Political Activism of Refugees in Würzburg and Irbid. Opportunities, Motivations and Challenges

Table of Content

Abstract

Acknowledgments

Table of Content

List of Abbreviation

List of Figures

1. Introduction

2. Context
2.1 Germany
2.2 Jordan

3. Definitions
3.1 Universal category “Refugee”
3.1.1 Legal Definition
3.1.2 Critique
3.1.3 Working Definition
3.2 Activism and Activists
3.3 What is “Political”?

4. Theoretical Framework
4.1 Acts of Citizenship
4.2 Visible and Invisible Activism
4.3 Contentious Politics
4.4 Space of Encounter
4.5 Personhood

5. Research Design
5.1 Research Question
5.2 Focus on two cities: Wurzburg and Irbid
5.3 Methodology
5.2.1 Qualitative Interviews
5.2.2 Participants and Interview Setting
5.2.3 Transcribing and Data Analysis
5.3 Challenges of the Research

6. Categories of activism in Wurzburg
6.1 Grounds and Aims for Protests
6.2 Protest: Strive for Visibility and Change
6.3 Reaction to the Protest
6.4 Changes: Success of Political Activism?
6.5 Vision for the Future

7. Categories of activism in Irbid
7.1 Refugees in the Society
7.2 Illegal Work is Legal
7.3 Challenge of Education
7.4 Non-participation or Strategy of Silence
7.5 Missing Future Perspective

8. Interpretation of Findings
8.1 Summary Statements of the Findings
8.1.1 Würzburg
8.1.2 Irbid
8.2 Connecting Findings in Würzburg and Irbid
8.3 Limitations and Strengths of the Study
8.4. Implications for Future Research

9. Conclusion

Publication bibliography

Abstract

Political discourse surrounding the “refugee” question is dominated by the negative sentiments in Germany and in Jordan. Through media refugees are often portrayed as victims, criminals or outsiders that are incapable of expression and void of agency. Present study provides a different perspective, examining refugee situation in Wurzburg and Irbid. Based on empirical findings gained from qualitative Interviews, visible and invisible forms of protest actions, employed by the refugees, are conceptualised and presented. Situation is complicated by structural challenges and the need to weigh possible gains and losses of visible opposition to the state. Study is concluded by a proposition for a differentiated approach to the “refugee problem”, with emphasis on creativity, discussion and potential for human interactions. The thesis mainly contributes to existing literature in outlining the ways of how refugee activists act in different contexts.

Acknowledgments

In this research project I was greatly supported by numerous people whom I would like to express my gratitude.

My greatest thank goes to my interview partners, who shared most valuable experiences. I also like to express my great appreciation to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Hannah Reich for her enthusiastic encouragement and valuable discussions during the whole writing process.

Apart from my supervisor and interview partners, I would not have arrived at writing acknowledgments for my dear colleagues and friends. I would like to thank my fellow students who were always there for any question and gave me useful feedbacks.

I am particularly grateful for the assistance given by Jesko Giessen who helped me to go through all ups and downs of the writing process.

Finally, I wish to thank my parents and my brother for their support throughout all my studies and life.

Thank you for always believing in me

List of Abbreviations

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

List of Figures

Figure 1: Number of initial asylum applications in Germany from 2011 till 2018 June (Statista, 2018) (“Anzahl der Asylanträge (Erstanträge) in Deutschland von 1991 bis 2018”)

Figure 2: Percentage Distribution of Jordanians Age (15+) Years by Educational Level, 2017 (Department of Statistics, Jordan, 2017)

Figure 3: Descriptive Typology of Refugees' Contentious Behaviour (Khoury, 2016, p. 17)

1. Introduction

“Belonging to a political community and participating in the public life of that community is a fundamental aspect of the human condition. Humans are distinguished from gods and beasts by our capacity for action and our existence in plurality.” (Fiske, 2016, p. 21)

In the world over 68 millions of people are displaced. Among those, 25 million are refugees (UNHCR 2018). They leave their countries of origin fleeing war, violence and political, ideological or religious persecution. The influx of refugees in many countries provokes heated debates in politics and society about immigration and integration. These debates are usually highly dominated by journalists, politicians, and representatives of civil society. However, refugees themselves often remain widely excluded and do not have the opportunity to speak out (see Steinhilper, 2016). The media tends to portray refugees as passive, vulnerable, needy victims or threatening outsiders (Godin & Dona, 2016; Steinhilper, 2017). Moreover, refugees in Germany were even presented as criminals (Atag, Kron & Schilliger et al., 2015, p. 9). The representation of refugees as a group and de-individualisation of their stories and identities are common occurrences in the debate (Godin & Dona, 2016). Even if the right to cross borders for refugees is established in the international law, in practice their presence is often unwelcome and punished (McNevin, 2011, p. 31). Those who have made it to other countries, such as Germany or Jordan, often face hostile environments and prejudices. Yet, these people hardly have a chance to share their experiences and opinions on the eye-to-eye level with broader society. Rarely are refugees perceived as agents, actors, participants, or in general subjects capable of making claims and demanding rights (Nyers, 2008, p. 164). An active push towards “personalising” is necessary for the understanding of the image of a “refugee“.

Refugees at large are excluded from politics because of the limited possibilities for non­citizens to formally participate in the political system, which they are subject to (Gauditz, 2017, p. 52). The cornerstone of political segregation which refugees face stems from a simple fact that as non-citizens refugees are deprived of the right to vote and choose their representatives. Despite this hindrance, other ways of political participation are more or less open to them. One such way is involvement in political activism.

Present study primarily deals with refugees who choose to be politically active - the claim-makers. By presenting their ideas, this work aims to “give” these people a voice and perceive them as individuals with their own history and opinion. The work will focus on forms of political activism taken on by refugees to partake in social discourse with their very own means and ways. Refugee political activism in two cities will be examined: Wurzburg in Germany and Irbid in Jordan. The aim is not to compare but rather to find out the opportunities, challenges and motivations of refugee political activism in widely varying contexts. The analysis of those aspects is important for the role of social workers, which they can or should play in integrating refugees into society and the political system.

Both countries, Germany and Jordan, had faced challenges because of the increase in refugee numbers. However, it is important to mention that the challenges of both states are different. Neighbouring countries to Syria like Jordan and Lebanon host the largest number of refugees per capita in the world. To be more precise one in 15 people is a refugee in Jordan¹ (3RP, 2018). Taking criticism of methodological nationalism as one of theoretical foundations of present research it is not only important to compare and/or differentiate between states but also to go beyond and look for connections and overlaps between two different territories.

As statistical data shows refugees usually tend to stay for extended periods of time in the hosting country. Thus, the biggest challenge lies in how to integrate this diverse group of migrants in the economic, cultural and political life of a hosting country. Curiously, political dimension is usually sidelined or not mentioned at all (Morales, 2011, p. 19). Refugees are a group of people who remain outside of the formal political system for years. H. Itzhaky and A. York (2000, p. 413) show in their study that participation in general, decision-making process in particular, is very important, because it is correlated with empowering people as well as giving them a feeling of sociopolitical control of their lives. Moreover: “It is associated with increasing their sense of belonging to their communities and their general sense of well-being.”(ibid.)

This paper is divided into nine sections. Section one gives a brief overview of the context in Germany and in Jordan. The second section presents three definitions - refugee, activism, politics - used in this research work. In the third section basic theoretical considerations will be examined. A research design including methodology is outlined in the fourth section. In sections five and six data gathered in Würzburg and Irbid will be described. Following chapter analyses the data and investigates possible explanations for it. Finally, the conclusion of the thesis will be presented.

2. Context

Before addressing refugee political activism in Würzburg and Irbid it is necessary to shortly consider few aspects about the context of both countries. Therefore in this section the overall situation of Germany and Jordan will be presented. In Germany the focus lies on immigration, integration politics, differences in the status of refugees and possibilities of political participation. In Jordan the emphasis is put on the overall political situation in the country including historical aspects and immigration. Another focus lies on the situation of Syrian refugees in Jordan as it gives necessary knowledge about the target group.

2.1 Germany

Germany has become a country of immigration at least since the resettlement of ethnic Germans form various countries and arrival of so-called guest workers from countries like Italy, Spain and Turkey. Guest workers were seen as immigrants who would eventually return to their home countries and stay in Germany only temporary as a workforce. Thus, there were no intention by the government to initiate integration measures. Guest workers often lived on the margins of the society in their own communities. Later on it became clear that integration of these guest workers, who stayed in Germany with their families, have failed. The importance of integration was then addressed broadly in the public, politics and media. It also influenced the recent debates about integration of refugees.

Figure 1: Number of initial asylum applications in Germany from 2011 until 2018 June (Statista 2018)

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

O Asylum Applications

The number in figure 1 presents initial[2] applications for asylum from year 2011 until 2018 June. It reflects the radical increase (compared to other European countries) of asylum applications in 2015 and 2016 which was even called as a “refugee crisis”. This immigration also influenced the rise in the number of foreigners. In 2017 around 11 percent of the population in Germany were foreigners (Statista 2017). In the same year slightly over 19 million people in Germany - accounting for 23% of the total population - had a “migrant background” (Destatis 2018). Even though migration to Germany is not a new phenomenon, there are still a lot of prejudices concerning the migrants in the population, in particular, towards immigrants with a Muslim background. As current research of the Berlin Humboldt University shows, 30 percent of the population have negative attitude towards Muslim men, regardless whether they are “good” integrated or not (Foroutan & Canan, 2016). However, even if the national debate in Germany is strongly marked by the dramatisation of discourse on the alleged threats of identity politics, the regional context is largely immune to such an interpretation (Schmidtke, 2016, pp. 98-99).

The number of Asylum applications sharply dropped in 2017 as it is visible in Figure 1. This drop can be explained by measures such as changes of international policy and binational agreements restricting the access to the countries of European Union. However, the topic of immigration remains widely discussed and politicised. In 2015 German Chancellor Angela Merkel for the first time said that Germany is also a country^{3 4} of immigration (FAZ, 2015). In addition, there are plans to intensify discussions on the new German immigration law this year (Deutsche Welle 2018).

A first integration law (Integration Act) in Germany was released in 2016. The focus of this law lies on the integration of asylum seekers in the labor market. This law addresses the integration process from the perceptive “supporting and challenging” (Fördern und Fordern). This means that refugees who show the potential to integrate and have a good chance of staying permanently in Germany are supported to get faster access to integration classes and employment opportunities, while refugees who refuse to cooperate can face a reduction in benefits (Federal Government, 2016). The most controversial aspect is the residence obligation for recognised refugees. It means that refugees are obliged to settle in places of residence to which they have been assigned (§ 12a Residence Act).

Status and Living Conditions

The status influences possibilities that migrants have to participate in the political system in Germany. Moreover, it was a main aim in the refugee protests in Würzburg^{4 5}. Thus, a short introduction into different statuses and the way of naturalisation in Germany will be presented. Subsequently, the life situation of refugees during the asylum procedure will be described.

There are different statuses that a person seeking protection in Germany can have. Individuals can receive an entitlement to asylum (Art. 16a), refugee protection (§3 AsylG) or subsidiary protection (§4 AsylG)[4]. Should none of these forms of protection be applicable, a ban on deportation can be issued if specific grounds apply (§60 AufentG). The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) decides on these questions. After one to three years the status granted must be re-examined. If the protection reasons are no longer present, the status can be revoked. If the prerequisites for the status of asylum, refugee or subsidiary protection remain the same, the permanent residence permit might be issued after three to five years if other preconditions such as the ability to make a secure living and adequate knowledge of German are met (see Federal Government, 2018).

People who have received the permit of permanent residence can apply for German citizenship after eight years (§ 10 (1) StAG). This period does not apply to spouses or children of these people. The prerequisites for naturalisation are that the applicants confess to the democratic order. Furthermore, they must be able to independently finance life for themselves and their families without receiving state benefits. In addition, they have to give up their previous nationality (some exceptions possible) and cannot have criminal record. Also, the language skills at level B1⁶ and knowledge of the legal/social order in Germany must be proven beforehand. The waiting period of eight years can be shortened to up to six years if, for example, an integration course has been attended or the language performance is particularly good. In addition to this route to citizenship, authorities may also grant German citizenship at discretion to foreigners who permanently reside in Germany, and to Germans' spouses and civil partners (Worbs, 2008).

At the beginning of their stay in Germany, refugees may only reside within a certain area defined by the competent authority (§ 56 AsylG, § 61 AufenthG). This regulation is called “Residenzpflicht” (residency obligation). Asylum seekers are obliged to stay in reception centers, with some exceptions, up to three months (Section 59 (1) Asylum Act). Asylum seekers from safe countries of origin or/and with a low prospect of being granted a right to stay are required to stay in these centres for the whole duration of their procedures. On average, asylum procedures last longer. At the end of 2016, the procedures lasted for an average of 8 months and in the second quarter of 2017 almost 12 months (Arp, Reimann & Schlossarek, 2017). During this time, asylum seekers need to live in the assigned “Gemeinschaftsunterkunft” (community accommodation), often without knowing what perspective they have. Around 15,000 refugees who arrived in 2015 are still living in emergency accommodations (ibid.).

Things the refugees need for everyday life are given to them in the reception facility. These include basic benefits for food, housing, heating, clothing, healthcare and personal hygiene. If refugees no longer live in that facility these benefits can also be paid out in the form of money. Asylum seekers and tolerated persons are allowed to work or start an education program after three months. This is not the case for asylum seekers from safe countries of origin as they are not allowed to work or start education. After the new Integration Law has entered into force in August 2016, asylum applicants with good prospects to remain can be obliged to start integration courses. The benefits may be reduced if a person fails to do so. Hoverer, the situation with the integration courses, where language should be taught, is very bad. In 2017, there were only 170,000 places for more than 500,000 authorised requests (Arp, Reimann & Schlossarek, 2017). In regards to that, it means that refugees have long waiting time before it is possible to learn German. The success of these courses can also be viewed critically as only 56 percent reach B1 level in the end (ibid.).

Integration into a labor market is crucial because it is one of the main factors for integration in society. It is expected that 50 per cent of the employable refugees in Germany after 5 years will pursue a profession. Overall, experts are optimistic about the situation of refugees in the labor market. In 2017, 160,000 refugees were paying mandatory social security contributions (Dpa, 2018).

Political Participation

There are different classifications of political participatory activities, most common are the categories “conventional” (e.g. to go to elections) and “unconventional” (e.g. protest). It can be differentiated between three groups according to electoral rights in Germany. German citizens enjoy active and passive electoral rights on all levels, nationals of European Union are allowed to vote and run as candidates in local elections while non-EU nationals do not have any legal ways to take part (Roth, 2017, p. 247).

In the absence of legal opportunity to participate in the conventional politics, foreigners' councils at the municipal level have been established in Germany since the 70's. Federal states have a right to determine how they are constituted and what rights they have in the local politics. Thus, there is no unified system in Germany but it lies in the competence of the states. In the states of Berlin, Bremen, North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) and Hessen, municipalities with a certain proportion of migrants have to set up these committees. In NRW and Hessen, for example, there are much more such bodies than in Bavaria, where these play a minor role. Around 60 percent of the municipalities in Germany have set up bodies of this kind, while large cities are in particular committed to doing so (Bekay & Antara, 2018). The members of these committees are elected in different ways, either by members of the local council or by the non-German population in the respective municipality. There are differences between states but usually only people with permanent residence status who have lived in the commune for at least three months have the right to vote and stand for election. Refugees who are in the asylum application process often have no voting rights (Bekay & Antara, 2018). The committees have no decision-making powers, but only the expertise of a consultant, and usually have only limited financial resources. Also, they have only small turnout of migrants - around 10 percent (ibid.). This fact is often criticised (Hunger & Candan, 2009, p. 11). Since the 2000s, more and more foreigners' councils have been converted into integration councils, which also have decision-making rights in the municipalities (Hunger & Candan, 2009, p. 13). In a study, Afghan and Syrian refugees were interviewed and said that they see these bodies as an opportunity to participate in politics (Bekay & Antara, 2018). Especially in the regional and urban contacts those bodies might grow and open up new ways for the social and political integration of migrants and minorities (Schmidtke, 2016, p. 101). However, the influence of these councils is very limited and depends heavily on the willingness of local politics to respond to the proposals (ibid., p. 100).

There are other political rights and ways for non-electoral participation open for immigrants from non-EU states, like demonstrations, strike or protest actions. In the matter of fact, refugees were politically active in various non-conventional ways in Germany since 1990 (Ploger, 2014) and their activism increased in Europe and Germany during the last decade (Gauditz, 2017, p. 49; Steinhilper, 2017, p. 78).

2.2 Jordan

For better understanding of refugee situation in Jordan it is necessary to shortly introduce some facts about history, political landscape, demographics, and economy of the country. Later in this sub-chapter the topic of refugees and especially the situation of Syrians will be described.

Overall Information

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan was established in 1946, when Jordan gained independence from the British mandate authorities. Just two years later the war with Israel started. During the war, in 1950, Jordan occupied the territories of West Bank. High number of Palestinians fled to Jordan consequently to the war. Firstly, Palestinians were granted Jordanian citizenship but this process was reversed after the “Black September”⁷. After the second war with Israel in 1967, West Bank was occupied by Israel. Finally, a peace agreement was signed between Jordan and Israel in 1994 clarifying territory, security, water, and further issues.

Hashemite monarchy is supported by the East Bank Jordanian tribes, which played the main role in establishing the contemporary state of Jordan. Currently, those tribes represent the essential characteristics of Jordanian identity (Franzis, 2015, p. 18). Moreover, security services, which are highly influential within the Jordanian government, are themselves tightly interconnected with East Bank Jordanian tribes (ibid). The exclusiveness of Jordanian identity in the social and political life of the state, stems, in part, from the manifested activity of East Bank Jordanians to preserve their political status within the kingdom (ibid.). As a down side of this political-military conglomerate, Palestinian-Jordanians are being sidelined and reduced to the second- class citizens. They suffer from marginalisation and exclusion from key positions in the state (Abdul-Hadi, 2016, p. 261). The memory of the Black September dominates their view of the central authorities and increases their sense of marginalisation (ibid.). In recent years Jordanian government has faced declining support from the East Bank Jordanian tribes. The main reasons are these: political negotiations by the government with the marginalised Palestinian elite and marginalisation of East Bank rural hinterlands over the past three decades due to the urbanisation process (Franzis, 2015, p. 19).

To understand the political landscape of Jordan a short introduction of its political framework is needed. Jordan is governed by the principles of parliamentary monarchy. Prime Minister of Jordan is the head of the government and of a multiparty system. The king has exceptional position which is regulated by the constitution. He has multiple rights such as signing, executing, and vetoing all laws, suspending and dissolving parliament, appointing judges, etc. Legislative function has National Assembly, which consists of two chambers: the lower house and the Senate. The reforms⁸ introduced contributed to a somewhat fairer elections of lower house in 2016 (Freedom House, 2017). However, press freedom is restricted by media laws, journalists are intermediated and “the judicial system is neither independent nor does it fully adhere to international standards” (ibid.). Jordan has ranked second in the Middle East and North Africa region and 42nd worldwide⁹ in the 2017-2018 World Justice Project (WJP) Rule of Law Index. The rule of law means equality and justice in the practice of day-to-day governance. As the working definition of WJP suggests the rule of law is based on four universal principles: Accountability, Just Laws, Open Government, Accessible & Impartial Dispute Resolution¹⁰. However, “(...) many times one discovers in Jordan the existence of an alternative, unwritten, law that often takes precedence over the written law.” (Kuttab, 2016).

Jordan faced numerous influxes of different population groups. Starting with the Circassians, Chechens and Armenians in the early phase of the state formation (Al- Khatib & Lenner, 2015, p. 7). This was followed by massive movements from Palestine to Jordan in 1948 and 1967, as it was mentioned before in this chapter. To escape the persecution and violence hundreds of thousands of Iraqis also came to Jordan in the 1990s and 2000s (ibid.). Finally, Syrians fled to Jordan in hopes to escape the war. Today most Jordanians have a Palestinian origin although the exact numbers of the demographic situation are not publicly available (Abdul-Hadi, 2016, p. 273).

Historically, the balance was established between different groups such as East Bank Jordanian tribes, West Bank Palestinians, Islamists, and nationalists coexisting in Jordan. Every population influx into Jordan has impacted this delicate balance, and the Syrian refugee influx is no exception (Franzis, 2015, p. 18). The long term settlements of Syrians in Jordan mean the growing number of non-Jordanian individuals including

Palestinians and Iraqis. Even if living years in Jordan those populations are unrepresented and live as second-class citizens (ibid., p. 20). Deficit of democratic representation might become a spark for real conflict inside the kingdom, fuelled by concerns for citizenship.

Jordanian economy is among the smallest in the Middle East. Jordan has insufficient supplies of oil and other natural resources. Jordan suffers from severe lack of water resources. Partly because of complicated political dynamics: regional water competition, domestic tribal politics, and poor water management (Franzis, 2015, p. 18). Thus, the government relies on foreign assistance as its main proceeds come from states that provide aid in grants and concessional loans (Mansur, 2014). Another economic challenge for the government includes very high rates of poverty and unemployment. Jordan's labour market has significant vulnerabilities. The unemployment rate in 2017 was 14,92 per cent (Statista 2017a). The situation is even worse for the youth, 15-24 years, as the estimated unemployment rate in Jordan was almost 40 per cent (Statista, 2017b). Around 45 percent of the population work in the public sector and only 53 percent in the private (Department of Statistics, 2017). This represents one of the highest number of people working in the public sector (Malkawi, 2016). All in all, the economic situation in Jordan is very challenging.

Current Syrian Refugee Situation

Jordan experienced a massive influx of Syrian refugees caused by the war in Syria. According to UNHCR Jordan hosts the third largest population of Syrian refugees after Turkey and Lebanon. The current estimates of the number of Syrian refugees are approximately 666,000. This number represent those Syrians who are registered with the UNHCR in Jordan. The government estimates that including the Syrians who lived in Jordan prior to the crisis the total number of Syrians in Jordan makes 1.4 million (Jordan Response Plan, 2015). Jordan has around 10 million inhabitants, including other foreign nationals, in total (Department of Statistics, 2017). The Syrian refugee number is equivalent to almost 10 per cent of the Jordanian population (ibid.). Syrian refugees, like Iraqis before them, are residing in the cities of Jordan. Around seventy-seven percent of these Syrians live in host communities as opposed to refugee camps. The largest numbers of Syrian refugees are located in the northern governorates of the country as they host more than 76 per cent of all the Syrian refugees in Jordan (Stave & 11

Hillesund, 2015, p. 4). Irbid is a third most populated city in Jordan. It has around 1,8 million inhabitants (Department of Statistics, 2017).

UNHCR is responsible¹¹ for status identifications, the protection of refugees and issuing asylum requests. Jordanian authorities require Syrians to register with the Ministry of Internal Affairs so the biometric service card can be issued to them. In addition, refugees need to register with UNHCR to get another “proof of registration” if they reside in formal camps or an “asylum seeker certificate” if they stay in host communities (JIF, 2018, p. 5). However, at least 113,000 refugees are not in possession of the vital card from the Ministry of Internal Affairs (Dangerous Ground, 2018, p. 6). Unregistered Refugees face major barriers to legally stay in their current place of residence, access public services and humanitarian assistance or register births, deaths and marriages (ibid.).

Jordanians took the streets in 2011 to protest against the rise of living-costs such as food, fuel and other commodities in Jordan. Thus, at the beginning the government of Jordan benefited politically from the inward flow of refugees because they made potential consequences of revolution visible and deflected public attention from the challenges of Jordanian political system (Francis, 2015, p. 3). However, in the long run the sharp population increase revealed and deepened the long-present lack of Jordan's political, economic, and social infrastructure (ibid.).

Refrains like “we do not have the resources to accommodate yet another group of people”, or “we already have the Iraqis, and the Palestinians” are common in the public and media (Al-Khatib & Lenner, 2015, p. 7). Thus, Syrians are often perceived as a burden on the country's economy, infrastructure, resources, and public services (ibid.). Francis states that the negative public sentiment toward Syrian refugees also affects the ability of Jordanian government to respond to the refugee crisis (ibid., 4). Since 2014 the situation of Syrians is getting more restricted as it can be concluded from the actions of Jordanian government. “Jordan has limited refugee inflows, violated international non-refoulement laws, and restricted services to Syrians already in the country.” (ibid., p. 20). Tight border restrictions have been applied since 2013 and after a suicide-bomb attack at the north-eastern border in Rukban the government of Jordan officially announced the closure of its border on 21 June 2016 (JIF, 2018). The situation of

Palestinian-Syrian refugees is dramatic. The Government of Jordan announced a policy of non-entry to Palestinians fleeing the Syria conflict in early 2013. They have an irregular status in Jordan and because of this the group faces considerable degree of insecurity. Difficulties are already present in the engagement with the civil institutions, illegal Palestinian-Syrian refugees aiming to access basic public government services, fall into a constant risk of refoulement (UNRWA, 2016).

The refugee status of Syrians does not allow to be legally employed in Jordan. Only 10 per cent of employed Syrians have a formal work permit (Stave & Hillesund, 2015, p. 6). Thus, they work in an informal sector where they are paid low wages, they work long hours and have poor work contracts. The research data of S. E. Stave and S. Hillesund (2015, pp. 6-7) shows that Syrian workers are generally being paid less, must work more, and have poorer contracts compared to Jordanians in the same informal sector. Approximately two-thirds of the population of Syrians who reside outside camps in 2014 lived below the Jordanian absolute poverty line of around 82 Euro per person per month (UNHCR, 2014). Several impacts of the economic situation can be addressed: Labour standards, such as the “minimum wage” Law got affected, alongside an increase of the informal labour market.(Stave & Hillesund, 2015, p. 8). The above mentioned policies on working permits for Syrian refugees have a big impact on the development of this phenomena. However, according to the economist Mansur the Syrians who came, they competed with the Egyptians, not with the Jordanian workers (Al-Khatib & Lenner, 2015, p. 28).

Figure 2: Percentage Distribution of Jordanians Age (15+) Years by Educational Level, 2017

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Statistical data collected by the Department of Statistics indicates challenges of the educational system of Jordan. As illustrated in Figure 2 with data from Department of Statistics in Jordan there is a high number of young people who have less than a secondary education. The situation is even more dramatic for the Syrian refugees.

Around 36% of registered Syrian refugees are school-aged children (UNHCR, 2017). There are different possibilities for refugees to access education like UNRWA schools, Ministry of Education schools situated in camp or in host communities, or non-formal or informal education programs. Nevertheless the challenge lies in acceptance of diplomas received in the education programs of informal schools. Moreover, the two shift solution applied in various schools in Jordan has a discriminatory component. Despite the commitment to place all refugee and vulnerable children living in the host communities in schools around 43% of refugee children remain out of school (Dangerous Ground, 2018, p. 6). Access to higher education for refugees is very hard. As in general university costs in Jordan are high. Most often only if granted a scholarship can refugees access the universities. Most common obstacles are those of financial origin as there are not only direct costs, but also indirect such as for transport and books, as well as fear of bullying within the school system (UNICEF, 2017).

Medical treatment represents the next challenge which refugees face in Jordan. Syrians had experienced difficulties in accessing basic healthcare since the government made a decision in November 2014 to cancel free healthcare services for Syrians living outside refugee camps in Jordan. The situation even worsened as in 2018 the subsidised healthcare services for Syrian refugees living in Jordan were canceled. That means that 80 per cent of the ‘foreigner rate' for healthcare needs to be individually paid (UNHCR, 2018a). It means that only NGO's like UNHCR are providing the health care services free of charge.

The benefits of hosting Syrian refugees are usually denied. Y. Mansur reveals the myths that are connected to the Syrian refugees. He believes that it was advantageous for the government “(...) to portray the refugees as helpless, poor, and dependent; and as consumers rather than possible producers” (Al-Khatib & Lenner, 2015, p. 25). Due to the increase of Jordan's population, the refugees, have a beneficial effect on the food market. The 87% of the food consumed in Jordan is imported. Which means that a higher demand would substantiate a reduction in costs of food (ibid., 24). While progress has been made to improve the legal status of Syrian refugees in Jordan, there are prevailing barriers to economic opportunities, quality education and access to medical care and other services.

3. Definitions

This chapter aims to explain terms that are of great importance for this study. It starts with an idea of what is meant by a “refugee” while dividing between the legal definition, critique of it, and finally, presenting the working definition. This chapter also provides a brief overview of what is meant with activism and who are seen as activists. This chapter concludes with an explanation of the term “political”.

3.1 Universal category “Refugee”

3.1.1 Legal Definition

The 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees gives a definition to the term “refugee”. According to it a refugee is a person, who:

“owning to wellfodunded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owning to such fear, unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owning to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.” (Article 1a(2))

It is a narrow definition, which was historically oriented towards the situation of European refugees during and after the Second World War. Thus, it was thought to be useful for an exceptional situation. In fact, this exceptional situation is turning to be more and more the normality and countries of the Global North are struggling to de facto question the universality of the Refugee Convention and Human rights without completely overthrowing all those values (Mokre, 2015, p. 33).

This legal definition is basis for granting a person a Refugee status in Germany. People who had to flee their country based on political grounds are entitled to receive asylum according to the Basic Law Art. 16a (if all conditions are met). Additionally subsidiary protection (Asylum Act § 4) is granted to the people who do not have to fear persecution, but have a real risk of serious harm if they returned to their home country. Thus, it is judged who is entitled to the refugee status and who is not. It is well worth noticing that the legal definition is describing the ideal-type rather than reflecting the various reasons for forced migration (Behrman, 2016, p. 40). According to Behrman: only people, who showed the will, the ability to travel and great courage and/or experienced tragedy can be “genuine” refugees (ibid.).

Jordan did not sign the UN's 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its additional 1967 protocol. Thus, the government has a greater degree of agency concerning the responses to the refugee influx (Francis, 2015, p. 6). Jordanian Constitution provides protection against extradition for political asylum seekers, but there is no special national legislation addressing status of refugees and asylum seekers. They are perceived by national laws as foreigners. The only legal instrument which clarifies the position of refugees in Jordan is a 1998 Memorandum of Understanding signed between Jordan and the UNHCR which allows the UNHCR to provide international protection to persons falling within its mandate. Excluded from the UNCHR mandate are Palestinian refugees, as they fall under the responsibility of the UNRWA.

Needless to say, the term exists and is widely used outside its legal definition. Often all people who flee from their countries of origin because of various grounds are named and seen by the society generally as “refugees”. This undifferentiated label is attached to all groups such as those with the legal status as well as those who cannot be deported and those without any legal status. Thus, there is a blurred meaning of this label in the society.

Even in its legal application, the definition is not permanently fixed for a “refugee”. If a person has acquired a legal refugee status in Germany it does not mean that this status will be applicable to him indefinitely. On the contrary, the status is not constant and tends to shift over time. Moreover the status can change not only because one was refused to be granted asylum, but also just by moving from one European country to another (Bhimji, 2016, p. 56). Also legislative and policy changes can influence the status of individuals (McNevin, 2011, p. 19). “The more the number of right less people increased, the greater became the temptation to pay less attention to the deeds of the persecuting governments than to the status of the persecuted.” ( Arendt, 1958, p. 294) Thus, taking into account the essentially unstable nature of the aforementioned definition, rather than discussing legal terminology and its applications, this study will focus on the issue at the “ground level”: on the struggle of people, who, for fear of war, persecution, violence, social inequality, economic hardship or poverty, fled their respective countries of origin.

3.1.2 Critique

“The single story creates stereotypes, and the problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue, but that they are incomplete. They make one story become the only story.” (Adichie, 2009)

To further the critique of the nomenclature in its use, it is necessary to address the critique of the term “refugee”. Firstly, it is important to challenge the homogeneous representation of refugees. The uniformity which is suggested by the term is narrowly applied to a multitude of situations and people, who vary widely both in identity, social and cultural background. Rare are pictures showing refugees as individuals with dignity who speak different languages and have their own history and more common are pictures of people being part of de-individualised “refugee mass” (Binder, 2017, p. 141).

“Within the repertoire of humanitarian concern, refugee now constitutes one of the most powerful labels” (Zetter, 1991, p. 39) This citation shows that already in 1991 refugee label was acknowledged to be very influential. The process of “labelling” can be understood as giving meaning and redefining who you are in relation to the others. As it is known, this process is highly problematic and bears the danger of creating the “other”, which can lead to various ways of discrimination. As W. Qaddour explained in the interview why he does not want to be called a refugee: “It is violent because the easiest way for a community to perceive you is to put you in a frame or a box. This makes it easier to deal with the ‘other'.”(Al-Khatib & Lenner, 2015, p. 45). E. Said (1994), one of the most influential thinkers of postcolonial studies, addresses the importance of putting the emphasis not on identity as a given good but to open a new perspective and think about how labels are constructed, why they are constructed, and by whom. He states: “No one today is purely one thing. Labels like Indian, or woman, or Muslim, or American are not more than starting-points, which, if followed into actual experience for only a moment, are quickly left behind” (ibid., p. 336).

One must nevertheless insist that refugees are not a homogenous group as those people are personalities, human beings with different age, gender, ethnicity which all cannot and should not be reduced to one identity. “The moment we want to say who somebody is, our very vocabulary leads us astray into saying what he is” (Arendt ,1958, p. 181). Thus, treating the person not because who someone is but what, H. Arendt contends, dehumanises the person (Fiske, 2016, p. 20). C. Moulin (2012, p. 60) criticises the fact that if refugees choose protection they are expected to show gratitude and are deprived political autonomy. She set an interesting calculation:

protection + gratitude = refugee (humanitarian subject) liberty + autonomy = no refugee (political subject)

This calculation perfectly represents the situation that refugees find themselves in. Both liberty and autonomy are not integral parts of created refugee identity.

Secondly, in the political and public discourses refugees are usually addressed from the deficit perspective. As a matter of fact, terms that are usually used talking about non­status people already implicate a lack (such as the lack of documents) or absence of social status or visibility (Nyers, 2008, p. 166). Also, a context of problems is commonly used while describing refugees. Stereotypes such as them being passive, poor, speechless and needing help are widely used by the media (Binder, 2017, p. 140). Common are pictures showing masses of people, mostly women and children, poor and wearing dirty clothes. In the German/European context very common are pictures showing masses of men, mostly young and single. The images used for describing natural disasters like floods or plagues are similarly applied while showing refugees and communicating the “crisis” of migrancy (Marciniak & Tyler, 2014, p. 8). Especially, in summer 2015 the definition “refugee crisis” and “wave of refugees” was a dominant framing of the situation. This representation of refugees without individual background does not help in any way to realise that each person in the photograph has a name, opinions, relatives, and a history. This universalism of the “refugee” makes it difficult for people in this category to be seen as political, historical and cultural actors rather than only mute victims (Malkki, 1996, p. 378). Moreover this role of victim implicates that people are passive and that they do not have a right to their own voice (Binder, 2017, p. 141).

There is a discrepancy in the past and present representation of the refugees. Nowadays the hegemonic discourse shows refugees as a pathetic and threatening figures as well as victims, in opposite to a past representation as heroes, or active shapers of life (Behrman, 2016). “The refugee is no longer a romantic figure, overcoming tragedy to triumph.” (ibid., p. 38) However, both ways are not adequately representing the complexity of refugees' experience.

An attempt to define the “other” is actually a way of defining oneself, as Europeans traditionally defined themselves in the context of the other (Maggio, 2007, p. 423). As the white, occidental, European superiority works only over construction of the “other” as deviation from the own norm (Wilke, 2018, p. 39). Migrants are seen as strangers, people who do not belong and their existence can be figuratively described as alien in the container of the national unity of citizens with rights (ibid., 26). “As Europeanism has a long history of imagining “minorities” as fundamentally “different” and, by implication, inimical to properly “European” cultural identities and values, thus converting them into “cultural” and/or “religious” problems and questions: The Jewish Question, The Gypsy/Roma Question, The Muslim Question.” (New Keywords Collective, 2016). This citation perfectly reveals the problematic of crating a person as a problem or question. This same strategy is adapted, when talking about the label refugee.

The refugee activists from Munich introduced the term “Non-Citizen” in order to reflect on the situation of people without any rights and claims to equality (Doppler & Vorwergk, 2014, p. 52). Giving an individual a label “refugee” can also lead to invisibility of his/her human rights (ibid., 57). As H. Arendt rightly claimed: “This extremity, and nothing else, is the situation of people deprived of human rights. They are deprived, not of the right to freedom, but of the right to action; not of the right to think whatever they please, but of the right to opinion” (Arendt, 1958, p. 296).

As noted above, it is impossible to find one definition that could be fairly used to describe the matter. E. Isin (2009) names those categorised with different words like foreigner, migrant, refugee, irregular migrant and so on as an “unnamed figure” and states that this figure is unnamed because we still did not recognised it, although it is quite visible (ibid., p. 367). In Jordan other terms such as “guest” or just referring to the country of origin like “Syrian” are common (Expert Interview I, 95-6).

Besides the negative image of refugees being aliens, there exists also a positive one as the human material to a new state (Behrman, 2016, p. 39). There is a discourse that refugees could fill the gap in society where the population is shrinking and ageing. The key issue is the ability of refugees to find jobs. Thus, the emphasis lies in the proper training and the long-term financial gains that refugees can bring for the economy.

3.1.3 Working Definition

Keeping in mind the criticism of the definition refugee, the term will not be abandoned, firstly, in order to ease the understanding, and secondly, it would require a substantial legal effort to provide an alternative term which goes beyond the scope of the present study. Also, people that were displaced use this definition themselves. Most of the people do not refer to their legal status as for example a person with subsidiary protection or asylum seeker but name themselves refugees (Doppler & Vorwergk, 2014, p. 52). Various self-organisations in Germany do include this specific definition in the names like “The Voice of Refugees”, “Refugee Tent Action”, “Refugee Struggle for Freedom”. Secondly, the term “refugee” has a historical dimension, which reminds people of the war and how masses of people fled and were looking for shelter in different countries.

In this study the working definition “refugee” will be used to define all people who fled their countries on various grounds such as war, violence, persecution, social inequality, economic hardship or poverty.

3.2 Activism and Activists

“Singing in a choir is not activism, but singing as a protest, for example in a prison or in a church, certainly can be.” (Martin, 2007)

Different definitions of activism can be found in literature. Activism is not a new phenomenon as it was always present and played a major role in: ending slavery, challenging dictatorship, protecting workers, claiming women rights, and many more (Jordan, 2002; Martin, 2007). B. Martin (2007, p. 19) defines activism as “action on behalf of a cause, action that goes beyond is conventional routine.” In this case, activism is tied to conventionality. As B. Martin suggests, in societies where free speech is prohibited the posting of complaints about the government can be subversive and the same action is a routine occurrence in the society where free speech is respected and protected. Another important aspect of activism is that, usually, activism is something that people with less power do, as those with positions of power rather use conventional means in order to reach their goals (ibid.). Moreover, activism is not something that can be generally seen as a good or a bad thing (ibid.). In other words, it is the cause of activism and used actions that can be interpreted as something positive or negative. For example, the cause of activism can be to promote equality and justice, as well as to attack minority groups in the society. Also, it can be differentiated between citizen- oriented actions and cause-oriented actions. Latter ones are used to pursue specific issues and policy concerns among different target groups, both within and also well beyond the electoral arena (Norris, 2005, p. 11). Activism cannot occur without people, who can be called activists.

There are activists who operate on their own, but more often activists are members of groups, which can be either small or large, act locally or globally (Martin, 2007, p. 21). Maria J. Funes who is analysing C. Tillys theory of collective action states: “Collective action is action carried out by a group of persons in which the following components can be identified: interests, organisations, mobilisation and opportunity (understood in terms of the political opportunity structure)” (Funes, 2016, p. 8) B. Martin names some benefits as well as some challenges that activists organised in groups face. On the one hand, a group can undertake larger tasks and share responsibilities between members. Sharing ideas and supporting each other can help to deal better with difficulties. On the other hand, miscommunication, disagreement, and power struggles can occur and hinder activism. Also, so called “supporters” can provide funding, legal support, shelter and in this way contribute without being activists themselves.

Activism can also be addressed in terms of time framework. For example, T. Jordan categorises activism in three groups: historical activism, present-day activism, future activism (Jordan, 2002, p. 26). Another way is to group it according to its form/method. The division into non-violent and violent activism is wide known. Methods of activism do have kind of dynamism as they change and evolve.

In this research, the focus lies on ways of politically motivated collective and also individual activism. Taking into account all aspects and modes of activism, for the sake of clarity, the understanding of activism is based on the B. Martin's (2007) ideas mentioned above. Although the term ‘political‘ is not so self-evident nowadays, because it can cover “everything from the personal politics of conversation to the big boys' politics of national election campaigns” (Jordan, 2002, p. 10) and will be clarified in the following section.

3.3 What is “Political”?

In order to talk about refugees and their political activism, it is first necessary to concretise what is meant with “political” in this study. As there are different definitions, how broad we define “politics” shapes the understanding of what is political activism.

For analysing the political activism of refugees it is beneficial to use some thoughts of J. Rancière (1999). He expressed the idea that at the heart of politics lies a conflict between those who really speak and those whose voice just make a noise because “Whoever is nameless cannot speak” (ibid., p. 22f). J. Rancière suggests that “political” is the irruption of equality into the social order, which presupposes a process of “subjectivisation” through which the subject must break with pre-given identities (Genel, 2016, p. 27). Moreover, he grasps the various dimensions of politics addressing visibility, speech, space and time. “Politics revolves around what is seen and what can be said about it, around who has the ability to see and the talent to speak, around the properties of spaces and the possibilities of time.” (Rancière, 2004, p. 13)

C . Tilly suggests that the realm of politics is entered when “we interact with agents of governments, either dealing with them directly or engaging in activities bearing on governmental rights, regulations, and interests.”(2008, p. 6).

Until today it is common in research to divide in “conventional” and “protest” politics (Norris, 2005, p. 11). Conventional politics is embedded in legal institutional framework or directly related to electoral process and include such actions as voting or participating in a referendum. Whereas protest politics involves unconventional ways of participation like demonstrating or striking. Needless to say that most often politics does not involve contention (Tilly, 2008, p. 6). Another aspect worth mentioning is the private and public division. “That the private is political might be familiar news, but the depoliticisation of the private or its total collapse into the political are also very ordinary stories.” (Papadopoulus et al., 2008, p. 137) The challenge of this division lies in the task to neither politicise everything done in the private sphere nor depoliticise it.

The demand of change is something that marks political activism. “Transgression is essential to activism because collective action lacks a political aspect unless change is demanded. Whether that change is the end of global capitalism or the abolishing of an Easter-bonnet parade, the fact that some transgression of an existing state of affairs is called for is essential for a collective action to be political.” (Jordan, 2002, p. 11)

In this paper “politics” is understood in the broader sense not as just party politics, elections and conventional ways of political participation, but as actions that go beyond regularity and are directed to achieve change. Research on political activism for P. Norris (2005, p. 1): “(...) compares the ways that citizens participate, the processes that lead them to do so, and the consequences of these acts.” Small remark should be done to this definition as in this study the emphasis lies on the political activism of refugees. However, it is a challenge to adapt such a broad definition of what is political as it can then lose it's meaning, when every action becomes a political one.

4. Theoretical Framework

This chapter sheds light on the theoretical framework of the study. This study examines political activism of refugees basing the arguments on different theoretical concepts. In the Critical Migration and Citizenship Studies there are various studies that address the migrant and refugee struggles (Isin & Nielsen, 2008; Neyers & Rygiel, 2012; Marciniak & Tyler, 2014). Much less research concerning migrants and refugees was done in the social movement research as it mostly concentrated on solidarity groups (Ataç, Rygiel & Stierl, 2016, p. 530). However, it is important to keep in mind that all areas of research have difficulties to explain political mobilisations of people who are deprived of significant rights and opportunities for representation and articulation (Schwenken, 2006, p. 36).

This chapter will address the theoretical stances needed for the analysis of this thesis. In the following, first the concept Acts of Citizenship will be presented. In the second sub­chapter perceptible and imperceptible forms of political activism will be addressed. Following sub-sections move to consider the concept of contentious politics and the meaning of space. A final section gives some ideas about the notion of personhood in the motivation of activism. However, a clear division between the research strains is often not possible because they are interrelated.

4.1 Acts of Citizenship

“We can consider the struggles over migrant and refugee rights, especially those that advocate sanctuary, as an inversion of borders: these struggles invert inside and outside in ways that make it difficult to maintain the myth of the borders of the state as a homogenous contained space.” (Isin, 2017, p. 196)

There are ongoing debates trying to answer the question of what citizenship is. Diverse distinctions like status vs. practice, domination vs. empowerment, descriptive vs. substantive, national vs. transnational are made and described. Traditional approaches to citizenship identify the concept as static and bound to the territory (Ataç, Rygiel & Stierl, 2016, p. 531). In contrast, citizenship was from the beginning challenged by various groups of people, who claimed to have rights (Koster-Eiserfunke, Reichhold & Schwiertz, 2014, p. 178). Probably the most known example is women, who fought for political participation and equal rights, as they did not share the same citizen rights as men. According to E. Isin (2009, p. 375), citizenship always had fluid and dynamic elements and, if not concentrating on transformation the institution of citizenship underwent from ancient to modern times, we are more prone to take for granted a static and unchanging view of citizenship as membership. “It is no longer adequate (if it ever was) to think of states as ‘containers' of citizens as its members.” (ibid., p. 370) In other words, what is understood under the term citizenship and who is counted to demos, is never stable, but is a subject to permanent negotiation and transformation (Koster- Eiserfunke et al., 2014, p. 179). Thus, from perspective of E. Isin, the question should not be what citizenship is but what citizenship is called as this concept evolved and changed (Isin, 2009, p. 369).

The need of rethinking citizenship (Isin & Nielsen, 2008; Isin, 2009; Nyers & Rygiel, 2012; Atac, Rygiel & Stierl, 2016) was the reason for the formation of Critical Citizenship Studies (CSS), which emerged in the 1990s and has been growing since then. The Focus of CSS lies especially on challenging how and who is seen as a political subject and rethinking citizen/non-citizen division.

Developed by the E. Isin and G. Nielsen (2008) the concept of “acts of citizenship” analyse how marginal populations (often migrants) are constituting themselves as activist citizens by claiming rights and demanding social justice. Different terms like: “Acts of Citizenship”, “Activist Citizenship”, “Citizenship From Bellow”, “Acts of Non-citizenship”, “Acts of protest” are used by various authors. Nonetheless, these different definitions are actually very similar in essence and understand citizenship as political practice: “Without the need to be ‘authorised' to formally and legally belong, acts of citizenship can be enacted by anyone and enable recognition of the political nature of various groups considered marginal who would, through their acts, become (activist) citizens.” (Atac, Rygiel & Stierl, 2016, p. 532).

To act means to take an initiative, to begin, to set something into motion (Arendt, 1958, p. 177). Those acts of citizenship are understood as “deeds”, that not only include political but also ethical, sexual, cultural and social acts, because all of them can represent a certain way of being political (Isin & Nielsen, 2008, p. 2).

“To do and to suffer are like opposite sides of the same coin, and the story that an act starts is composed of its consequent deeds and sufferings” (Arendt, 1958, p. 190) In other words, action is connected to suffering as it can be a consequence of acting or/and a starting point.

[...]

---

¹ This number includes just registered refugees.

² All asylum applications consist of the number of initial applications and repeated applications.

³ More in the chapter 6.1.2

⁴ More in the chapter 3.1

⁵ B1 refers to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. There are six levels: A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2.

⁶ Black September is called the civil war between the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and the monarchy in 1970. It marked a turning point in the formation of Jordanian national identity. In the aftermath Jordan refocused its national orientation towards specifically Jordanian basis relegating the Palestinians to the secondary position (Abdul-Hadi, 2016, p. 51).

⁷ New electoral law was applied in the elections of 2016. The prescribing proportional representation system was used in place of the previous single nontransferable vote system, which had been often criticised for favouring pro-government tribal elites (Freedom House, 2017).

⁸ The survey is based on the data from 113 countries around the world and received from over 110,000 households and 3,000 expert surveys. Germany was ranked at place 6.

⁹ 1.Accountability: The government as well as private actors are accountable under the law. 2. Just Laws: The laws are clear, publicised, stable, and just; are applied evenly; and protect fundamental rights, including the security of persons and property and certain core human rights. 3. Open Government: The processes by which the laws are enacted, administered, and enforced are accessible, fair, and efficient. 4. Accessible & Impartial Dispute Resolution: Justice is delivered timely by competent, ethical, and independent representatives and neutrals who are accessible, have adequate resources, and reflect the makeup of the communities they serve. (WJP)

¹⁰ Further explained in sub-chapter 3.1.1 Legal Definition.

¹¹ In the annex you find the transcript of the expert interviews.