Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Brian Callan
(Independant scholar)
Naomi Thompson (Goldsmiths University)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Roundtable
- Transfers:
- Open for transfers
Short Abstract:
With the number of forcibly displaced people now over 117 million the issue of migration is a core concern. This roundtable seeks to bring together scholars and activists from North through South, to explore the practices and policies of both liberal and illiberal stances to the global asylum system
Long Abstract:
Rightward political trends in the Global North have been emboldened since the Great Recession of late 2007 through 2009 and subsequent austerity economics that denuded public services in many states. Anti-immigrant anxieties in state policy have foregrounded nativist movements in North America and Europe. Such movements, which often encompass racism and xenophobia, constitute a global political movement that that is antagonised by the humanitarian conventions established by those same states only 50 years earlier.
For refugees and asylum seekers this is leading to a ‘global protection drought’ (Callan et al. 2025). Those seeking sanctuary are demonised, borders are militarised, migrants are commoditised and states seek to circumvent international law and ‘offshore’ obligations. At the same time certain states in the Global South have also learned to ‘game the system’ (Callan et al, 2025) or use refugees as political pawns. With over 117 million people worldwide forcibly displaced as a result of persecution, conflict, violence or human rights violations this asylum drought is of central global significance.
Nonetheless, the humanitarian impulse has not diminished. Across the world migrants, communities, volunteers, activists and professionals come together in a wide variety of creative ways to find new ground or create new cultures in defiance of the illiberal politics and policies of exclusion.
This roundtable seeks to bring together scholars and activists from North through South, to explore the practices and policies of both liberal and illiberal stances to the global asylum system and the millions of lives this contestation touches upon.
Accepted paper:
Paper short abstract:
Recent Hong Kongers ideologically see themselves as refugees, but don’t seek asylum under the UK government’s BN(O) visa Pathway, designating them so deserving of asylum that they bypass the asylum process. Simultaneously the UK’s push against ‘illegal migrants’ targets ‘boat people’ seeking asylum
Paper long abstract:
The recent wave of Hong Kongers emigrating to the UK are not refugees. Like Ukrainians, the UK government has designed a special resettlement pathway for them so that they bypass the asylum process. Created in 2021, admits the UK government’s campaign against ‘illegal’ migration of the ‘boat people,’ whom the government claimed sought asylum ‘illegally,’ as well as growing public suspicion towards refugees faking asylum claims for economic benefit or even to gain access in the UK for acts of terrorism, the Hong Kong BN(O) Pathway to resettlement creates a new category for Hong Kongers as ‘deserving’ asylum - so much so that they need not be refugees. My research looks at how Hong Kongers negotiate these conflicting notions of deservingness surrounding their situation, and doing their best to maintain a good impression with their new neighbors. While many see themselves as ‘cultural refugees,’ who had no option but to leave Hong Kong, they are hyper aware of their special legal status outside of asylum, and adamant that they do not be conflated with the ‘burdeness,’ ‘illegal,’ and potentially ‘dangerous’ asylum seekers. Hong Kongers highlight the fact that they are allowed to work, and had to pay thousands of pounds for their visas. Financial and social contribution to community and society, and not relying on government benefits as asylum seekers must, is the key difference Hong Kongers see between themselves and asylum seekers - not the reasons they had to flee. This exposes the UK government’s villainization ‘illegal’ asylum seekers.