‘If you don’t have documents or a legal procedure, you are out!’ Making humanitarian organizations partner in migration control

Abstract

The paradoxical merger of humanitarian care and securitization imperatives can be seen not only at external and externalized borders, but also at the internal borders in the Netherlands. Here, humanitarian organizations that sprang up to support migrants without a legal status in response to – and given their disagreement with – the state’s exclusionary migration policies have become involved in migration control. During a gradual and subtle responsibilization process, the Dutch authorities have used specific measures and redirected monetary flows in order to incorporate these organizations into its broader migration control policies. This has resulted in a decrease in the number of support organizations for unauthorized migrants, a reduction in their independence and autonomy, and an increased focus on selection and return. Ethnographic fieldwork amongst unauthorized migrants illustrates the consequences of this exclusionary control. These migrants experience exclusion, selection and enforcement by humanitarian organizations and doubt the trustworthiness of these organizations. This development seems to fit in with the broader trend of European states disarming humanitarian organizations for unauthorized migrants by either responsibilizing or criminalizing them. However, these strategies are not without consequences because they run the risk that unauthorized migrants will further withdraw and turn away from this type of assistance altogether. We use both a humanitarian and a pragmatic perspective to argue that it would make sense for states either to allow organizations to continue their – uncompromised and unconditional – support for unauthorized migrants or to adapt their migration policies in such a way that humanitarian support becomes redundant.

“I Have to Start All over Again.” The Role of Institutional and Personal Arrival Infrastructures in Refugees’ Home-making Processes in Amsterdam

“…(Ali) This bad situation refers to him not being eligible for state infrastructures given his lack of a legal status. He felt punished by the Dutch authorities, which is more common among unauthorised migrants (Kox et al 2020). For some unauthorised respondents, the lack of adequate state provisions combined with the availability of such personal infrastructures in Amsterdam was the reason to come to this city in the fi rst place.…”

Shaping a Climate of Arrival: National and Local Media Representations of Refugees’ Arrival Infrastructures in the Netherlands

“…They show that the national authorities have been somewhat reluctant to provide any form of support for these rejected asylum seekers, while actors at the local level saw themselves confronted with the consequences of the lack of support Shaping a Climate of Arrival 53 for this group and, as a result, provided shelter and support for them (cf. Kox and Staring 2022). In Amsterdam, some rejected asylum seekers and volunteers united in a group called 'We Are Here' and started to protest against the national immigration policies.…”

The Exceptional Becomes Everyday: Border Control, Attrition and Exclusion from Within

“…Amid this backdrop of increasing criminalisation of migration, Dutch civil society includes a paradoxical merger of humanitarian care and securitisation imperatives (Kox and Staring 2020). In this context, humanitarian organisations refer to the wide range of agencies that provide relief to alleviate the hardship of migrants-critically, as Kox and Staring (2020) argued, these support organisations do so whilst simultaneously 'reproducing the causes of migrants' suffering and legitimizing restrictive migration policies' (p. 3). As van der Leun and Bouter (2015) demonstrated, internal border controls have rendered migrants without legal status wholly dependent on the (material and non-material) support of humanitarian organisations.…”

“…Originally established to offer support to groups excluded from state-provided forms of support-many of these agencies emerged from protest movements against restrictive migration policies-these 'emergency relief' organisations now find themselves in the 'ambiguous' position of advocating for migrant rights whilst collaborating with central authorities in migration control (Kox and Staring 2020, p. 3). Whilst there is a measure of organisational resistance to these processes, empirical evidence suggests that unauthorised migrants largely consider these humanitarian organisations to be part and parcel of the Dutch migration control system (Kox and Staring 2020).…”