish), would have wished or expected.
I will specifically use what the refugees said they have encountered with the Danish asylum-social
authorities in the Municipalities, trace some of political discourses of the time through the media archives
(informedia webpage), as well as use literature on what some writers in anthropology and social sciences
in Denmark had written on the refugee politics at the time, to examine the claim made by the refugees.
2
See how Ghosh (2004; 1-4) has extensively grouped these factors of migration into causes & effects.
Thesis outline
The thesis starts by introducing how voluntary repatriation can be affected by the way refugees are
treated in exile, the political significances for refugees and asylum, the intent of the author and the
material to be used. Chapter 2 concerns the background of the study, namely repatriation in Denmark,
why I personally got interested in such a topic, the repatriation of the Iraqis including, a graph and
statistical figures showing both the number of Iraqis, the numbers repatriated, especially in 2006 when
the interviews were conducted and how the process had been used by both refugees and other
immigrants. Chapter 3 shows the methodology and why or how they are applied in this study whereas
chapter 4 deals with the theory used to underpin the study, namely, “Otherness”. Chapter 5 deals with
the theory application to the practices and discourses by the politicians and media, experts on refugee
issues, as well as some literature on the topic. The sixth chapter concludes with reasons why, according
to my estimation, the Iraqis unwillingly left Denmark, the reason that also explains the failure of the
repatriation.
The Purpose of the thesis:
The purpose of the thesis is to draw attention to some of the treatments meted out to refugees that may
cause them to wrongly decide on assisted voluntary repatriation and reintegration.
Formulation:

Did the Iraqi refugees feel welcome in Denmark?

And were they pleased at the services rendered them by the Danish authorities?

Were the Iraqi refugees willfully inclined on leaving exile? That is, how voluntary was their
voluntary repatriation?
 Were the Iraqi refugees fully prepared to use the assisted repatriation program?
The Research Question:
Despite the decisive efforts made by the Danish government through organizations such as Danish
Refugee Council, to help on return and resettlement decisions, there has always been some, after
receiving counseling and advices and being afterthoughts, who, wouldn’t wish to repatriate, but will
remain in exile. As there are also always some refugees who would feel that they were “pushed” out of
exile by the host authorities, and thus, involuntarily repatriating. My question is what, according to the
Iraqis actually prompted them to go back to their troubled home country, Iraq, only to return afterwards
to Denmark, knowing full well that the situation in Iraq wasn’t favorable for repatriation.
Specific Objective:
The objective is to find out about which circumstances might have led the Iraqi refugees, to unwillingly
repatriate to Iraq, a decision, they later regretted.
Research Question:
Why did the Iraqi refugees repatriate to Iraq when they actually didn’t want to, as they
indicated in the interviews?
Chapter 2
Background of the Study
2.0 Why this Study?
As a migrant in Denmark, I had almost always overheard colleagues and friends discuss about their living conditions.
These discussions often are endless and lead to fundamental confusions about whether to not these people should
consider leaving or staying here in Denmark. I have also witness people just take their luggage and leave either to
other European countries, England, for example, or to their home country---a sort of “self-deportation”.
It is not uncommon to see or hear immigrants, who regardless of the number of years they been in Denmark, still
have not fully integrated nor felt at home, here in the country. In my own view, these discussions were not helped
by the change of government in 2001 where these talks reached their climax. That’s when the liberal V-K
government resumed power and had to lean on the Danish peoples’ party in order to gain the needed majority in
parliament.
Further, I draw that this situation is not dissimilar to what Iraqi refugees had experienced and had also expressed in
the interviews. These are legal refugees who first decided to get help from the government of Denmark to go back to
Iraq, but then decided again to come back to Denmark.
I intend therefore to use some of the data from the interviews, which was originally used for analyzing how the
repatriation of the Iraqi refugee was neither successful nor durable.
2.1 Repatriation in Denmark: administration and practices
According to the refugee convention, refugees are to be given absolute protection; or as the UNHCR,
(1980; 1) recommends in the ‘Durable solutions’, they can either be voluntarily repatriated, or resettled
elsewhere or can also be integrated into the existing society.
Indeed, as the UNHCR had observed, the voluntary repatriation seems to be the ideal, the best, the
preferred and most desirable to host countries (cf: Warner, 1994; UNHCR, 1986; 269). But, in order to
give any repatriation process a voluntary perspective, it must conform, among other recommendations,
to what Harrell-Bond and Voutira have called ‘voluntary repatriation’ that is to say, it must have a
humanitarian corridor. According to her without a safe zone that would enable the returnees to think
twice about the repatriation, there is no ‘voluntary repatriation’, at least, not of dignity, (cf; Pottier, 1999,
Harrell-Bond & Voutira, 1992).
In his article, Johan Pottier3 (1996) notes that, refugees have rights to protection and humanitarian aid as
they do have the principle of freedom regarding repatriation.
2.2 The repatriation of the Iraqis
The repatriation of the Iraqis as well as the granting of asylum to them during the V-K government was
not as smooth as the UNHCR otherwise, would have wished.
“Irakere presses til at rejse hjem: Afviste irakiske asylansøgere sættes på madkasseordning, selv om det er umuligt at
sende dem hjem, og FN på det skarpeste advarer mod hjemsendelse. Amnesty mener, de bør have midlertidig opholdstilladelse
Regeringen forsøger at presse irakiske asylansøgere til at forlade landet ved at sætte dem på den såkaldte madkasseordning,
selvom det i praksis er umuligt at sende dem hjem. FN's Flygtningehøjkommissariat UNHCR advarer på det skarpeste mod at
tvangshjemsende irakere på grund af den »ekstreme vold,« der hærger Irak, hvilket bla. har fået Storbritannien til at opgive al
hjemsendelse”. (Ritzaus Bureau 03/05-2004).
In Denmark, besides the DRC, the Municipalities, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other organization
such as the Red Cross are players involved in the administration and practices of enhancing dignified
repatriation and reintegration of both refugees and immigrants who choose the repatriation program.
The Danish Refugee Council (DRC) or as they are referred to in Danish, Danskflygtningehælp, though do
not have the right to decide, who gets asylum or not, was one of the main actors responsible for the
voluntary repatriation of the Iraqis in direct consultation with the Municipalities and the government. The
DRC is a non-governmental, humanitarian, non-profit organization. Founded in 1956 in Denmark, the
organization seeks to provide assistances, such as humanitarian aid, rehabilitation, relief efforts and
renders support to refugee and/or immigrants who quite willingly decide to return to their home country.
Recommendations by the DRC on the repatriation of the Iraqis become therefore paramount. However
the DRC reports on the rejection of some of its advices on the repatriation of the Iraqis by the V-K
government, whilst it also expresses its worry about the refusal to give asylum to certain Iraqis, (DRC,
2009; 12. http://www.danskflytningehjælp.dk). I reserve to say, that the paper will not deal with Iraqis, who
committed crimes and were refused asylum, for instance, the sending home of the 19 year old Iraqi for
3
Johan Pottier is a senior lecturer in Anthropology at the school of Oriental and African studies (SOAS) University of London. His
article entitled “The ‘self’ in self repatriation: Closing down Mugunga camp, eastern Zaire. In; The end of the refugee cycle? Edited by
Richard Black and Khalid Koser
brutal criminal offence4, however troubling due to his tender age.
The figure below shows a graph of the total number of asylum-seekers from selected countries, who
were rejected from 2006 to 2011, as it also shows that Iraqis were the most rejected asylum-seekers in
2006, precisely the same year the interview was conducted.
Figure 1.
Source: www.newtoDenmark.dk
According to the Danish media, the questionable refusal of asylum to these groups of people, especially
those with Islamic background, was primarily due to the request from the far right-wing Danish Peoples’
party, during the reign of the V-K government:
“Dansk Folkeparti har sat sig nye mål for stramninger i udlændingepolitikken i forbindelse med dette efterårs finanslovforhandlinger.
Der skal gang i hjemsendelserne af afviste asylansøgere, ulandsbistanden skal tages fra lande, der ikke vil tage imod deres egne
borgere, og der skal oprettes asylansøgningscentre så tæt som muligt på de lande, asylansøgerne kommer fra” (Ritzaus Bureau;
18/09-2004).
Unfortunately, there were also some doubtful repatriation, some of the refugees were, reportedly, forced
home5 even including non-criminals6, for instance, there were others that had to be taken from a church7
4
Ritzaus 11/10-2012
5
Trods advarsler fra bl.a. UNHCR sendes endnu en iraker tilbage til det uroplagede Bagdad. Otte blev sendt tilbage i maj og juni og
flere fængslet ved ankomsten.
6
ikke-kriminel iraker tvunget hjem (Ritzaus Bureau 05/08-2008)
in Copenhagen before being sent home. The table below shows the numbers of Iraqis, who, for reasons
beyond the purpose of this writing, have been sent home from Denmark since the start of the war in
Iraq.
Table 1
Statistics over number of Iraqi repatriated from Denmark (2003-2012)
Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Overall
From
total
01/Jan
to 30/
June
Number
71
141
85
(3)
28
20
(7)
133
66
(1)
85
87
7
(3)
(11)
(1)
723 (26)
Source: www. Danskflytninghælpe.dk
Note: The numbers in brackets designate the self-repatriation of Iraqi immigrants.
In June 2002, the Danish government embarked on a plan to limit the number of ‘in-flow’ of refugees
into the country, and consequently, the application numbers in 2002, for example, dropped from 12,512
in 2001 to about 6,068, a fall of about 51.5% (IOM, 2004).
In recent times, the number of people, both refugees and immigrants, who repatriate from Denmark,
seem to be on the rise. In their yearly report in 2011, the Danish Refugee Council 8, writes that 613 of
immigrants in Denmark have been helped through the repatriation law, to voluntarily return to their
home country, whereas the number in the previous year (2010) was only 370 immigrants.
The council writes that the reason for the success with repatriation was due the economic security
rendered to the participants. For instance, people who voluntarily repatriate are able to carry their
pension sums and health insurance with them.
It is worth stating that, the DRC does not decide which refugee should be given the right to asylum or
not. The V-K government had a committee to evaluate the asylum cases, and for certain reasons, some
of the non-criminal Iraqis, despite the security situation in Iraq, failed to qualify for asylum and had to be
sent home. These groups of Iraqis, according to one news media in Denmark, were constantly being
‘hunted’ away from Denmark by the Danish police as most of them also went ‘underground’.
7
8
Politiet tømte kirken for irakere (Ritzau, 13/08-2009)
see http://www.danskflytningehælpe.dk
With a headline that reads; “Afviste irakere forlader Danmark”9----(”Iraqis who are refused asylum escape
from Denmark”),
a newspaper on the 21st of July 2009 reported that 46 of the refugees had escaped (46
afviste irakere forsvundet” ).
The forced repatriation continued and by the middle of 2010, about a year after, the same paper again
reports that, the majority of the Iraqis had been sent home, as the paper writes: “Det tynder ud i de afviste
irakere”10, referring to the reduction in numbers of the Iraqi refugees in Denmark, due to either escape
and or by other means than being forcibly repatriated by the police. Refugees who do have the legal right
to stay in Denmark but choose to repatriate have also the right to regret their decision after repatriation.
2.3 Regret of the Decision to repatriate (“fortrydelsesret loven”)
”Fortrydelsesretten” refers to the right to regret the decision to repatriate to ones’ own home country and
gives the chance for coming back again to Denmark, if the decision is made within a year of return. The
right is reserved for refugees, who have received economic help to return to their original country or any
other country of the person’s choice. The right, however, is only reserved to refugees and not regular
migrants, because according to the foreigners’ law11, the rule is that, any foreigner who gives up his or her
residence in Denmark and who decides to leave Denmark has also his or her residence permit forfeited and
invalidated.
The provisions in these laws are made clear to those who choose the program before they make their final
decisions, because, as mentioned earlier on, the DRC helps prospective repatriates with all the guidelines
on repatriation.
The assumption, in this paper is that, the Iraqi refugees were fully acquainted with all of the repatriation
requirements and regulations as, they, I presume, were fully advised on how to say “yes” to a proposed
repatriation.
9
Ritzau Bureau 28/07-2009
10
Ritzau Bureau 12/05-2010
Chapter 3
Methodology and Limitation
3.1 Case selection
As discussed in the previous chapter the right to abandon repatriation is restricted to refugees and not
regular immigrants or any other groups of aliens in Denmark. The study, done in 2006 by two students
from the Roskilde University in Denmark, had only those Iraqis who were or who have been refugees in
Denmark and have chosen to voluntarily repatriate as they also have had the right to abandon their
repatriation.
The choice of the case was therefore based on two things, the first is the ease and availability of the
data, through the Danish Refugee council (DRC), and the second is, it meets the above mentioned
requirements on ‘regret right’.
The answers given by the refugees, who participated in the interviews lead me to the choice of my
theory and conforms to what Strauss and Corbin, (1990) had referred to as ‘theoretical sampling’. In
other words, the theory, I espouse to use already is embedded in the data.
Finally, the choice of this case is due to my attempt to understand what the refugees actually said in the
interviews. And by using their responses on one side, and collectively, the repatriation processes and
practices, the Danish asylum policies, some political rhetoric and bureaucracy (Hill, 1993) of the V-K
government and its support party, the Danish Peoples’ party, on the other side, I expect to be able
examine the claims made by the Iraqis.
Further, and relating to the limitation of my study, I have not only relied on the data from two students
from the University of Roskilde in Denmark, whom I have not been in contact with, but also the Iraqi
refugees. I have also not been able to access salient documentations on the repatriation process, and
that totally limits my ability to make generalizations, even when I hardly doubt the credibility and the
authenticity of the thesis work.
I had wished however, to be able to pore over much more
documentations on the repatriation, unclassified though, at the DRC, the municipalities or other
authorities in Denmark, in order to ascertain my thoughts and suspicion of what I had repeatedly referred
to as a “push” on the refugees in this writing. Besides I have only chosen some of the answers and not
all of them to make the analysis and this may have an effect on my conclusion.
3.2 Source of Data
The main empirical data in this study is secondary data and comes, as said earlier, from interviews
conducted by 2 students, Nielson and Riiskær (2006) from the Roskilde University in Denmark.
The students did the interview to assess the efficiency, success and the durability of voluntary
repatriation. I had used some of the interview responses to look at the repatriation of Iraqis from a
totally different point of view, thus, what might have contributed or caused the Iraqi refugees to
repatriate in the first place, instead of why the repatriation was failed. I believe that the post-repatriation
factors might have also affected the repatriation.
I used information from contextual data, for example, from the DRC, from brochures, and webpages12 as
well as from books and articles. As well as answers to questions I posed to reliable officials from DRC,
which gave a lot of nuances on the repatriation process, as they also became my guide.
In short, my corpus includes:
a) answers or narratives from the refugees (--- from the problem centered-interviews).
b) Newspaper articles relating to the Iraqis, especially from and around 2006—‘infomedia’
c) Information from the internet
d) Books, brochures & articles by diverse authors
I did not personally get the chance, the finance or time to conduct interviews among the refugees.
However, I am confident that, the data, due its source and being of such relevance to the repatriation of
the Iraqis, is credible and have the advantage of allowing me save time and cost.
Furthermore, the information, the political discourses, from the website (for example, ‘infomedia’) and
other brochures relating to the topic, gave me the opportunity to compare, interpret, (Smith, 2008) and
made easy the analysis of the reasons given by why the Iraqis, as they also helped me get answers to
my research question.
One precaution I took was not to consciously make alterations on the original statements. I maintain
that, the original interpretations of the discourses and the subject’s objectivity (Cooper, 1998), had been
respected throughout this writing, I admit though that, the mere choice of using some of the interview
answers and not all leaves room for selection biases, that said I suppose, other forms of biases are
consciously avoided.
3.3 The Method
The method used in the study is discourse analysis. It is a discourse analysis of one of the reasons given
by the Iraqi refugees by using both political discourses, rhetoric, the Danish migration policy and
legislation as well as experts’ views to understanding why the Iraqis said they wanted to abandon exile—
Denmark.
The analysis is based on the four themes in the answers to would want to leave or abandon 13 Denmark,
out of the twelve reasons (see appendix 1) given by the Iraqi refugees, namely: employment, the
chances of getting family reunification, economic hardship and social isolation. These themes are also
12
http://www.danskflytningehjælp.dk and http://www.nyidenmark.dk/
13
Reason number 5.
what the V-K government‘s politics were mainly centered. I have therefore used selected political
discourses and rhetoric as well as experts’ view in analyzing these themes.
For example, I used political presupposition, implications, metaphors, comparisons and polarization used
by the Danish politicians in attempting to classify immigrants and refugees in order to make them look
different from the ethnic Danes. Thus, analysis of rhetoric used in the V-K-O’s politics of the ethnocultural emotionalism (Kvaale, 2011; 226) as expressed in language,---be it spoken or textual.
I have chosen to use some of the political verbal language used by the V-K government and its support
party, the Danish peoples’ party, which I see to fall under the category of the act of ‘Otherness’,
especially if they seem to add to the divide ---the ‘we’ and ‘them’. According to Volmert, (1989),
politicians, who are interested in formulating or constructing the ‘we’-versus-‘them’ group, always have
something they use to construct these differences:
“A speaker has at his disposal a whole range of clever options with which to present the interests and affairs of ‘we-groups’. With
the context of election campaigns, for example, a speaker can unite his audience into a single interest group by replacing
differences in origin, confession, class and life-style with a simple ‘we’. This interest group may be bound by different degrees of
intimacy and familiarity: from the common economic interests of society a s a whole to the emotional needs of a family-type
community”. (Volmert, 1989; 123: cf; Wodak, et al., 1999).
Again, the method chosen in the study was directed by the kind of data and the objective (Bryman,
2008), of this paper. I used also prominent writings by respected anthropologists in Denmark in analyzing
the discourses and the practices, as I also used some internationally laid down principles and regulations
in the refugee field.
I had relied on quotations from various Danish newspapers, for example, those from the “infomedia” and
other forms of literature on the repatriation of the Iraqis in particular, and the situation of refugees and
immigrants in Denmark during the ten year governance of the V-K government from year 2001 to 2011,
in general. Because, I think that, the contingent factors such as ‘cultural background’, the untenable
forms of stereotyping and marginalization of refugees and immigrants in Denmark, in that period, form
the basis of most of the arguments in the paper.
3.4 Analysis strategy
Based on the concept of ‘Otherness’, and by using what the Iraqis said, what some politicians have said
and what academic experts have said and written, I hope to be able to make analytic generalizations
(Curtis, 2000; 1002), and come up with conclusions on why I think the Iraqis opted to leave Denmark.
A potential limitation to this strategy is the fact that I did not take all the reasons given by the refugees
because, I felt that they do not directly pertain to my chosen themes, I have though, linked the
individuals directly with what they said in the interviews, what the politicians, according to the media
have said and what the experts have written on the issues all in the analysis. For example, who said
what on residence and family reunification or on which treatments by social workers and so on, and so
forth, can be discerned in the analysis. In short, I have chosen to “let the Iraqis, the politicians, the
experts speak” in the analysis and made sure that, their formulations are kept intact, be it a critique or a
praise, peaceful or perilous.
I use the infomedia, as a sort of an archive, for all sorts of information that relates to the Iraqi
repatriation issue in Denmark, by searching with keywords such as (Iraqis, Denmark, DF,
Arbejdsmarkedet, integration voluntary repatriation, security in Iraq etc etc).
The analysis, therefore, is centered on the following themes:
a.
That they were offered insufficient money (economic hardships).
b.
That they were unable to reunify with their spouses (family reunification).
c.
That they were housed in isolation from the entire population and therefore felt lonely, due, perhaps to the
so-called “bopælspligten” in the Danish asylum law (social isolation).
d. That they felt a sense of sabotage, or pressure from their contact persons in the municipality (forced
repatriation).
3.5 Situating the use of narratives, Discourses and storytelling.
I have chosen to use narratives and storytelling, from both the Iraqi returnees and the Danish politicians
in the paper, and thereby making narratives as a form of an anthropological research tool, in order that I
can elucidate the personal experience (Tony Fielding, 1992; 201, see also Ginsburg, 1987 and Herzfeld,
1985), expressed by the people involved. This view is supported by many anthropologists, for example, in
her book on the interplay between lives and words, anthropologist Sara Lamb, sees storytelling as “a
practice by which people reflect, exercise agency, contest interpretation of things, make meanings, feel sorrow and
hope, and live their lives, a narrative presentation of self and culture” (Sara Lamb, 2001, 28).
The French philosopher, historian and sociologist Michel Foucault, sees discourse use as being about the
use of languages and practices in diverse forms. According to Foucault (1972) discourses could be
“practices that systematically form the objects of which they speak”, (Foucault, 1972, 49),
thus, discourses constitute
individuality, subjectivity and power relations in societies. He believes that power is established or
consolidated through the production, circulation and the construction of discourses, not only in political
context, but also in the social one.
I intend to be inspired by these observations made by Foucault in my deconstruction of the political
discourses that might have resonated well with the 13% DF members in the Danish population, the V-K
government politicians and the refugee social workers in the municipalities.
The use of certain forms of languages and discourses by the Danish politicians and the media, I argue,
might have directly or indirectly impacted the way the municipal asylum workers handled the refugees
and hence their decisions on the repatriation.
Chapter 4
Theoretical Framework
4.1 The build-up of ‘Otherness’ theory
According to the researchers, the 30 Iraqi refugees who participated in the interviews mentioned that
they did not feel welcome in Denmark, (Reason #5, appendix 1). In other words, the treatments given
them by the Danish asylum social workers in the municipalities made them feel that, they did not ‘belong’
here in Denmark but elsewhere (Hervik, 2004; 258), a situation that fits well into the perceived notion of
‘we’ and ‘them’. This form of notion among certain Danes, and how it has been used politically, was
made explicit in an extensive study conducted by Peter Hervik in 2004 on different kinds of Danes, with
different kinds of profession, class and interest. The author observed the tendency of ‘we’ and ‘them’ as
the ‘them’ are also perceived as only strangers and not naturally belonging to Denmark.
As Herviks writes: Residents are ‘we’, the Danes, the indigenous Danes’, those who were here to begin with, or those who
belong ‘naturally’ to the territory and imagine themselves as a homogenous cultural community. Danes are at home in this cultural
sameness. Newcomers are those who arrived for various reasons, as refugees or guests and have settled to become the target of
official programs of integration” (Hervik, 2004; 258).
On the basis of this explicit ‘we-them’ tendency in the society, I considered using the concept of
‘otherness’ to illustrate the theoretical framework of this study. Here is one of the many facts, which
support my choice. The following is what 12 prominent authors and academicians, who were invited into
a committee to enact the Danish Cultural Canon, and who were alarmed by the intentions, because,
according to them, the move was unprecedented, if not “ undanish” and in their view, that was not the
Denmark, they had known or could identify with:
Når Dansk Folkeparti med regeringspartierne som garanter og ikke mindst som aktivt lovgivende medspillere udpeger en
befolkningsgruppe med en anderledes fremtoning, dvs. indvandrere og flygtninge, som syndebukke, krænkes medmennesket i os
alle. Vi glemmer, hvem vi er, og den rolle, vi som danskere tidligere i historien har spillet, som hjælpere og beskyttere af de svage
og forfulgte. Vi tvinges til at se et etnisk mindretal udelukkende som en anonym, ansigtsløs gruppe og ikke som mennesker, dvs.
som vidt forskellige individer med vidt forskellig oprindelse og personlighed, med hver sin særlige livshistorie og tolkning af
tilværelsen. Individet viskes ud, tilbage står den fordomsfulde kliché.
Vi er i risiko for ikke længere at betragte vores muslimske medborgere som mennesker på godt og ondt som os selv. I stedet er der
i det politiske liv og i medierne en tendens til udelukkende at se på dem som kriminelle, samfundsskadelige elementer og som
potentielle voldtægtsforbrydere eller sociale klienter. Fremtrædende højrefløjspolitikere hæfter uvilkårligt i offentligheden mærkater
på vores muslimske medborgere som 'pest', 'baciller', 'kræftknuder', 'der venter på at blive mange nok til at slå os ihjel'. Vi kender
denne retorik fra historien, senest fra Balkan, hvor den var en bebuder af de kun alt for velkendte etniske udrensninger. Der er tale
om en glidebane af moderat racisme, der allerede i flere henseender er slået over i diskrimination og dobbeltlovgivning baseret på
et: 'dem' og 'os'. En regel for 'os', en anden for 'dem'. (14/12-2005).
That is to say, the choice of ‘othering’ or ‘selfing’, had been based on the explanation and the
descriptions of the experiences the Iraqi refugees claim, they had with those Danish authorities,
(sagabehandler) in the municipalities. For example, one of them said he was even ‘bribed’ with material
goods (a refrigerator and electronic equipment) to admit to repatriate. Some others said, they were
isolated from everyone in the community, a demarcation, while some complained about the inability to
get to reunite with their spouses in Denmark, these, in my estimation were attempts to prevent them
from having a ‘home’ here in Denmark.
4.2 The Concept of “Othering” or “Otherness”: Definition and application
4.2.1 Definition of ‘Othering’:
In order to discuss the issues pertaining to the repatriation of the Iraqi refugees, it is essential to
understand the “notion of Otherness”, which I intend to use to illustrate to the situation the Iraqis said
they experienced in Denmark, before they hastily chose to go back to Iraq.
This concept refers to a process where people are identified as being different from ‘oneself’ or from the
mainstream as it also do refer to situations where according Weis (1995, 17), people are able to
construct their own identities in reference to the people, they are ‘Othering’. ‘Otherness’ was first used in
the relationship between the former ‘slaves’ and their ‘masters’, as it is still constructed to divide people
into where “we” (those who are “Othering”) assume, “they” (those who are being “Othered”) belong, and
as Andre Gingrich phrases, ‘Othering’ is an act of “introducing ‘differences’ as the fundamental dividing line
among humans” Gingrich (2004; 12).
‘Othering’ could also be used to reaffirm ones identity (Lister, 2004), as it could also accordingly, be used
by some to distinguish between ‘gender’, human skin coloration and even to designate ‘hierarchical order’
in a family (cf: Jensen 2009; Simone de Beauvoir’s, 2004; 15-16). ‘Otherness’ is also applied in many
instances, including the existence of ethnic identity and diversity, between diverse cultures and numerous
religious disciplines practiced by humans.
4.2.2 Theorists behind Othering
The term had since been used by Hegel to explain dialectic master-slave relation. In the post-colonial era
by Edward Said coined the term Orientalism in 1978 to elaborate the term. Edward Said is an exiled
Palestinian-American intellectual of double identity, well respected but also criticized by other scholars.
After his work on Orientalism, Said had released many works including ‘the question of Palestine (1979)’
and ‘covering Islam (1981)’. For the purpose of this study, I intent to describe in brief how said have
referred to the ‘Orient-Occident’ dichotomy form the ‘Orientalism’ (1978; 52-72). In Said’s Orientalism
which is also of interest to this writing, Said introduces the dichotomy of ‘the Orient’ and ‘the occidental’
to initially represent the ‘east’ and the ‘west----‘the us’ and the ‘them’ respectively. Said had used these
terms to refer to these to the western colonialism, imperialism, and according to him ‘Orientalism’ is a
style of thought based upon the ontological and epistemological distinction made between the ‘Orient’
and the ‘Occident’, which Said had used these two terms to refer to the interaction between the ‘Orient’
as the antithesis of the colonized culture and not a subject that involves the freedom of thought whereas
the ‘Occident’ as of the west, the strange, civilized, writers, novelists, philosophers, political theorists,
economists and the imperial administrator. In other words, according to Said, ‘Orientalism’ is all about
discourse, such as making statements about, teaching the ‘orient’, ruling over it, a discourse of
dominating, restructuring and having authority over the ‘orient’. Said introduces the so-called “imagined
geography”, which denotes the ‘orient as the ‘Other’ which dramatizes the distance and the difference
between what is close and what is far away—‘out there towards the east’ (Said, 1978, 52-72). The term
‘Othering’ was first coined by G.C. Spivak, was used it philosophically in her article entitled the “ Rani of
Sirmur” in 1985, and applied it to the master- slave relationships between the British and the Indians in
the so-called ‘manipulative pedagogy’ (Spivak, 1985). Current developer of the concept include Andre
Gingrich of the Institute of Social Anthropology, the Austrian Academy of Sciences, who with
Gerd
Baumann, who have worked extensively on conceptualizing identities from an essentialized use of
‘Othering’ to differentiation of Grammars, from anthological viewpoint. In their book “Grammars of
Identity/ Alterity, a structural approach”, which I have quoted from and referred to many times in this
paper, these two authors reviewed several major trans-disciplinary aspects of identities and alterity---say, extended clarifications on ‘Otherness’.
4.2.3 Application of Otherness in the Danish Political Debates
Evidently, ‘Othering’ has also been observed by writers such as Hervik, (1999), Diken, (1998) and
Schierup, (1993), in the Danish public debates, which according to them, are dominated by ‘Othering’
discourses on the ethnic minorities.
In fact, the unwarranted struggle for self-identity, may see the construction and application of
‘otherness’ as there is the likelihood that people, especially politicians, would play the “we” and “them”
card to win elections, if not that of the “superiority” and “inferiority” one. Take for example, the creation
of the westerners, ‘we’ and the non-westerners ‘others’ on the international scene. Many of us see the
world, in the words of Lisa Malkki, ‘as spatially segregated, cultural gardens separated by boundary- maintaining
values’ (Malkki 1997; 58), and tend to see certain territories as belonging to certain type of people, (‘the
family of nations’—Malkki, 1994) with a certain specified type of culture----‘cultural sameness’. According to
Malkki, this claim or notion is a long tradition among people because, we belief that our way of life and
the understanding of it, seem to be linked with where we dwell or originate. I argue that, this kind of
notion is not different from that of some of the politicians in Denmark, especially those on the right-wing
of the aisle, not to totally exclude those leaning left. The attitudes of these politicians towards the
unprivileged minorities in Denmark could best be described as being based on the fact that these
politicians and their backers, in the words of Kvaale, (2011):
‘seemingly conceive of themselves as an
indigenous people whose unique and territorialized natural culture is threatened from the outside by a foreign,
aggressive culture’. According to Malkki, people think that culture emanates from soils: “It has to do with the
fact that, like the nation, culture has for long been conceived as something existing in “soil”. Terms like ‘native’
‘indigenous’ and ‘autochthonous’ have all served to root cultures in soils: and it is, of course, a well-worn observation
that the concept of ‘culture’ derives from the latin word for ‘cultivation’.” (Malkki, 1997; 58).
The V-K government had earmarked non-westerners, in general, and people from specific countries in
particular, who they do not want to come to Denmark either due to their religion or their background. As
a newspaper in Denmark reveals:
Stopklods: Barsk kur skal bremse indvandringen: Venstre vil slå massivt ned på familiesammenføringer til herboende tyrkere,
pakistanere og somaliere. I princippet gælder udspillet alle danske statsborgere. Men Venstres sagde det selv helt åbent, da
partiet på et pressemøde i går fremlagde sit forslag til voldsomme stramninger af reglerne for familiesammenføring: Målet er ikke
at få færre amerikanere eller italienere til Danmark. Målet er at sætte en stopper for, at personer med tyrkisk,
pakistansk eller somalisk baggrund bliver ved med at hente deres ægtefæller i det land, de stammer fra. »Det er barske
regler,« erkendte Venstres udlændingeordfører, Birthe Rønn Hornbech (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001).
Observe the aim of the main party in the V-K government coalition. The goal of the political coalition is to
forbid the Turks, the Somalis and the Pakistanis from getting family unification in Denmark, and observe
what all these countries have in common----Islam, which also does not, in my view exclude the Iraqis.
As noted by the Danish writer, Marrianne Gullestad (1997), refugees as well as immigrants are likely to
form the subset of the “they” (the “Orients”) and become a problem as long as they leave their country
of origin and reside elsewhere (cf. Hervik, 2004; 255). I argue that this statement does not apply to all
immigrants, but only do apply to immigrants from the unprivileged worlds and perhaps all refugees,
because refugees, undoubtedly, most commonly also stem from such worlds—the inferior worlds. The
aim of V-K government is not to discourage the entry of Italians nor Americans in Denmark; the aim is
rather to prevent the Turks, the Pakistanis and Somalis, from bringing their spouses from these countries.
In Denmark, as Andersen (2005) has noted, the discourses in both the public and the political spheres
“draw on colonial tropes and cultural racism” (cf: Jensen, 2009; 14).
First recognized by Said in 1978 (cf: Baumann, 2004; 19-20), this form of ‘Othering’ is not only restricted
to the equation; ‘us=good’ and ‘them= bad’ but also depicts seeing the negatives and the backwardness
that was once in the ‘self’ to be still existing in the ‘other’, something Said vividly referred to as
“orientalist discourses”. Said (1979), saw ‘orientalism,’ another term for “Otherness” as having an
ideological link in the cultivation of western superiority over ‘others’, the so-called non-westerners.
According to Baumann (2004), ‘Othering’, could be recognized in the realms of politics, religion and
aesthetics, it also attempts to emphasize ‘superiority’ of ‘self’ to the ‘other’---as Baumann puts, “dialectical
way of ‘selfing’ one’s own and ‘Othering’ the alien” (ibid; 21).
Furthermore, according Baumann, ‘otherness’ also does have consequences, ranging from milder ones
like social, political and racial exclusion or annihilation to the dreadful, fatal and deadly consequences,
such as genocide and ethnocide, (ibid; 42).
Again, there had been examples of ‘Otherness’ in many instances in Denmark, and among certain Danes,
especially with regards to the foreigners in the country as Hervik (2004) illustrates, there is the ‘we’ the
host and ‘they’, the guest, who has to conform to our norms and live their lives accordingly by them.
Another example of “Othering” among Danes, is what two Danish scholars observed with the so-called
‘Expo 2010’, where there were exhibition of cultures and artifacts from many countries, organized in
China. By using the term ‘orientalism’, Carina Ren and co-worker Ooi, examining how Denmark was
represented at the program, observed that, the Danes felt they were superior and perceived the ‘others’
in the audience (the Chinese audience) as “inferior” and “uncivilized” (Ren, at al., 2012; 8).
As indicated previously, in order to fully understand this practice of ‘we’ belong here, and ‘they’ belong
elsewhere, I will draw again on Gerd Baumann (2004) and his work on the concept of ‘selfing-andothering’ to explain why the Iraqis chose to get out of exile---Denmark. My take on this, is that, the
Danish peoples’ party and the V-K government see non-westerners as inferior, incompetent and as being
something else, other than what the Danes are.
“ DF: Et stop for indvandring fra ikke-vestlige lande”. (Ritzau Bureau 04/08-2010).
In the analysis I use the ‘orientalist’ (“Otherness”) to argue that, the immigration policies and the politics
at the time and how these policies and practices had resonated among the population in Denmark,
contributed to the plight the Iraqis refugees as it also did influence what caused them to make those
decisions on the failed repatriation.
Chapter 5
Analysis
5.1 The Danish state and refugees
The plight of refugees in any nation is depended on the government because ‘refugees’ connote a
political realm (Hein, 1993, 43-44). I start the analysis by highlighting some of the political issues that
surrounded the plight of asylum-seekers, refugees and to a larger extend all other immigrants during the
reign of the V-K government between the years 2001 and 2011. And more importantly, try to explain the
reason why I have chosen the concept of ‘Othering’, to underpin the analysis in this study.
The fact is, as mentioned earlier on, the V-K government became dependent on the populist Danish
Peoples’ party, which repeatedly had a new range of political demands on the table before rendering the
needed parliamentary support, after succeeding with enacting the “the Aliens Consolidation Act” in 2002.
”Regeringens støtteparti har fundet et columbusæg som kan løse de økonomiske problemer: Et stop for indvandring fra ikkevestlige lande.
Dansk Folkeparti forsøger nu at skabe sig sin egen tredje vej i dansk økonomisk politik. Indvandringen fra lande som Tyrkiet,
Pakistan og Irak udgør nemlig en "møllesten" om halsen på den danske økonomi, som det udtrykkes”. (Ritzau Bureau 04/08-2010)
This time, we do not need to assume that the Iraqis due to Islam, were a subset of those demarcated
family reunification, here, they aren’t to be given the chance to come to Denmark. As I mentioned in the
introduction, the Danish Peoples party see immigrants and refugees from non-western countries as a
burden on the Danish economy. I have to say two things here, this perception of immigrants and
refugees did not start with the Danish Peoples Party but also with those on the left too, the next thing is
not all in the V-K-O coalition supported the views of the Danish Peoples Party. The Social Democratic
government under Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, also drew the attention of the UNHCR, before the V-K
government came to power.
“Flygtningehøjkommissær fastholder kritik af dansk debat: - Hvorfor skulle jeg det? Jeg hævder, at der er en tendens til at tale
negativt om udlændinge. Det er den tese, jeg forsvarer her, sagde Lubbers efter sine møder med statsminister Poul Nyrup
Rasmussen (S), udenrigsminister Mogens Lykketoft (S), udviklingsminister Anita Bay Bundegaard (R) og indenrigsminister Karen
Jespersen (S) Sidstnævntes ide om at isolere kriminelle asylansøgere på øde øer kom således ikke op på pressemødet.
Hovedbudskabet var derimod en appel om at undgå, at "rigtige flygtninge konfronteres med et klima, hvor de ses som en slags
kriminelle". - Jeg vil på ingen måde komme med beskyldninger mod enkeltpersoner, for jeg ved, at mange gange bliver der sagt
ting i en særlig sammenhæng. Når folk gør den slags ting, så glemmer man at se hele sammenhængen. Det, jeg siger, er: Vær
forsigtig, sagde UNHCR-chefen, Ruud Lubbers, (Ritzaus Bureau, 22/06-2001).
The reason for saying that is, some of the main politicians in the V-K government, repeatedly and openly
criticized the Danish Peoples’ party, for inhumanity and discrimination. According to Danish newspaperss
there was a standoff between a leading member of the Danish Peoples’ party and the integration minister
who was responsible for the administration of matters concerning immigrants and refugees, the paper
write:
1.
”Samtidig er det også en kendt sag, at Birthe Rønn Hornbech tidligere har været på kant med V-K-regeringens støtteparti.
I sin bog "Tale er guld" fra 2006 kritiserede hun Dansk Folkeparti for at være med til at dæmonisere muslimerne i
Danmark. I bogen citerede hun netop Jesper Langballe for at sige, at "islam er en pest over Europa". Det fik Jesper
Langballe til at trække hende i Københavns Byret for citatfusk, men i september blev hun frikendt (Ritzaus Bureau;
27/11-2007).
2. Rønn angriber DF's forslag om 28-års-regel: Integrationsminister Birthe Rønn Hornbech (V) retter nu en sønderlemmende
kritik af Dansk Folkepartis krav om at stramme 24-års-reglen til 28 år. Det vil være direkte skadeligt for både
integrationen og den økonomiske vækst i Danmark, hvis DF får sit krav igennem, skriver hun i en mail til Berlingske
Tidende.(Ritzaus Bureau 29/07-2010).
To understand how all these might have affected the ordinary immigrant and in particular, the refugees, I
will especially touch on the issues relating to, the legal and structural admittance of refugees, as I intent
to refer to the political discourses and processes initiated by the V-K government and its support party,
which I argue might have caused the ‘Othering’, an example of such fiery political rhetoric, that also
caught sharp criticisms is:
Halsløs gerning: ”Dansk Folkeparti forsøger at presse regeringen til for irakiske flytninger at formulere et egentligt
hjemsendelsesprogram med en tidsplan. Men det er halsløs gerning at binde sig til en tidsplan på et tidspunkt, hvor man endnu ikke
har fået den irakiske overgangsadministration på plads”. (Leder i Berlingske Tidende, 24/04-2003).
I will also examine, among others, whether or not the refugees were given unrestrictive access to
education, to the labor market, to housing and to fundamental social life, such as marriage and family
reunification, as I, in the same vein, will try to analyze how these private relations among the refugees
and immigrants in Denmark, demonstrate the degree to which they are included or excluded from the
existing dominant Danish society.
According to Baumann (2004), ‘Othering’ can be used politically to create differences among people
based on what the ‘self’ means is different from the ‘other’. In his writings, Foucault (2000), explicitly
states how discourses could be constructed, based on ones’ self-knowledge and self-determination in
relation to identity, especially in contrast to how other identities are perceived. The language use by
certain politicians in the far right-wing in Denmark leaves no doubt about how these politicians see
themselves in relation how they perceive their objects---(see Jacques Lacon, identity’s inter-subjectivity
through language use14). I have chosen to give examples of some of the utterances by those politicians
depicting the ‘Others’ as something else than themselves.
Below are few examples of the harsh pronouncements, in the swirling debates on immigrants and
refugees:
a. ----from an MP and party spokesperson;
“Dansk Folkepartis Martin Henriksen mister ikke sin ordførerpost i Folketingets Uddannelsesudvalg trods udtalelser om at
’frydes over tortur’ ” (Ritzau Bureau, 23/05-2006).
b. --------from a parliamentarian:
”Louise Freverts (DF) udfald mod muslimer prægede fra start Folketingets åbningsdebat”. ”Regeringen og Dansk
Folkeparti kæmper for de rige mod de fattige og for danskere mod nydanskere, lød oppositionens hovedanklage under
folketingets åbningsdebat torsdag” (Ritzau Bureau, 06/10-2005).
c.
-------from a municipality politician:
"Jeg skal stærkt beklage, at jeg med mine bemærkninger vedr. socialt bedrageri og sort arbejde blandt flygtninge og
indvandrere på en uhensigtsmæssig og ikke korrekt måde blandt andet har inddraget Odense Erhvervsråd og andre
samarbejdspartnere i en sag, som ligger mig meget på sinde", skriver Erik Simonsen i sit brev, som er offentliggjort af
Fyens Stiftstidende (Ritzau Bureau; 11/04-2006).
d. -----from a party member:
Muslimer er noget snavs (af Information, Ritzaus Bureau 16/09-2007)
Men du lægger ikke skjul på, at du ikke er
begejstret for muslimer?"Nej, jeg bryder mig ikke om muslimer. Det er ikke, fordi de er muslimer, men det er måden, de
opfører sig på, og måden, de udtaler sig om os, der betaler gildet," siger Merethe Egeberg Holm,
e. ------from a Municipal politician DF-byrådsmedlem:
“Men at åbne kassen til alle der kommer, så føler vi det som at de stjæler fra vore lommer«. De mødedeltagere,
JydskeVestkysten har talt med, er ikke i tvivl om, at Jette Kristiansen hentyder til indvandrere, der i digtet også beskyldes
for at være kriminelle og voldelige.( DF-byrådsmedlem »af Jydske Vestkysten; Ritzaus Bureau 05/10-2005).
14
Lacan, J. (1998a) On Feminine Sexuality. The Limits of Love and Knowledge. 1972–1973. Encore. The Seminar of Jacques Lacan. Book XX Trans. B. Fink, edited J. A.
Miller. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Co
f.
----The party members and supporters do not see any difference between Islam and Islamism.
Ingen forskel på islam og islamisme: Til gjaldende klapsalver fortalte Søren Krarups datter, Katrine Winkel Holm, på
Dansk Folkepartis landsmøde, at der ikke er forskel på islam og islamisme.(Ritzaus Bureau 15/09-2007).
g. ----The party had earlier on in 2001, equated Islam to terrorism.
Dansk Folkeparti satte på weekendens årsmøde i Vejle lighedstegn mellem islam og terrorisme og udråbte hovedparten af
herboende muslimer som en femte kolonne for islamisk terrorisme (Ritzaus Bureau, 16/09-2001)
It is worth mentioning that, most of the politics have been dealt with differently by the new Danish
government, which came to power in 2011, as they have repealed some of the harsh migration
regulations and which, obviously, had also openly been criticized by the politicians from the old V-K one,
or by their support party.
As one of the prominent politicians from the far right expresses:
”De lempelser, som regeringen lægger op til, vil få alverdens flygtninge til at søge mod Danmark, mener DF. Dansk Folkeparti
advarer kraftigt regeringen imod at gennemføre et nyt udspil, der skal forbedre forholdene for asylansøgere. Det siger partiets
udlændinge- og integrationsordfører, Martin Henriksen, i en pressemeddelelse”. Ritzau Bureau 13/06-2012
The MP is afraid that the changes in the alien acts will lead to attracting all the world’s refugees towards
Denmark. As mentioned earlier on, the V-K government and the parliamentary support party, the Danish
Peoples’ party, had a political agenda to create a nation for native Danes (Denmark for “we”, the Danes),
by insisting on the difference –‘cultural diversity’ between ‘we’ the native Danes with the superior, lawabiding culture and ‘them’, the aliens, plagued with criminalities, subordination, inequality, repression,
and an inferior form of religion. As Weber puts, such political activity becomes straight in its formulation,
“the belief in common ancestry is a consequence of collective political action—not its cause” (cf; Jenkins, 1997; 8).
In this period, there were open negative criticism of Muslims and immigrants, and the members of the
peoples’ party could come with anything to demean, deject, detest, dishearten or demonize the
minorities. For example, as cited earlier on, one of the members of the Peoples’ party openly asserts that
she hates and detests Muslims, drawing a clear distinction between ‘they’ the Danes and Christians and
the ‘them’, the Muslims,-----(”Muslimer er noget snavs”)
One way of alienating ‘other’ groups, is to embark on the politics of not-wanting them in ones’ country by
placing certain stringent immigration regulations to either prevent or restrict them, as well as also saying
negative things about them. According to Rytter, (2011; 55), the peoples’ party succeeded in getting the
V-K government to enact five main restrictive regulations, which cover the following criteria: first, age
(24-års-reglen), that is both partners have to be 24 years of age; second, accommodation (boligkravet),
which implies that the applicant should possess an apartment with certain specified area in quadrant
meters; the third is financial assistance (forsørgelseskravet), the applicant should be able to prove that
he or she will be able to fend for the spouse in a marriage, tied to last a minimum period of seven years,
as well as, to also meet the fourth requirement, which is to deposit fifty-seven thousand Danish kroner as
a guarantee or collateral (sikkerhedsstillelsen), the fifth is the national attachment demand
(tilkyntningskravet), which depends on the administration and estimations by the officials, with aim of
preventing coercive or arranged marriages among aliens.
As de Beauvoir, (1997; 24), inspired by Heglian frames it: “when an individual (or a group of individuals) is
kept in a situation of inferiority, the fact is that he or she is inferior. But the significance of the verb to be must be
rightly understood here……it really has the dynamic Heglian sense of –to become”—(cf: Jensen, 2009). The laws
though do not only set the aliens under control and obscured position, they also set them low in relation
to the native Danes, as the laws discriminate and favor some, (ethnic Danes) whilst they at the same
time disadvantages the others-----“the Others”. A paper reveals:
“Danske mænd scorer på udlændingelov: Find dig i hans tæsk, ellers ryger du ud af landet. Det er vilkårene for mange
udenlandske kvinder, der gifter sig med en dansk mand. Ifølge udlændingeloven kan kvinderne udvises, hvis de bliver skilt fra
manden, inden der er gået syv år. Udenlandske koner må bide vold og ydmygelser i sig fra deres danske mænd. Ellers risikerer de
at blive sendt hjem, og manden kan hente en ny kone hertil”. (Ritzaus Bureau 02/06-2010).
And as Rytter, (2011; 67) has noted, under the V-K government, Sweden offered suitable conditions for
marriage by Danes, irrespective of the fact that these people
are ethnic
Danes or are of mixed
nationality.
People can be subjected to ‘Othering’ based on phenotypical, biological, cultural and religious factors,
(Baumann, 2004; 21). This is true for the politics by the Danish V-K government (2001-2011) and the
Danish peoples’ party, helped by the Danish media, in ‘essentializing’ color, culture and religion and using
them in constructing differences between, as they claim, the Danes ( Dansker) and the foreigners
(indvandrere).
The foreigners, in the view these politicians and their backers, weren’t to live in Denmark in their natural
or preferred form of human beings, but must be transformed into ‘Danishness’ (Hervik, 2012) through
assimilations:
“Med assimilation følger krav. Hvis Thulesen Dahl rådede over 90 mandater i Folketinget havde myndighederne langt større
beføjelser til at skride ind og diktere rammerne for indvandrerfamilier i Danmark. Følger familierne ikke kravene, skal samfundet
kunne tilbageholde økonomiske ydelser. Han mener, at myndighederne i alt for høj grad er berøringsangste over for at tage et
"opgør med kulturen" (21/07-2009).
The existence of such extreme far right parties is not only restricted to Denmark alone, according to
Gingrich (2006; 197), they are spread all over Europe. The author reveals that most of these parties, if
not all, share the same stance: “a restrictive and exclusivist stand on such issues as illegal immigrants, or any
further immigration from the EU. In relation to such topics, a narrow ‘law and order’ practice is one denominator that
is informed by relatively explicit, if not authoritarian, pro-state ideals, which may then be supported by xenophobic
elements of discourse” (ibid; 197).
However, quite remarkably, as exemplified in the decline of influence by the Austria Peoples’ party, the
negative effect of the politics, particularly the essentialist cultural rhetoric, by these “new right” parties,
most often than not, according to Gingrich (2006), are played down by the main stream parties.
The construction of “a Danish identity”, based on ethnic sameness and perceived as being different and
better than the identities of the foreigners, was the core of the so-called værdikamp---a sort of ‘cultural
relativism exercise’.
This strategic kind of identity creation in the view of Malkki (1995; 71), “is always mobile and its procession
is partly self-constructed, partly categorized by others, is partly a condition, a status, a label, a weapon, a shield, a
fund of memories and
so on”.
Notably, this political strategic, ‘the weapon’ was used only against
immigrants of non-western background and refugees of Islamic decent in particular, as this strategy
repeatedly became a real election winner.
Different forms of strategies were also adopted including the avoidance of criticism from human ‘watchdog’ organizations, evident in the closing down of the center for ethnic equality and human rights in
2002, because of their continual criticism of the aliens act.
“Ny hård kritik af dansk udlændingelov: I en ny omfangsrig udredning fastslår Institut for Menneskerettigheder, at stramningerne i
udlændingelovgivningen krænker konventionerne, skriver Berlingske Tidende lørdag. Institut for Menneskerettigheder retter i en ny
udredning, som offentliggøres mandag, en hård kritik mod regeringens og Dansk Folkepartis stramninger i reglerne for
ægtefællesammenføring. Eksempelvis konkluderer instituttet, at den såkaldte 24 års regel sammenholdt med tilknytningskravet
fører til krænkelser af retten til familieliv i henhold til EMRK ART. 8 (Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedskonvention, red.) .Også
udlændingelovens 28-års regel står for skud i udredningen. Tilknytningskravet sammenholdt med 28 års reglen medfører
diskrimination på grund af etnicitet og race. Samtidig fører reglen om, at folk, der søger om ægtefællesammenføring, skal kunne
stille 53.096 kr. i sikkerhed, til krænkelser af retten til familieliv. Udredningen indeholder flere kritikpunkter og konkluderer
sammenfattende, at udlændingeloven har medvirket til at stadfæste skellet mellem majoriteten og minoriteterne, dvs. mellem »os«
og »dem (Ritzaus Bureau, 01/10-2004).
The center today, has been given the relevant support and services the it needs to function as a human
rights ’watch-dog’ by the new S-led government.
”Mens V-K i ti år beskyldte Institut for Menneskerettigheder for politisering og skar i bevillingerne, vil den nye regering styrke
instituttet og sikre, at Danmark efterlever konventionerne. Vi ønsker at gøre Institut for Menneskerettigheder mere selvstændigt og
give det mere frihed. Armslængdeprincippet er vigtigt, og det er vigtigt, at nogle holder øje med os,« siger udenrigsminister Villy
Søvndal (SF) til Berlingske”. (Berlingske 15/ 10/ 2011).
Other opposition- silencing strategies include the demand in 2006, for a research into the Cold War in
order to use the results to criticize the left wing parties in Denmark for their role in the WW II. And in
both 2007 and 2008, in order to discourage the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ effort to forge harmony and
solidarity with the Arabic world, by initiating dialogue through the establishment of dialogue centers in
the middle east, in the advent of the controversy that surrounded the drawing of Mohammed, the Danish
Peoples’ party objected to a direct contact between Denmark and the Arab world. Beside all these, they
again, used their vote to lure the government to carry out a research into Islamism in Denmark and
demanded the creation of a statistic data over immigrants’ children, in order to use the growth rate of
immigrants and refugees in politics.
”Vil indvandrere overtage Danmark? Dansk Folkeparti har tidligere fået regeringen med på at undersøge, hvad indvandringen
koster Danmark i kroner og øre. Han henviser til tal fra Danmarks Statistik, som viser, at personer med ikke-vestlig baggrund i 2009
udgjorde 6,6 procent af befolkningen, hvilket svarer til 361.000 personer. Ifølge Danmarks Statistiks befolkningsfremskrivning vil
den gruppe næsten blive fordoblet til 12,1 procent af befolkningen i 2050. Det svarer til 728.000 personer. I alt vil 16,6 procent af
befolkningen have indvandrerbaggrund i 2050 mod 9,7 procent i 2009. - De tal gør os bekymrede for, at vi får et meget opdelt og
multikulturelt samfund. Vi har allerede parallelsamfund i dag, men vi skal værne om det kulturelle fællesskab i fremtiden. Det er
forudsætningen for velfærdssamfundet, siger Martin Henriksen. (Ritzau Bureau 20/05-2011).
The mere fact that certain groups of people are to be counted and controlled, buttresses the notion of
perceived differences and the ‘essentialization’ of the Danish culture and identity, between the ‘ought to
be counted and controlled’ and the ‘not to be counted and controlled’….”Otherness”.
The apparent, yet subtle de-legitimization of the presence of Islam and immigrants in Denmark, I think is
strategically used in emphasizing the claim of cultural difference and ethnic identity----‘ethnic Othering’
(Bauman, 2004), a sort of Otherness’ creation typified in marginalizing and controlling of specific religious
and ethnic groups in the country, based on cultural skepticism.
Human rights organizations15 in Denmark felt that the Iraqi refugees were forced back into Iraqi due to
political pressure from Danish peoples party were warning against the repatriation as the see the
repatriation as a bleach of rights, in his view on the protection to refugees in exile, Nobel, (1988) stated
that; “Refugee law is inseparable part of the code of Human Rights” Nobel, (1988; 20, cf Malkki, 1995).
Indeed, according to a newspaper in Denmark, the government sometimes was not sure of what it was
undertaking regarding the repatriation of the Iraqis, but just heeded to the demands from the support
party. The paper writes; “udvisninger fortsætter trods tvivl”----meaning “the repatriation continues despite the
uncertainty about the security in Iraq” the same paper writes, “Frygt for afviste irakeres liv”,-----translated as
“Fear for the lives of the repatriated (rejected) Iraqi refugee”, (Ritzau Bureau, 08/06-2009). This piece of
information alone speaks for the claim by the Iraqis that, they were not willing to repatriate in 2006, even
though, this refers to other kinds of Iraqis, namely, those who were directly refused asylum in Denmark.
Two years after the interviews were given by the Iraqis, another piece of evidence that goes to support
the Iraqis’ claim is what has been written in the newspaper in 2008.
”Byrettens afgørelse viser, at der er så stor usikkerhed om disse sager, at vi bør hente de allerede udsendte tilbage og stoppe for
tvangshjemsendelser af de øvrige, siger udlændingeordfører Johanne Schmidt-Nielsen (EL), der i samrådet vil kræve at se den
aftale, som regeringen har lavet med de irakiske myndigheder om hjemsendelserne” (Ritzau Bureau 28/05-2008).
Other credible evidence in support of this is the recommendations from a fact finding group, or mission
from Denmark, which went to Iraq to examine the security situation and came back to sound the same
piece of warning in 2006, yet the repatriation continued:
”Hasard at vende hjem: Organisationen Care4You gennemfører i november en rejse til Irak for afviste asylansøgere, men
15
Amnesty International according to Ritzau Bureau (26/04-2010) alarms the civilian Iraqis in Iraq live under fear: “Iraks civile lever i
frygt”
formanden for Dansk Irakisk Forening fraråder folk at vende hjem” (Ritzaus Bureau, 20/10-2006).
In the mean time, attempts to seek other places for sanctuary became the order of the day for most of
the Iraqi refugees and immigrants, who were having difficulty with having ‘normal’ life under the
erstwhile government. The fact today is, the new Danish government has made changes in the refugee
situation in Denmark, even though the basic criteria for gaining asylum in the country remain unaltered:
"Regeringen ønsker en mere human tilgang i asylpolitikken. Kriterierne for, hvem der kan få asyl, ændres ikke. Men de, der
søger asyl i Danmark, skal behandles værdigt". "Regeringen vil sikre en ordentlig og anstændig behandling af asylansøgere, mens
de er i Danmark. Asylansøgere skal have mulighed for at arbejde og bo uden for asylcentrene. På den måde bygges afviste
ansøgere op som mennesker og får flere kompetencer. Således vil de have lettere ved enten at integrere sig i Danmark, hvis de får
asyl, eller bedre forudsætninger for at starte et nyt liv, når de vender hjem". "Derfor skal afviste asylansøgere, der ikke kan vende
hjem, og som har samarbejdet om hjemsendelsesforanstaltningerne, samt asylansøgere, der får deres sag behandlet, kunne
arbejde og bo uden for centrene efter et halvt år"(Ritzau Bureau 14/10-2011).
5.2 Political discourse and ‘Othering’
In this part of the thesis, I intent to review, the political rhetoric and practices, driven by indigenousness,
used by the politicians and argue that the politics at the time where certain kinds of people weren’t to be
allowed into Denmark, or as they became ‘objects of political attacks’ was because of their background-ethnicity, geo-identity—(non-westerners), culture or religion,…..(‘Othering’ based on background and
identity)…. And this might have also been felt by the Iraqi refugees and hence their decision on the
“false” and “failed” repatriation. I argue that through identity creation and political power ----(Spivaks’:
Subjects-Versus-Subordinates)----seen in Spivak’s writings on the relationship between the British masters
and the subordinate Indians, the V-K government made immigrants and refugees feel different through
placing stringent political laws on them, beside those negative political rhetoric that also affected
adversely.
The political construction of ethnic groups, immigrants, based on culture and religion as well as ascribing
these groups of people, as foreigners ----indvandrere, a constructed, conscious demarcation--- as Spivak
phrases it, ‘the construction of differences among people’ (Spivak, 1985; 256), can lead to ‘Othering’ of them, as
they may also be made to think that they belong somewhere else than Denmark, and not deserving
equal treatments, as given to the others---- the ‘masters’.
The interviewees said, they were subjected to undue pressures from the state asylum caseworkers in
order to coerce them to choose to repatriate, as one of them expresses:
“[…] på grund af alt dette her pres som jeg var udsat for her i to år, var det eneste formål for mig at forlade Danmark. Jeg tænkte
ikke videre.” (Ali; page 80)……because of pressure I have subjected to in two years, the only way was to leave Denmark. I did not
think any further.
This pressure may be borne out of the expressed view amongst some politicians in Denmark, who have
the belief that all native or ethnic Danes have common ancestry, a common reference point, and
therefore ‘belong’ together and to Denmark, and to the soil; “a sense of belonging associated with the Danish
territory” (Kvaale, 2011; 226), and how this view, expressed in political discourse and practice, has been
used to create the ‘we’ --the Danes and the ‘them’-- the foreigners, who are perceived to belong
elsewhere and therefore must be discouraged from ‘planting’ themselves in Denmark---a sort of
fundamental nationalistic political ideology.
The ideology of the ethnic ‘we’, who possess ethnic sameness and can claim national-belonging, was
made the cornerstone, as well as using the state apparatus, organs, and institutions to facilitate the
formation of ‘a super we-group’ of the owners of Denmark as against a ‘they-group’ of intruders, guests,
foreigners, who only should deserve to be done favor, and given rights.
Weber in 1978 argued; “ethnic membership does not constitute a group, it only facilitates group formation of any
kind, particularly in the political sphere. On the other hand, it is primarily the political community, no matter how
artificially they are organized, that inspires the belief in common ethnicity” (Weber, 1978; 389, cf: Jenkins 1997; 9).
As aforementioned, the migration policy was often attracted the attention of the UN high Commissioner,
during his first visit to Denmark few days after the V-K government came to power, she sounded notes of
warning against discrimination in Denark:
“FN-højkommissær taler om dobbeltmoral og advarer mod diskrimination af flygtninge »Den nye regering i Danmark skal
selvfølgelig have lov til at vise, hvad den vil. Men der har aldrig før været et så påtrængende behov for ikke bare at bekæmpe
diskrimination, men også for at komme flygtninge og asylansøgere i møde,« siger Mary Robinson til Information. Eksempelvis er
spørgsmålet om ikke-diskrimination meget vigtig, især når det gælder familiesammenføring. Der må ikke være forskellig tilgang til
forskellige nationaliteter,« siger hun (Information, 28/11-2001).
Some elements in the immigration legislations by the V-K government were found to be questionable
legality, or, I argue, sometimes clear illegality. The European Union was always finding the political
agenda as discriminating and was raising fingers accordingly, at the politics by the V-K government,
sometimes also being rejected by the leaders in the government:
”Mindretal i Danmark får en skidt behandling, mener Europarådets racismekommission i rapport, som Fogh krøller sammen og kyler
i papirkurven. Det hører hjemme i papirkurven, når Danmark får kritik for at behandle sine mindretal dårligt. Statsminister Anders
Fogh Rasmussen (V) sagde tirsdag, at han vil blæse på, at Europarådets kommission mod racisme, ECRI, samme dag frigav en
meget kritisk rapport om Danmark.- ECRI laver sin rapport på grundlag af von hørensagen, hvor man hører lidt der og lidt her, og
så fører det ind i rapporten. Det kan vi ikke tage alvorligt, sagde statsministeren på sit ugentlige pressemøde” (16/-05-2006).
The outright rejection and rubbishing of the EU- committee’s report by the then Prime Minister, is a direct
indication of how segregated the EU is. The union is without any cohesive bond—especially, regarding
international affairs, because not all the members are bound by the union’s regulations.
As identitied by Luedtke, (2005), EU member states and parties that strongly identifies with their nationstate are less likely to support the general EU legislations on immigration, which in a sense do not look at
the differences between people and their identities.
It is not wrong to say that, the political agenda during the reign of the V-K-O, was directed towards color
and Muslims, and was used to attempt to ‘prune’ the Danish society of aliens, as these groups were
perceived as unintelligent and poor. The V-K government claimed that, only the rich and clever aliens
were welcome to Denmark….”Orientalism”. And this again put Denmark under barrage of criticisms
especially for her treatment of the minorities in the country.
The following is an examples of EU’s
concern about the politics in Denmark:
1.
”Statsminister Anders Fogh Rasmussen (V) bliver nu presset af Europa-Kommissionens formand José Manuel Barroso i
spørgsmålet om en fælles immigrationspolitik i EU. Godt nok vil kommissionsformanden ikke blande sig i Danmarks EUforbehold i asyl og indvandringsspørgsmålet, men Kommissionens seneste tanker om immigrationspolitikken står i klar
modsætning til det nyeste udspil fra den danske regering, som kun indbefatter de rigeste og klogeste indvandrere,
mens problemerne med de fattige bådflygtninge ikke indgår i VK-planerne”.
2.
Europarådet bekymret over intolerance i Danmark: Europarådets Ministerkomité er bekymret over, at der i Danmark
eksisterer en intolerance, der kan føre til øget fjendtlighed mod forskellige etniske og religiøse grupper. I en resolution
opfordrer ministerkomitéen, der består af udenrigsministrene fra Europarådets 46 medlemslande, derfor de danske
myndigheder til at være mere lydhøre over for disse minoriteter. (Ritzaus Bureau 17/12 2005).
The V-K government was inclined to only admit the rich and clever people into Denmark and leave out
people, they see as poor and unintelligent. In other words, the V-K government seems to indicate that
the rich and clever people are better human beings than the poor and perceived unintelligent people, a
clear division of human beings and a form of ‘Otherness’, as I have consistently insisted.
And as I contend, this politics can be used to explain the deliberate laying of pressure on the refugees to
get them to self deport from Denmark, through the creation of deplorable conditions in the asylum
Camps, a condition that became one too many, and which even attracted the attention of the wife of the
Prime minister (stateminister) and very many other concerned Danish people:
”Statsministerfrue Anne-Mette Fogh Rasmussen er repræsentativ for en stor del af Danmark, når hun kritiserer forholdene på de
danske asylcentre, mener S. - Jeg tror, at der er flere og flere danskere, der mener, at vi skal have en konsekvent
udlændingepolitik, men de udlændinge, der er i Danmark, skal vi altså behandle ordentligt. Både når de søger asyl og bliver
integreret i samfundet”, siger Lotte Bundsgaard til Ritzau, 27/10-2006.
Two things are clear here, the first is both the then Danish first lady and the politician, who commented
on the situation agree that the government was not treating the refugees humanely, or rightly put,
treating them in ways, Danes wouldn’t be treated— viz, differently ---hence; ‘Othering’, and that is to say
since the refugees are different, they also deserve different treatments. The second is, even when the
Danes complain about massive immigration, with majority in parliamentarians supporting the immigration
policies, there were many ethnic Danes in the public sphere, who were against the way the refugees
were treated.
What is interesting among the parties that make coalition to form the majority in the Danish parliament
was that, as I have earlier tried to give a perspicuous example on, there was interior disagreement
amongst them. An example of the split is:
1.
“Mens De Konservative kalder forholdene på asylcentrene rystende, ser statsministeren kun én løsning på problemerne:
Afviste asylsøgere skal rejse hjem. Statsminister Anders Fogh Rasmussen (V) anerkender, at der er problemer på landets
asylcentre. Men han mener, at problemerne skyldes en mangel på vilje blandt afviste flygtninge til at rejse hjem” (Ritzau
18/04-2006).
2. Det er hjerteløst og under al kritik, at de irakiske asylbørn i Røde Kors Lejren i Sandholm har psykiske lidelser.
Dansk Røde kors legitimerer og blåstempler regeringens og Dansk Folkepartis umenneskelige behandling af asylbørnene,
når de ikke hjælper, men blot accepterer den urimelige situation i Sandholmlejren. Uanset børnenes nationalitet og deres
families politiske situation så skal børnene beskyttes og hjælpes. Vi kan simpelthen ikke være andet bekendt! (Benny
Normind, Farum; 16/01-2010).
Immigration into Denmark, or the coming of non-westerners to Denmark is not a new phenomenon. The
Danes have over the years experienced all forms migration of people with different ancestry or culture
since the late 80s, (Schwartz, 1985), and are also not unaware of the fact that ‘people have always sought
refuge and sanctuary’ (Malkki, 1995; 496). The many Danish rescue stories during the WW 2 are told
elsewhere in the history, besides the fact that Danes have actively invited non-westerners, Muslim---through “the guest worker program”. The problem is, this time, the presence of these ‘strangers’, should
strangely enough, be politicized, through ‘state colonization of territory, based on territorialized blood, ethnicity
and nationhood’ (Kvaale, 2011; 228).
The V-K government’s construction of the ‘we’ the Danes and the ‘they’ the uncivilized others, based on
having a state of territorial belongingness (Zuniga, 2012; 87, see also Luedtke, 2005), for example, the
manufacturing of the “Kulturkanon”, is seen as a clear portfolio of compulsory authorized “Danishness”
(Jenkins 2011; 259), in order to emphasize and maintain the dominance of the Danish cultural, deemed
also as homogeneous, which also must be a criteria for the ‘divide’----the “Others” and the “self”.
National identity and the formation of it, was to be the fundamental basis for the ‘Kanon’ aimed at
distinguishing between the ‘home owners’ identity and the identity of the ‘foreigner’ or ‘guest’ (Hervik,
and however doubtful such a national identity construction could be, it became a state sponsored project,
footed by Danish tax-payers, including those it was also meant to be used against.
Wodak, et al., (1999), believe that, there is ‘no such thing as the one and only national identity’ as they write:
“national identities are not completely consistent, stable and immutable. They are, to the contrary, to be understood
as dynamic, fragile, ‘vulnerable’ and often incoherent. However, we do assume that there are certain relations (of
transfer and contradiction) between the images of identity offered by political elites or the media and everyday
discourses’ about nations and national identity” (Wodak, et al., 1999; 154).
It could also be due to racism. There is undoubtedly racism in Denmark, (Jenkins, 2011; 261) has
asserted. Under the V-K regime racism cases ‘ran’ races in the Danish court rooms, one peculiar case was
when the High court dismissed the accusation made by the Danish Peoples Party against a certain man
who was charged with calling the Danish Peoples party’s politics, racist, (Ritzau Bureau, 23/06-2003).
Besides, many of the party members have been, along the line, accused of racism.
And paradoxically, Danish laws are against racism, an indication that, they the members, politicians, and
the backers of the Danish peoples’ party have difficulty with keeping the country’s laws at the same time
as they accused the ‘Others’ of violating them. As one politician from the left-wing draws attention to
this:
Socialdemokraternes kulturordfører, Mogens Jensen, efterlyste en forklaring på, hvordan Dansk Folkeparti - senest i forbindelse
med integrationspakken - kan insistere på, at flygtninge og indvandrere skal underskrive erklæringer om at skulle overholde landets
love, når partiet godt kan acceptere, at egne medlemmer får racismedomme (Ritzau Bureau, 06/10-2005).
Is the Danish society not busted open by racism? I argue that, brash rhetoric is naïve, as I am scared to
call it dangerous. This criticism, I think is erratic, since there was no demarcating line with regards to the
accusation----all regular immigrants and refugees for that matter are to undertake a commitment to be
lawful. Obvious in this, is the generalizations made often about foreigners which, I believe, has nothing to
do with western foreigners, say, the Swedish, the Norwegians, or the Germans in Denmark, but has
everything to do with people of color or from underdeveloped countries and Muslims in particular. The
Prime minister could not even differ on this as on the 21st of November 2004, he said the following:
“Indvandrere og flygtninge skal respektere ytringsfrihed, lige ret for kvinder og mænd samt adskille politik og religion. Samfundet
kan ikke hænge sammen, hvis indvandrere og flygtninge ikke respekterer danske grundværdier som ytringsfrihed, lige rettigheder
for kvinder og mænd samt adskillelse af politik og religion. Mange udlændinge er flygtet fra forfølgelse i samfund, som ikke
respekterer disse værdier. De skal vide sig sikre i Danmark fra islamiske fundamentalisters trusler” (State minister Anders Fogh
Rasmussen).
There is no doubt that, this has an address to people with Middle-east and Islamic origins. Interestingly,
there were some few in the Danish parliament who also originate from such areas. Additionally, this was
precisely the time the Prime minister’s party venstre chose to reward the Holland politician, Ayaan Hirsi
Ali, the woman who participated in the “Submission” film, critical of Islam, produced by instructor Theo
van Gogh, who was unfortunately killed in Amsterdam.
In any case, this form of generalizations and such ironical political approaches are not new to
anthropologists, Vered Amit, (2011; 278), writing on “the immigrant Other” and citing a similar situation
in Quebec, Canada, believes that what was going on Denmark runs parallel to the so-called “code of
living”, where, as an example from the Canadian situation, an ironical attempt was made to remind
Muslims ‘that stoning and female circumcision were forbidden in Canada’.
According to the author, the reason why the Danish case is not dissimilar to that of Canada is the
construction of the Danish culture and its activation into the so-called “Kultur-kanon”. An approach he
sees as a deliberate political maneuver for using it to stand not only in contrast to, but also in competition
with the ‘perceived’ culture of the immigrants, and this could be liken to what the author refers to
‘legitimizing marginalization and exclusion’ (ibid; 279). And this, I allow myself to imagine to be a classical
example of ‘we’ and ‘ours’ versus ‘they’ and ‘theirs’. “In many ways, therefore, constructions of Danishness
appear to be drawing on claims to a broader Western enlightenment tradition. And the tendency to assume that
Muslim immigrants hold values that are incommensurable with this tradition could similarly be interpreted as an
instance of a much more widespread, venerable Western tradition of Orientalism (Said, 2003) as well as more recent
versions of European cultural fundamentalism” (Vered Amit, 2011; 280) .
Are certain Muslims not Danes? How many native Danes, who are married to or are in a relationship with
a foreigner, do not identify themselves with them? The establishment of the “Kulturkanon”, aimed at the
construction of a truthful, trustworthy and ‘distinct Danes’ against the ‘not-too-welcomed aliens’ of
different cultures and incompatible ways of life (Hervik, 1999), suffice me to say, cannot be less of
‘Othering’.
As the Vered Amit has noted, the western tradition of “Orientalism” could be formed in many ways
including for example, pointing to certain group of people, non-westerners, of course, as not being able
or not understanding the western norms and values.
The political motive behind valorizing the Danish culture into the ‘Kulturkanon’, caught the attention of
cultural experts, even among those who were to sit in the committee responsible for the formulation of
the ‘KulturKanon’. For example, the members on the committee protested against the minister after
learning of the intention of the V-K-O politicians. In a letter to the minister, Professor Erik A. Nielsen,
from the Nordiske studier at the University of Copenhagen complains, writes:
”Det bliver næsten parodisk, hvis man skal lave sådan en 'gave fra de fine'. Vi har betragtet kanon-forsøget som en kvalificeret
selskabsleg, men det lå ikke i oplægget, at det skulle bruges aggressivt over for indvandrere” (Erik A. Nielsen).
Notice, the Professor’s clear reference to ‘Orientalism here’--- “gave fra de fine”--- “a gift from the nice”
to for example, the “filthy” and notice again, his suspicion that the “Kulturkanon,” was to be used
aggressively against the foreigners---“bruges aggressivt over for indvandrere”--‘the foreigners?’---well,
“the Others”.
The V-K government’s
“ethnicity-driven” politics, for cultural differentiation I believe was for the
protection of the “fædreland”, variously orchestrated by the
Danish Peoples’ Party, to draw a line
between those referred to as ethnic Danes—“the we Danes” and the “they foreigners” based on culture,
as DeVos has noted “a subjective symbolic or emblematic use of any aspect of culture (by a group), in order to
differentiate themselves from other groups” (DeVos, 1975; 16), in his view Burgess (1978, 270) adds that this
identity and group formation is also based on the use of ‘markers’ (-----instead of a person’s name, it is the
person’s symbols, religion or background, such as Dansk-Pakistaner, indvandrere, Dansk-Tyrker, Afrikaner, and so
on), which include cultural, biological, or territorial, forms of Said’s sense, ‘geographical Otherness’, as it
also enhances stigmatization.
According to de Beauvoir, (1997; 16), “the category of the ‘Other’ is as primordial as consciousness “self”. More
so, it emphasizes that ‘we’ --the Danes have a culture and a society perceived as homogeneous, which
therefore, must be screened from the ‘contamination’ due to the presence of ‘different’ kinds of cultures,
feared to dilute the ‘worshipped’ homogeneity.
People who experience ’Othering’ tend to find a ’hiding place’, to avoid the pressure, a sort of antidote, to
counteract the unpleasant circumstances they find themselves in, by internalizing, and this might explain
the reaction of the Iraqi refugees to the governments’ or the authorities’ pressure or ‘push’ on them in
order that they will be compelled to choose to repatriate unwillingly, (a sort of self-deportation).
As Jensen (2009; 6) had observed and argued, the strategies used by people who experience ‘Othering’,
is the construction of “a third place”, she cites internalizing as an example, in case of the Iraqi refugees, I
suppose, running away to Iraq seemed to be the only window opened to them at that time, because, the
Dublin accord forbids them from seeking asylum in yet another country in the EU.
Some regular immigrants in Denmark, in order to find a ‘third place’ followed up on their marriages and
‘run’ away from Denmark to countries like Sweden, the US, the UK and Germany, including those who
have difficulty in seeing themselves as belonging to Denmark (cf: Holmes, 2000).
Many, I know, have moved to Malmo in Sweden to escape the Danish alien laws. Anthropology studies in
Denmark has revealed that certain immigrants, regardless of the length of stay in the country continue to
feel like, they are strangers in Denmark. For instance, in her studies among Palestinians, who have lived
in Denmark for years, Kublitz, (2013), found out that Palestinian youth who were born in Denmark, and
who might have been expected to possess a sense of loyalty and belonging to the country, seems to
constantly be fighting what they see as “the discrimination by the Danish state 16” (Kublitz, 2013; 15).
Perhaps, this tendency is not only in Denmark, but all over Europe. Another example of the far right-wing
party, is the Jörg Haider’s freedom party in Austria, with ‘pro-state ideals supported by xenophobic
elements of discourse’ (Gingrich, 2006; 197). Gingrich has described these parties as the ‘new right’,
whose polity is to spread the feelings of identification with the nation-state (Seton-Watson, 1977).
According to Gingrich these ‘new right’ parties embark on a more constructivist political approach which is
immensely rooted in a deep understanding of the nationhood, hence their rhetoric and narratives of
national belonging (Brubaker , 1998; 4), as they do also insist on ‘ancestral claim of ethnical sameness’.
“We” are different, ‘we’ are superior and better humans than “them”, and therefore “we” belong
together, and to this soil, but “they” don’t.
There was no holding back when, Allen (2009), referred such political forms as being a “social and literal
constructions and demonization of cultural difference”. The branding foreigners in Denmark as criminals, as
dependents on the welfare state, and as having incompatible culture in relation to that of the Danes’ can
be likened to the sort of politics that echoes what Gingrich (2006; 212) refers to as ‘we’ as ‘pro-state’ and
‘pro-law and order’ typical of the new right parties.
What is interesting and yet, intriguing is that, Denmark is a country that prides itself with ‘freedom of
speech’ and ‘freedom of religion’, and was at the same, unlike its neighbors and friends in the
Scandinavians, ‘warring’ in Iraq and Afghanistan to promote democracy and freedom of speech, besides
treating refugees as if they weren’t the results of such ‘democracy transfer’. Where then do we place this
claim? Perhaps, this “freedom of speech” claim is only legitimate when it is used for criticism of aliens17,
16
There is an investigation underway on an alleged bleach of the UN convention, which allows for the granting of citizenship to
stateless refugees, by the then Danish government with regards to some stateless Palestinians .
17
See the attributes outlined by Fidel (1997); cf: Hervik 2004; 254), in interviews. Fidel, U. H., (1997). Why the difference makes a
in Denmark, a group of people whose social construction or mobility is and has always been dependent
on the degree of already damaged cordiality and inclusiveness.
The disconcerting thing about the whole construction of this ‘divide’, the ‘we Danes’ and the ‘them aliens’,
is the enactment of the restrictive laws on the issues this thesis is about, namely, family reunification,
isolation, unemployment and other as aspects of the social and political lives of aliens in Denmark.
According to many Danish newspapers 18, Denmark signed an agreement with the unstable Iraq
government on the 13th of May 2009 on the sending back the refugees. At the time, the paper reports
that 78 on the waiting list were cooperating with the police chief 19. The paper further reports that, since
the agreement was made the police had been able, on three occasions all by using force to send those
Iraqis who were refused asylum in Denmark, back to Iraq: the numbers were 6 on the 25th of June 2009;
7 on the 13 of August, 2009; and 22 on the 2nd of September.
Notwithstanding all these developments, the paper reports on the growing dissatisfaction with the Danish
Peoples Party, as one of the instrumental MPs behind the Party’s politics which as revealed, is based on
obsolete traditional and ancestral order of things, shows publicly, his disapproval of the ‘slow’ deportation
process, the paper states:
“Det beroliger dog ikke Dansk Folkepartis udlændingeordfører, Peter Skaarup
20
. Han mener, at det går alt for langsomt med
hjemsendelserne.” (ibid).
The repatriation continued in November, and yet that couldn’t be enough to please the politicians from
the Peoples’ Party, a newspaper writes;
“På seks måneder er 35 af 242 afviste irakere sendt hjem. Det er ikke godt nok, mener Dansk Folkeparti, der vil have svar på,
hvornår de sidste kan sende hjem.” (Ritzaus Bureau, 01/11/2009).
This prominent MP from the Danish Peoples’ Party claim that “the presence of too many immigrants and
refugees in Denmark, threatens the Danish cultural values, and thereby advocates for ‘zero political
tolerance’ towards immigrants and refugees alike, (Hervik, 2012; 213). The MP goes ahead to further
threaten to cut the economic support the Iraqi authorities were receiving from Denmark, if they do not,
regardless, quickly take back their people.
”Der skal ikke gå mange uger, hvor der stadig ikke sker noget. Så må vi sige til irakerne: I opfylder ikke jeres del af aftalen, og når
I ikke gør det, så kan vi heller ikke opfylde vores aftale om at give jer økonomisk bistand.” (Ritzaus Bureau, 01/11-2009)
difference: Some cultural understanding of ethnic differences behind Danish registration practices. A paper presented at the conference;
“Structuring Diversity: European response to emerging multiculturalism” Copenhagen, December 5 th-6th 1997.
18
See also the kristeligt dagblad
19
The rigspolitiets Udlændingafdeling, vicerigspolitichef, Hans-Viggo Jensen
20
Peter Skaarup was the spokesperson for the Dansk folkeparty for aliens/foreigners issues
5.2.2 Social ‘Othering’
Social ‘Othering’ can be constructed through different ways that alienates people who are perceived as
being different and belonging elsewhere than where they find themselves. For example, certain
governments may enact discriminatory bills that restrict or prevent certain people’s social mobility and
social capital. Certain political practices by host countries in socially restricting immigrants and refugee
may be seen as subtlety ‘Otherness’, as Fassin (2011; 124) explicitly puts it “social construction of Otherness
implies the social construction of identity. It means imagining borders and boundaries” . The author is referring
here, to the construction of ‘others’ and ‘selves’---the divide---based on tradition, culture, race and so on,
and not the least, about the construction of migration-related ‘Otherness’. I intend to evoke Lister’s
definition of ‘Othering’ to emphasize that the V-K governments’ attempt to demarcate the native Danes
from the perceived aliens, was purely due to the perceived color, geographical, traditional, cultural, racial
differences.
Lister (2004): “Othering is a process of differentiation and demarcation, by which the line is drawn between “us”
and “them”----between the more and the less powerful—and through which social distance is established and
maintained” (Lister 2004; 101 cf: Jensen, 2009; 13).
As exemplified in the Aliens Consolidation Act #608 which forbids couples less than 24 years to marry in
Denmark. I argue in this section that the V-K governments attempt to legislate ‘love’ by placing stringent
regulations, besides those pre-eminent rhetoric from their support party, that forced immigrants with
different backgrounds to deflect to neighboring countries in order to get to unite with their spouses, is
due to the notion that such people are seen as different from the Danes.
The extension of the period for granting permanent residence to spouses from three to seven years, is
also another example for discouraging the ‘Others’ from having social life in the country, because they,
perhaps are deemed to belong elsewhere and cannot be part of the “We”, the people of Denmark---identity ‘Othering’---hence a restriction on the lives-----restrictions that also differentiate them from those
who can freely choose their partners. Other examples include the forbidding of foreigner’s parents over
60 years the requirements of a certain amount of money, to be set aside as guarantee for inviting
spouses and so on21.
Furthermore, the most insecure aspect of this strict law, is its administration, which can be anything
depending on the personality of the applicant through whether or not the applicant have had children
with an ethnic Dane to whether or not the applicant is a member of any Danish organization.
In order that these stringent bills get an impact as intended, the bills were continually tightened22 as a
leading Danish newspaper reveals that the laws were tightened every eight months, this again drew
21
See http://www.inm.dk for more details on the law.
22
Ritzau Bureau; 28/03-2010
criticisms from diverse human right organizations (Ritzaus Bureau, 01/10-2004), however, all those
criticisms were blunted by the government.
Udlændingeloven strammes hver 8. måned: Udlændingeloven er ændret 14 gange under VK-regeringen. Kritikere mener, at det
hele tiden sætter de borgere under pres, som er omfattet af loven (Ritzaus Bureau, 28/03-2010).
The effect of the politics of ‘them’ and ‘us’’ casts some shadows over the integration, also the social
integration of aliens in Denmark. As if the integration, was not a cover up excuses for wanting to curb
immigration from non-western countries (Hervik, 2012; 212), but to create spaces for foreigners in, for
example, the work places, enhance better social support (social inclusion). This, according to Danish
scholars seems unclear, especially regarding what the prospective immigrant has to do, to be seen as
being well integrated. The bigger problem with the integration is the prejudice on the newcomers in the
Danish society, a tendency, even the minister of integration in October 2003, couldn’t differ from:
“Når flygtninge og indvandrere kommer hertil, bliver de straks behandlet som stakler, får hjælp til alting og bliver pakket ind i
tolkebistand og taxaboner. Der er desværre nogle få læger, der strøer alt for mange lægeerklæringer om sig, og man må forstå, at
udlændinge ikke har de samme bremsemekanismer, som danskere har” (Bertel Haarder; October, 2003).
The minister is here saying that, all refugees and immigrants, even when they might not have come from
the same origin nor possess the same cultural and ethnic entity, and do not have the same qualities
(‘bremsemekanismer’), like the ethnic Danes.
This is not different from what both Baumann has
described as ‘Othering’ and Said as ‘Orientalism’.
What I think is left unspoken about the integration is what is perceived as the difference between ‘we’
and ‘them’ and how it is deepened by political rhetoric, like those of the minister. The integration is not
the main purpose of this writing, as I now will like to address some of the social issues in Denmark that
had had political influence on the lives of immigrants and refugees and what I also contend that it is an
attempt to differentiate between and native Danes and aliens, hence ‘Otherness’.
5.2.2.1a. “The family re-unification law” as a form of social ‘Othering’
The right for any refugee to live together with the spouse is enshrined in the UN convention, thus,
according to the Refugee act, the Iraqis refugee have the right to reunite with their spouses, also in
Denmark. The V-K government, as promised during the election, had intentions to block the entry of
specific people from entry into Denmark, as a political agenda. As mentioned earlier on, a prominent
newspaper in Denmark the Berlingske Tidende has revealed that Turkish, Somalis, Iraqis and Pakistanis
are to inhibited in getting family reunification.
The intent here is to totally discourage the entry of additional people from the above mentioned countries
to Denmark, by putting hindrances in marriages among those who live in Denmark and those back home
in such places. I believe that, the treaty of Amsterdam, prohibits this political move as it deals with issues
surrounding migration and rights given to immigrants by the EU, the rules on family reunification are
enshrined in the Unions’ Family Reunification Directive (Directive 2003/86/EC) and binds Members states
‘to respect family life’.
As well expected, one of the Iraqi refugees expressed in the interview that the strict Danish family
reunification rules make it impossible for him to get his wife into Denmark:
”Jamen, jeg tænkte på at nu hvor Saddam Hussein er fjernet, så er muligheden for familiesammenføring med min kone her det er
nul næsten, det er umuligt. Derfor måtte jeg rejse tilbage til Irak.” (Hamza, page 79).
Hamza sees the reunification with his wife as impossible in Denmark, and therefore decided to leave
Denmark, without considering much about the impending security risk and how he could or couldn’t be
able to live in Iraq with the family. He wasn’t able to fulfill any of the requirements to be able to have the
right to family unification.
Unfortunately, the 1951 convention, which Denmark is a signatory to, has the ‘non-refoulement clause’23
and which in the first place, guarantees refugees’ refusal to return to the troubled ‘homeland’, besides
the sanctity of the refugee law that gives them the right to family life also in exile. I argue in this section
of the thesis, that anything that might force a refugee from utilizing such principle is tantamount to a
gross erosion of refugee right, endorsed by the convention, as I also think that the premeditated political
agenda on certain selected people, countries---is ‘Othering’.
I further argue that the restrictive bills by the V-K government especially in the case of Hamza, renders
the convention nebulous, because, he, as a refugee in Denmark, for not being given the right to family
life, was also compelled to leave exile because he wanted to have a family life.
Below are some of the harsh bills the parties in the V-K coalition government have planned beforehand,
and that is why I refer to the politics as being premeditated….and therefore ‘Othering’
1: Venstre vil begrænse tilgangen af udlændinge ved hjælp af færre familiesammenføringer til danske statsborgere og ved at
bremse tilgangen af flygtninge (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001).
2: Familiesammenføringer af ægtefæller skal fremover betinges af, at parrets samlede tilknytning til Danmark er større end til et
andet land. Hvis familiesammenføring har været fast praksis i familien, vil det som udgangspunkt være et nej. Hvis den herboende
ægtefælle har deltaget i modersmålsundervisning trækker det i samme retning (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001).
3: Det skal også være sværere at få asyl (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001)
4: For både indvandrere og flygtninge skal det gælde, at ingen skal kunne få permanent opholdstilladelse, før de har været her i
syv år. I dag siger lovgivningen tre år (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001).
The parties have planned to restrict certain people…..the ‘Orientals’ from coming to Denmark, by
enacting impossible bills such as ---attachment to Denmark , seven year period of marriage before given
23
That no contracting state shall expel or return (‘refoule’) a refugee, against his or her will, in any manner whatsoever, to a territory
where he or she fears persecution.
permanent residence, and other conditions such whether or one has been taught his or her own mother
tongue in Denmark. My estimation of all these is that, they are a way of differentiating and therefore
‘Othering’.
One interesting argument against such alien act is the stance taken by the European court of justice in
2008, in what was referred to as the “Metock-case” (Rytter, 2011; 70), which seems to undermine the
Danish foreigners’ legislation. The V-K government fouled on many of her international obligations and
couldn’t live by them, due to its inordinate desire to hold on to power, and also continued in 10 years
groping for answers to whether or not, those alien restrictive laws were right or wrong. Today, there is a
case in front of a committee, (the Statløse Komitee), to find out who was responsible for refusing
citizenship to Palestinians who were born in Denmark, and therefore have been stateless, as the UN
conventions recommends.
As indicated earlier on, Denmark is not bound by certain legal obligations from the EU because of its
reservations with the EU, and therefore not bound by the EU integration directives regarding family
reunification---Directive 2003/86/EC and the EU Pact on immigration and asylum in October 2008
(European council, 2008), which outlines the importance of adopting a policy by the member-states, that
enables fair treatment of migrants and their harmonious integration into the societies of their host
countries
Not in isolation is the fact that, according to previous Danish laws, refugees have had the right to apply
for the reunification for their families. The Danish 1983 Aliens act allowed spouses, minor children and
even elderly parents to refugees to unite with them in Denmark.
As is always the case, there was a ‘raised’ voice against the discrimination of the Iraqi refugees, from
some of the Danish refugee lawyers, as this support my argument on differentiating and hence
‘Othering’--- as reported under the headline, ”Myndigheder beskyldes for at forskelsbehandle iraker”:
“Irakere har sværere ved at få familiesammenføring end næsten alle andre etniske grupper. Det siger en række af landets
flygtningeadvokater til Information. De beskylder Udlændingestyrelsen og Integrationsministeriet for at forskelsbehandle irakere i
forhold til andre ansøgere ved at stille en række krav, som de fleste herboende irakiske flygtninge ikke har mulighed for at opfylde.
Advokaterne peger især på det såkaldte tilknytningskrav, som irakiske familiemedlemmer kun yderst sjældent kan opfylde, fordi de
ikke kan få visum til at besøge Danmark. Et irakisk par vil derfor altid samlet set have større tilknytning til Irak end til Danmark.
Derudover peger advokaterne på, at udlændingemyndighederne stiller så skrappe dokumentationskrav til f.eks. vielsesattester, at
det er næsten umuligt at bevise dokumenternes ægthed”.(Ritzau 18/01-2006).
The situation, where particular ethnic people, mainly colored, ‘the orients’,
are discriminated and
hindered from staying in Denmark with their spouses is not new in the Danish polity. As Said (1978), has
noted on ‘orientalism’, writes “there is no doubt that imaginative geography and history help the mind to intensify
its own sense of itself by dramatizing the distance and difference between what is close to it and what is far
away”(Said (1978; 55, cf: Jensen, 2009).
The right to family reunification by refugees and immigrants seem to be troubling politicians on the rightwing in Denmark, since this is not the first time there is a case of such calibre has been in the news
about foreigner’s family reunification. References are made to the same abuses by the authorities in the
early 1990s, a situation called the “Tamil sagen” (Vested-Hansen, 1994), which also resulted in the
resignation of the then State minister (the Prime Minister) at the time.
In 1992 this particular act was amended, Vested-Hansen, (1994; 255), writes that, the amendment was
to give the refugees open chances for inviting their family depending on the strength of their personal
economy, the problem is whether or not refugees have or can get sound and rightful economy, as the
Vested-Hansen questions the economic capability of refugees, and calls, this ‘window’ restrictive (ibid;
256).
The factor remains that, the intention was to make the family reunification lenient, and that is why the
above mentioned dispensation24 was introduced. However, the one thing that is not very clear is the fact
that, the Danish Aliens Act’s section 7 or 8, which renders the law administrative. As Hervik (2004),
quotes the human rights institute in Denmark, for revealing: “There is NO right to family unification or
reunification, but this is granted at the discretion of an administrator’s evaluation of fulfillment of these subjective
requirements” (Institut for Menneskerettigheder, 2004). Family reunification for immigrants and refugees in
Denmark depends on individual judgments, and even then, the dispensation, offered to the refugees, is
only a suspension of ‘one’ or ‘more’ of the strict requirements that applies to the regular immigrants.
Another hurdle to refugees, like Hamza, is the fact the an evaluation should first be made on whether or
not a refugee applying for the reunification ‘can be able to’ join his or her spouse in their original or home
country---and thus, the refugee in question would be asked to leave Denmark, if the answer to the
evaluation is “yes”……that is, the refugee has to ’self-deport’ from exile to be able to live with his or her
spouse.
The V-K government was deeply inclined on restricting the presence of refugees and immigrants in
Denmark in a way that utterly unmoored from the realities outlined in both international conventions and
human rights requirements. Many experts were in disagreement to this as an expert from DRC, the nongovernmental organization which is supposedly a partner to the government with regards to refugee
repatriation and integration, in a news item declares:
”Det er i strid med den Europæiske Menneskerettighedskonvention at give flygtninge afslag på familiesammenføring med
henvisning til tilknytningskravet,”, (Anne la Cour; jurist og asylchef i Dansk Flygtningehjælp, 18/02-2006).
Indeed, these types of restrictive bills targeting certain groups of people is a sort of ideological animosity,
well exemplified in, for instance, the ‘24-years-requirement’ marriage law, which I will look at later on in
this thesis.
Additionally, a prominent refugee lawyer adds his comments on the situation of the Iraqi refugees,
admitting that the Danish political practices stand in contrast to a number of international conventions
24
Seehttp://www.nyidenmark.dk, under “refugees or persons with protection status”
and obligations Denmark is committed to:
”Det strider mod filosofien bag FN's Flygtningekonvention, der siger, at en flygtning har ret til at leve et liv i fred og frihed i
asyllandet. Det har aldrig været meningen, at flygtninge skulle blive ved med at bevise deres ret til asyl,« siger han og mener, at
den måde, Udlændingestyrelsen afviser irakiske flygtninges ret til familiesammenføring på, betyder, at de i praksis tilbagekalder
deres asylret - ad bagdøren. Signalet er, at hvis du vil bo sammen med din familie, må du rejse hjem”, (Helge Nørrung).
Hervik in 2012, exposed the rationale behind V-K-O regimes’ political maneuver as being based on “zero
tolerance” politics against people of color (Hervik, 2012; 217)----the ‘Orients’. This, according to the author was
done through the waging of the cultural war of values against aliens, mostly Muslims---- the so called
“Kulturkamp,” (ibid; 218).
5.2.2.1.b. “The 24-year old law” as a form of social ‘Othering’
To beef up the restrictions on immigrants and refugees from coming to Denmark or from getting their
spouses from other countries to come to Denmark, the V-K government, besides making marriages
among such groups pricey, also put an age limit on them and aimed deliberately at certain group of
people:
Under valgkampen i Danmark luftede Venstres retspolitiske ordfører, Birte Rønn Hornbech, en idé om at gøre det sværere for
udvalgte grupper, eksempelvis somaliere, at få familiesammenføring (Information, 28/11-2001).
It is also a kind of discriminatory law the V-K government had several difficulties in selling to the Human
right ‘watchdog’ organs in both the UN and the EU. For instance, the V-K government submitted a
misleading, wrong and ‘fortified’ report to the UN High Commissioner for Human rights racism committee
(CERD) in Geneva. The report was also locally criticized by Danish experts and lawyers for racism.
"24-års-reglen beskrives som værende designet til at forhindre tvangsægteskaber, underforstået at den kun rammer der, hvor der
25
er tale om tvang. Og det er jo forkert," siger Jens Vedsted-Hansen .
Det nævnes i rapporten, at både 24-års-reglen og tilknytningskravet gælder for alle, men i realiteten drejer det sig primært om
mennesker af anden etnisk oprindelse end dansk, påpeger både Jens Vedsted-Hansen og Bjørn Elmquist.
"Det er jo løgn. Her er tale om lodret diskrimination. To danskere kan jo godt gifte sig. Men en dansker kan ikke gifte sig med en
udlænding, før man er fyldt 24 år. I øvrigt kan man spørge sig selv, om det er grundlovsstridigt, fordi man her har ret til at gifte sig
som 18-årig," siger Bjørn Elmquist (09/08-2006).
Leder af den nationale afdeling på Institut for Menneskerettigheder (IMR) Birgitte Kofod Olsen vil være tilstede i Genève til
eksaminationen, og hun frygter, at Danmark, ligesom for fire år siden, vil møde skarp kritik fra komitéen for den måde, vi modtager
og håndterer etniske minoriteter på. Hun kalder regeringens rapport mangelfuld og mener ikke, at den giver et retvisende billede af
Danmark. "I forhold til den kritik, regeringen kom med af Europarådets rapport tidligere på året, er denne rapport overraskende,"
siger hun (09/08-2006).
According to Professor Jens Vedsted-Hansen, these laws had its specified object, ‘the Orients’, I argue.
In other words, certain clauses in the law that allows for certain administrative practices in already
25
Professor of Law from the University of Aarhus, Denmark
restrictive law, can give the sense of discrimination, a keen problem in the Danish political discourse
(Sjørslev, 2006; 77: see also the ECRI’s 2006 Report on discrimination in Denmark).
Besides, the fact still remains that policies do not always dictate the ways they are implementation and
their effects are not always traced appropriately. I am of the opinion that the administration of such
stringent laws and the accompanying preferential treatments, albeit, in favor of the ‘Danishness’, was
unambiguously directed by the notion and the construction of ‘Otherness’.
For example, aliens who have children with native Danes from previous marriages or relationships, are
exempted from depositing money meant to serve as the so-called ‘guarantee’. Those who do not have
Danish children are to deposit money as a guarantee to the marriage.
Tilknytningskravet sammenholdt med 28 års reglen medfører diskrimination på grund af etnicitet og race.«Samtidig fører reglen om,
at folk, der søger om ægtefællesammenføring, skal kunne stille 53.096 kr. i sikkerhed, »til krænkelser af retten til
familieliv«.(Ritzaus Bureau, 01/10-2004)
The laws are administrated to treat people according to their relatedness or affiliation to Danes, this, I
argue gives a feeling of attempting to put native Danes above all ‘other’ forms of people--aliens and
refugees, living in the same society---as I argue that, this could also be seen both differentiating and
encouraging superiority----inferiority in Said’s sense….hence ‘Othering’.
In the case of Hamza, for instance, his wife might have been more than 24 years, but how was he going
to meet the other requirements? Be it as it may, the last and the most unpredictable aspect, the
nonnegotiable hurdle, I repeat, is the administration of these laws—which could lead to discrimination
and hence----‘Othering’.
A proper understanding of these laws, the intentions and the expected impacts are made clear by Hervik
(2012), who writes: “the V-K government suspended any rights for aliens to acquire family reunification, unless the
‘subjective requirements’ are met, which also depends on the interpretation of the wordings in the law, if not on the
discretion, of those who administrate them” (Hervik, 2012; 219).
In fact, one cannot predict any outcomes by just reading the text in the law, because they depend on
other things than wordings in them.
Another clear example pointing to the fact that the V-K government, through the notion of “Otherness”
was depriving non-westerners (the Orients) from coming to Denmark, is the Danish Peoples’ Party’s
request to change the 24 years to 28 years, as well as demanding that any foreigner who would opt to
marry from outside, were to have been a Danish citizen for 28 years.
The idea behind making of marriage age-dependent, as explained by the then Minister of integration,
Bartel Haarder, was that “the older one is, the better the person can resist the pressure from his or her family
might to influence the person’s marriage” (cf: Erdine, 2012; 26). Do all people of different settings experience
such influence from their family? In her paper, Erdine saw this law as an ‘orientalist discursive construct’
(ibid, 22), which aims to differentiate between people based on their background, a sort of contestation of
identities, phrased simply ‘Danishness’ and ‘Others’.
Despite the stark warnings of chaos, hostility and insurgency in Iraq, if Hamza, in our example, decides
anyway, to repatriate to Iraq because of his inability to reunification of the wife, it can be implied that the
creation of ‘otherness’, or ‘Othering’ of people can also trigger ‘involuntary’ repatriation of refugees.
5.2.2.2 “Isolation from the local population” as a form of social ‘Othering’
One of the means of creating the ‘us’ and ‘them’ in any host country is by isolating the ‘newcomers’—
refugees or immigrants, from the existing local people through the allocation of housing. This was the
experience of some of the Iraqi refugees in the interview, who claimed that they had to live in a place
reserved for tourists26 and therefore complained of isolation. For example Basheer narrated his
experience as follows:
”Det sted jeg fik tildelt at bo i var et turiststed hvor der kunne bo 2000 mennesker, men jeg var den eneste der boede der. Så det
var meget tomt, og jeg følte mig meget ensom.” (Basheer; page 79).
This form of social exclusiveness, expressed differently, a deprivation from any chances of socializing by
the refugees in the Danish community, I argue, is based on the assumption that, one party is inferior to
the other and therefore incompatible. According to Olwig et al., (2011; 12), the construction of societies
by socially excluding certain kinds of people can lead to notions of not being part of or belonging to the
existing communities. The authors have cited ethnographic case studies among immigrants in Denmark
depicting their adverse experiences of exclusiveness in Danish institutions.
According to the 1951 convention, and more precisely in article 1 section 21 of the 1951, refugees have
right to adequate housing by host nations. The reported situation in most societies is that, refugees, like
most immigrants living in western countries, get to group themselves in certain areas in the society
because of several concerted policies, especially in the municipalities, and this leads to the grouping of
these people and their cohorts.
The situation is not different in Denmark, and had even drawn the attention of the legal institution.
According Vested-Hansen (1994, 250) the high court in Denmark, had cautioned against discriminatory
practices, by grouping and isolating aliens in certain areas, codenamed-ghettos27 by the politicians in the
municipality. The practice of discriminatory housing, according to the author has not abated in Denmark,
notwithstanding the caution from the High Court.
It can be said that, this practice which lends itself to what in Denmark is referred to as “Dem og Os”
practices, thus separating “Dem” (“they”), the immigrants, and refugees from “Os” (“we”), the native
Danes is not coincidental but perhaps by design.
Isolating refugees from the population, by housing them in places where they hardly can see people of
26
A holiday resort
27
The art of clustering people together by housing due to their ethnic identity, exemplified in the American urban ghettoes
their caliber, people they can identify themselves with or who they can interact or communicate with, a
form of cultivating ‘they’ and ‘us’, can create problems for the refugees and make they feel dejected, as
Zahida complains about how they felt lonely in the camp:
[...] der hvor vi boede før var der næsten ingen mennesker og vi kendte ikke så mange. Man har ikke noget liv hvis man
ikke har nogen at snakke med. Der hvor vi boede før var der ikke så mange indvandrere og flygtninge, og de danskere der
boede der havde ikke lyst til at snakke med os for de var ikke vant til flygtninge. Det tror jeg var en af grundene til at vi
rejste tilbage. Vi kunne ikke kommunikere med danskerne og jeg vidste ikke hvordan man gjorde det. Så en af grundene til
at vi ville vende tilbage, var fordi der var at der ikke var nogen flygtninge og indvandrere at snakke med, og vi følte os
meget isolerede i Danmark, (Zahida; 79).
Such practices that make refugees in exile live without any form of social capital can be detrimental for
them, and in the worst case scenario, cause them break down, Reichelt, et al., (1994, 142), has dealt
through therapies with refugees with “suffering and degrading experiences” due to lack of social
resources. My argument is, this obviously, wasn’t any experience the Iraqis had wished for and perhaps
explains why they will repatriate.
5.2.2.3 Exclusion from the work force as a form socio-economic ‘Othering’
There are two descriptions of both the employment situation for immigrants and refugees and their social
status in Denmark. The first is, according to scholars, these people have an unemployment rate that is
three to four times higher than the ethnic Danes (Thomsen & Moes, 2002; 2). The next is, they live in
ghettos as they also do marry amongst themselves (Ryther, 2011; 67). These academic descriptions of
the socio-economic situation of immigrants and refugees in Denmark, add yet another dimension, besides
political, to make clear the ‘Otherness’ notion……… the ‘they’ and ‘us’. There are other factors that add to
these ‘hurdles’, according to studies conducted among these groups. The chances for an average Danish
entrepreneur or employer to employ an immigrant or a refugee is measured as a study by the Institute of
Social Research has revealed:
”Indvandrere, der kæmper for at få deres første job i en dansk virksomhed, er oppe imod særdeles hårde odds. Arbejdsgiverne
lægger nemlig mest af alt vægt på erhvervserfaring fra - en anden dansk virksomhed. Det skriver I dag - Industriens Dagblad. Både uddannelse og erhvervserfaring skal simpelthen være fra Danmark, hvis en indvandrer skal øge sine chancer for at komme i
job. Socialforskningsinstituttets undersøgelse er nedslående læsning for arbejdsivrige indvandrere, der ikke allerede har haft deres
første job på det danske arbejdsmarked. Ud over dansk erhvervserfaring og uddannelse peger den på gode danskkundskaber og
netværk som de vigtigste adgangsbilletter til et job. Selv peger mange indvandrere ifølge undersøgelsen på diskrimination som
årsag til, at de har vanskeligt ved at komme i arbejde - også selv om de ikke personligt har følt sig diskrimineret”, siger
Forskningsleder Anders Rosdahl fra Socialforskningsinstituttet (Ritzaus Bureau 05/04-2006).
I hate to use hard words like discrimination and racialization, but I admit and maintain, as I have also
always done in this writing that, experientially, there cannot be any credible nor sound arguments against
the presence of preferential treatments in the Danish job market. This fact, however wordless in the
everyday discourses, is public knowledge and remains that, the Danes prefer appointing ‘those’ who
resemble themselves……..”vi ansætter dem der ligner os” and thus, among many immigrants in Denmark,
demography, at times, and to say this quite conservatively, becomes the lead to their destiny, social
status and social capital.
One striking issue that strengthens the ‘they’ and ‘us’ is the differences in skin color between the native
Danes and the heterogeneous newcomers, yet another unspoken fact is, according to (Schierup, 1993),
the creation of the ‘we’ and ‘them’ division which has been on an increase since the late 90s, worsened
by the fact that any attempts to downplay the notion that skin pigmentation determines behavior has
been underrated.
The relative deprivation of immigrants and refugees from the Danish work force, I believe, makes easy
the stigmatization of them, and hence my point on ‘Otherness’.
The situation of refugees and asylum-seekers is even much more worse, as they, until the new Danish
government came to power, were not allowed to work at all. According to Vedsted-Hansen (1994, 249),
“the legal condition that refugees granted asylum are not also granted work permit is problematic”, this is agreed
to by Crepeau et al., (1994; 239), who asserts that, “one of the ways to get traumatized refugees who live in
exile to maintain a minimum dignity is to allow that they participate in the workforce and be able to the contribute to
the society that has received them”. Though, the act is repealed today under the new government, refugees
weren’t to work under the V-K government as this was what the Iraqi refugees experienced in Denmark
and which also might have added to their frustration and hence their involuntary repatriation.
Some of the interviewees desired to work. Ali talks of his frustration about not being allowed to earn his
own money and had to depend on the token offered him by the asylum social workers:
…..afgørende ting for et menneske her i Danmark, det er at have et arbejde. Og når arbejdsformidlingen vil stå i vejen for at jeg får
arbejde, så kan jeg ikke leve.” (Ali; pages 79-80)
The idea by the new government of the Radikale Venstre (B), the Solistiske Folkeparti (SF) and the
Socialdemocrats (S), that refugees are able to gain a bit of socio-economic capital through working and
interacting with people, instead of sitting in their liminal space (Turner, 2012; 2 & 112) in the Camps,
could enhance both their integration into the existing society or their voluntary repatriation.
Backers to the idea for improving refugee life in exile have advocated for diverse enhancing approaches.
For example, Gallagher (1994) has noted and urged for a short alternative to legal integration, which
entails that refugees get access to the labor market of the hosting country, the DRC suggests temporary
legal residence permit for refugees under severe circumstances (DRC, Danskeflygtningehjælp, årsreport
2008; 15: www.danskeflytningehjælpe.dk).
I contend that this deprivation, as Ali has complained about, is counterproductive with regards to the
troubled refugees, because I believe there is a lot to gain by allowing the refugees to participate in the
job market. The structure of the formidable Danish labor unit and its regulations alone is sufficient to
rebuild these refugees, however traumatized or troubled, and this, I believe is an effective way for
refugees’ reconstruction, because it contains everything from social protection and effective
management, through equality and non-discrimination, to personal improvement and economic security.
The argument by the V-K government was based on the fear that getting to join the Danish workforce
will encourage the refugees to remain in the country and even attract more--- “DF: Asyludspil gør
Danmark til flygtningemagnet” (Ritzaus Bureau 13/06-2012). I argue that this argument overshadows the fact
that the refugees could be able to regain themselves in the long-term, and as the erstwhile V-K
government beforehand, chose repatriation over all other options entailed in the refugee welfare and
protection.
As a means for getting the Iraqi refugees to opt to return home to Iraq, the V-K government embarked
on reducing the financial assistance given to the refugees in the Camps. The so-called ‘start-hjælpe’
system for refugees and was to serve the purpose of not making Denmark attractive to other refugees.
In the interviews, some of the refugees in the interview said they had repatriated due the unbearable
economic situation.
According to the students who conducted the interviews, some of the refugee
families begun to have mental disorders because of the economic pressure laid on them and that
hastened their decision on the repatriation, however unwillingly. Rania tells the interviewers:
”Vi er syv mennesker i denne her familie, og vi fik 900 kroner om ugen
28
, og vi har været nede ved kommunen, hos
sagsbehandleren, og har snakket med dem, og fortalt dem at det ikke rakte.” (Rania; page 78).
Her husband Mohammed goes deeper to explain the situation that triggered the repatriation from
Denmark:
“Hver dag når jeg kom tilbage fra praktik græd hun, så jeg kunne ikke holde denne her situation ud mere. Derfor besluttede vi at
vi skulle rejse tilbage til Irak.” ”Vi snakkede sammen om det. Det var ligesom at vælge mellem pest eller kolera, i Irak er der dårlig
sikkerhed, og i Danmark har vi ikke nok mad at spise” (ibid, 78).
For this family, the only reason why they went back to Iraq, according to the authors, is the economic
pressure they were put under. The same economic pressures, as stated before were laid on the instable
Iraqi government to receive the forcedly repatriated Iraqis. As I have already indicated, the new S-SF-B
government has and continues to repeal some of the harsh regulations on refugees and other
immigrants, this time, to the delight of the DRC and other organizations:
“Den nye regering afliver starthjælpen: Dansk flygtningehjælp har siden starthjælpens fødsel i 2002 været kritisk over for
starthjælpen.--- Starthjælpen skaber en ulighed, som er svær at forstå. Så det er glædelige nyheder, lyder det fra generalsekretær
i Dansk Flygtningehjælp, Andreas Kamm. Ifølge generalsekretæren vil det få stor betydning for indvandrerfamilier, der hidtil ikke
28
Dette lave beløb skyldtes, at det kun var Mohamad der fik kontanthjælp, og at kommunen trak ham i kontanthjælp hver gang Rania
udeblev fra sin aktivering. Hun udeblev ofte fra aktiveringen, fordi hun var nødt til at blive hjemme med deres fem børn, som de ikke
havde råd til at sende i børnehave og vuggestue.
har haft råd til eksempelvis at lade deres børn gå til en sportsgren. Dermed får integrationen et løft, lyder det” (Ritzaus Bureau
02/10-2011).
An eminent spokesperson from the V-K government, who thinks the betterment of the refugee conditions
in Denmark will attract more refugees, adds her critique to treating the refugee’s right by giving them
reasonable economic support.
- Man kan jo ikke fortænke asylansøgere i at søge asyl i de lande, hvor det er lettest, det ville jeg også selv gøre. Jo bedre forhold
vi giver dem, jo større en magnet er vi, siger Inger Støjberg (V) (Ritzaus Bureau 08/02-2013).
Observe the wordings in this statement, the better ‘we’ treat ‘them’, the more attractive ‘we’ become for
those others who will want to seek asylum, I think this is a clear division among human beings.
5.2.3 Cultural ‘Othering’
Peter Hervik, an anthropology professor from both the University of Aaborg in Denmark and University of
Malmo in Sweden in 2004 summaries in his release; “The Danish Cultural World of Unbridgeable
Differences” in reference to the V–K government’s handling of the immigrants and refugees: “the
contestation of foreign presence in Denmark” and adds “This denial in the popular sphere builds on the same
culturalist construction of unbridgeable differences between a ‘we-group’ of ‘alike’ (or invisible) Danes and a visible
‘out-group’ that dominates both popular and political understandings of immigrants and refugees in Denmark in the
end of the 1990s”
I will talk about racism here. No, nobody is racist, I am and will only talk about differentiating among
human beings, because certain people here, in Denmark had to be ’uprooted’ (Malkki, 1992) from the
Danish soil, their culture makes them belong elsewhere.
In this section, I explore how the Danish culture, norms and values were constructed as ‘posited essence’
(Prakash 1990; 394, cf Malkki, 1997), by the government and the Danish Peoples party and used as a
‘political tool’ to fight the minorities based on the perceived cultural differences as it was also used to
buttress and widen the ‘them’ and ‘us’ divide through laws that demarcated the ‘newcomers’ from the
native Danes.
“FN advarer mod dansk diskrimination: FN-højkommissær taler om dobbeltmoral og advarer mod diskrimination af flygtninge »Den
nye regering i Danmark skal selvfølgelig have lov til at vise, hvad den vil. Men der har aldrig før været et så påtrængende behov for
ikke bare at bekæmpe diskrimination, men også for at komme flygtninge og asylansøgere i møde,« siger Mary Robinson til
Information. Eksempelvis er spørgsmålet om ikke-diskrimination meget vigtig, især når det gælder familiesammenføring. Der må
ikke være forskellig tilgang til forskellig nationaliteter,« siger hun” (Information, 28/11-2001).
The thought about the Danish cultural identity in politics, defined in terms of ‘one-shared’ culture, a
collective self, based on shared-history and shared-ancestry, coupled with the perception that all natives
Danes are ‘one-people’, quite unchanging and therefore also have the same destiny---oneness,
sameness, a tendency that both eases and leads the creation of specific form of Othering---ethnic
Otherness (Baumann, 2004). Because, in my view, those who were ‘Othered’ seem to have distinctive
characteristics, ‘markers’ such as skin color, eye-color and hair color, that isolate them from the ‘selves’,
as they also almost always form the minority, as Schwalbe et. al., (2000) observed that “Othering is a
process whereby a dominant group defines into existence an inferior group” (Schwalbe et. al., 2000; 422; cf: Jensen,
2009; 13).
It was to assume that all native Danes belong together, have the same background and even act
together, the constructed and perceived ‘sameness’. This stance, which is also the backbone of the
divide, as I had argued that it is also ‘Otherness’, is highly disputed, Jenkins (1997) writes: “neither culture
nor ethnicity is something people have or indeed, to which they belong. They are, rather, complex repertoires which
people experience, use, learn and do in their daily lives, within which they construct an ongoing sense of themselves
and an understanding of their fellows.” (Jenkins, 1997; 14). Again, to emphasize the perverse notion that
Denmark belongs to the native Danes, the V-K government and the support party in both practice and
rhetoric, constructed cultural identities, between the Danes and aliens--cultural demarcation, through
what in Malkki’s view
is ‘‘the taken-for-granted ways of thinking about identity and territory’’ the author
summaries such notions as “a commonsense ideas about countries and roots, nations and national identities”
(Malkki, 1997; 166), used in this political context against the aliens in Denmark, the so-referred to as the
‘intruders’ who are only aiming at invading the welfare state.
The perceived differences in culture became one of the easy and discernible arguments used by the
Danish Peoples’ Party in that continuum, as their utterances are not only subtle racism, (van Dijk, 1995),
but also do attach people to their perceived culture, to their birthplace seen as being their origin.
“To claim that people and cultures are not inferior initially enables the users of neo-racist rhetoric to deny racism;
humans are seen as always part of cultures and cultures are naturally tied to certain landscape and climates. If
people of different cultures are in the ‘wrong place’, their culture will be incompatible with the culture of the new
context, which inevitable generates conflict and xenophobic reactions. An implication of this naturalization of culture
is that ‘living among one’s own kind is natural’ and therefore mixing is undesirable” (Hervik, 2012; 214).
The aliens were not only deemed as having a different and incompatible culture, but also a sort of culture
that stands in contrast to that of the Danes and will compete with the Danish culture “mod-kultur”,
(opposite culture). As if culture is fixed, and not porous (Barth, 1969), this question has driven into the
arguments on the integration of immigrants. The perception and the stigmatization of immigrants as
being “different” and “incompatible” within the Danish society, I think, makes the integration quite vague
and unidirectional, as Kvaale (2011; 226), exposes on the confusion that exists between
what the
politicians refer to as integration which perhaps seems like assimilation. Nevertheless, the author sees
the integration process as, “the conducting of culturalized national politics with the intension of complete
assimilation of immigrants rather than civil state politics with the intention of functional integration” (ibid 231).
The problem however, is whether or not all the foreigners in Denmark have a common culture or even
common religion, and this makes it difficult to envisage which particular culture, the kultur-kamp was
directed against. My take, however vaguely, is that the target perhaps was the Islamic culture, leaving
behind the question of whether or not all the foreigners are Muslims or will even desire to be.
OSCE: Danmark diskriminerer muslimer: Danmarks behandling af den muslimske befolkning bliver igen udsat for hård kritik fra en
international institution. Denne gang fra OSCE, der i en ny rapport, som Dagbladet Information er kommet i besiddelse af, skarpt
kritiserer muslimers stilling i Danmark. OSCE -ambassadør Omür Orhun kritiserer den danske regering for på en række områder at
have forværret danske muslimers stilling gennem de seneste fem år og afslører, at han flere gange i efteråret advarede
udenrigsminister Per Stig Møller om, at regeringens håndtering af karikaturkrisen var uklog. (Information, 03/04-2007).
Muslims in Denmark, regardless of how modest, fanatic or whatever they may be, they all have to
constantly listen to critics and suspensions as their presence in the country also became questionable.
The state backed campaign based on the notion and experience of culture as territorially and ethnically
rooted with certain indigenous people, (Kvaale, 2011; 242) and as if the Danish culture and how the
citizens adopt and use them is patentable to the Danish state. A campaign championed by the far right
Peoples’ party, with their uncompromising stance and which was only to discriminate between the native
Danes and the aliens in the country. In his collections, Sewells’ (2005; 156) had defined culture in two
ways, according to the author culture is “a concrete and bounded body of beliefs and practices” and two,
“culture evolves social life”. In any sense, I argue that beliefs, practices and social life, are not restricted to
or owned by any specific group of people nor do they have any patent over them, as these are also not
static but dynamic.
As Connor (1994, 92), has noted, the imprecision of the use of the terms ‘nation’, ‘state’, the ‘nation-state’ and
‘nationalism’ in ‘Othering’; and the claims by certain political parties, which associate themselves with particular
territories as belonging to them, thereby seeing ‘Others’ as also belonging elsewhere, creates a divide among people
in the same country.
Culture can be used as a strategic tool to constructing ‘we’ and ‘them’ which can also lead to
discrimination. Culture is not fixed as do also identity, according to Castells (1997), both culture and
identity formation are the same with regards to what people are faced with, it ‘is people’s source of meaning
and experience’ (Castells, 1997; 6).
Notwithstanding all these assertions, culture identity and ethnicity, still seemed to be the political
arguments that directed the V-K government restrictive bills on immigrants and refugees.
The V-K government and the Danish Peoples party in their process of using the perceived cultural
difference between the native Danes on one hand and the minorities on the other, strategically, put the
existing Danish cultural institutions in the country under political control.
“Stram styring af dansk kultur: Der sættes i disse år nye politiske rammer for de danske kulturinstitutioner, der går i retning af øget
politisk styring af de statslige midler.” En meget anti-liberal politisk styring af dansk kultur," som betyder, at man fratager de
danske kulturinstitutioner deres autonomi”, (Elsebeth Gerner Nielsen; 28/06-2006)
This form of political agenda, whereby culture and its perceived differences, are used as a dividing-line,
as I have outlined throughout this paper, has been disputed by many anthropologists including Eller
(1959; 8), who has referred to this as an “odd paradox”, because according to him, the relation between
ethnicity and culture is not perfect.
In other developments, DeVos (1975) adverted to such processes and described them as: “subjective
symbolic or emblematic use of any aspects of culture by a group, in order to differentiate themselves from other
groups”, (DeVos, 1975; 16; cf, ibid; 8). It could be argued that the V-K government that prides itself with
liberalization could place such restrictions on free thinking cultural institutions. I think, this explains the
enormity of the attempt to draw a cultural line between ‘we’ the Danes and ‘them’, the refugees and the
immigrants, or call them the ‘Orients’ as this also attracted a critic from a member of parliament. A
lecturer from the University of Copenhagen at the institute of Arts and Culture adds:
“Oppositionen kalder det anti-liberal politik, der giver mere bureaukrati og mindre kunst Den nuværende regering ønsker at få mere
hånd i hanke med de offentlige tilskudsmidler til dansk kultur. Lektor ved Institut for Kunst og Kulturvidenskab ved Københavns
Universitet, Peter Duelund, er enig i, at "det helt klart giver mulighed for større politisk detailstyring," hvilket han mener, går ud
over princippet om at holde armslængde i forholdet mellem kunst og politik”. (Ritzaus Bureau, 28/06-2006).
By attempting to construct national identities for natives Danes, the V-K government backed by, if not
directed by the Danish people’s party with their burning desire to oust immigrants from Denmark,
succeeded in having a sort of “biopolitical” agenda that only impinged or rested on race, identity, culture
stereotyping and gender issues.
For example, the verbal tussles and the negative vibes surrounding refugees and immigrants, the political
utterances and practice they are subjected to, in my judgment, are only to depict the intra relationships
among aliens as seductive and lacking sexual freedom, as they do also to show that these group of
people collectively do not have any affable character.
That said, the Danish culture, which already imposes a necessity for its dominance in Denmark, as I draw
on my own experience, can co-existence with these sub-cultures, the prerequisite though, is tolerance.
“Europarådet bekymret over intolerance i Danmark: Danmark kritiseres nu igen for sin måde at behandle etniske og religiøse
minoriteter på. Nu må regeringen lukke ørerne op og gøre noget, mener oppositionen. Europarådets Ministerkomité er bekymret
over, at der i Danmark eksisterer en intolerance, der kan føre til øget fjendtlighed mod forskellige etniske og religiøse grupper.”
(Ritzaus Bureau, 17/12-2005).
However, according to Hervik, (2004; 249), the intolerance for aliens, especially Muslim aliens by certain
Danes begun with the wars in the Balkans and in Somalia in the 1990s, and the subsequent rise in neonationalism in the country in the late 90s. The election of the liberal party in 2001, supported by the
Danish Peoples Party was only to cement and climax, the already ‘latent’ they-and-us construction. In his
view, seeing or much rightly, perceiving people from other cultures as a threat to ‘people’ who deem
themselves as having cultural homogeneity, get us close to far-right populism than to just populism
(Hervik, 2012; 214). Well in all other respects, this form of populism is what I believe, underscores the
enormity of the politics the Danish Peoples’ party practiced with the V-K government, what I had believed
to be differentiating, hence ‘Othering’ or ‘Otherness’. Because by demonizing the perceived alien’s
culture, which is seen as a type of culture that does not belong to Denmark and even contradict the
Danish culture is------a sense of belonging----hence ‘Othering’ or ‘Otherness’. Remember that one central
rhetoric in the so-called Kultur-kamp was the “Deres-og-vores” kultur, (meaning ‘theirs’ and ‘ours’ culture),
with the ‘western’ superiority as opposed to ‘non-western’ inferiority’ as an undertone in the ‘conduction of
the culturalized national politics’ (Kvaale, 2011; 231).
Allen (2009), inspired by the German writer Schnitzler, refers to this form of seeing oneself as not being
what the others are, as an act of “the underpinning of the imperialist power” well as being “attempts or
strategies to stereotype and thereby marginalize and control specific national, ethnic, religious, or linguistic groups”
in the society (ibid; 44). He continues to see this type of politics, as it also in Denmark in the V-K
governments’ era as “using objectifying representational strategies in constructing otherness” (ibid; 45).
The repatriation of the Iraqis happened at a time when the government had constructed the so-called
“kultur canon” ---the ‘cultural canon’ project, believed to be used in waging a “kulturkamp” ---the ‘cultural
war of values’ (Hervik 2012; 218), by emphasizing the notion of ‘identity’ relative to other ‘identities’—
‘Othering’ or ‘Otherness’, (Spavik, 1985).
The ‘preaching’ of these ‘blatantly essentialist culture concepts’
(Kvaale, 2011; 136)
and how these
discourses resonated with the voters in the Danish community, in my view, also can be used to
determine and explain the pressures mounted on the Iraqi refugees and which also triggered the
irrational decision on the repatriation and I say quite experientially. The consequences of the ‘biopolitics’
in Denmark for the ten years still await an eminent Danish writer or historian.
It was in this period, where the V-K government deliberately attempted to create some sort of ‘unity’ or
‘sameness’ through the enhancement of cultural relativism, as they were also emphasizing cultural
incompatibility (Gingrich, 2004; 12). This form nationalism in the words of Andre Gingrich, fakes internal
division among people, as he states: “Most versions of nationalism aggressively construct, and mobilize for, an
emotionalized ‘us’ thereby downplaying all kinds of internal conflicts among such an ‘us’ which is usually defined
along narrow and rigid cultural lines. Simultaneously, the minds and feelings of ‘us’ are directed against stereotyped
and stigmatized forms of ‘them’, by downplaying all common factors that ‘us’ and ‘them’ do, or could, share”
(Gingrich, 2006; 199)
In his earlier works, Hervik (1999) pointed to the construction of ‘cultural others’ in referring to with the
presence of the Somalis in Denmark, these people were perceived as distinctively different and unable to
be integrated into the Danish society. The distinctive nature of Black people, Somalis for example, and
non-Christian denominations, say Islam, as I have argued before, is a factor on which, the Danish
Peoples Party, the ‘new right’ generate forces justifiable by the easy identification of these ‘objects’, to
subject them to discrimination and nepotism. Perhaps Hervik is right when he writes, “I contend that a
Danish cultural understanding of immigrants and refugees follows the general pattern of figured worlds and contains
a set of agents, a set of typical progressing events, and specific set of motivating forces” (Hervik, 2004; 253).
This sort of divide, again I argue, might have reflected how the authorities in the municipality
“sagsbehandler” might have perceived and treated the Iraqis.
According to one of the Iraqis called
Basheer, who found the atmosphere in the camp as uncongenial and didn’t feel like continuing to be in
Denmark, the social workers, (Sagsbehandler), wanted to entice him in order for him to say ‘yes’ to
repatriation. Basheer explains his experience with the Asylum social workers in this way:
”Han bekrigede mig psykisk. Han pressede mig til at rejse tilbage. Han sagde for eksempel til min praktikvært at han havde tilbudt
mig et køleskab og et fjernsyn hvis bare jeg ville rejse hjem til Irak.”
“Det var sagsbehandleren der drev mig så langt ud at jeg ikke kunne se noget håb i Danmark, der var ikke anden udvej end at
forlade Danmark.” (Basheer; 80).
It could be example of the effect of the mainstream V-K-O’s politics, as this campaign might have
resonated among the entire population. Hervik, (2004; 261), observed among a group of Danish people
he studied that, if foreigners do not ditto-ditto comply with the Danish way of life or directly copy them,
they are deemed as being unruly—unruly guest.
The author observed from these interviews, that, the notion of ‘we’ the Danes and the ‘host’ on one
hand; and ‘they’, the aliens and the ‘guest’ or out-group, as he called it, on the other hand (ibid; 253) , are
perceived as existing with ‘irreconcilable cultural differences’….a sort of the reinforcement of the notions of
“cultural Others”.
On ‘otherness in Europe’, Gingrich (2006), illustrates how nationalism had influenced the ‘carving of’ or the
formulation and the mobilizing of ‘us’ by ignoring the internal conflict and the differences that might have
also existed within this ‘us’, in his opinion these construction are mainly based on culture, (ibid; 199)
leaning utterly on the ‘perceived differences and commonalities’ (ibid; 200), of such cultures. The author cites
Holland et al., for coining a well and befitting modern terminologies “culturally-figured worlds” (Holland et
al., 1998), and “cultural models” (ibid, 1987) to describe these tendencies.
5.2.4 Religious ‘Othering’
There is not much in the V-K government that was against other forms of Christianity beside the national
Danish Christian-orthodox church, no, the problem is Islam. “At the same time, Denmark’s Christian culture is
regarded as inseparable from democratic society, yet with freedom of religion expunged in the face of Islamic
incompatibility” (Hervik, 2012; 221). The growing disconnect, however is the disagreement between the
government and the support party, which is categorically Christianity-inclined, as it is also deemed as a
core element in the quest for “Danishness” (Jenkins, 2011; 260). As I gave examples earlier on, the
members of the party have a special feeling for Islam and do not believe that Muslims can follow
democratic norms……democracy is a Christian norm and not a process. According to Baumann (2004),
‘Othering’, could be recognized in the realms of politics, religion and aesthetics, it also attempts to emphasize
‘superiority’ of ‘self’ to the ‘other’---“ (see, page 21).
“DF-formand maner til kamp mod islam: Dansk Folkeparti har sat sig nye mål for stramninger i udlændingepolitikken i forbindelse
med dette efterårs finanslovforhandlinger. Der skal gang i hjemsendelserne af afviste asylansøgere, ulandsbistanden skal tages fra
lande, der ikke vil tage imod deres egne borgere, og der skal oprettes asylansøgningscentre så tæt som muligt på de lande,
asylansøgerne kommer fra” (Ritzaus Bureau; 18/09-2004).
The Danish peoples’ party opposition and objection to Islam on Danish soil also led to in two not-too-easy
to understand actions taken by party during the V-K government’s regime. 1. Their unequivocal
mandating the government to participate in the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars, and 2. Their opposition to
using Danish money in the rebuilding the war-torn Islamic countries—“the Others”, and categorical
opposition to supporting the renovation29 of 13 Mosques in Afghanistan.
This form of intolerance stands alone with regards to what we read from countries, Denmark claims to be
friends with. For example, in the US and Canada, two of the main refugee receiving western countries in
the world, the prohibition of discrimination based religion is clear and explicit under what is referred to as
“reasonable accommodation” (1972 in the US, and in Canada under the Canadian Chapter of Rights and
Freedoms in 1982; cf. Bribosia et al., 2011 and Ringelheim et al., 2010). In much the same way, as the
European Commission’s convention on Human Rights in 1978 and the EU’s Equality Directive of 2000, is
also expected to prohibit religious discrimination, even when, according to Bribosia et al., (2011), this EU
directive has been subjected to varying interpretations in different courts 30 from one Member state to the
other. Albeit, Member states that are bound by the EU’s legal obligations are inspired by them. It suffices
though, to say that, Denmark is not bound by any EU regulations and makes its own decisions on
whether or not to adopt any of the EU regulations.
Besides, Denmark, according to Olwig et al., (2011; 2), perhaps in contrast to most of the western
countries, like Sweden and the UK, Canada and the US, is perceived as a “modern egalitarian, culturally
homogeneous and mono-religious state”, therefore, it may be understandable to experience
an iota of
resistances in allowing plurality of religious practices and beliefs in the country. That said, detesting
Islam, or discouraging its presence in Denmark in the 21th century, in my sense, my goodness, could best
be expected as only for winning elections, and not winning elections to practice such politics, and without
attempting to decry the polity in the country, well, that is far from my intention, however I was stock to
witness that, this kind of politics could be practiced in 10 years. I say this because the influence of the
Danish Peoples’ party seems diminishing now; at least, this politics, in 2011 was not a winner in
Denmark, after ten years of its use and practice. The reluctance to recognize immigrants’ religion, I
believe, is no longer on the political agenda, despite the sporadic references to it, due to the unabated
outcry on migration from certain quarters in the Danish Parliament.
The debated Kulturkanon had Christianity as a prime element, and I think that, it makes the “Others”
indignant because it appropriates the dominant Danish culture. In Said’s ‘Orientalist’ sense, they are
politically powered by the re-thinking and the re-visiting of history, ancestral holdings, to make certain
29
Ritzau Bureau 09/07-2008
30
1981 in the UK; 2000 in Greece and 2008 in France, just name but few.
groups in the Danish society see themselves as different and ‘Others’. The ‘Kanon’ which Jenkins (2011)
had referred to as a centrally proscribed cultural canon, has since 2006 been the cornerstone of the
religious education for schools, the kristendomskunskab, which was to be leaned towards the Lutheran
church, (Jenkins, 2011; 259). It has since drawn sharp criticisms:
”Krav om nationalistisk- kristen folkeskole kritiseres skarpt: Dansk Folkeparti (DF) står tilsyneladende isoleret med sine ønsker om,
at folkeskolens værdigrundlag ændres, så det alene fokuserer på dansk kultur og kristendom” (Ritzaus Bureau, 13/02-2006).
Where will the Islamic religion stand in the face of the so-called integration of immigrants? As mostly
perceived among the politicians on the far right of the political aisles in Denmark, the integration may not
meet severe difficulties among people with European background, Jenkins (2011; 257). To some degree,
I dispute, it is deeply due to their background as they are perceived as being readily able to integrate,
and not incompatible to the Danish norms and values because they, generally are not Muslims.
As anthropologists, like Grillo, have observed as a problem, immigrants with ethnic backgrounds, who
live transnational live and insist on maintaining their own values and norms can be at ‘odds’ with the
news societies which they live in (Grillo, 2011; 267). A tendency the Danish integration system cannot
escape.
Grillo seems to get it right as his point hits the core of the belated, yet impending integration in Denmark.
In his view, the minorities can be ‘in the Danish society but different’, with individual freedom and choices and
social engagement (ibid; 268), aided underway by the cessation of those cinematic negative discourses on
the disfiguration of immigrants and refugees in Denmark, I argue.
In the same vein and quite understandably, Jenkins (2011), debates how the integration process may be
different and uneasy, for instance, for ‘visibly’ different, religiously challenging (mainly Muslims) migrants,
who mostly arrived in Denmark from the mid-1980s onwards, and who are or who will find it, difficult to
integrate’. These things, I dispute, can only be challenges and not hindrances, far from that. Jenkins
debunks the impossibility of integrating such groups into the Danish, the stance of politicians from the
Danish Peoples’ Party based on the notion of “Otherness” have taken. They have any forms of
descriptions for Islam and one can only hope that they have acquired enough knowledge about the
religion.
“Islam er den største trussel mod verdensfreden siden kommunismens fald” (Per Dalgaard, DF; 29/04-2007).
The Danish Peoples’ Party’s politicians perhaps reserve the integration to Christians immigrants (ibid;
259). Or perhaps, the integration demands immigrants to give up what they came with and take up the
Danish way of life or are the immigrants, to maintain for example, their—culture, language or traditions.
In any case these “new right” politicians construe the Danish integration as a process of becoming an
‘ethnic Dane’, or as becoming “the imagined national (native) citizen” (Grillo, 2011; 274)…… their emphasis is
unchangeably on we the Danes with ‘vi Dansker’ an untainted attitude, as against the immigrants of
unstinted characters, an argument aided by anti-Islam, ethnic profiling and the politics of no tolerance for
immigrants and their religion. The reason can maybe be spotted in what the current leader of the Danish
Peoples’ Party said in 2009:
”Det handler om assimilation, hvis samfundet skal fungere. Om at folk med anden etnisk baggrund entydigt skal tilpasse sig danske
traditioner. tørklæder være forbudt i offentligheden, 24-års-reglen var afløst af en 28-års-regel, og Danmark ville primært modtage
flygtninge fra den vestlige kulturkreds, mange indvandrere ville blive tvangsflyttet væk fra ghettoer, og muslimer stillede helst ikke
spørgsmål til indholdet af pølsehornene ved den lokale byfest”. (DF's magtfulde gruppeformand Kristian Thulesen Dahl: 21/072009).
I personally wait to see how the conversion of these Muslims into the Danish Christian religion would look
like or the form of assimilation the party had wished, will be, insomuch as the fact remains that any
effective integration, in the words of Jenkins is ‘not the prerogative of the state’ (Jenkins, 2011; 264).
5.2.5 Media ‘Othering’
The expected neutrality among the news media is slowly being eroded, as most journalists and
newscasters, according to Cook (1998, 85), do not only communicate political information but also have
assumed the role of the construction political agenda.
It is revealed (Hervik, 2004) that the perception of immigrants and refugees by most ancient Danes in
the population, are only drawn from the media. In his extensive studies on the relationship between
native Danes and immigrants and refugees in Denmark and how the Danish media has contributed in
getting the Danes to seeing the immigrants and refugees as ‘the Others’---“Orients”--- Peter Hervik,
writes: “Few Danes know any immigrants and refugees personally. Since the Danish media have been saturated by
negative stories about immigrants, it is therefore hardly surprising that the distinction between a ‘we-group’ of Danes
and a ‘they-group’ of immigrants is present in all of our interviews” (Hervik, 2004; 253). An interesting counter
reaction to the negative perception of immigrants and refugees by most in the population due to both
political and media influence is what a Danish artist exhibited during the early years of the V-K-O reign in
Denmark to ironically tell people that immigrants and refugees are also human beings:
Flygtninge er også mennesker: ”Postkort fra Paradis” kalder fotograf Anders Clausen sin udstilling på Platformen, Brandts
Klædefabrik. Den varer til 18. april og fortæller med egne fotos, hvordan flytninge på Dansk Røde Kors’ asylafdelinger ser sig selv.Flygtninge-billeder i medierne fokuserer på ydre begivenheder: På flugt, på sagsbehandlerens kontor, i tolden. Disse stereotyper er
med til at forstærke indtrykket af, at flygtninge ikke er individer, men en gruppe. Og som sådan bliver de bedømt, siger Finn
Thrane, direktør på Museet for Fotokunst, der har givet plads for Anders Clausens udstilling. Den viser derfor flygtninge som de
forskelligartede mennesker, de er i virkeligheden Fyens Stiftstidende, 09/03-2004).
In Denmark, the media joined in the political move to see immigrants and refugees as different and not
belonging to Denmark, but elsewhere. Gåsholt and Togeby, (1995), observed that the increase and
decrease in intolerance for immigrants and refugees relates to how much is written about this ‘they’
group (cf. Hervik, 2004; 248), whereas Rikke Andersen, a media lecturer from the University of Malmø,
did not miss words in her description of how the Danish media helps create not only the division but also
the emphasis on the ‘superiority’ and ‘inferiority’ among native Danes (the ‘we’) and ethnic minorities (the
‘them’) respectively, and how these tendencies resonate amongst the population.
”Det drejer sig om landets indvandrere, som igen er blevet hovedtema i en valgkamp. Men danskernes viden om deres medborgere
fra Pakistan, Somalia eller Irak kommer næsten udelukkende fra medierne, og det er bekymrende. For journalisterne videregiver
stereotype og negative billeder af indvandrerne. Det siger Rikke Andreassen, lektor i medie- og kommunikationsvidenskab på Malmö
Universitet, efter at have undersøgt, hvordan danske medier siden 1980'erne har beskrevet de etniske minoriteter. Mediernes
beskrivelser påvirker dels danskernes opfattelse af etniske minoriteter, dels deres selvopfattelse. Når medierne fremstiller tyrkiske
Hassan på en bestemt måde, f.eks. som kvindeundertrykker, får det danske Lars til at fremstå som det modsatte. (Ritzaus Bureau,
07/11-2007).
The media, today, cannot be expected to perform the role of monitoring power, and the giving of
attentions to views and opinions, nor to only providing information to the public (Caparini, 2004), it goes
a step further by taking sides on all aspects of issues including social, cultural and political agendas.
The Danish media did not only aid politicians to change opinions and perceptions of the masses on
immigrants and refugees, they articulated the negative political ‘outburst’. For instance, Hervik, (2012;
216) reveals how the leader of the Danish Peoples party’s message about the demand for a referendum
on whether
or not the Danes should accept immigrants in Denmark: “Ask the Danes: ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to
immigrants”, was made a broad story in a tabloid newspaper on the 22 of April, 1997, even before the V-K
government came to power [----I challenge that, this is an undisputed form of ‘imaginative’ geographical
kind of “Otherness”, (Said, 1979), even though it seems insensitive to media manipulation----]. The
author also reveals how the media aided in forcing an immigrant politician from politics in Denmark, by
labeling the person as an ‘enemy’ among the politicians (Hervik 2012; 216-217).
The Danish media was only articulating the negative rhetoric on immigrants and refugees, as they also
were setting the political agendas they favored as well as pushing them through the public sphere.
“In the first half of 1997 the tabloid paper Ekstra Bladet ran the aggressive campaign which’s objective was to create a debate
about what the paper saw as the most salient topic for the Danes: the presence of immigrants and refugees”………….In response to
whether there should be a debate or a referendum of the immigrants and refugees…….”In response to this implicit demand for free
political debate, Extra Bladet started the campaign, which could serve the democratic function, (31 March, Ekstar Bladet) ” (Hervik,
2012; 217).
This amounts to the preliminaries of putting refugees and immigrants on the Danish political agenda, a
contrived kind of political agenda, which sits deep in minority marginalization and stereotyping, supported
by the media, and which also became an election winner.
Remarkably, during the reign of the V-K government, the politics was restricted to ‘blocks’---the rightwing parties ‘block’ and the left-wing parties ‘block’ of the political aisle. It was also in this period that
two classic events, besides the internal migration one, dominated the Danish politics, namely the Iraq
war in 2003 and the caricature depiction of Mohammed by the JP, on 30/09-2005. By examining how
neutral, or supportive or objective, or critical the Danish media are, with regards to these two issues,
Hjarvard, (2006) found that the JP and the Berlingske Tidende, seem to lean towards the right-wing,
whereas the Information and the Politikken were found to be left-leaning.
It was also the Jylland Posten that brought the Mohammed caricatures, meant initially to be a national
conflict (Christoffersen, 2006; 21), but exploded and assumed global dimension. As noted by Gingrich,
(2006; 196), since the 1980s and the 1990s, the media, politicians and intellectuals have been engaged
with what he calls the ‘new right’ all over in Europe, and have had immigration and anti-multiculturalism
as one of their main items on the agenda. This is also true for the V-K government’s regime, according to
Elkjær and Bertelsen (2006), the chief-editors of the major Danish public media concurred to the V-K
government’s cultural wars, as Hervik cites: “The prime minister’s value and interest-based politics was closely
accompanied by new initiatives to strengthen value-based journalism. With a new emphasis on values, JyllandsPosten joined the ‘culture war’ in summer 2003 by deciding to widen the concept of culture from ‘high culture’ to
include and debate ‘habits, ways of thinking and life ways’” (Elkjær & Bertelsen, 2006; cf. Hervik, 2012; 218).
It may not readily be easy to understand, nor measure the impact of the media-aided political discourses
on the public and how they resonate with the people, how it is received by the people, adopted and
adapted by them and even how these discourses, peaceful, discriminating, perilous and so on, have been
re-conceptualized by the people at large, without also looking at their manifestations among the
immigrants and the refugees, of which the Iraqi refugees are not an exemption.
The enormous political influence the right-wing Populist Party, the Danish Peoples Party, gained under
Anders F. Rasmussen’s V-K government in the early years of the 20s, was due to the support by most
Danish media (Gåsholt & Togeby, 1995). As the politics of categorizing and repressing immigrants and
refugees ethnocentrically based on culture is one of the many examples of the outcomes of such
influence.
The media hype on the minorities and more specifically around certain elements such Islamic headscarf,
rape and terrorism, aided the V-K government to win three consecutive elections in Denmark, by simply
tagging such, ‘marked terms’ or signs, say problems, with immigrants in the political discourses ,---“the
marked term is in fact necessary for the primary term to be defined”, (Diken, 1998; 41, cf. Jensen, 2009; 11),--Danske medier videregiver fordomsfulde billeder af indvandrere og har gjort det i 25 år, viser ny undersøgelse. Billederne skinner
skarpt igennem i valgkampen. Alle taler om dem. Alle har en holdning til dem. Det drejer sig om landets indvandrere, som igen er
blevet hovedtema i en valgkamp. Men danskernes viden om deres medborgere fra Pakistan, Somalia eller Irak kommer næsten
udelukkende fra medierne, og det er bekymrende. For journalisterne videregiver stereotype og negative billeder af indvandrerne.
Det siger Rikke Andreassen, lektor i medie- og kommunikationsvidenskab på Malmö Universitet, efter at have undersøgt, hvordan
danske medier siden 1980'erne har beskrevet de etniske minoriteter. Mediernes beskrivelser påvirker dels danskernes opfattelse af
etniske minoriteter, dels deres selvopfattelse. Når medierne fremstiller tyrkiske Hassan på en bestemt måde, f.eks. som
kvindeundertrykker, får det danske Lars til at fremstå som det modsatte.
- Vores nyhedsmedier giver os en række negative og generaliserende historier om etniske minoriteter, og vi ser den samme type
historier igen og igen. Det er bl.a. historier om etniske minoritetskvinder udsat for hustruvold, tvangsægteskaber og æresdrab. Om
etniske kvinder, der går med tørklæder, og at tørklæder er undertrykkende, og unge muslimske mænd, der er meget kriminelle og
voldtager, siger Rikke Andreassen (Ritzaus Bureau, 07/11-2007).
By bringing such stories to the public sphere, thanks to the Danish media, the Danish peoples’ party
always succeeded in depicting the newcomers as not being worthy to live among Danes. The Danish
media, as exemplified in the publication of the Mohammed caricatures, under the wide protective arms of
‘Freedom of Speech’ and the eminent criticism embedded in ‘self-censoring’, publishes every thing they
think, they should publish also when these materials sometimes, are disdainful.
As Rytter (2011; 69) has observed, both the public and the media discourses in Denmark, was not only to
disqualify a number of people based on their family histories, but also to make their presence in the
Danish society problematic,-----geographical ‘Othering’ (Said, 1979).
What is quite unfortunately about this, is that the main national news media, which everybody in the
society contributes towards---the DR- --Denmark’s Radio--- could not differ on this but joined in the
creation of the ‘division’ by demonizing the ethnic minorities:
Til Ritzau siger Ole Hyltoft, at han gerne vil støtte Dansk Folkepartis "indsats for at holde en dybt reaktionær og voldsorienteret
ideologi som islam lidt på afstand af dansk kultur". Og at Ole Hyltoft på den måde går til angreb på islam som sådan og ikke
islamisk fundamentalisme, viser ifølge Mogens Jensen, at Hyltoft dæmoniserer en hel religion. - Det er skammeligt, at DR, der har
en vigtig opgave med integration, har en næstformand, der dæmoniserer alle muslimer - også dem, der arbejder og integrerer sig i
det danske samfund. Det viser, at kulturministeren begik en kæmpe fejl, da hun for nyligt udpegede Ole Hyltoft som næstformand
for DR's bestyrelse, siger Mogens Jensen til Ritzau og tilføjer: - Hans udtalelser viser, at han ikke arbejder for et DR for alle, men
ønsker at ekskludere en stor gruppe i Danmark, (20/04-2009).
Scholars who studied the Danish media in those times, assert that the success of the polity in that period,
was also due to the fact that the negative statements made to ‘demean’ and ‘demonize’ the immigrants
and refugees by the politicians, were not only forwarded unaltered, but were also concurred to and
magnified by the Danish media. In her book entitled “Der er et yndigt land. Medier, minoriteter og danskhed",
after anlysizing 300 news articles and 300 news items in the Danish television stations (Denmark radio
and TV 2) Rikke Andreassen, (2007) as fore mentioned, revealed how the Danish media mostly writes
negative things about aliens in the country to aid the politics.
These intensified negative rhetoric on how unfit the aliens cultures and lifestyles was because the media
took political blitzes against foreigners in general and Muslims in particular, into alarming proportions, as
they always won the battle by choosing the best trope, to depict the minorities as unfit for being
accepted into the Danish society.
According to Grillo (2011; 272), most western media, referring to the murder of van Gogh in 2004,
through for example, the trope “ritual murder”,
propagated this tragedy into confrontational levels,
resulting in deepening the ‘we’ and the ‘them’ in many societies. In the post-caricature era, it became
public knowledge that moderate Muslims around the world, more especially in Egypt and Denmark,
believed that there is a lack of knowledge about Islam on the part western journalists, and for instance,
these moderate Muslims opted to help broaden the understanding and tolerance for Islam among Danish
journalists:
Den muslimske, egyptiske organisation Bridges Foundation har sammen med Islamisk Trossamfund i Danmark besluttet at holde en
konference for danske journalister om islam hvor de kan lære om islam (Ritzaus Bureau, 02/01-2006).
I contend that, this form of ‘freedom of speech’ exercises by the Danish media, could never have come
off, in any other period than that of the V-K government, where there were a conscious effort to socially
and political marginalized people based on again, culturalized-national politics (Kvaale, 2011; 231), where
cultural incompatibility is on the lips of many politicians, where there is resistances to multiculturalism (Hervik,
2012; 212), where the creation of ‘unnatural communication’ between people of different cultures had been
paramount, (cf: ibid; 213, Danish Peoples Party, 2007; 1), and where immigrants and refugees from developing
countries are treated as being a threat, and are the main items on the political agenda.
Chapter 6
Conclusion
I have attempted to draw supportive arguments to show that successful assisted voluntary return and
reintegration could be affected by many factors such as, the experiences and the treatments meted out
to refugees in exile. In my view, as it is also the recommendations by the DRC, a steep repatriation
demands thorough counseling or advices as well as ‘a feel of admittance’ into the new ‘home’ of the
refugees in question. I conclude, that practices that make refugees feel unease or unrest in exile, for
example, the feel of being ‘Othered' by the host authorities, may result in the making of wrong decisions
on repatriation.
The politics of wanting to ‘push’ the Iraqi refugees to yield a ‘yes’ on repatriation by isolating them from
the local population, depriving them from working, excluding them from effective social support and
above all, not allowing them to get family comfort can lead to the making of wrong decisions on
repatriation.
According to the answers given in the interview, the finding of a middle ground between staying in ExileDenmark, and repatriating to troubled Iraq, was non-existing for the interviewee, hence their hasty
decision on repatriation, which was far from being voluntary. Therefore, I suggest that voluntary
repatriation should not be induced, but can be enhanced (see also the DRC recommendations—
‘hjemsendelse’, 18/05-2010), through dialogue, besides, security evaluations of the refugee’s homeland,
in order to be able to gain beneficent effect, from the program. I do also suggest that security concerns
in the refugee’s home country must precede any thoughts of voluntary repatriation.
As Muggeridge, et al., (2006), found from her interview of with British refugees, ‘security in home
country’ was the main hindrance, otherwise most of the refugees had strong desire to return to their
home country.
Further, I have argued, that if the Iraqi refugees had had to feel at home in Denmark- a sense of
belonging31, the decision would have been different, let alone if they had been given the opportunity to
earn their own income, as a morale booster, or as an enhancement of their lininality (Turner, 2012, 43).
And even when, admittedly, refugee admission is only a humane sacrificial burden on the part of the host
country, the politics of religious sentimentalism, nationalism, party ideologies and self, become obstacles
to the well being of refugees in exile.
6.1 Recommendation
Allowing refugees to earn their own income, besides also granting them enough money, while in exile,
hopefully, can avert their destitution as it could also eventually enhance their, integration or repatriation
and ease up on an eventual reintegration.
“Regeringen afskaffer ifølge Politiken de såkaldte fattigdomsydelser som starthjælp, introduktionsydelse og kontanthjælpsloft. Det
fremgår af regeringens forslag til finanslov for 2012, der fremlægges torsdag”. (Ritzau Bureau 01/11/2011).
Lukewarm attitudes with dealing with asylum cases may create frustrations among the asylum-seekers.
Figley, (1989), sees swift reviewing of asylum cases, as being a requirement for refugees to regain
control over their lives, namely, as an empowerment to them. Additionally, authors such as Andersson
and Goolishian (1992), had written on the significance of therapy (cf; Reichelt, 1994; 26), that help
refugees gain control over their lives.
Again, it becomes eminent that the exertion of undue pressures (Stepputat, 2004, 5) by host
governments on refugees could make them unsafe about making rational decisions on repatriation- and
may get the repatriation look like ----a sort self-deportation, as some of them may choose to decamp
instead. Even when some do not agree, incentives given to refugees in exile could enhance their
voluntary repatriation. In her accounts on the Ethiopia refugees, who were to go back ‘home’ from
Sudan, Hammond, (1999, 241), was not sure if the incentives were a motivational factor, why the
refugee will go back.
In their study on
why repatriations fail, Allen and Morsink, (1994), found out that one reason why
repatriation fails is the presumption or the taking for granted on the part of the host authorities, that the
refugees by themselves want to go back home. In supporting of this view, Bakewell writes:
“Repatriation is often seen as the optimum outcome for refugee situations as if by definition and the ‘obvious’ thing for refugees to
do. The fact of their wanting to return is taken for granted so their motivation for repatriating does not necessarily arise a question”
(Bakewell, 2002, 47)
31
Hargarty et al., (1996; 242-244), had examined sense of belonging in relation to loneliness, involvement in community activities,
relation to social support among others, and concluded that sense of belonging has both social and psychological person effects.
Refugees after being relieved of the traumatic experiences of war and other persecutions may wish to
either avoid the repeat of their experience in future or will wish to resist return. According to Malkki
(1992), ‘the “myth of return” is not a natural and inevitable belief shared by all refugees’.
Finally, it is documented that Iraqis in exile, who get education, voluntarily return to Iraq. According to
Romano (2004; 137), some of the Iraqis who exiled to Europe decided to return home by themselves,
after the 2003 war. These are people were educated, prosperous professionals and businessmen, who
saw a renewed hope in their country and made a voluntary return in order to use their skills, knowledge,
foreign contacts and investment funds, they hope to utilize in the nation rebuilding. The author had
interviewed some of the returnee between 2003 and 2004, who said that they had sold their homes and
businesses in the US and the UK, to be able to return.
6.2 Perspectives
Throughout the paper, I have tried to argue that the Danish politician and authorities in the municipalities
alienated through subtle ‘Othering’ the Iraqi refugees, in a way that, they felt that they were different
and belonged elsewhere than Denmark. On the contrary, I think that, such treatments may not have
happened out of the blue moon, they might have been triggered by certain activities among the refugees
and immigrants. For instance, refugees, asylum and migration connote security realm.
Reports upon reports indicate that many of the refugees, like some immigrants, resort to diverse forms of
criminality. For example, a news media 32 in Denmark reports on the massive criminality in Denmark,
twenty percent of all refugees were involved in criminality in 2011, and that asylum seekers in Denmark
are twenty three percent more criminal than the entire Danish population.
”813 asylansøgere fik afgjort sager om kriminalitet i 2011. Det svarer til hver femte, Asylansøgere som gruppe er langt mere
kriminelle end danskerne som helhed. Det viser tal fra Kriminalregistret og Danmarks Statistik”. TV2 Nyhederne, (Ritzau, 25/022013).
Another aspect of the paper that needs attention is the repatriation, which was based on
recommendations and advices from experts in the UN organization. It must be noted that voluntary
repatriation in itself conforms to the recommended durable solutions and therefore is a normal practice in
the refugee world. I therefore argue again, that the request by the government and/or those accused
Danish asylum social workers, for example, be it coercive or persuasive, voluntary or involuntary, and
could be due to misleading information from the United Nations on the peace situation in Iraq.
Take for example this notice from the UNHCR:
FN: Irak kun flygtningesikkert i nord: Mens regeringspartiet Venstre mener, at store områder i Irak er uden problemer for
32
TV 2
flygtninge, som vender hjem, kan FN's flygtningeorganisation kun anbefale, at flygtninge vender tilbage til det nordlige, kurdiske
Irak. UNHCR anbefaler imidlertid kun, at flygtninge vender tilbage til den nordlige, kurdiske del af Irak, og kun kurdiske flygtninge.
Det oplyser Paal Aarsaether, chef for eksterne relationer på UNHCR's nordiske kontor i Stockholm. .(Ritzaus Bureau, 16/01-2006).
Whereas the organization claims that Iraq was unsafe, they in they also recommended that certain parts
of the country were peaceful. And this recommendation was followed up by one of the parties in the V-K
government, the liberal party (venstre).
“Venstre mener, at der er store områder i Irak, hvor flygtninge kan vende tilbage. FN anbefaler, at det kun sker til det nordlige,
kurdiske Irak.
Mens regeringspartiet Venstre mener, at store områder i Irak er uden problemer for flygtninge, som vender hjem, kan FN's
flygtningeorganisation kun anbefale, at flygtninge vender tilbage til det nordlige, kurdiske Irak” (16/01-2006).
Again, from the interviews, it became obvious that not all of the Iraqis would have wanted to go back to
Iraq, for reasons outside the recommended processes with the voluntary repatriation. For example, it
could be difficult not to believe that after experiencing the comfort of being in peaceful Denmark, some
of the Iraqis might have found a means to remain in the country.
It is not wrong to motivate refugees to accept repatriation by other lawful means. Because certain
factors, such as the refugees’ love and affection for their home country, can naturally make them choose
to repatriate with ease and they may need help in realizing such patriotic endeavor. An example of this is
seen in the study made by Bakewell (2002). According to the author, the ‘conception of national identity’
felt among the Angolans in exile in Zambia, was the driving force for repatriation, whereas Roger in 1994,
saw material motivation as an enhancement.
Albeit, I agree to the fact that the vitality of nationalism in any nation-building, national solidarity and
configuration, as envisaged in Gellner’s assertion that ‘nationalism’ procreates ‘nations’ (Gellner, 1983;
55), can be a political agenda and depends on how the politicians handle it.
References
Allen, J. K, (2009). “Dreaming of Denmark: Orientalism and Otherness in
Schnitzler’s Traumnovelle” Modern Austrian Literature and Cultural Association’ vol.
42. No. 2., pp 41-59.
Amnesty International Annual Report (2004): War on Global Values.
Anderson, M. L. (2005). “Thinking about Women-a quarter century’s view”, Gender
and Society. 19 (4), 437-455
Andersen, H., & Goolishian, H., (1992) ‘Client is the expert: a not-knowing
approach to therapy.’ In McNamee, S. & Gregen, K.J. (eds), Therapy as social
construction, London: sage Publications.
Andreassen, R., (2007). “Der er et yndigt land. Medier, minoriteter og danskhed,
Tiderne Skifter. Fårlag, utgivningsår.
Appadurai, A., (1988), “Putting hierarchy in its place” Cultural Anthropology : Vol. 3
(1), pp 36-49
Barth, F., (1969). “Introduction” In Barth (Ed) ‘Ethnic groups and boundaries’. The
social organization of cultural difference, 9-38. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Baumann, G., (2004) “Grammars of Identity/alterity: A structural approach.” In:
Baumann, G., & Gingrich, A., (eds) “Grammars of Identity/alterrity” A structural
approach.
Black, R., Koser, K., & Munk, K., (2004). “Understanding voluntary return” In
home office online reports London: Home Office; Geneva
Borjas, G. J., (1994). The economics of immigration. Journal of economics
literature. Vol. 32 pp 1667-1717
Bribosia, E., Rea, A., Ringelheim, J., & Rorive, I.,(2011). “Reasonable
accommodation of religious diversity in Europe and in Belgium: Law and Practices.
In Saakia Bonjour, Andrea Rea & Dirk Jacobs (Eds). “The Others In Europe”
Editions de la Universite de Bruxelles: Bruxelles.
Brubaker, R., (1998). “Citizenship and Nationhood In France & Germany”,
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Bryman, A. (2008). “Social Research methods”. 3rd Ed. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Caparini, M., (2004). “Media and the security: oversight and accountability”. In
M.caparini (ed). ‘Media in security & governance. Baden-Baden: Nomos, pp 15-49
Castells, J., (1997). “The power of identity” Vol II of The Information Age:
Economy, Society and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell
Cook, T. E., (2006). “Governing with the News: The News media as a political
Institution”. Chicago. University of Chicago Press.
Cooper, H., (1998). Synthesizing Research: “A guide for Literature review”. 3rd Ed.
Sage publications: Thousands Oaks.
Constants, A., & Massey, D., (2002). Return migration by German guest workers:
neoclassical versus new economic theories. International Migration. Vol. 40 pp5-38
Connor, W (1994) “Etnonationalism”: The quest for understanding. Princeton
University Press.
Crisp, J., (2003). A new asylum paradigm? Globalization, migration and the
uncertain future of the international refugee regime. New issues in refugee rearch:
Working paper no. 100. Geneva: UNHCR evaluation and policy analysis unit.
Crepeau, F., & Barutciski, M.,(1994). “Symposium on the Human rights of
Refugees” Journal of refugees studies. Vol. 7 No. 2/3
Curtis, S., Gesler, W., Smith, G., & Washburn, S., (2000). “Approaches to
sampling and case selection in qualitative research: examples in the geography of
health.” Social Science and medicine Vol. 50 1001-1014
Danish Peoples Party (2007). Arbejdsprogram udlændinge-asyl- og
integrationspolitik. http://www.danskfolkeparti.dk
Davenport, P., Healy, P.J. & Malone, K., (1995), ‘Vulnerable in the village: a study
of returnees in Battambang province, cambodia, with focus on strategies for the
landless’ Lutheran World Service, UNHCR, Japan Sotoshu Relief committee---an
unpublished report.
Debenedetti, Externalization of European Asylum, op. cit 10
De Beauvoir, S. (1997). “The second sex”. London: Vintage 1949.
Diken, B. (1998). “Strangers, ambivalence and social theory”. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Djajic, S., & Milbourne, R., (1988). A general equilibrium model of guest-worker
migration: the source country perspective. Journal of International Economics. Vol
25, pp 335-351
Duffield, M., (1996). Social reconstruction in Bosnia and Croatia: An exploratory
report for SIDA. Birmingham: Center for urban and regional studies, university of
Birmingham.
Dumont, L., (1980). “Homo Hierarchicus: The case system and its implication”.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dustmann, C., (2003). Return migration and optimal migration duration. European
Economic Review. Vol 47 pp 535-369.
Eller, J. D., (1959). “From Culture to Ethnicity to Conflict”. An Anthropological
Perspective on International Ethnic Conflict. Pp 7-48
Erdine, M., (2012). “ The subject and governmental action: A Foucaulian analysis
of subjectification and the 24 year-old rule in Denmark. Fem Leg Stud. 20: 21-38.
London UK.
Evans-Pritchard, E. E., (1937). “Witchcraft, oracles, and magic among the Azande”.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------(1940). “The Neur”. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Fassin, D., (2011). “The Social construction of Otherness”. In Saakia Bonjour,
Andrea Rea & Dirk Jacobs (Eds). “The Others In Europe” Editions de la Universite
de Bruxelles: Bruxelles.
Fielding, T., (1992), “Migration and culture” In ‘Migration Processes and Patterns’
Eds. Vol. 1 by Tony Champion & Tony Fielding. London: Belhaven Press. Pages
201-212
Figley, C.R., (1989) “Helping traumatized families” London: Jossey-Bass.
Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the prison. New York:
Vintage
Foucault, M. (2000). ”Subject and Power” In: James D. Faubion (Ed). ‘Essential
works of Foucault 1954-1984- Power. Vol. 3 London: Penguin Books, pp 326-349
Gaasholt, Ø., & Togeby, L., (1995). I syv sind: Danskrenes holdinger til flytninge
og indvandrere. Århus: politica.
Galal, E., & Thunø, M., (2009) “Global medier I verdens brændepunkter: religion,
politisk og kultur” Museum Tusculanums Forlag. København.
Gallagher, D., (1994). “Durable Solutions in a new politicalera” Journal of
International Affairs Vol. 47 No. 2 the trustees of Columbia University in the city of
New York.
Gellner, E., (1983). “Nations and Nationalism”. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Gil de Zuniga, H. (2012). Modeling the process of political participation in the EU.
In: Friedman Rebecca. (Eds). European identity and culture: narratives of
transnational belonging. Burlington; Ashgate.
Gingrich, A. (2004). “Concepturalising Identities: Anthropological alternatives to
essentialising difference and moralizing about othering” In Gerd Baumann & Andre
Gingrich (Eds) “Grammars of Identity/Alterity” A structural approach.
Gingrich, A. (2006). Neo-nationalism and the reconfiguration of Europe. Social
Anthropology, 14(2), 195-217.
Goodwin-Gill, G., ed. (1991). The 1951 convention relating to the status of
refugees: Principles, Problems, and Potential. Int. Journal. Refugees Law 3(3)
(Special Issue).
Grillo, R., (2011) “Danes and Others” an epilogue. In Karen Fog Olwig & Karsten
Pærregård (Eds) ‘The Question of Integration: Immigration, Exclusion and the
Danish welfare state’ (2011), Cambridge scholars publishing, Newcastle, UK.
Gullestad, M., (1997). “Home, local community and nation: Connections between
everyday life practices and constructions of national identity” Focaal, No. 30/31. Pp
39-60
Hagerty, B. M., Williams, R. A., Coyne, J. C., & Early, M. R., (1996). “Sense of
belonging and Indicators of Social and Psychological functioning” Archives of
Psychiatric nursing. Vol. 10. Isssu 4 pp 235-244
Hammond, L., (1999) “Examining the discourse of repatriation: Towards a more
proactive theory of return migration” In: Black, R. and Khoser, K, The End of the
Refugee Cycle?
Repatriation and reconstruction, Berghahn Books, Oxford and Providence.
Hathaway, J., C., (1990). A Reconsideration of the Underlying Premise of
Refugees Law, 31 Harv. Int L. J 129. (Highlighting the overriding importance to
donor states of issues that affect their own countries).
Harrell-Bond, B.E.,Voutira, E., & Leopold, M., (1992). “Counting the refugees: gifts,
givers, patrons and clients”, Journal of Refugee Studies Vol. 5 ed ¾ pp 205-225
Hein, J., (1993). Refugees, immigrants and the state. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 19: 4359
Hervik, P., (1999) Den generende forskellighed. Danske svar på den stigende
multikulturalism. (ed.) Copenhagen: Han Reitzals Forslag.
Hervik, P., (2004).”The Danish cultural world of unbridgeable difference”. Ethnos,
Routedge journals Vol 69 (2) pp 247-267
Hervik, P., (2012) Ending tolerance as a solution to incompatibility: The Danish
‘crissi of multiculturalism’. European Journal of cultural studies, 15 (2) 211-225
Hill, J. K., (1987). Immigrant decisions concerning duration of stay and migration
frequency. Journal of Developemnt Economics. Vol. 67 pp 351-372
Hjarnø, J., (1991). Migrants and Refugees on the Danish Labour market. Journal of
Ethnic and migration studies. Vol. 18 Iss. 1 pp 75-87.
Hjarvard, S., (2006). “Medier og Religion I mediernes’ offentlighed” In: Lisbet
Christoffersen (Ed). Gudebilleder, København. Tiderne Skifter.
Holland, D. C., & Quinn, N., (1987). Cultural models in language and thought.
(Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holand, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C., (1998). Identity and Agency in
cultutral worlds. (Eds). Boston: University of Harvard Press.
Holmes, D. R., (2000). Integral Europe. Fast-capitalism, multiculturalism,
neofascism. Princeton: Princeton University Press
Jenkins, R., (1997). “Rethinking Ethnicity”. Arguments and Explorations. Sage
publications. London
Jenkins, R., (2011) “Integration Of the Folk and by the Folk” an epilogue: In Karen
Fog Olwig & Karsten Pærregård (Eds) ‘The Question of Integration: Immigration,
Exclusion and the Danish welfare state’ (2011), Cambridge scholars publishing,
Newcastle, UK.
Jensen, S., (2009). ‘Preliminary notes on Othering and agency—Marginalized
young ethnic minority men negotiating identity in the terrain of Otherness’. Social
working Paper, nr. 27.
Kaye, R., (1994). “Defining the Agenda: British Refugee policy and the role of
parties”
In Roger, Z., & Black, R., (1994), “Journal of Refugee Studies” Vol. 7 No. 2/3
Oxford University Press.
Kirdar, M. G., (2009). Labour market outcomes, savings accumulation and return
migration. Labour economics. Vol. 16. Pp 418-428
Kourula, P., (1997). Broadening the edges: Refugees Definition and International
Protection Revisited, 209.
Kublitz, A., (2013). “Siezing catastrophes: the temporality of Nakba among
Palestinians in Denmark” University of Aalborg, Denmark (unpublished).
Kvaale, K., (2011). “Something begotten in the state of Denmark? Immigrants,
territorialized culture, and the Danes as an indigenous people”. Anthropological
theory. Sage publication. 11 (2) 223-255
Leonard, S., (2009). The creation of Frontex and the policies of institutionalization
in the EU external borders policy. Journal of contemporary European research 5
(3) 371-388.
Luedtke, A. (2005). European integration, public opinion and immigration policy:
testing the impact on national identity. European Union politics 6(1), 83-112
Malkki, L. H., (1992) ‘National geographic: the rooting of peoples and the
territorialization of national identity among scholars and refugee’, Cultural
Anthropology vol. 7 (1) pp 13-45
……….(1997) “National Geographic: The Rooting of Peoples and the
Territorialization of National Identity among Scholars and Refugees. In Akhil Gupta
& James Fergusen (Eds): Culture, Power, Place. Explorations in Critical
Anthropology. Durham. Duke University Press. London, pp 52-74
Malkki, L.,H., (1995). Refugees and Exile: From “Refugee Studies” to the National
Order of Things. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 24: 495-523
Martin, S. F. (2004). Refugee Women. (2nd Ed.). New York: Lexington Books
Muggeridge, H., & Dona, G., (2006). Back home? Refugees’ experiences of their
first visit back to their country of origin. Journal of Refugee Studies. Vol. 19 NO. 4.
University of east London. London, UK
Nielson T., & Riiskjær, H. B., (2006). ”Irak tur-retur” En analyse af, hvorfor en
gruppe irakiske flygtninge har valgt at fortryde deres repatriering til Irak og igen er
vendt tilbage til Danmark. Speciale på Socialvidenskab. Roskilde Universitetscenter,
Denmark.
Nobel, P., (1988). “Refugees and other migrants viewed with legal eye…or how to
fight confusion. Pp 18-31
Pottier, J., (1996) “Relief and Repatriation: Views by Rwanda Refugees; lessons for
humanitarian aid workers’ African Affairs Vol. 95 ed. 380 pp: 403-429
Prakash, G., (1990). “Writing Post- Orientalist histories of the Thid World:
Pespectives from India historiography”. Comparative studies in Society and History,
Vol 32 no. 2 pp 383-408.
Ragin, C. C., (1994). “Constructing Social Research”: The Unity and Diversity of
Method, Thousand Oaks, London & New Delhi: Pine Forge Press.
Ren, C., & Ooi, C.S, (2012) “Auto-communication and Micro-orientalism at the
Shanghai expo 2010-Perfrming and regulating ‘Danishness’. CLCS Working Paper
2012
Reichelt, S., & Sveaass, N., (1994). “Developing meaningful conversations with
families in exile” In Roger, Z., & Black, R., (1994), “Journal of Refugee Studies”
Vol. 7 No. 2/3 Oxford University Press.
Rytter, M., (2011) “‘The family of Denmark’ and ‘The Aliens’: Kinship images in
Danish Integration Politics”. In Karen Fog Olwig & Karsten Pærregård (Eds) ‘The
Question of Integration: Immigration, Exclusion and the Danish welfare state’
(2011), Cambridge scholars publishing, Newcastle, UK.
Said, E., (1978) “Orientalism”. New York: Vintage Press.
-----------(1979). “Zionism from the standpoint of its victims. Social text No. 1 pp
7-58
-------- (1984). “Reflections on exile” Granta 13; 159-172
Salehyan, I., & Gleditsch, K., S., (2006). Refugees and the Spread of Civil War.
International organization 60. Pp. 335-366.
Seton-Watson, H. (1977). Nations and States: “An enquiry into the origins of
Nations and the Politics of Nationalism. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Schierup, C. U., (1993). På kulturens slagmark: Mindretal og størretal taler om
Danmark. Esbjerg: Sydjysk universitetsforslag.
Schnitzler Arthur (1997) “Arthur Schnitzler und schriftsteller seiner zeit”
Traumnovelle; 1926. Frankfurt a. M.:Insel 2002. Print.
Sepulveda, D., C., (1995). “Challenging the assumption of repatriation”, Courier Vol
150 pp 83-85
Sewell, Jnr. W. J. (2005). Logics of History: Social theory and social
transformation. Chicago, University of Chicago
Sjørslev, I., (2011). “The paradox of Integration: Excluding while claiming to
integrate into Danish society”. In: Karen Fog Olwig & Karsten Pærregård (Eds)
‘The Question of Integration: Immigration, Exclusion and the Danish welfare state’
(2011), Cambridge scholars publishing, Newcastle, UK.
Smith, E., (2008) The pitfalls and promises: The use of secondary data analysis in
educational research. British Journal of Educational Studies. Vol. 56. Issue 3 pp
323-339
Spivak, G. C., (1985). “The Rani of Simur” in Europe and their others. Volume 1,
Eds. In: Francis Baker et al., Colchester: Uessex 1985.
Stark, O., & Fan, C. S.,(2007). “The analytics of seasonal migration” Economics
Letters. Vol. 94. Pp. 304-312
Stein, B. N., (1987). ICARA ॥: “Burden Sharing and Durable Solution” In Rogge, J
(Eds). Refugees: ‘A third world Dilemma’ Totowa, NJ USA: Romani Littlefield, pp
47-59
Stepputat, Finn. 1992. Beyond Relief? Life in a Guatemalan Refugee Settlement in
Mexico, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Copenhagen.
Stepputat, Finn. 1997. 'Repatriation and everyday forms of state formation in
Guatemala', a draft article. In: Black, R. and Khoser, K, (ed) The End of the
Refugee Cycle?
Repatriation and reconstruction, Berghahn Books, Oxford and Providence.
Stoddard, A., Adele, H., DiDomenico, V., (2009). Providing Aid in insecure
environments: 2009 update’ humanitarian policy group policy brief 34 London:
Overseas Development Institute.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J., (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research, grounded Theory
Procedures and techniques: Sage, London.
Szuchewycz, B., (2000). “Re-Pressing Racism: the Denial of racism in the
Canadian Press” Canadian Journal of Communications, vol. 25 no. 4
Turner, S., (2012). “Politics of Innocense: Hutu Identity, Conflict and Camp Life”.
Studies in Forced migration, Vol. 30., Berghahn Books: New York & Oxford
Turner, V., (1967) “The forest of symbols: aspects of Ndembu Ritual, Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press.
UNHCR, Annual Report , January 2011
UNHCR, (2010) Global Trends 2010
UNHCR, (2009). 2008 Global Trends, UNHCR, June 2009, page 7
UNHCR (2003) Declarations under section B of article 1 of the Convention
http://www.unhcr.ch/cgi
Vejledning til repatrieringsloven (Juni 2010): Ministeriet for flygtninige, indvandrere
og integration. Nye regler, January, 2010. http://www.nyidanmark.dk
Vested-Hansen, J., (1994). ”The legal condition of Refugees in Denmark” (eds). In
Roger, Z., & Black, R., (1994), “Journal of Refugee Studies” Vol. 7 No. 2/3
Oxford University Press.
Van Dijk, T. (1997). Discourse as a social interaction, Sage: London
Van Dijk, T A., (1995) “Elite discourse and the reproduction of racism. In: Rita Kirk
Whillock & David Slaydon (Eds). ‘Hate Speech’. Thousand Oaks CA, Sage: pp 1-
28
Van Dijk T. A., (2004) “From text Grammar to Critical Discourse Analysis”. A bief
academic autobiography. Universitat Pompen Fabra, Barcelona.
Volmert, J., (1989). “Politikerrede als kommunikatives Handliungsspiel. Ein
integriertes Modll zur semantisch-pragmatischen Beschreibung Öffentlicher Rede.
Munich: Fink.
Wodak, R, (1989) (Eds.) Language, power and ideology. Philadelphia; John
Benjamins.
Wodak, R., De Cillia, R., & Reisigl, M.,(1999). “The discursive construction of
national identities” Discourse and Society, Vol. 10 (2): 149-173
Weiner, M., (1993). International migration and security, westview Press. Pp 333
Weis, L. (1995). Identity formation and the processes of “othering”: Unraveling
sexual threads. Educational Foundations, 9(1), 17–33.
Zetter, R., (1988), ‘Refugees, repatriation and root causes’ Journal of Refugee
Studies, Vol. 1 (2) pp 99-106
Appendix
Appendix 1:
The 12 reasons given by the Iraqi refugees on why they returned to Denmark:
1.
Lack of Security -the unabated conflict.
2.
Status as returnees from the western countries and the local perception of them.
3.
Lack of employment and the difficulty with starting up a business.
4.
Insufficient information on home country, especially, prior to making the decision to repatriate.
5.
A wish to abandon Denmark, rather than a real wish to return to homeland.
6.
The undergone changes in homeland during time in exile.
7.
Shortages of electricity, water, oil and gas in home country.
8.
The fear of losing of ties to Denmark.
9.
Internal disagreement among family members, regarding the decision to repatriate.
10. A lack of public, social services in home country.
11. The feeling of being perceived as a stranger or an outsider in home country.
12. Personal perception as not belonging to ones homeland after being influenced by other cultures-‘Denmark has
changed them’.
Appendix 2:
Number of repatriated refugees from Denmark (2000-2006)
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
232
224
170
194
249
164
45
Number of
refugees
Total
1,278
Appendix 3:

Number of people repatriated from Denmark from 2006 to 2011
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Year
Status
Ref
Immi-
ugee
grant
253
117
Total
148
Source: Danskflytningehælpe
111
206
138
370
613
Appendix 4:
Number of Refugees who have used the return right in the law since 2008
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Total
From January 15
to August 27
1
15
36
40
31
231
Source: Dansk flygtningehjælpe
Appendix 5:
3.5 The interviews
The interviews were conducted on 73 Iraqi refugees, who regretted their ‘planned’ decision to return to Iraq. Among
the interviewees were 33 above 15 years of age. Most of them said the main reason for agreeing to repatriate was
circumstantial and not well thought through. It is worth noting that even when these people came back to Denmark,
five households who initially came up their repatriation and came to Denmark had disappeared again from Denmark
for which reason and destination the authors of the thesis could not give.
The following interview guide was used in interviewing 15 households of the 73 refugees who gave up their
repatriation and came back to Denmark.

Vil du starte med at præsentere dig selv?
........Could you please start by presenting yourself?

Kan du fortælle om, hvordan du havde det i Danmark, inden du valgte at repatriere?
.....Could you please tell about how you felt before deciding to leave Denmark for Iraq?

Kan du fortælle om, hvordan du besluttede dig for at vende tilbage til Irak?
........Could you please tell about why you decided to go back to Iraq?

Kan du fortælle om, hvordan det var at være tilbage i Irak?
.......Could you please tell how it was to be back in Iraq?

Kan du fortælle om, hvordan du besluttede dig for at vende tilbage til Danmark?
.......Could you please tell about why you decided to come back to Denmark?