Nyers Arguments Against Refugees Analysis

In the last few years, millions of refugees have been forced out of their homes, cities, and countries, and have sought refuge in various European countries, as a consequence of the civil unrest in Syria and Iraq due to the influence of the terror organisation, Islamic State (IBtimes). When examining the history of refugees, one can argue that a new refugee regime emerged after WWII. The establishment of the 1951 Refugee Convention carried a new approach for managing mass displacements of individuals (Malkki). This does not indicate that there were no refugees before WWII, however, it implies that the convention provided tools and guidelines on how to manage these challenges (Malkki). As the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

As Peter Nyers argues: “refugees are interrelated with the discourse of emergency” (Nyers). One can argue that an ‘emergency’ continually needs a solution, which further reinforces the assumption that refugees are in need of a solution. As previously mentioned, the discursive practices are greatly influenced on one’s impression of refugees. It can be argued that these discursive practices can e.g. be the language frequently used in correlation with refugees in order to prompt a reaction. Nyers argues that often within refugee movements, these specific words are used to describe the situation: complex, crisis, border control, problem, national security, and political emergency (Nyers). This form of discursive language can be argued to entail several implications. One can argue that by portraying refugees through the given words, one contributes to the social construction of refugees as a problem. Furthermore, it creates the notion of a us-vs.-them situation, which creates a social between the citizens of the host country and the refugees. It can be argued that this social gap can prevent refugees from being integrated successfully into the society, as they are alienated. The aforementioned, can thus be correlated to Foucault’s notion of ‘system of exclusion’. This entails how the notion of problematizing refugees and somehow ‘excluding’ them from the society is influenced by the society’s perception of normal, and thereby what they identify as acceptable and unacceptable (find source). It can thus be argued, that a potential increase of refugees in a society could be dismissed and not regarded as part of their ‘normal life’, thereby, portraying it as a problem in need of solution. However, once again, this correspond to the notion of the social construction of refugees that the society