Can Rights Discourse Diminish Support for Displaced Persons?

Abstract

Human rights discourse has become central to the global debates about treatment of and solutions for refugees and displaced persons. Following the expansion of rights-oriented terminology generally, advocates for displacees have increasingly framed their arguments in human rights terms. Many believe that human rights discourse can help mobilize humanitarian solutions for people fleeing violence and persecution. However, we argue that the backlash against human rights institutions and organizations within some communities may render this strategy ineffective and even reinforce exclusionary attitudes among host communities. Based on socio-legal analysis of the refugee label and human rights discourse within Israeli society, we demonstrate how the strategic use of this terminology by pro-refugee NGOs portrays displacees as a security and identity threat to local communities. We suggest alternative framings that might better achieve advocates’ goal of protection.

Keywords:

• Human rights
• refugees
• displacement
• legal labels
• framing

Notes

1 Indeed, the Refugee Convention’s scope was not extended to refugees outside of Europe until the adoption of the 1967 Protocol, which Israel ratified in 1968. (UNHCR, States parties, including reservations and declarations, to the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, at https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/5d9ed66a4).

2 A few references to the label are made in the Government’s procedure for treatment of requests for political asylum, in accordance with the “Refugee Convention.” https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/policy/handling_political_asylum_seekers_in_israel/he/5.2.0012.pdf

3 The label “immigrant” is not a formal legal label governing displacees in Israel. Instead, it is used to denote non-Jewish individuals who enter Israel lawfully for limited approved purposes, such as work or marriage, under the Entry into Israel Law. As mentioned, majority public sentiment regards non-Jews as a challenge to Israel’s ethno-national character, and accordingly, the label “immigrant” (or “immigration’) represents a demographic threat that jeopardizes Israel’s Jewish character (in contrast of the positive label “Oleh’, which is reserved for Jewish immigrants). As a result, the term “immigrant” has negative connotations in Israel, which are evidenced in many global and domestic surveys measuring attitudes about immigrants and immigration.

4 This was the first of three amendments tailored to adapt this legislation to the African refugees. For a detailed description of these amendments, see Cohn (2017).

5 The term “asylum seeker” has deeper social and cultural roots within Israeli society. It references the biblical term “asylum city” (‘Ir miklat’), which carries a strong connotation among Israelis. Biblical asylum cities were intended to serve as places where people who committed accidental homicides could find immunity from revenge killing. While the asylum city provided fugitive manslayers protection from vengeance, it also imposed its own punishment, as the asylum seekers were required to remain there in exile until the death of the high priest (Greenberg, 1959). In this sense, “asylum” connotes a detention center for manslaughterers. Clearly, the purpose of the biblical asylum laws was humanitarian (curtailing and controlling vengeance). However, the linguistic context and biblical origin of the term reference both crime and detention, and therefore may invoke negative feelings and associations.

6 HCJ 8665/14 Desta v. The Knesset; HCJ 7385/13 Gabrisilasi et al. v. The Knesset et al.; HCJ 7146/12 Adam v. The Knesset (16.9.2013).

7 A 2013 Pew Research Center public-opinion poll found that the Israeli public holds the most hostile attitudes toward the United Nations of the 39 nations polled, with 70% of the population expressing unfavorable views toward the organization. See https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2013/09/17/united-nations-retains-strong-global-image/. See also Drake (2013).

8 “Iron Dome” is the missile defense system designed to protect Israeli cities from Palestinian rockets (see Grossman, 2012).

9 H.C. 5100/94, Pub. Comm. Against Torture in Isr. v. Gov’t of Israel, 53(4) P.D. 817, 845 (President Barak’s judgment, paragraph 39) (hereinafter: the torture case).

10 In future research, we plan to do so. By presenting a set of potential displacees to experimental subjects, manipulating only the labels used to describe the candidates and the basis of their claim to admission, we will attempt to gauge the causal effect of these labels.