Universal Rights versus Exclusionary Politics: Aspirations and Despair among Eritrean Refugees in Tel Aviv

Abstract

By investigating contemporary refugees, this paper analyses the contradictory dynamics of a global order whereby universal rights are distributed unequally through nation-state politics. It uses an ethnographic case study of Eritrean refugees in Tel Aviv as its empirical base in order to investigate refugeeness as a condition of everyday life. The paper demonstrates how a repressive environment within Eritrea has made people refugees, and how that condition is being reinforced by the Israeli government's refusal to recognise these refugees as such. It further interrogates the relationship between persecution and belonging that characterises the lives of Eritreans as refugees in Israel. The paper concludes by arguing that being a refugee does not preclude feeling a strong sense of national belonging. Eritrean refugees in Tel Aviv do not aspire to gain cosmopolitan citizenship rights but are driven by the desire to be rightful citizens of Eritrea.

Transnational Lived Citizenship – The Case of the Eritrean Diaspora

“…All the articles focus on the case of Eritrea, a case that represents in many ways a model for wider understandings of stratification of citizenship and practices of belonging (Bernal, 2006; Woldemikael, 2019). Eritrea is situated in the Horn of Africa, a site of intensive emigration, both within the region and further afield to the Gulf States (Thiollet, 2011), Europe (Belloni, 2019), the USA (Bernal, 2006), Canada (Berhane and Tyyskä, 2017), and Israel (Müller, 2015; Sabar and Rotbard, 2015) – to name some major destinations of Eritrean migrants. Eritrea is one of the most diasporic states globally with an estimated one-third of its population in the diaspora (even if statistics are outdated).…”

Colonial borders and hybrid identities: Lessons from the case of Eritrea

“…In addition, national service recruits often work in areas that do not correspond to their skills or expertise, thus they are not in fact benefitting the development of the country in the best way possible, as official justification claims. In turn, this has led to an outward movement of Eritreans, with one of the highest per capita percentages of refugees world-wide (Kibreab 2013;Müller 2015). Taken together, the nonguarantee under international law of the Eritrean border has turned what was originally an outward looking doctrine of self-reliance that was grounded in a belief in one's own strength to make one's way in a globalised world into an inward-looking tool of oppression.…”

Refugees and citizens: Understanding Eritrean refugees’ ambivalence towards homeland politics

“…Moreover, their ambivalence cannot be reduced to an opposition between external pressures and internal traditional family expectations. In fact, national duties are deeply engraved in values and behavioural norms of young Eritreans, even among those who decide to leave the country (Müller, 2012(Müller, , 2015. It would be wrong to downplay the effect of decades of nationalist propaganda on the moral upbringing of young generations.…”

“…However, it remains to be understood why many refugees are similarly ambiguous, despite being forced to escape from their country. It is then crucial to consider not only the strategic reach of the Eritrean state in the diaspora but also the incoherencies of national and diaspora policies (Riggan, 2013), the rootedness of nationalistic feelings (Reid, 2009), and the interaction between the status of external citizen and that of refugee (Müller, 2012, 2015). As I argue throughout this article, refugees occupy a peculiar position, not comparable with other migrants, vis-à-vis their homeland.…”

“…I also met many who were fully supportive of the government and others who were strongly committed to opposing it by political and military actions. However, sharp distinctions between supporters and opponents -which have long shaped the debate on Eritrean politics and diaspora -may not be enough to make sense of other widespread but less documented attitudes towards the homeland (Hirt and Mohammad, 2017;Müller, 2012Müller, , 2015. The notion of ambivalence, instead, can be helpful to interpret generalised disengagement and its various structural, historical and cultural roots.…”