I have made more than 20 formal applications for documents since 1991. I even visited the Ombudsman's Office. They [the authorities] didn't explain things to me, they just asked for documents that I don't have.
Haidar Osmani, stateless Roma in North Macedonia, quoted in UNHCR statelessness report (UNHCR, 2017c : 27)
This is a problem many believe has been
Lewis Hine’s Photographs of Refugees for the American Red Cross, 1918–20
Sonya de Laat
( Gutman, 1967 : 14). Hine’s skills would prove invaluable for shining light on civilians’ wartime need; they were equally instrumental in making the ARC shine as American’s preeminent relief agency.
It was the Great War that created stateless persons, making stark the emerging reality that rights were not inhered in the person, as has been the central tenet of European philosophy since the time of the French Revolution. Rights were increasingly tied to citizenship ( Ngai, 2004 ; see also Hunt, 2007 ). For many in today’s world it is difficult to imagine anything
Numerous scholars and policymakers have highlighted the predicament of Roma as the most disadvantaged ethnic minority in Europe. This predicament has often been discussed as an unfortunate anomaly within otherwise inclusive liberal democratic states. In this book, Julija Sardelić offers a novel socio-legal enquiry into the position of Roma as marginalised citizens in Europe. Whilst acknowledging previous research on ethnic discrimination, racism and the socio-economic disadvantages Roma face in Europe, she discusses civic marginalisation from the perspective of global citizenship studies. She argues that the Romani minorities in Europe are unique, but the approaches of civic marginalisation Roma have faced are not. States around the globe have applied similar legislation and policies that have made traditionally settled minorities marginalised. These may have seemed inclusive to all citizens or have been designed to improve the position of minority citizens yet they have often actively contributed to the construction of civic marginalisation. The book looks at civic marginalisation by examining topics such as free movement and migration, statelessness and school segregation as well as how minorities respond to marginalisation. It shows how marginalised minorities can have a wide spectrum of ‘multicultural rights’ and still face racism and significant human rights violations. To understand such a paradox, Sardelić offers new theoretical concepts, such as the invisible edges of citizenship and citizenship fringes.
Bordering intimacy is a study of how borders and dominant forms of intimacy, such as family, are central to the governance of postcolonial states such as Britain. The book explores the connected history between contemporary border regimes and the policing of family with the role of borders under European and British empires. Building upon postcolonial, decolonial and black feminist theory, the investigation centres on how colonial bordering is remade in contemporary Britain through appeals to protect, sustain and make family life. Not only was family central to the making of colonial racism but claims to family continue to remake, shore up but also hide the organisation of racialised violence in liberal states. Drawing on historical investigations, the book investigates the continuity of colonial rule in numerous areas of contemporary government – family visa regimes, the policing of sham marriages, counterterror strategies, deprivation of citizenship, policing tactics, integration policy. In doing this, the book re-theorises how we think of the connection between liberal government, race, family, borders and empire. In using Britain as a case, this opens up further insights into the international/global circulations of liberal empire and its relationship to violence.
Given the significant similarities and differences between the welfare states of Northern Europe and their reactions to the perceived 'refugee crisis' of 2015, the book focuses primarily on the three main cases of Denmark, Sweden and Germany. Placed in a wider Northern European context – and illustrated by those chapters that also discuss refugee experiences in Norway and the UK – the Danish, Swedish and German cases are the largest case studies of this edited volume. Thus, the book contributes to debates on the governance of non-citizens and the meaning of displacement, mobility and seeking asylum by providing interdisciplinary analyses of a largely overlooked region of the world, with two specific aims. First, we scrutinize the construction of the 2015 crisis as a response to the large influx of refugees, paying particular attention to the disciplinary discourses and bureaucratic structures that are associated with it. Second, we investigate refugees’ encounters with these bureaucratic structures and consider how these encounters shape hopes for building a new life after displacement. This allows us to show that the mobility of specific segments of the world’s population continues to be seen as a threat and a risk that has to be governed and controlled. Focusing on the Northern European context, our volume interrogates emerging policies and discourses as well as the lived experiences of bureaucratization from the perspective of individuals who find themselves the very objects of bureaucracies.
By expanding the geographical scope of the history of violence and war, this
volume challenges both Western and state-centric narratives of the decline of
violence and its relationship to modernity. It highlights instead similarities
across early modernity in terms of representations, legitimations, applications
of, and motivations for violence. It seeks to integrate methodologies of the
study of violence into the history of war, thereby extending the historical
significance of both fields of research. Thirteen case studies outline the
myriad ways in which large-scale violence was understood and used by states and
non-state actors throughout the early modern period across Africa, Asia, the
Americas, the Atlantic, and Europe, demonstrating that it was far more complex
than would be suggested by simple narratives of conquest and resistance.
Moreover, key features of imperial violence apply equally to large-scale
violence within societies. As the authors argue, violence was a continuum,
ranging from small-scale, local actions to full-blown war. The latter was
privileged legally and increasingly associated with states during early
modernity, but its legitimacy was frequently contested and many of its violent
forms, such as raiding and destruction of buildings and crops, could be found in
activities not officially classed as war.
Sabotage as a citizenship enactment at the fringes
In 2013, Nazif Mujić, a Bosnian citizen of Romani background, received a Silver Bear Award at the Berlin International Film Festival. He won the award for his leading role in a low-budget film, An Episode in the Life of an Iron Picker , directed by the acclaimed director Danis Tanović. The film showed the daily struggles stateless Roma face: in a role of a husband, playing out his life, Mujić destroys his car and sells it as scrap metal so that he can pay for his wife's urgent medical treatment. She has no
organisations have contributed to making the citizenship of Romani individuals devalued, precarious and irregularised. Despite usually possessing EU citizenship (for a discussion of statelessness, see Chapter 4 ), Roma as marginalised minorities are often grouped together with non-European migrants. This reveals the complexities of bordering processes in Europe which not only work against newcomers (van Baar, 2016 ) but also create hierarchies within its own citizenry. The chapters have discussed how legislation and policies create invisible edges of citizenship. Despite
, however, are often exponentially diverse: some Roma are EU citizens who have their freedom of movement hindered (Parker and Catalán, 2014 ; Sardelić, 2017b ); others have multiple forced migrant statuses (such as Duldung or the temporary suspension of deportation) in the EU and on its outskirts (van Baar, 2017 ; Sardelić, 2018 ); and some are undocumented, legally invisible or even stateless (Sigona, 2015 ; Sardelić, 2015 ). All these different legal statuses have something in common: they can be considered precarious citizenship (Lori, 2017 ) and abject
, who were
marginalised as a consequence of an exclusionary vision of nationality law, but one that
remains pertinent today.
One response to such concerns is the revocation of citizenship –creating conditions of
bare life –and in a number of cases, rendering individuals as stateless. This process gets to
Houses built on sand
the very heart of ideas of belonging –inclusion –within political projects but also reveals
the importance of context and contingency in decisions of revocation. The removal of
citizenship serves as a means of excluding people from