0 Graduate School of Social Sciences
MSc International Development Studies 2017-2018
The Future is Coming Soon:
Experiences of Syrian Asylum Seekers and Refugees
of the Dutch Asylum-Seeking Procedure
Author: Rachelle Traboulsi, 11211466 Supervisor: Dr. Dennis Rodgers Second reader: Dr. Anja Van Heelsum
2
Abstract
In recent years, the Netherlands has experienced an influx of Syrian asylum seekers fleeing violence and persecution in their home country ravaged by war, seeking a safe haven and a better future. Many people chose the Netherlands based on preconceptions and ideas that the country is welcoming to refugees, and offers them services and benefits that could allow them to start a new life in a new place. They came with aspirations for a better education, work and a social life, and a prosperous future. What they were faced with during the asylum-seeking procedure, was the opposite of the smooth process they were anticipating, with the majority experiencing long waiting times and many displacements. These have led to frustration and anxiety, hindered their physical and mental well-being, and added to the traumatic experiences some of them faced in their country of origin and during their forced migration. Until their residency permit is granted, and a permanent house is assigned, asylum seekers and refugees are rarely able to start their journey towards integration. In many studies dealing with integration, this concept is often used to describe the responsibilities of refugees, with a focus on language acquisition, education and labor status, as well as socio-cultural adaptation. It is covered from the perspective of the receiving society and its government, but rarely from the refugees’ perspective, or based on their experiences of life in the destination country since their arrival. This research explores how the experience of Syrian asylum seekers and refugees, waiting and moving between asylum seekers’ centers (AZCs), affects their sense of the future and their level of integration in the Netherlands. Findings are generated from conducted semi-structured interviews with Syrian asylum seekers and refugees, and observations in AZCs and in communities. These findings suggest that the long and arbitrary waiting and moving between AZCs during the asylum-seeking procedure, which Syrian asylum seekers and refugees experience, has a negative impact on their sense of the future and hampers their integration process. It affects their agency and hopes, keeps them stuck in the present, dwelling on the past, unable to imagine the future. Other important factors, such as a quality of interaction between service providers or community members and asylum seekers/refugees, the lack of a proper communication plan and a good expectation management, add to the frustrations and anxieties of asylum seekers. Furthermore, the study shows how integration is perceived and experienced by Syrian asylum seekers and refugees, and how much they are willing to fight for building a better future of their own. There is a need for better instruments and mechanisms that support these efforts. A better consideration of refugees’ hopes and aspirations, from their told stories and experiences of the asylum-seeking procedure, is key in shaping immigration and integration policies in the Netherlands. This research will explore perceptions, offering lessons learned and recommendations that could inform these policies, which in turn could contribute to a smoother and successful integration process in the host country.
Key words: asylum seekers, refugees, Syrian, experience, waiting, moving, sense of future, hope, integration, Netherlands.
3
Acknowledgement
The topic of this research is dear to my heart. I have always felt that the topic of migration is something familiar to me as a Lebanese citizen, with more Lebanese residing outside the country than in it. In Lebanon, waiting is something that is felt on a daily basis, in every aspect of life. People are constantly waiting for the political situation to get better or for the next war to happen. We live in the present, with a blurry sense of the future. Studying the asylum situation of Syrian people in the Netherlands made me connect and relate to the people I met on many levels. The process of the research was challenging at times, nevertheless, ten times more rewarding. Because of the support of many people, I was able to overcome the challenges.
This research wouldn’t have been possible without the support of my supervisor Dr. Dennis Rodgers who has been a remarkable professor and mentor along the way, whose academic and field work I admire. He always provided me with the time and support needed, adapting to my rhythm in conducting the research and writing the thesis. I learned how to conduct fieldwork and write an academic paper from him. I would also like to thank the professors at the University of Amsterdam who were very supportive in providing me with the right tools. Also, Dr. Anja Van Heelsum, assistant professor at the Department of Political Science at the University of Amsterdam (UvA), whose work on migration I appreciate. I would like to thank her for accepting to be the second reader of my thesis.
I will never forget the mental support and encouragement that my mom and my two best friends Rana Faddoul and Carole Rizk provided me. Although we live far away from one another, I always felt their support. Carole and Rana both offered their editing expertise and provided valuable input on the structure of the thesis. I am thankful for many people who sat with me and helped me make sense of some explorations and navigate my fieldwork, among them friends Venetia Rainy and Ed Woodhouse, as well as alumni Olivia Bausch, Geert van der Sluis and Janine Bannwart. Getting their feedback was extremely valuable.
I want to thank Bengin Daod, an artist, architect and co-founder at Ondertussen. He referred me to key people, which helped open doors to more encounters and interesting conversations. I am also grateful for Barnet Kanseel, photographer and coordinator at Ondertussen, for connecting me with key people in organizations in the asylum-seeking chain.
I will never forget the beautiful people I had the pleasure of meeting during my fieldwork. Especially the Syrian people who offered their time and accepted to share their stories, even though it was hard for some to deal with such memories and experiences all over again. I learned and I am still learning a lot from them as remain in contact.
For we are like rail-tracks Never meeting
And if we incline towards each other The wagons of the heart will overturn
4
Table of Contents
Abstract ... 2
Acknowledgement ... 3
Introduction ... 5
Chapter 1: Context of the Netherlands ... 9
A- A brief on the changing immigration environment in the Netherlands ...9
B- Asylum application procedure in the Netherlands ... 12
Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework ... 17
A- Waiting ... 17
B- Moving ... 20
C- Sense of the Future ... 24
Conceptual Scheme ... 28
Research Questions ... 29
Chapter 4: Methodology ... 30
Research Design and Methods ... 30
Operationalization ... 32
Respondents and recruitment ... 33
Ethical reflections ... 34
Limitations of Research ... 35
Chapter 5: Empirical Findings ... 37
“I did not know when the waiting will end…” ... 37
“We felt out of place…” ... 41
“It’s the instinct of human beings…we love life; this is what pushed us to come here” ... 48
Discussion ... 56
Chapter 6: Conclusion and Recommendations ... 61
Bibliography ... 64
5
Introduction
Witnessing the Syrian “crisis” in Lebanon, seeing the big influx of Syrian refugees taking place after the start of the war in Syria in 2011, the term “lost generation” kept on repeating on the news, among non-governmental organizations, and in humanitarian activities. Syrian refugees lived in dire situations in Lebanon, housed in informal tented settlements, counting on foreign aid from non-governmental organizations to survive. They are often pictured reminiscing about the past, contrasting it with today’s situation. The future is often uncertain for many of them, and for children and adolescents, it is pictured as a dream. Living within a State that doesn’t provide refugees with the right of employment or citizenship, leaves the majority hopeless, and pushes some, depending on their financial and organizational capabilities (Van Heelsum, 2016), to take the journey to Europe, where there might be a chance for a better future.
Europe, in recent years, has witnessed a high influx of asylum seekers. comparing the number of asylum application recorded (focusing on applications of citizens from non-EU members) from the peak of the early 90s (1992) within EU-15, to the one recorded in 2015 and 2016 within EU-28, it approximately doubled, arriving at around 1.3 million applications1. It was agreed, among EU member states that the Netherlands would accept 3,800 asylum seekers from Greece and 2,150 from Italy, up to September 2017. Data from the European Committee shows that until August 2017, the figures reached 1,490 and 663 respectively, a total of 2,153. Based on the distribution formula of expected inflow in Southern Europe, and seeing that the latter declined considerably in the last year, the appeal court in The Hague ruled that the Netherlands did not have to resettle the complete number of people originally assigned2. The country has also witnessed a high influx of spontaneous asylum seekers arriving at the border, which has created a lot of pressure on their asylum system. Despite an overall system reorganization – creating the ‘track’
1 Eurostat Statistics explained. “Asylum statistics”. Data extracted on March 13, 2017
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Asylum_statistics
2 Immigration and Naturalisation Service, Ministry of Justice and Security. “The Netherlands received 2,153 asylum seekers from Greece and Italy”. August 3, 2017.
https://ind.nl/en/news/Pages/The-Netherlands-received-2153-asylum-seekers-from-Greece-and-Italy.aspx
“Being a refugee is much more than a political status. It is the most pervasive kind of cruelty that can be exercised against the human being by depriving the person of all forms of security, the most basic requirements of a normal life, by cruelly placing this person sometimes at the mercy of inhospitable host countries that do not want to receive these refugees. You are forcibly robbing this human being of all aspects that would make human life not just tolerable, but meaningful in many ways”.
Mentioned in Human Flow Documentary, by Ai Weiwei.
6 system3 and the creation of the one-week structured recognition procedure – a new backlog built up in 2015, which resulted in a slowdown in asylum bureaucratic procedures.
The 1951 United Nations Convention on the Status of Refugees recognizes the rights of the person to seek asylum from persecution in other countries. A refugee is defined in the convention under Article 1, which stresses the importance of protecting refugees from political or other forms of persecution. “A refugee according to the convention is someone unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion” (UNHCR, 2010: 3). The majority of European countries, being member states of the convention, host asylum seekers, process their cases, and decide on a case by case basis, whether or not to provide them with a temporary residency permit. Asylum seekers are often dealt with as temporary visitors: people who seek temporary protection until the situation in their country of origin gets settled, or when they stop being persecuted. However, often times, the duration of their stay becomes (quasi) permanent, due to the prolonged duration of the crisis they originally fled from or other factors such as settling down in the host country and building a successful life there. Therefore, the asylum seekers’ status of temporality is not always a good concept to work around in designing and implementing immigration and integration policies, which are proving to become stricter every day and involving more complex procedures and requirements. Asylum-seeking procedures are intended to offer protection to the oppressed, and give them a start in a new life as quickly as possible, so they can cope with the host society, start a new professional career, build a social network in a new environment where one feels accepted and supported, and envision a future. Nevertheless, this is not often seen within the asylum system in the Netherlands, with the system witnessing a bureaucratic slowdown, which caused to prolong the time of waiting of asylum seekers during the application process (Thränhardt, 2016). This long wait and the constant displacement during asylum application procedures, sometimes in harsh conditions, leads to higher levels of frustration and anxiety among asylum seekers (Hailbronner, 2007). This could bring a feeling of being stuck in limbo and hinder or slow down the process of adaptation and integration in the host country4.
Stories in the news sometimes show that Syrian people go through a long period of uncertainty and sometimes rejection of their applications. Other times the opposite is showcased. What is being seen more often is stories of Syrian people who were able to find their grounds and be successful in the new
3Original document in Dutch: proposition of the State Secretary for Security and Justice on an emergency plan to reorganize the asylum-admittance system due to the high number of applicants.
Can also be found in (Thränhardt, 2016) .Source: Tweede kamer der Staten-Generaal, Vergaderjaar 2015-2016, 19637 Vreemdelingenbeleid, Nr. 2085.
4 Pew research Center. “Still in Limbo: about a million asylum seekers await word on whether they can call Europe home”. September 20, 2017.
7 country despite the harsh experiences they had faced before and during their arrival. It is the contrast between the stories of the same population (Syrian people) in two different regions (the Middle East and Europe) but also in the same European country, the Netherlands, which pushed this study. It aims to explore the point of view of Syrian asylum seekers and refugees. How does their experience of the asylum-seeking procedure in the Netherlands, especially the waiting and the constant moving, affect their sense of the future, and therefore, their level of integration in this host country?
Chapter 1 describes the political environment in the Netherlands and the changing context of immigration. It explores the immigration and integration policies throughout the late 20th and early 21st century, and highlights the changing responsibilities of migrants and asylum seekers wanting to reside in the Netherlands.
Chapter 2 explores the main concepts that this research is founded on, based on past literature and theories. The first concept is “Waiting”. Focusing on the work of Javier Auyero in “Patients of the State: The Politics of Waiting in Argentina” and Craig Jeffrey in “Timepass: Youth, Class, and the Politics of Waiting in India”, I will explain the meaning of the adopted dimensions of waiting in this research. The waiting is then contextualized for asylum seeking. I explore how waiting is experienced by asylum seekers and refugees, and how it affects people’s well-being and meaning in life. The second concept I explore in this chapter is “Moving”. Adopting the perspective of Emma Jackson, in her work on mobility of homeless young people in “Fixed Mobility: Young Homeless people and the City”, the term will be given meaning in relation to the research informants’ experiences. I will show how moving can affect their sense of the future, which is the last concept to be explored in this chapter. “Sense of the future” will be associated to hope and the sense of coherence a person has in the present. It is a way of identifying to what extent the person has a vision of their future and is able to acquire an understanding of where they are now, and what comes next. The most important thing, is that the focus remains on the experiences of asylum seekers and refugees, and that the level of their integration is not only understood based on their acquisition of the Dutch language, enrollment in education and finding employment. Rather, it should focus on dynamics within their asylum application procedure, which could greatly affect their sense of the future, and motivation in their integration process.
Chapter 3 discusses the research design, and the methods used throughout the two-month fieldwork in the Netherlands, which allowed the collection of deep personal insights and valuable experiences. These are core in informing the research questions, and in clarifying the meaning of integration among asylum seekers and refugees.
Chapter 4 discusses the dimensions and variables of the concepts discussed in chapter 2, will be further explored and analyzed. The data collected throughout the fieldwork comes from observations and interviews with Syrian asylum seekers and refugees, of different ages and genders, and from people
8 working and contributing to the asylum system, constituting an important influence in those people’s lives. The findings will be discussed, bringing all the elements of this research together in one coherent and consistent answer to the research question: how does the waiting and moving affect the sense of the future, and therefore, the integration of refugees and asylum seekers?
Chapter 5 concludes the research based on explorations made, and offers recommendations that are purely informed from the research informants’ experiences of the asylum system in the Netherlands. This could potentially inform the current and future implementation of immigration and integration policies.
9
Chapter 1: Context of the Netherlands
A- A brief on the changing immigration environment in the Netherlands
The Netherlands, a densely populated country located in western Europe, has a rich history of immigration, and was known in the past for its multiculturalism and high tolerance for refugees. It is known to be a country that has sheltered people fleeing persecution, violence and poverty, providing a safe haven and a new home for people seeking a better life. However, this has changed throughout the years. A new discourse coalition
emerged at the end of the 1980s (stirred by the economic downturns during that period) that advocated a more social-economic approach to immigrant integration, to stop migrants from becoming too dependent on welfare state facilities (Duyvendak & Scholten, 2011). In the 1990s, the country shifted to an integration model, where minorities (mainly Muslim migrants or from former colonies)5 were invited to integrate, with a special focus on their socio-economic incorporation. The aim of this policy, introduced in 1994, was to better include immigrants in mainstream services, and shift from ethno-specific provisions related to multiculturalism. The 1983 Ethnic Minorities policy, previously adopted, focused mainly on cultural aspects and respect of ethnic and religious differences. It was seen as a welfare policy, which funded ethnic minorities to build their own places of worship, media and schools… The Dutch government back then adopted a system of ‘Verzuiling’ which meant ‘live and let live’; it served to pacify conflicts between native religious and political groups. However, it was seen by many to be an inadequate system to be used as an instrument for immigrants’ integration. Therefore, there was a move to an integration model in the 90s, with a clear shift from supporting group identity to promoting individual identity. Thus,
5 Since post-world war two, the Netherlands contracted migrant workers from nonwestern countries (mainly from Turkish and Moroccan nationalities) to rebuild their country. A lot of those migrants settled in the country after staying for years, something the Dutch government back then didn’t think would happen, and what is referred to as ‘the myth of return’.
10 it still focused on the aspect of mutual respect for identity as a necessary condition for equal participation in Dutch society and integration (Vasta, 2007). In 1998, the Civic Integration of Newcomers Act was introduced, where an obligatory programme, consisting of Dutch language classes, social orientation courses on work and social related issues, were provided for newcomers, with a final exam to test their knowledge and progress. Additionally, sanctions were applied if attendance norms were not met, therefore, efforts were compulsory.
In the beginning of the new millennia, an assimilationist model emerged in the Dutch integration policy, as a response to a multicultural “tragedy” or “disaster”, as journalist Paul Scheffer6 describes it. The aim was to bring to the forefront Dutch culture and values in policy making. This shift in rhetoric happened especially after the 9/11 attacks, which triggered fierce reactions by the media and led to some ethnic religious violence. A “cold war” against Islam was called by the populist politician Pim Fortuyn, who claimed that the Netherlands had too many immigrants and that Islam is a backward religion; he believed that the real victims were the native Dutch, inciting more anger and frustration among the latter. He got murdered days before the parliamentary elections, which did not stop his party from winning 25 out of 150 seats and becoming the second largest party. Hate and fear towards Muslims grew as witnessed by attacks towards Muslim institutions by native Dutch perpetrators. This questions even more the validity and success of the Dutch multicultural model. The situation got worse when filmmaker and columnist Theo Van Gogh7 got brutally murdered on the streets of Amsterdam in 2004. It was during that year that the formed far-right coalition and cabinet agreed to a new integration model. The Dutch Ministry of Justice specified that “The integration obligation will only have been met as soon as people have successfully passed their integration examination … The newcomers and the settled immigrants will be in charge of their own integration… If a newcomer has failed to integrate after five years an administrative fine will be imposed” (as cited in Vasta, 2007: 718). Therefore, sanctions were adopted not only according to efforts made by immigrants, but based on results.
People started supporting the anti-immigration rhetoric more and more, which was concretely and clearly seen in a draft manifesto (which eventually didn’t pass) released by the Netherlands' Party for Freedom. The latter called for the country's "de-Islamization"; for closing down mosques, Islamic schools and asylum centers; prohibiting public veiling; and putting a ban on migrants from Islamic countries of origin (UNHCR, 2017). This created fear from “the other” who is different, mainly fear of refugees. It therefore led to the introduction of a new style of integration policy in 2002. Although the new style followed the paradigm
6 In 2000 journalist Paul Scheffer attracted considerable attention with his claim that the Dutch had been too generous by not insisting that immigrants learn the Dutch language, culture and history (Engbersen 2003, 4, cited in Ellie Vasta- from ethnic minorities to ethnic majority policy).
11 of the 1990s integration policy – which focused on the concept of ‘citizenship’ and putting the immigrants’ responsibility-taking at the center – it nevertheless put more emphasis on cultural adaptation of immigrants to Dutch society. A call for cultural integration and a successful socio-economic and educational performance was emphasized by political parties to bring again social cohesion in Dutch society. The integration policy had become linked and instrumental to immigration policy. It indicated whoever was considered a suitable immigrant could reside in the country, with a specific focus on asylum seekers, family reunification and marriage migration (Bruquetas-Callejo, Garcés-Mascareñas, Penninx, & Scholten, 2005).Dutch society and its values are considered to be at the center of the recent integration policy with a more mandatory and restrictive nature, that supposedly serves to prevent further segregation in society, fearing that no one would feel at home anymore. People wishing to reside in the Netherlands were to make an individual effort to find their way around, and this through learning the Dutch language and taking a civic integration exam, which shows the level of their understanding of Dutch culture as well as willingness and ability to integrate and contribute to Dutch society8.
The generation of stricter policies was a product of people’s anxiety and fear of “the other” as well as the “bogus” asylum seeker, which was, according to some, beefed up by politicians themselves, as a way to distract people’s attention from actual existing structural problems they were incapable or not keen on handling. Therefore, asylum procedures were more meticulous and attentive to details, with more complex steps in the asylum application (Bohmer & Shuman, 2008).
Vasta argues that the Netherlands turned to the opposite of what it was known to be, tolerant and liberal, and demanded full conformity and undemocratic sanctions against immigrants in case they did not succeed in conforming to Dutch values and culture (Vasta, 2007). However, a multicultural model continued to be a valid portrayal of the Dutch approach to immigrants’ integration. The Dutch have proven to remain accommodative when it comes to dealing with ethno-cultural diversity: “Organizations and activities based on ethnic grounds are still generously supported—directly and indirectly—by the government. Whether people want it or not, ethnicity still plays an important role in public institutions and discourse”(Koopmans, 2007) (Karavias, 2015)(Kos, Maussen, & Doomernik, 2015).
Nevertheless, the new integration policy reflects this feeling that immigrants have not met their responsibilities, and that the welfare state has provided them with several benefits without asking for anything in return. Hence, changing the Dutch model from a multicultural to an assimilationist one, where
8 Integration of Newcomers, Government of the Netherlands.
https://www.government.nl/topics/new-in-the-netherlands/integration-of-newcomers (last visited on December 23rd, 2017). Integration policy based on Dutch values, Government the Netherlands.
https://www.government.nl/latest/news/2011/06/17/integration-policy-based-on-dutch-values (last visited on December 23rd, 2017).
12 people are asked to assimilate to a sense of “Duchness” no longer rooted in diversity, inferiorizes in a way ethnic minorities, showing that they have to follow the Dutch path, the correct and the best path. This makes it impossible for immigrants to integrate. People have a sense of loss of control over their lives and that they are being underestimated. For instance, even if they have a job, they feel that they are not earning the benefit of their hard work (Vasta, 2007).
Integration conditions were also applied for refugees, with few exceptions. First asylum seekers are granted a temporary residence permit, which is only renewed if the person is considered fully integrated (after passing the language and civic integration exams). Otherwise, they risk having it withdrawn. A status can also be reversed if the country of origin is designated as safe again, and if people can safely reside there. A person can apply for a Dutch passport after seven years of residency in the Netherlands, up from five years before 2017 (Van Heelsum, 2017). These more restrictive policies, were perceived by some academics as a strategy adopted to make the country less attractive as a destination country (Bruquetas-Callejo et al., 2005) (Metselaar, 2005). It was also accompanied by an extension in the time of the application process (Humanity in Action, 2015), with poor or no adequate human and financial resources allocated to allow proper management of all these claims in a timely manner, which led to ambivalence in accepting more asylum seekers (Thränhardt, 2016). A lot of attention has been drawn towards not making the same mistake of non-integration/assimilation of immigrants, but it can be argued that “the shift in policy has done more harm than good in the past years” (Beijer, 2016: 21)
With integration for refugees getting stricter, and uncertainty growing in their residency status, this can have negative effects on their socio-economic integration. It was proven essential for people to feel secure and safe in order to be able to focus on a future in the Netherlands (ibid).
The following paragraph, will explain in more detail the steps followed in the asylum seeking procedure in the Netherlands, and consecutively, the research will explore how the procedure affects asylum seekers and refugees’ sense of future and being in control of their lives, and therefore their level of integration in the host country.
B- Asylum application procedure in the Netherlands
This part discusses in details the steps (that usually change with shifts in policy) that asylum seekers go through, from their arrival to the Netherlands until a decision is made on their asylum application. Special procedures are followed by the Dutch government which determines whether or not the asylum seeker genuinely needs protection. It is not until a temporary residence permit is granted, that he/she is
13 considered a refugee, and has rights to housing, education and employment, the same as any other resident in the Netherlands.9 Several steps are followed since the first day of asylum declaration10:
a. Asylum declaration. People declare asylum in the Netherlands, are referred to the Vreemdelingenpolitie (Aliens Police) in Ter Apel, where they go through a time of rest and preparation, to recover from their journey. This period lasts at least six days. During this time, they should report to the Aliens police on personal details to be recorded, such as name, date of birth and nationality among other details. Their photo and fingerprints are taken. Identification documents of any sort are checked for authenticity, and other documents such as boarding pass, or anything that may prove their journey and the truthfulness of their story, are prepared to be used later after the registration phase is over, and when the application process starts. Additionally, a medical screening and examination is done, where an X-ray of the chest is conducted, in order to make sure that the person applying is not a carrier of Tuberculosis. After making sure that the person is healthy, the process continues to the registration phase, when the registration interview with the IND is held.
b. Preparation for the start of the asylum procedure. Right after the registration and Tuberculosis test are conducted, they are referred to a reception center close to Ter Apel, run by COA (with meals and medical care). After that, the asylum seeker is moved to another AZC run by COA, which is close to the IND office where the application will be processed. During the time spent in the second AZC, the person is first referred to the Gezondheidscentrum Asielzoekers (Healthcare Centre for asylum seekers) (GCA), to make sure that he/she is getting the appropriate medical attention and care if needed, during their stay at a COA center. During this period, help from the Dutch Council for Refugees (VVN) is provided, in the form of information and preparation for the asylum procedure, and help to prepare the necessary documents, such as identity papers, medical report...etc. An interpreter can be present during the meetings if necessary. VVN staff will also assist all asylum seekers during the asylum procedure. A medical examination is also conducted, if the asylum seeker is willing to go through it, with the help of a nurse from the Forensisch Medische Maatschappij Utrecht (Utrecht Forensic Medical Service) (FMMU), to make sure that the person is in good mental and physical health, and is able to normally go through with the application procedure. A medical report is provided as proof. An interpreter is also there to
9 https://refugeestartforce.eu/2016/08/22/vluchteling-asielzoeker-statushouder-wat-het-verschil/
10 Asylum procedure. Government of the Netherlands. https://www.government.nl/topics/asylum-policy/asylum-procedure (last visited on January 13th, 2018).
Housing asylum residence permit holders. Government of the Netherlands. https://www.government.nl/topics/asylum-policy/housing-for-residence-permit-holders (last visited on January 13th, 2018).
14 remove the language barrier. This examination could also happen over the phone. A lawyer is assigned to each asylum seeker, by the Raad voor Rechtsbijstand (Legal Aid Board), which is an independent entity affiliated with the Dutch government. The lawyer prepares the asylum seeker for the interviews with the IND. An interpreter is present during every meeting with the lawyer. c. Asylum application procedure. After at least six days, the application procedure starts. The
asylum seeker is invited to the first interview with the IND, where questions on identity, origin, and journey to the Netherlands are asked. Questions are also asked on parents or care givers before arriving to the Netherlands, to prove the identity of the person and that he/she is being truthful. The second day, the lawyer sits with the asylum seeker, and goes through the report shared with him/her from the first interview, making sure that the information written in the report is recorded correctly. Preparations for the second interview are conducted with IND on the same day. On the third day, the second interview takes place and focuses on explaining the reason behind the asylum application, highlighting why the person cannot expect protection in their home country. Any proof from documents to physical scars from incidents that happened in the country of origin is usually an added value to the case of an asylum seeker. A VVN representative, or a relative or friends can be present during this session, besides the lawyer and the interpreter. On day four, the report of the second interview is discussed and checked for missing information or details registered that do not match what the person stated during the first interview. On day five, the IND shares an intended decision, whereby there are three possibilities:
- The person will receive a letter from the IND informing them that the residency will be granted as he/she meets the conditions required.
- The IND needs more time to process the application, beyond these eight days, hence needs to further investigate it within the extended asylum procedure. The person will be provided with further information on the requirements and on what to expect in this case.
- The person receives a letter with an intended refusal of application, as the person does not fulfil the conditions required.
In the third case, on day six, the lawyer will discuss this letter with the asylum seeker, as well as the possibilities ahead, and send the IND written ‘view-points’, mentioning why the person disagrees with this decision. On day seven or eight, the IND will give a final answer, after having read the viewpoint. The answer could be an acceptance, or referral to the extended procedure as the IND needs more time to investigate the case beyond those eight days, or a rejection considering that the person still does not fulfill the necessary requirements to be granted asylum. The IND can also refer the file to the “Dienst Terugkeer
15 en Vertrek”11 (Repatriation and Departure service- DT&V) in order to look into it, and decide if there are valid reasons why the person cannot return to their country of origin, hence a decision can be made based on DT&V report.
After the application period, a person can either be accepted or rejected. If accepted, he/she will reside in the “Centraal Orgaan opvang Asielzoekers” (COA)12 AZCs, to wait for housing and start their process towards integration, by finding education, a job or volunteering experiences, with the support and orientation of COA and the VVN. If the person is rejected, then an option for appeal against this decision is then discussed with the lawyer. The lawyer can also try to provide the rejected person with the right to stay in the Netherlands while waiting for the court’s decision on the appeal. Based on the court’s decision, a person has the right to appeal one more time in case of a rejection. If he/she does not appeal against this decision, the person has the responsibility to leave the country on their own within twenty-eight days, otherwise they are supported by the DT&V in organizing the departure. If the person gets accepted, they wait according to the normal procedure, for their residence permit, to be assigned a municipality/house, while getting the support for finding their way around the Dutch system.
Nevertheless, the asylum procedure in the Netherlands experienced a bureaucratic slowdown and application processing backlog, around 2014, when the country experienced an 84% increase in asylum applicants. “…in 2016 the country received a total of 18.171 applications, among them 2.158 were Syrians” (Baggerman, Dellouche, Kampen, Wolf, & Ypma, 2017: 42). Thus, the process of obtaining eventual refugee status started taking several years for some (Humanity in Action, 2015). Asylum seeking procedures are intended to offer protection to the oppressed, and give them a start in a new life as quickly as possible, with new professional and economic activity, as well as build a new network where one feels accepted and supported. However, the asylum system in the Netherlands has proven to be the opposite in the past few years (Thränhardt, 2016). As a result, Asylum seekers end up staying for a very long time in AZCs, waiting and just hoping for a positive outcome.
Usually, when an asylum seeker enters the Netherlands, there are several possibilities of reception, and this depending on the available reception capacity. During the asylum application procedure, a person can be housed in a regular AZC, in an emergency reception center in the cases where there is a shortage of AZCs, or in a crisis reception center, which is very rare and has a very temporary nature (not exceeding 72 hours of residency). Due to the backlog and pressure on the Dutch asylum system, long procedures are frequently accompanied by constant moving of asylum seekers' centers in the Netherlands; whereby
11 The Repatriation and Departure Service (DT&V) is responsible for expediting the voluntary and forced departure of foreign nationals who are not allowed to stay in the Netherlands.
12 The COA is responsible for the reception, supervision and departure (from the reception center) of asylum seekers.
16 Syrian Asylum seekers are randomly housed by the COA, in different locations along the different stages of application.
This research focuses on the experiences of Syrian asylum seekers during the asylum application procedure, and will show the contrast between current policies and regulations and lived realities, and attempts to understand how current practices affect asylum seekers and refugees’ well-being, their sense of future and integration in the host country.
17
Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework
Around 2014, an influx of Syrian people arrived to the Netherlands to seek asylum, and escape from war and conflict in their home country, and sometimes from the unhospitable environments of neighboring countries. The aim of their move, was on the short term to access basic rights and needs like education, housing, safety and security, and on the long term, to think ahead of and investing in safety and prosperity. When they arrived to the Netherlands, reality was not as they imagined, especially in terms of the harsh conditions the majority go through during the asylum-seeking procedures. The integration of asylum seekers and refugees is usually understood by measuring their levels of integration using indicators related to the host country’s requirements within immigration/integration policies, and comparing them with those of members of the host community. This research will shed light on the many layers that are often neglected when the topic of integration of these people is discussed. The research will explore how the different asylum seekers and refugees’ experiences of the asylum-seeking procedure, focusing on their experience of the waiting and the moving during the process, can affect their sense of the future. By understanding how the process affects people’s understanding of their future, hopes and ambitions, we can understand how the integration process is going, and what affects it. The concepts that this research is based on are three; “Waiting”, “Moving” and “Sense of the future”.
A- Waiting
Waiting is something we do on a daily basis. We all wait. We wait for something to happen, for an event to occur. Whether waiting for a baby to be born, for the sun to come out or the rain to irrigate the plants…Waiting is an integral part of our daily life. But in that sense, the outcome is anticipated and predicted, people know that it will happen somewhere in the near future; people know that the benefit of the wait will usually arrive. However, waiting sometimes takes years or generations, and can be something that is endured, as not voluntary and surrounded by uncertainty and arbitrariness in the life of the poor and the destitute.
Javier Auyero in his book “Patients of the State” describes waiting among the poor as a form of subordination. It has its roots in structural problems and injustices. It is “a subtle, and usually not explicit daily lesson in political subordination” (Auyero, 2012: 9); it is a way for bringing recognition of state power and domination. Craig Jeffry in his book ‘Timepass’, in which he studies the waiting of young Indian men coming from different social class and castes, also argues that waiting has its origin in political and structural violence, and creates a feeling of insecurity and being “stuck in limbo”. The waiting is referred to as “timepass” where time is considered to be “valueless”, to be “passed” or “killed” (Jeffrey, 2010).
18 People waiting are usually stigmatized by the community they live in, as “surplus to requirements” or “loitering” (ibid: 4). The waiting is determined by politics, which is often considered as a distant practice that renders the people waiting powerless. “Poor people often put up with the uncertainty, confusion and arbitrariness of waiting...” (Auyero, 2012: 72). People start seeing waiting as something unavoidable, due to unpredictability of decision making and adopted changes, especially after enduring long routines and delays. Therefore, “…we can find the ‘why’ of their compliance in the ‘how’ of it” (ibid: 73). People expect that things will change for their benefit one day. Some people achieve the outcome of their waiting, and others keep on waiting. People keep on waiting because “there is a lot of hopelessness in that hope” (ibid: 102). Auyero talks about forms of power exercised by the State, one of them called “invisible tentacles”, usually practiced by minor state bureaucrats, who help in “the political production of patients of the State”, and which is used in the daily lives of the destitute.
There are three processes that take place when the destitute wait, which vary in settings:
- Veiling. It takes place when human actions and faults hide behind nonhuman operations, such as a machine errors or the policies dictated by the State from above. As Ferguson et. al mention, people have to ‘imagine’ the State (Gupta & Ferguson, 2002). It is generally understood that the State is something that is ‘above society, and something far away that is out of reach.
- Confusing. It is characterized by miscommunication and lack of information shared in relation to the extent of time the person needs to wait. This is something Jan-Paul Brekke, in his work on how asylum seekers experience waiting for a decision, refers to as going through a directionless time (Brekke, 2004). The lack of transparency in handling the cases plays a role in making people feel out of control, they find themselves stuck in the present situation, reducing predictability of what might happen next, and threatens what is called ontological security of a person waiting (ibid: 58).
- Delaying or Rushing. It happens when changes are introduced with no proper or logical explanation, which leaves people more confused. This is also what Auyero refers to as “clandestine kicks”, a force exercised on those people when they are metaphorically being “kicked around” in time and space.
In Timepass, young students (men) in Uttar Pradesh expressed frustration and anxiety in regards to having to “galvanize themselves into action at short notice in pursuit of a textbook, examination paper or result”; which results in a “combination of panic and inertia” where there is a “need to hurry up and wait”. This mode of domination is thus founded on the creation of a generalized and permanent state of insecurity and inconsideration of destitute people’s time and worth. All they had to do is wait on the side, and were never asked for their opinions on matters that relate to their lives. Therefore, while waiting, there is
19 uncertainty of the time that will be spent, combined with an uncertainty of the outcome, which exacerbates suffering.
As a result, “most of them do not see themselves as agents capable of modifying their own conditions of existence” (Auyero, 2012: 135).
It is argued that poor people’s suffering created by waiting and structural violence, negatively affects their mental health and wellbeing (Eggerman & Panter-Brick, 2010).This is especially true when it comes to economic stressors, specifically for a male from the global south, who experiences a sense of “not having achieved locally13salient norms of masculine success” (Jeffrey, 2010: 11), where, culturally, masculinity means that a man is able to provide financially. This can create forms of tension and violence within a couple or family sometimes, potentially creating another form of violence (Eggerman & Panter-Brick, 2010). As in Auyero, women are usually perceived to have less anxiety when it relates to waiting, for the reason that most of the time they have a male figure who provides for and supports his family. Which means that the “waiting room” is a room dominated by women, as they have the time to just wait to get the State's welfare benefits (2012: 125). Therefore, it is portrayed that it is less likely for the waiting to affect women, especially coming from the South.
Within such randomness, injustice might appear. Individual experiences cannot be compared to those of others sharing the same circumstances, background and stories. One might finish the process before the other, although the latter came first and waited longer. “Relative waiting” is when the individual’s experience of waiting depends on other people’s experiences. It is by comparing your waiting to that of others in the same circumstances that makes you judge whether the experience of waiting becomes too long (Brekke, 2004). In this scenario, asylum seekers may experience a sense of “stuckedness”, something that Ghassan Hage refers to in his book ‘Waiting’ as characterized by the lack of agency, whether physically or existentially understood (G. Hage, 2009). This feeling of being stuck, is sometimes diminished by local practices and support provided by local actors, who support people in getting out of that state (Bakker, Cheung, & Phillimore, 2016), which relates in a way to “social connections”, what we will be later referred to in the operationalization, when talking about integration levels.
Moreover, there are questions as to why the State makes people (the destitute and legal aliens) wait in zones of uncertainty and arbitrariness, if they would like to include them as active citizens (Auyero, 2012). Endless postponements and long waits happen due to bureaucratic mistakes and inefficiencies, and due to the lack of necessary documentation, which leads to denying people the most elementary forms of
20 citizenship, a concept we’re going to refer to later when discussing the variable “Foundation” under the level of integration.
It is also good to portray the resilience and agency that people who wait might adopt for the attainment of the hoped for outcome. They are not solely in a passive state of being, their waiting time is spent actively, pursuing the needed tasks, sometimes with the help of a network of actors involved in the process (peers, state agents, NGOs, volunteers…). The time waiting is considered as a long-term investment, therefore it is not wholly purposeless (Jeffrey, 2010: 4-5). As Jenkins et al. point out, it is people’s ability to “obstinately create and find some continuity in their lives, in the face of hostile circumstances and their own vulnerability [that is] perhaps the most significant story” (Jenkins, Jessen, & Steffen, 2005:11). Paul Willis focused on the ability of young men belonging to the lower middle class to create new realities through their “active and creative use of available symbolic materials in ways shaped by people’s structural position” (Jeffrey, 2010: 22). People learn to adapt and find their way around the system in order to attain the anticipated outcome. However, Jeffrey adds in his book that it is known that even “source” (connections) and “force” (physical strength) are no longer enough to get where they want to be. Higher political connections or relatives in the relevant bureaucracy can greatly help their case (ibid). Moreover, Young men and women prove to be agents of change of their reality shaped by structural political violence, not only by holding on to hope but by working hard and investing in long-term strategies. In her study, Serena Sorrenti shows that Afghan women refugees are unable to imagine a future due to the insecurity characterizing their life, before and during refuge, and due to displacement. Their arrival to a safe haven allows them to rebuild an identity that is already impacted by war and traumas. A peaceful period begins, where they try to build a life of dignity and security.
B- Moving
This coupling of prolonged procedures with constant moving from one asylum center to another, denies asylum seekers the right to settle down. In a study conducted by Emma Jackson on young homeless people in the United Kingdom, she describes how movement can be perceived and experienced by people as a loss and dislocation, but also by others as a resource. She highlights the relationship between mobility and fixity. Mobility can be used by young people as a tactic, when people are able to plan and make a move, according to opportunities available at the time of change or moving. Agency of young people plays a role when it comes to choosing their tactics. As in Simone’s book, “the residents of KasaVubu have to simultaneously avoid everyday violence… they must be cautious; they must scrutinize what they can say to whom and how they can ‘duck into’ different worlds and alliances” (Simone, 2014: 210). Mobility can be responded to in different ways: “as resource”, “as loss”, or “as managing”. It can be perceived as a resource and opportunity to move around, and gain some knowledge of a certain environment and
21 surrounding, “making tracks”. It is something that involves navigation, but mostly what Caroline Knowles (Jackson, 2012: 735) refers to as social navigation, understanding how the world (surrounding them) functions, and acquire skills to make their own way, which could be beneficial in the future. Moving can be experienced as something positive that can initiate change in people’s lives, and perceived as “a positive break from their current situation”, especially if the next place offers better living conditions and opportunities (Manzo, Kleit, & Couch, 2008: 1871). The disruption, through an externally determined date, of the creation of social bonds and plans with residents having little say in the decision making, can be seen as a threat to their long-term goals. Therefore, it creates fear and concern about their future. People try to make sense of the inevitable relocation and the redevelopment of a reality (ibid). Therefore, mobility can be seen sometimes “as a loss”. When they get detached from their social link and network, people feel the need to quickly adapt to a new environment, which sometimes engenders a feeling of being depressed from losing important connections that used to form an enormous support in their daily lives. People often begin to express “staying in one place” as being their ultimate hope for the future, being “like normal people”, in one place, as a marker of normality and stability (Jackson, 2012: 737). Moving housing has proven in previous studies to have a significant impact on well-being and housing stability. In their study on social housing and displacement, Lynne, C. et al., argue that displacement negatively affects social ties which establish social support for a person and affect place attachment, an emotional bond between people and places, which is generally influenced by the length of time spent in that place, as well as local social involvements the person has invested in (Manzo et al., 2008). This sense of community and belonging that some people create, makes moving even harder. Even though moving to another place might mean advancing to a better situation of housing and in life in general, people experience moving as the loss of the sense of community. It hinders their coping mechanism and ability to imagine daily life in the future without their neighbors’ support in a new location. This can be exacerbated when residents of social housing experience stigmatization by people in their community living outside public housing, describing them all as “dirty, sub-human and poor” (ibid: 1865). This can create a greater sense of bond and empathy among people living inside public housing, even among different ethnicities and backgrounds, as they all have something in common, which brings a feeling of being safe and stable. Ethnical and racial diversity of neighbors within social housing can sometimes be seen as an added value, and can therefore bring a positive aspect to the residents’ experience of living there. It is seen as an opportunity to learn more about the world and about the different other. Diversity plays an important role in contributing to the development of social ties and place attachment (ibid). To continue with the concept of Jackson, “Mobility as managing” is finding your way in between the spheres where life puts you. Abdoulamlik Simone places attention on the capability of poor people to understand their surrounding in an urban setting, and stresses the importance of understanding the forces at play in order to pick the right move and survive everyday life. Life emerges from the uncertainty of life. He refers to moving as “being able to circulate through different relationships, stories, scenarios, and
22 events…” (Simone, 2014: 5). Sometimes, they act in networks based on trust and cooperation, and other times they resort to manipulation and immobilizing the other for their own movement and the creation of open spaces. People become resiliently capable of becoming many different things at any time, as daily requirements, quickly changing guidelines, and expectations limit their freedom (ibid: 212). Therefore, they become fixed in their social navigation and movement.
Jackson argues that it is important to not just look at who moves, but why they move, and what forces play an essential role in their experiences of moving. She adds that the process of moving is something they become fixed into (Jackson, 2012). Massey’s goes further into this idea, enabling a closer look at the concept of mobility, which she argues is differentiated; with different social groups having distinct relationships to it. Some are more in charge of it and others might be imprisoned by it. It differs by the amount of power each person has in making a decision to move or stay still. (Jackson, 2012). There is a role played by institutional and informal networks that contribute to “shaping im/mobilities and fixing the young people in mobile states” (ibid: 733). The space policing that takes place by peers and institutional organizations (like the police) exacerbates the feeling of being fixed in their moving. People do not feel safe going out to areas they do not know, especially if they are considered as strangers, as different in race and ethnicity. They feel threatened without their support networks, in an unknown space (ibid). Whether women or men, both experience a feeling of being unsafe travelling around in new, unfamiliar areas alone. It shows that this policing of space is affected more by race, ethnicity and background rather than age and gender (ibid). Nevertheless, women in some ethnicities can feel trapped by culture and values which can limit their mobility. Their movement is considered as having negative repercussions on their image and reputation as women, and is therefore discouraged.
In a study that describes the psychological processes that are affected by geographical displacement (Thomson, 1996), M. Thomson discusses, from the mental health community's perspective, how displacement experienced by people creates many problems. Referring to people who had to flee war and persecution, she argues that their problems when it comes to displacement, “range from reestablishing residence and finding work to recovering from trauma related to war or torture” (ibid: 1516). Having lost their house, the place of their belonging and memories – therefore their sense of belonging – due to conflict or disaster, contributes to psychological disorders. This rupture of person-place relationship creates mental distress, and hesitance to create a new life in a new place, from fear of losing the assets they work on creating again. It is important for the new setting created by government to be “great”, to assist those people in their existential search for meaning, which “allows for the expansion of human consciousness, creativity and generativity… By contrast, “toxic” environments threaten health and survival” (ibid: 1517). Moreover, “the personal “sense of place” is shaped by the person’s past, as well as by the person’s attitudes, beliefs and actions in the present”. In Eggerman and Panter-Brick’s study on Afghani mental health and resilience, “not owning a home was equated with a loss of social position and feelings of insecurity” (Eggerman & Panter-Brick, 2010: 74). Owning a home was essential for a sense of
23 stability. This sense of belonging to a place, usually arises from the operation of three psychological processes: familiarity, attachment and identity. Displacement replaces familiarity with disorientation, and attachment with a sense of nostalgia, as for identity it replaces it with alienation; and this undermines the sense of belonging, and mental health, in general. A sudden loss of a house and exterior world/environment, is considered as a loss of the self, and because this environment is considered to be a source for safety and security, a threat to it can imply a threat to the self. This period can be characterized as a period of paralysis, and not knowing what comes next. People start looking back to the past, and its good memories, which creates a sense of enjoyment in their present, but the comparison between the “then” and the “now” also makes the present even more dreaded and creates a greater sense of disorientation (Thomson, 1996).
This randomness in the time of displacement denies people the feeling that they have the ability to start planning. As in “Patients of the State”, people who are waiting for government welfare support always had the feeling that everything was still packed as they were ready to move at any moment in time (Auyero, 2012). This insecurity is investigated by Jenkins who argues that this can negatively affect people’s well-being. He goes: “Any perduring social condition that acts upon that fragility to produce mental conditions such as depression, trauma, or debilitating anxiety […] is harmful and in my view understood as structural violence” (Sorrenti, 2015). Therefore, it is important to highlight the political nature of displacement, whereby the government applies different modes of governance, with control and regulations continuously produced, becoming a manifest in a spatial politics of exclusion and marginality. It is referred to by Darling, as “domopolitics”. In the context of asylum seeking and immigration, it refers to using an array of techniques to secure the place of a homely nation within a world where immigration influx is considered a threat. Consequently, the dispersal of asylum seekers in a country tries to order and position circulation within defined locations. It is sometimes also a way for authorities to impose their governmentality and rule, creating discomfort, marginality and insecurity for those accommodated. By producing a politic of discomfort, asylum seekers are forever positioned at the border, not fully included in the life of the host country, and always regarded as different and as strangers (Darling, 2011). It is shown that the majority of asylum seekers could relatively easily find their way in the most modernized economy, if they were housed in core areas. When asylum seekers’ centers are placed in central locations, their residents could easily create social links and start to learn about the economy and culture of the country at an earlier stage, and thus, can contribute to its prosperity. However, other factors can play a role, such as stricter asylum policies (refer to background) as well as discrimination tendencies from the Dutch labor market, which can reduce their eligibility for potential job opportunities in the future and make it harder for them to connect to the life of the city (Muster-d & Muus, 1995). In terms of the nature and experiences of moving within social housing (asylum seekers’ centers), Darling studies the presence of safe spaces and drop-in-centers, where a momentary feeling of being home is created. These places are presented as spaces of safety, hospitality and reciprocity, that most often
24 positively affect the lives of their residents and facilitate the recreation of social ties and feelings of security. Nevertheless, he argues that within this benevolence and compassion that volunteers offer in these spaces, there is a neglect and understatement of potential connections between care and power, and “an ‘asymmetrical relationship’ between those needing care and delivering it”. Volunteers and donors, are not in a symmetrical relation with asylum seekers. Asylum seekers can only give what they possess, “survival and embodiment, presence in its starkest form” (Darling, 2011b: 415). These spaces create dependency on care, and passivity of asylum seekers, reducing them to receivers of such generosity, which reproduces relations of power and passivity. Therefore, these are spaces where the politics of compassion, in the case of asylum seekers, strips them from the right of contestation and denies them their agency. It reproduces the image of asylum seekers as the victims of the asylum system, and as people for whom “decisions are made and lives decided upon with little capacity for contestation” (ibid: 414).
C- Sense of the Future
As we have seen in both previous concepts, Waiting and Moving, the uncertainty of the period of time spent waiting and moving accompanied by the uncertainty of the outcome, and that of constant displacement, contribute greatly to a sense of insecurity and unsettlement. Some people find themselves dwelling on the past, with the feeling of being stuck in the present, and incapable of projecting and envisioning a future of their own. The sense of being disoriented and stuck in the uncertain now was clearly mentioned throughout Auyero’s book (2012) when he talks about waiting for the State’s decision making and handling of cases of the destitute. The future of the people waiting was in fact operated and controlled by State agents who were literally and metaphorically “kicking them around in time and space”. This engenders a sense of powerlessness “and a shared sentiment that the future is not in their hands”, to the point that “most do not see themselves as agents capable of modifying their own conditions of existence” (ibid). People in such cases “live with their minds closed off to the outside world” (Brekke, 2004), just waiting for a decision to be made on their case. When talking about people’s capabilities, it is important to refer here to Sen’s capability approach, where capability means someone able to transform opportunities and resources into functioning, and this is usually influenced by factors that play an important role: internal factors (such as physical and mental impairment) and external factors (such as the social environment) (Sen, 1999). Capability, according to Sen, also means “the substantive freedoms to choose a life one has reason to value” or the “freedom to achieve” (ibid: 74-75). This is not often found in asylum seekers’ centers, where people are just waiting for decisions to be made on their behalf, and constantly moving from one location to another beyond their ability to influence their situation.
Asylum seekers often come with a background of suffering prior to arriving to the destination country. This suffering is often exacerbated by the long wait and the constant displacement from an asylum
25 seekers’ center to another. When they arrive to the host country, they try to build a new identity, which is usually shaped by its surrounding. This affects a person’s mental and physical well-being as confirmed by a study conducted in South India, which explores the connection between social status and depressive symptoms among women in this area (Sorrenti, 2015). Bad experiences of interactions between residents of the centers and community members who sometimes have negative preconceptions about refugees, aggravate the feeling of insecurity among them, and thus hinder the achievement of their capabilities, deterring their integration process. Therefore, having a sense of the future comes from the ability of a person to use his or her capability for his/her own benefit, to adapt to the new context, in order to start projecting and planning towards the future. In the context of asylum seekers, integration becomes the desired capability. According to Sen, there are four factors that support capability: agency, resources, freedom and functioning. The absence of one of these factors affects the capability [therefore the integration] of this person (as cited in Beijer, 2016).
Although people are faced with present day-stressors and violence, some of them still find their way and are able to imagine the future ahead of them, despite the suffering they lived in their past, and that persists in their present. A research on Afghan men and women exploring how they make sense of adversity shows that, even in the highest risky environments, they are capable of showing resilience. “Resilience and fortitude rest upon a sense of hope: the belief that adversity can ultimately be overcome and a process of ‘meaning-making’ that gives coherence to past, present, and future experiences (Eggerman & Panter-Brick, 2010: 81). As Havel mentions “Hope… is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out” (ibid: 71). Eggerman explains how old women with families, expressed their sense of hope in faith, which represents for some “a source of individual strength in the face of misfortune”. It is mainly articulated in expressions of resignation where their destiny is not in their hands, but in the hands of God; “it is up to God to decide” (ibid: 76). Faith brings comfort in the face of distress. As Giddens mention: “Religious beliefs typically inject reliability into the experience of events and situations and form a framework in terms of which these can be explained and responded to.” (Giddens, 1990: 103) Jeffrey mentions that the sense of a better future was mainly seen when rich farmers made a decision to invest in their children’s education in the mid-1990s, and saw that it entailed “waiting” to achieve a better future (Jeffrey, 2010).
In his study on hope in transnational migration, Philip Mar argues that migration is not only a one-way movement to the receiving country, with a focus on adaptation and integration in the host society. It is also involved in multiple networks and pathways, based on external pulls and pushes, as well as internal emotional forces that play a role in shaping people's migration process and their hopes. Pushes and pulls are usually experienced through ambivalence and tension, especially when there is no directionality or clear idea of what to expect in the future. The reason that drove them to leave their country, the uncertainty in it, and the uncertainty experienced in the host country, creates an emotional environment
