Humanitarianism with a Sovereign Face: UNHCR in the Global Undertow

Abstract

This article examines the global forces that are responsible for the transformation of the meaning and practice of UNHCR's humanitarianism, and asks whether a transformation that enables the organization to become more deeply involved in the internal affairs of states is welcome or worrisome. I open by reviewing the changing relationship between multilateralism, sovereignty, and humanitarianism, and link that conceptual discussion to the international refugee regime. I then argue that the combination of state pressures and the normative principle of popular sovereignty enabled a more political and pragmatic UNHCR to widen its activities under the humanitarian banner and to become more deeply involved in the circumstances in the refugee‐producing country. This expanding humanitarian umbrella, I suggest, might be a stealth agent for a policy of containment and a threat to refugee rights. This possibility is suggested by recent debates over the category of internally displaced peoples; the decided preference for repatriation; and UNHCR's involvement in reintegration activities. These developments generate the worrisome possibility that a more pragmatic UNHCR is potentially (though unwittingly) implicated in a system of containment. I conclude by reflecting on UNHCR's role in global politics and the dangers of a sovereignty‐led humanitarianism.

When Do Displaced Persons Return? Postwar Migration among Christians in Mount Lebanon

“…With the end of the Cold War, refugee return became a larger focus of the international refugee regime (Barnett ). Millions of displaced persons have returned to their place of origin since then.…”

The Migration State in the Global South: Nationalizing, Developmental, and Neoliberal Models of Migration Management

“…Here, the focal point remains on the failure of states and populations in the Global North to adequately respond to and manage refugee crises, rather than on the study of policymaking and migration management in southern states. Indeed, with notable exceptions (Jacobsen 1996(Jacobsen , 2002, states in the Global South are often missing or lack agency in this literature, relegated to the backdrop on which refugee crises unfold, the passive recipients of international aid, or victims of the policies of more powerful Northern states (Barnett 2001;Betts and Collier 2017). This is not to say that there has been no attention to migration management outside Europe and North America.…”

Impugning the Humanitarian Defence

“…However, the development of the concept and the changing practices associated with it resulted in increased complexity and a troubling association with the state. A number of states have used the principle of humanitarianism to justify political/economic interventions and as a strategy to contain problems rather than devote resources to solve them (Barnett, 2001; Mills, 2005: 164; Weiss, 2000: 14). With the involvement of states, the impartial, neutral and independent components of humanitarianism have been undermined.…”