Mobilizing for safe passages and escape aid: challenging the ‘asylum paradox’ between active and activist citizenship, humanitarianism and solidarity

ABSTRACT

The ‘asylum paradox’ is a pivotal feature of refugee politics in the Global North: In order to effectively claim and obtain refugee rights, refugees are forced to cross borders illegally because of the lack of legal entry options. As a result, access to refugee protection has become a controversial issue, and civil society initiatives have begun mobilizing people for safe passage and escape aid. This paper analyses a range of such practices in Germany and Austria. While some initiatives focus on existent, but barely implemented legal entry channels, such as resettlement, family reunification, or relocation, others directly facilitate the transit of refugees, including undocumented border crossings. In the context of dominant border regimes, members of these organizations oscillate between positions of ‘active citizens’ and ‘activist citizens’ (Isin). In different ways, these initiatives demonstrate notions of community and belonging, pointing to practices of transnational solidarity that include people on the move.

KEYWORDS:

• Asylum paradox
• refugees
• escape aid
• solidarity
• activist citizenship

Acknowledgments

The article is a result of the ‘From refugee support to escape aid’ research project, funded by the Fritz Thyssen Foundation (2018-2020). We owe great thanks to the escape aid initiatives and individuals who shared their stories and experiences with us. Vanessa Pohlmann and Felix Keß provided excellent support and discussions throughout the project. We would also like to extend our thanks to the INEX (The Politics of Inclusion and Exclusion) research platform and the participants of our workshop at the University of Vienna in June 2019 as well as to the anonymous reviewers for their discussions and comments, and Matt Rees for proofreading.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. Being aware of the dichotomous categorization of refugees and migrants, we use the term ‘migrants’ in a comprehensive sense (Carling 2015). The term ‘refugee’ is used when applied to legal categories, when our interviewees use it and in our analysis to avoid denying the specificity and exclusionary effects of such a discourse.

2. All German quotes, websites, and documents were translated by the authors.

3. The campaign was named Fluchthilfe & Du (Escape Aid & You), a critical reference to a campaign by the Austrian charity Caritas, which had been using a slogan Caritas & Du.

4.  This initially applied indefinitely and was later limited to a period of five years in mid-2016.

This initially applied indefinitely and was later limited to a period of five years in mid-2016.

5.  In Germany, this could be seen in the introduction of a small-scope resettlement programme in 2012 as a result of the Save Me campaign launched three years before. Other examples include limitations on declarations of commitment (2016) as well as the hesitant introduction of a private sponsorship programme by the federal government (2019) resulting from an exchange with the Flüchtlingspaten Syrien. One final example concerns the German Foreign Minister’s intention to accept refugees rescued from distress at sea in Germany, even outside of a Europe-wide distribution mechanism (2019); this had been one of the main demands of Seebrücke for over a year.

In Germany, this could be seen in the introduction of a small-scope resettlement programme in 2012 as a result of the Save Me campaign launched three years before. Other examples include limitations on declarations of commitment (2016) as well as the hesitant introduction of a private sponsorship programme by the federal government (2019) resulting from an exchange with the Flüchtlingspaten Syrien. One final example concerns the German Foreign Minister’s intention to accept refugees rescued from distress at sea in Germany, even outside of a Europe-wide distribution mechanism (2019); this had been one of the main demands of Seebrücke for over a year.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Helge Schwiertz

Helge Schwiertz is a postdoc researcher at the Institute for Migration Research and Intercultural Studies (IMIS) and at the Institute of Social Sciences at the University of Osnabrück in Germany. His research interests include migration and border studies, anti-migrant movements and racism, (pro-)migrant organizing, conflict, social movement and citizenship studies as well as political and social theory. In 2019 he published his dissertation on the radical democracy of migratory struggles in Germany and the United States (Migration und radikale Demokratie. 2019, transcript) and he is co-editor of movements. Journal for Critical Migration and Border Regime Studies.

Helen Schwenken

Helen Schwenken is a Professor of Migration and Society and vice director of the Institute for Migration Research and Intercultural Studies (IMIS) at the University of Osnabrueck in Germany. Her research interests include gender and migration, social movement studies and labour migration. She is co-editor of the journal “Peripherie – Politik, Ökonomie, Kultur”, a journal on South-North relations. Amongst her publications are: Globale Migration (2018, Junius), Worth the Effort? Protesting successfully against Deportations. In: Protest Movements in Refugee and Deportation Policies (2018 with M. Kirchhoff et al., Springer), New migration and citizenship politics (2014, Palgrave, co-ed. with Sabine Russ).