Browse by title

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 93 items :

  • All accessible content x
Clear All
This content is available to you

Edited by Mary Crock and Lenni B. Benson

This content is available to you

Mary Crock and Lenni B. Benson

In this introductory chapter we identify themes that will be carried throughout the book. We begin in section 2 with a discussion of the human rights challenges presented by children on the move, posing questions that our contributors will address as they build on the themes we identify. This is followed by an examination of obstacles that have been created to recognizing child migrants as rights bearers. After setting out in section 4 a brief outline of the book’s structure, the chapter concludes with some comments on global initiatives that have been made to address the challenges associated with mass migration, on the one hand, and of forced movement of refugees, on the other. We will argue that the uncertainty and risks facing the world in the new millennium certainly constitute problems – but they also offer opportunities for positive change. Four foundational principles inform our discussion of how states should respond to children on the move. The first is that childhood is unique in that the status of being a child is transitory and (absent disabilities) the capacities of children evolve as children age. Second, it follows that children require special protection and assistance, most particularly in their younger and adolescent years, if they are to develop and thrive. The third point is that procedural accommodations should be made for children in recognition of the physical and cognitive stages of their development. The fourth and final principle both flows from and unites the three that precede it. It is that the treatment of child migrants matters because it has long-term consequences – both for the children themselves and for their host communities.

This content is available to you

Edited by Mary Crock and Lenni B. Benson

This content is available to you

Robin Wilson

This content is available to you

Robin Wilson

This content is available to you

Jacqueline Bhabha

This content is available to you

Nils A. Butenschøn

Presenting main academic discourses on Israel as an ‘ethnic’ state, ‘democratic’ state, and ‘Jewish’ state, Nils Butenschøn maintains that whereas the legal and institutional fabric of the State of Israel is ethnocratic in distribution of rights and resources, the state itself, just like Palestine, is still a state in the making, an unfinished state. He argues that the citizenship approach is sufficiently open in its theoretical orientation and precise enough as an analytical tool to capture the complexities of Israel as a state formation, and yet identify the distinct challenges this state poses in its relations with the various demographic groups that have claims to the territories under its current rule or control. The nature of these challenges can only be fully comprehended with a view to the extent, content, and depth of citizenship as premised by Zionism, the state ideology, and the historic conditions of the unfolding Palestine conflict.

This content is available to you

Edited by Nils A. Butenschøn and Roel Meijer

This content is available to you

Ludger Pries

This content is available to you

Ludger Pries

The chapter gives an overview of the topic and issues treated in the book. Three main arguments are presented. First, the dynamics of the refugee events of 2015 reflect the degree of globalization and transnationalization of social relations. In Syria as well as in Europe the global is becoming local and the local is becoming global. Transnational social relations are becoming more and more important. Second, since the 1990s a European refugee regime has been being developed, but its (nice) provisions for refugee protection almost collapsed in face of the organized non-responsibility of EU member states. Third, the networks of refugee- and asylum-oriented organizations and elements of a related transnational social movement compensated the ‘organized non-responsibility’ of national governments.