University Of AALBORG

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

Department Of Political Sciences

The Global Refugee Studies (GRS)Programme

Apparent Involuntary Repatriation

An analytical study of the reasons given by the assisted Iraqi returnees, who regretted their decision to repatriate and came back to Denmark.

By Kojo Yeboah Francis

Supervisor: Anja Kublitz

Date: 28th June 2013

Voluntary repatriation, among the UNHCR’s “durable solution”, is seen as the most preferred one, for solving problems with refugees in exile. However, experiences encountered by the refugees while in exile, among others, may be credible obstacles to achieving successful voluntary repatriation. This study analyzes the reasons why the Iraqi refugees unwillingly repatriated to Iraq, despite their legal status as refugees in Denmark, as told by them, in interviews conducted by 2 master students from the Roskilde University of Denmark in 2006.

Preface

This thesis is in partial fulfillment of the award of a master’s degree in Global Refugee Studies at the faculty of Social Science, Department of political sciences, at the Aalborg University, in Denmark in June 2013. I would like to thank all those who assisted me to be able to write. Even when my sincere gratitude, naturally goes to my supervisor, Assistant-professor Anja Kublizt, it should equally be shared with Vagn Klim Larsen from DRC (Dansk Flygtningehjælp), for making it possible to access the main data used in this paper.

AbstractIn the contemporary European migration context, the alienation of minorities, due to geo-identity creation and enhancement, especially by the ‘new right’ Gingrich (2006), is achieved through the construction of ‘ethnic identity’ and ‘cultural differences’ that creates the “we” and “them” divide, and has had tremendous, sometimes adverse effect on immigrants and refugees. In this thesis, I argue that the politics by the V-K government and the support from the far right-wing, the Danish Peoples’ Party, which drew soaring criticisms, was driven by the notion of “Otherness”. I therefore use the concept of “otherness” to underpin the analysis of the reasons given by the Iraqi refugees on why they repatriated. The thesis is based on some of the answers given by the Iraqi refugees who gave up on their repatriation and came back to Denmark, in interviews conducted in 2006 by two students from the Roskilde University in Denmark. The objective is to analyze the reasons why the refugees did choose to repatriate in the first place, even when, according to them, they didn’t willfully want to. The thesis uses database articles and books, expert’s views, political discourses and rhetoric as well as newspaper articles in the analysis of the answers given in the interviews. The paper concludes that restrictive policies, or ill-treatments that make refugees feel uncertain about their future in exile as well as having the feel of being different, or belonging elsewhere than the host country as a result of, for instance, isolating them from the local populace, placing them under economic hardship, depriving them from reuniting with their spouses, and exempting them from the local workforce, may not be favorable for easy and right decision-making on voluntary assisted repatriation.

Key words: otherness, political discourse, geo-identity, voluntary assisted repatriation, unwillingly, voluntarily, uncertainty, restrictive policies, rational decision-making, restrictive policies, economic hardship, local workforce, isolating and spouses.

Acronyms and abbreviations

AVRR Assisted Voluntary return & Reintegration B The Radikale venstre DRC Danish Refugee CouncilEU The European UnionGRS Global Refugee StudiesIOM International Organization for MigrationJP Jyland PostenK The conservative partyNGO Non-Governmental Organization (s)O The far right-wing populist Danish Peoples’ partyS The Social DemokratsSF The Socialistiske FolkepartiUNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for refugeesUK The United KingdomV-K-O The coalition government: Venstre, Konservativ& Danske FolkepartiV The Liberal Party, ‘venstre’

Table of Contents

Preface……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….2

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..2

Acronyms & Abbreviations…………………………………………………………………………………………………3

Chapter 1: Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………….6

Thesis outline………………………………………………………………………………………………..9

Purpose of Study & Formulation…………………………………………………………….……...9

Research Question………………………………………………………………………………….………9

Chapter 2: Background of Study

2.1. Why the study………………………………………………………………………………….….……….10

2.2 Repatriation in Denmark: Administration & Practice…………………………..……..…10

2.3 The Repatriation of the Iraqi refugees………………………………………………………..…11

2.4 Fortrydelsesretten…………………………………………………………………………………………14

Chapter 3: Methodology & Limitation

3.1 Case Selection……………………………………………………………………………………….……...15

3.2 Source of Data……………………………………………………………………………………………….15

3.4 The Method Used………………………………………………………………………………………….16

3.5 Analysis strategy……………………………………………………………………………………………17

3.5 Situating the use of narratives, Discourses & Storytelling………………………………18

Chapter 4: Theoretical framework

4.1: Theories build-up………………………………………………………………………………………..19

4.2: The concept of “Othering” or “Otherness”………………………………………………….20

4.3: Definition & Application of Otherness

4,4 Theorists of Othering…………………………………………………………………………………….20

4.5 Application of theory to the Danish political Debate……………………………………..21

Chapter 5: The Analysis

5.1: The Danish State and refugees and immigrants….…………………………………………23

5.2: Political Discourses & ‘Othering’………………………………………………………………….30

5.2.2: Social ‘Othering’………………………………………………………………………………………….38

5.2.2a: “The family reunification law”……………………………………………………………………40

5.2.2b: “The 24 year old law”………………………………………………………………………………..43

5.2.2c: “Isolation from the local population”…………………………………………………………45

5.2.2d: “Exclusion from the work force”………………………………………………………………..47

5.2.3: Cultural ‘Othering’………………………………………………………………………………………49

5.2.4: Religious ‘Othering’…………………………………………………………………………………….55

5.2.5: Media ‘Othering’…………………………………………………………………………………………58

Chapter 6: Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………..62

Recommendation………………………………………………………………………………………………………………63

Perspectives………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………63

References…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………65

Appendices:

Appendix 1: The 12 reasons given by the Iraqis on why they return to Denmark……………….80

Appendix 2: The number of repatriated refugees from Denmark 2000-2006………………………80

Appendix 3: The number of people repatriated from Denmark 2006-2011…………………………80

Appendix 4: The number of refugees who have used the return right since 2008……………….80

Appendix 5: The interviews………………………………………………………………………………………………..80

Tables & Figures

Table 1…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….13

Figure 1…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………......12

Chapter 1

Introduction

In Denmark, between the years 2001 and 2010, the V-K government, made up of the Liberals (Liberal party-venstre) and the conservatives (Det Konservative Folke parti) took over power and had migration as one of the main political agendas. As an election promise; migration, immigrants and refugees became not only the cornerstone of the politics at the time, but also objects of political grandstanding and fiery debates. Most of it all was the fact that, in order to again majority in parliament, the V-K government had to lean on the far right-hand Populist Party, the Danish peoples’ party, whose vote, almost always for the ten years reigning period, was needed by the V-K government to surpass the threshold to passing the annual fiscal budget. And as a strategy to gain policy influence, the Danish people’s party continually used the needed support, to lure the government into enacting the party’s harsh aliens acts, the type of politics, they had labeled as “a war to protect ‘our’ Danish values from ‘theirs’”. ”Dansk Folkeparti bestemmer tempoet og krydrer finansloven med en håndfuld udvalgte værdipolitiske markeringer. De har næsten altid islam, udlændinge og danske værdier som fællesnævner” (Ritzaus Bureau; 04/03-2008).”Dansk Folkeparti har, siden V-K-regeringen kom til verden, gang på gang brugt finansloven til at føre værdikamp og komme med krav, som strengt taget ikke har meget med finansloven at gøre”. (Ritzaus Bureau: 23/09-2009).

Put differently, the Danish Peoples’ party found the then existing migration legislations too lenient and punitive and therefore aimed their politics at ‘revamping’ the immigration system with harsher and tougher laws, and even made an attempt to rid people from non-western countries of coming to Denmark. For example, the party saw the immigration of non-westerners as costly for Denmark as they also blamed them for being responsible for the economic problems or meltdown in 2008 and hence made attempts to either reduce or stop non-westerners, particularly Muslims, from accessing Denmark1. The intention behind the politics was explicitly spelt out by the current leader of the party in 2009:Ikke flere muslimer til Danmark: ”Det handler om assimilation, hvis samfundet skal fungere. Om at folk med anden etnisk baggrund entydigt skal tilpasse sig danske traditioner. tørklæder være forbudt i offentligheden, 24-års-reglen var afløst af en 28-års-regel, og Danmark ville primært modtage flygtninge fra den vestlige kulturkreds, mange indvandrere ville blive tvangsflyttet væk fra ghettoer, og muslimer stillede helst ikke spørgsmål til indholdet af pølsehornene ved den lokale byfest”.“Det, der sker lige nu, er, at mange af de danskere, som betaler en høj skat for at finansiere gildet, har fornemmelsen af, at pengene mere eller mindre bliver spildt på nogle folk, der er kommet hertil, og som ikke ønsker at blive en del af det danske samfund”, (DF's magtfulde gruppeformand Kristian Thulesen Dahl, 21/07-

1? Ritzau bureau 05/08-2010

2009). All in all, by always having immigrants and Muslims as their political targets, the Danish People’s party, insisting geo-identity and claiming that Denmark is for ethnic Danes, the indigenous people of the land (Kvaale, 2011), constantly saw immigrants and refugees in the country as intruders, invaders and parasites on the Danish welfare state (Olwig et al., 2011). I owe to mention that, there was a consistent expression of intolerance for immigrants and Muslims, Hervik, (2012), has asserted “the impasse between the newcomers in Denmark and the native Danes regarding multiculturalism, has been plagued by unwarranted combination of neo-racism, neo-nationalism and political populism” Hervik, (2012; 224). The writer was referring to the intolerance to ‘external cultures’ and the deliberate “essentialization” of the minority cultures by both the Danish media and the right-wing politicians.Collectively, these political maneuvers seem to point to the fact that, the Danish politicians aided by the media (ibid; 224), didn’t want certain kinds of people in their country. The politics was preformed and involved with all aspects of migration in Denmark, refugee issues, asylum evaluations, family reunifications, and many others, as one of the main politicians in the V-K government reveals: ”Under valgkampen i Danmark luftede Venstres retspolitiske ordfører, Birte Rønn Hornbech, en idé om at gøre det sværere for udvalgte grupper, eksempelvis somaliere, at få familiesammenføring” (Information, 28/11-2001). I argue in this paper with lucid examples such as the laying down of strict criteria for obtaining residency and many others, that refugees, like regular immigrants largely felt uncertain and unwelcome in Denmark in these periods.In sense, if refugees in exile do not experience that they are welcome by the host country which has given them protection, this troubled and discomfort feeling of dejection in their ‘new’ home, cannot be seen as being different from the circumstances in their own country, which might have caused their fleet. More saliently, this, unfortunately can lead them to making wrong decisions on repatriation, in much the same way as it is also significantly troubling, when refugees are compelled to return to countries they once had ‘ran’ away from, simply because their repatriation had not be voluntary but “induced”. ‘Dansk Folkeparti har sat sig nye mål for stramninger i udlændingepolitikken i forbindelse med dette efterårs finanslovforhandlinger. Der skal gang i hjemsendelserne af afviste asylansøgere, ulandsbistanden skal tages fra lande, der ikke vil tage imod deres egne borgere, og der skal oprettes asylansøgningscentre så tæt som muligt på de lande, asylansøgerne kommer fra” (Ritzaus Bureau; 18/09-2004).It is common knowledge that the convention, of the essence, the ‘refugee’ plight, rests completely on the politics of the receiving country, it’s therefore unequivocally political. In other words, if the politics of the host country seem to disfavor the presence and the welcoming of the refugees, asylum to refugees becomes worthless. The opposite is proven true. Humane treatment of refugees based on humanitarian grounds, may help decisions on willful repatriation, as Said (1984; 159, cf Malkki, 1995) frames it;

’exile’ connotes “a readily aestheticizable realm”, whereas ‘refugees’ connotes “a bureaucratic and international humanitarian realm”. Therefore, the situation of refugees in exile, however political, is also deeply humanitarian.This understanding seems to sit well with the far right parties, the so-called the ‘new right’ parties’ entrance and influence in the contemporary Europe, perhaps due to security reasons. And as Ferris (1992), had observed, the previous perception of immigration as a humanitarian issue is being eroded by notions of security threats. Not surprisingly, refugees connote a security threat, refugees, like other immigrants collectively, are seen as a burden on states’ economy, in the case of Denmark, as a threat to the existence of the social welfare and national homogeneity (Olwig et al., 2011: 3-4). This assumed threat, I think, partly explains why we see countries derogating from the obligations in the convention. As Black, et al., (1999) have noted, the increase in political interest in repatriation runs parallel to the increment in the restrictions on the granting of refugee status. And all the while, when it comes to talking about a good future solution for refugees, most governments, if not all in the stable, worthy democracies, tacitly or otherwise, share the same ‘denominator’—namely repatriation. These forms of planned repatriation defer, as it sometimes, is purely involuntarily or through a “push” on the refugees to ‘go home’, a tendency Stepputat (2004; 5), sees as highly detrimental to successful repatriation. Ghosh (2000; 1-4) illustrates the push-pull2 factors and explains the causes of involuntary repatriation explicitly in both social and economic contexts. As reported by the Amnesty International (2004), the outcome of such ‘pushes’ include, for instance, fleeing due to the violation of their human rights and fundamental freedoms, such as economic, civic, social, cultural rights, as well as ethnic intolerance, in both home country and in exile; (Amnesty International, 2004; 5).Contrary to forced or coercive deportation, assisted voluntary return and reintegration ought to be dignified and of integrity, as it must also depend on self-identification, self-determination and self-willingness among the refugees. The opposite is believed to yield unintended outcomes, because even when certain refugees persuasively would nod yes to repatriation, there are some who will never repatriate regardless of the substantive support offered them, Roger, (1994; 31) observed that even when all the relevant conditions for repatriation was in place, there were still some refugees who declined it. The 73 Iraqi refugees who were interviewed by students from the Roskilde University cited reasons why they gave up on the repatriation and why the repatriation failed and mentioned also their reluctance to the process. It is arguable that the refugees might have had other intentions than what they have expressed in the interview; I owe, therefore, the authenticity and credibility of this data to the University of Roskilde. My intent, then, with this writing,

2 See how Ghosh (2004; 1-4) has extensively grouped these factors of migration into causes & effects.

goes with what seems to have been implied by the Iraqi refugees, that, they, the refugees, said yes to repatriation, during their stay in Denmark, was better than any other alternatives the Danish authorities (sagsbehandler—Danish), would have wished or expected.I will specifically use what the refugees said they have encountered with the Danish asylum-social authorities in the Municipalities, trace some of political discourses of the time through the media archives (informedia webpage), as well as use literature on what some writers in anthropology and social sciences in Denmark had written on the refugee politics at the time, to examine the claim made by the refugees.

Thesis outline

The thesis starts by introducing how voluntary repatriation can be affected by the way refugees are treated in exile, the political significances for refugees and asylum, the intent of the author and the material to be used. Chapter 2 concerns the background of the study, namely repatriation in Denmark, why I personally got interested in such a topic, the repatriation of the Iraqis including, a graph and statistical figures showing both the number of Iraqis, the numbers repatriated, especially in 2006 when the interviews were conducted and how the process had been used by both refugees and other immigrants. Chapter 3 shows the methodology and why or how they are applied in this study whereas chapter 4 deals with the theory used to underpin the study, namely, “Otherness”. Chapter 5 deals with the theory application to the practices and discourses by the politicians and media, experts on refugee issues, as well as some literature on the topic. The sixth chapter concludes with reasons why, according to my estimation, the Iraqis unwillingly left Denmark, the reason that also explains the failure of the repatriation.

The Purpose of the thesis:

The purpose of the thesis is to draw attention to some of the treatments meted out to refugees that may cause them to wrongly decide on assisted voluntary repatriation and reintegration.

Formulation:

Did the Iraqi refugees feel welcome in Denmark? And were they pleased at the services rendered them by the Danish authorities? Were the Iraqi refugees willfully inclined on leaving exile? That is, how voluntary was

their voluntary repatriation? Were the Iraqi refugees fully prepared to use the assisted repatriation program?

The Research Question:

Despite the decisive efforts made by the Danish government through organizations such as Danish Refugee Council, to help on return and resettlement decisions, there has always been some, after receiving counseling and advices and being afterthoughts, who, wouldn’t wish to repatriate, but will remain in exile. As there are also always some refugees who would feel that they were “pushed” out of exile by the host authorities, and thus, involuntarily repatriating. My question is what, according to the Iraqis actually prompted them to go back to their troubled home country, Iraq, only to return afterwards to Denmark, knowing full well that the situation in Iraq wasn’t favorable for repatriation.

Specific Objective:

The objective is to find out about which circumstances might have led the Iraqi refugees, to unwillingly repatriate to Iraq, a decision, they later regretted.

Research Question:

Why did the Iraqi refugees repatriate to Iraq when they actually didn’t want to, as they indicated in the interviews?

Chapter 2

Background of the Study

2.0 Why this Study?

As a migrant in Denmark, I had almost always overheard colleagues and friends discuss about their living conditions. These discussions often are endless and lead to fundamental confusions about whether to not these people should consider leaving or staying here in Denmark. I have also witness people just take their luggage and leave either to other European countries, England, for example, or to their home country---a sort of “self-deportation”. It is not uncommon to see or hear immigrants, who regardless of the number of years they been in Denmark, still have not fully integrated nor felt at home, here in the country. In my own view, these discussions were not helped by the change of government in 2001 where these talks reached their climax. That’s when the liberal V-K government resumed power and had to lean on the Danish peoples’ party in order to gain the needed majority in parliament. Further, I draw that this situation is not dissimilar to what Iraqi refugees had experienced and had also expressed in the interviews. These are legal refugees who first decided to get help from the government of Denmark to go back to Iraq, but then decided again to come back to Denmark.

I intend therefore to use some of the data from the interviews, which was originally used for analyzing how the repatriation of the Iraqi refugee was neither successful nor durable.

2.1 Repatriation in Denmark: administration and practices

According to the refugee convention, refugees are to be given absolute protection; or as the UNHCR, (1980; 1) recommends in the ‘Durable solutions’, they can either be voluntarily repatriated, or resettled elsewhere or can also be integrated into the existing society.Indeed, as the UNHCR had observed, the voluntary repatriation seems to be the ideal, the best, the preferred and most desirable to host countries (cf: Warner, 1994; UNHCR, 1986; 269). But, in order to give any repatriation process a voluntary perspective, it must conform, among other recommendations, to what Harrell-Bond and Voutira have called ‘voluntary repatriation’ that is to say, it must have a humanitarian corridor. According to her without a safe zone that would enable the returnees to think twice about the repatriation, there is no ‘voluntary repatriation’, at least, not of dignity, (cf; Pottier, 1999, Harrell-Bond & Voutira, 1992). In his article, Johan Pottier3 (1996) notes that, refugees have rights to protection and humanitarian aid as they do have the principle of freedom regarding repatriation.

2.2 The repatriation of the Iraqis

The repatriation of the Iraqis as well as the granting of asylum to them during the V-K government was not as smooth as the UNHCR otherwise, would have wished.

“Irakere presses til at rejse hjem: Afviste irakiske asylansøgere sættes på madkasseordning, selv om det er umuligt at sende dem hjem, og FN på det skarpeste advarer mod hjemsendelse. Amnesty mener, de bør have midlertidig opholdstilladelse Regeringen forsøger at presse irakiske asylansøgere til at forlade landet ved at sætte dem på den såkaldte madkasseordning, selvom det i praksis er umuligt at sende dem hjem. FN's Flygtningehøjkommissariat UNHCR advarer på det skarpeste mod at tvangshjemsende irakere på grund af den »ekstreme vold,« der hærger Irak, hvilket bla. har fået Storbritannien til at opgive al hjemsendelse”. (Ritzaus Bureau 03/05-2004).

In Denmark, besides the DRC, the Municipalities, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other organization such as the Red Cross are players involved in the administration and practices of enhancing dignified repatriation and reintegration of both refugees and immigrants who choose the repatriation program. The Danish Refugee Council (DRC) or as they are referred to in Danish, Danskflygtningehælp, though do not have the right to decide, who gets asylum or not, was one of the main actors responsible for the voluntary repatriation of the

3 Johan Pottier is a senior lecturer in Anthropology at the school of Oriental and African studies (SOAS) University of London. His article entitled “The ‘self’ in self repatriation: Closing down Mugunga camp, eastern Zaire. In; The end of the refugee cycle? Edited by Richard Black and Khalid Koser

Iraqis in direct consultation with the Municipalities and the government. The DRC is a non-governmental, humanitarian, non-profit organization. Founded in 1956 in Denmark, the organization seeks to provide assistances, such as humanitarian aid, rehabilitation, relief efforts and renders support to refugee and/or immigrants who quite willingly decide to return to their home country. Recommendations by the DRC on the repatriation of the Iraqis become therefore paramount. However the DRC reports on the rejection of some of its advices on the repatriation of the Iraqis by the V-K government, whilst it also expresses its worry about the refusal to give asylum to certain Iraqis, (DRC, 2009; 12. http://www.danskflytningehjælp.dk). I reserve to say, that the paper will not deal with Iraqis, who committed crimes and were refused asylum, for instance, the sending home of the 19 year old Iraqi for brutal criminal offence4, however troubling due to his tender age.

The figure below shows a graph of the total number of asylum-seekers from selected countries, who were rejected from 2006 to 2011, as it also shows that Iraqis were the most rejected asylum-seekers in 2006, precisely the same year the interview was conducted.

Figure 1.

Source: www.newtoDenmark.dk

According to the Danish media, the questionable refusal of asylum to these groups of people, especially those with Islamic background, was primarily due to the request from the far right-wing Danish Peoples’ party, during the reign of the V-K government:“Dansk Folkeparti har sat sig nye mål for stramninger i udlændingepolitikken i forbindelse med dette efterårs finanslovforhandlinger. Der skal gang i hjemsendelserne af afviste asylansøgere, ulandsbistanden skal tages fra

4 Ritzaus 11/10-2012

lande, der ikke vil tage imod deres egne borgere, og der skal oprettes asylansøgningscentre så tæt som muligt på de lande, asylansøgerne kommer fra” (Ritzaus Bureau; 18/09-2004).Unfortunately, there were also some doubtful repatriation, some of the refugees were, reportedly, forced home5 even including non-criminals6, for instance, there were others that had to be taken from a church7 in Copenhagen before being sent home. The table below shows the numbers of Iraqis, who, for reasons beyond the purpose of this writing, have been sent home from Denmark since the start of the war in Iraq.

Table 1Statistics over number of Iraqi repatriated from Denmark (2003-2012)

Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012From 01/Jan to 30/ June

Overall total

Number 71 141 85 (3)

28 (7)

20 (1)

133 66 85(3)

87(11)

7 (1)

723 (26)

Source: www. Danskflytninghælpe.dkNote: The numbers in brackets designate the self-repatriation of Iraqi immigrants.

In June 2002, the Danish government embarked on a plan to limit the number of ‘in-flow’ of refugees into the country, and consequently, the application numbers in 2002, for example, dropped from 12,512 in 2001 to about 6,068, a fall of about 51.5% (IOM, 2004). In recent times, the number of people, both refugees and immigrants, who repatriate from Denmark, seem to be on the rise. In their yearly report in 2011, the Danish Refugee Council8, writes that 613 of immigrants in Denmark have been helped through the repatriation law, to voluntarily return to their home country, whereas the number in the previous year (2010) was only 370 immigrants. The council writes that the reason for the success with repatriation was due the economic security rendered to the participants. For instance, people who voluntarily repatriate are able to carry their pension sums and health insurance with them.It is worth stating that, the DRC does not decide which refugee should be given the right to

5 Trods advarsler fra bl.a. UNHCR sendes endnu en iraker tilbage til det uroplagede Bagdad. Otte blev sendt tilbage i maj og juni og flere fængslet ved ankomsten.6 ikke-kriminel iraker tvunget hjem (Ritzaus Bureau 05/08-2008)

7 Politiet tømte kirken for irakere (Ritzau, 13/08-2009)

8 see http://www.danskflytningehælpe.dk

asylum or not. The V-K government had a committee to evaluate the asylum cases, and for certain reasons, some of the non-criminal Iraqis, despite the security situation in Iraq, failed to qualify for asylum and had to be sent home. These groups of Iraqis, according to one news media in Denmark, were constantly being ‘hunted’ away from Denmark by the Danish police as most of them also went ‘underground’. With a headline that reads; “Afviste irakere forlader Danmark”9----(”Iraqis who are refused asylum escape from Denmark”), a newspaper on the 21st of July 2009 reported that 46 of the refugees had escaped (46 afviste irakere forsvundet” ). The forced repatriation continued and by the middle of 2010, about a year after, the same paper again reports that, the majority of the Iraqis had been sent home, as the paper writes: “Det tynder ud i de afviste irakere”10, referring to the reduction in numbers of the Iraqi refugees in Denmark, due to either escape and or by other means than being forcibly repatriated by the police. Refugees who do have the legal right to stay in Denmark but choose to repatriate have also the right to regret their decision after repatriation.

2.3 Regret of the Decision to repatriate (“fortrydelsesret loven”)

”Fortrydelsesretten” refers to the right to regret the decision to repatriate to ones’ own home country and gives the chance for coming back again to Denmark, if the decision is made within a year of return. The right is reserved for refugees, who have received economic help to return to their original country or any other country of the person’s choice. The right, however, is only reserved to refugees and not regular migrants, because according to the foreigners’ law11, the rule is that, any foreigner who gives up his or her residence in Denmark and who decides to leave Denmark has also his or her residence permit forfeited and invalidated.The provisions in these laws are made clear to those who choose the program before they make their final decisions, because, as mentioned earlier on, the DRC helps prospective repatriates with all the guidelines on repatriation. The assumption, in this paper is that, the Iraqi refugees were fully acquainted with all of the repatriation requirements and regulations as, they, I presume, were fully advised on how to say “yes” to a proposed repatriation.

9 Ritzau Bureau 28/07-200910 Ritzau Bureau 12/05-201011

Chapter 3

Methodology and Limitation

3.1 Case selectionAs discussed in the previous chapter the right to abandon repatriation is restricted to refugees and not regular immigrants or any other groups of aliens in Denmark. The study, done in 2006 by two students from the Roskilde University in Denmark, had only those Iraqis who were or who have been refugees in Denmark and have chosen to voluntarily repatriate as they also have had the right to abandon their repatriation. The choice of the case was therefore based on two things, the first is the ease and availability of the data, through the Danish Refugee council (DRC), and the second is, it meets the above mentioned requirements on ‘regret right’. The answers given by the refugees, who participated in the interviews lead me to the choice of my theory and conforms to what Strauss and Corbin, (1990) had referred to as ‘theoretical sampling’. In other words, the theory, I espouse to use already is embedded in the data. Finally, the choice of this case is due to my attempt to understand what the refugees actually said in the interviews. And by using their responses on one side, and collectively, the repatriation processes and practices, the Danish asylum policies, some political rhetoric and bureaucracy (Hill, 1993) of the V-K government and its support party, the Danish Peoples’ party, on the other side, I expect to be able examine the claims made by the Iraqis. Further, and relating to the limitation of my study, I have not only relied on the data from two students from the University of Roskilde in Denmark, whom I have not been in contact with, but also the Iraqi refugees. I have also not been able to access salient documentations on the repatriation process, and that totally limits my ability to make generalizations, even when I hardly doubt the credibility and the authenticity of the thesis work. I had wished however, to be able to pore over much more documentations on the repatriation, unclassified though, at the DRC, the municipalities or other authorities in Denmark, in order to ascertain my thoughts and suspicion of what I had repeatedly referred to as a “push” on the refugees in this writing. Besides I have only chosen some of the answers and not all of them to make the analysis and this may have an effect on my conclusion.

3.2 Source of DataThe main empirical data in this study is secondary data and comes, as said earlier, from interviews conducted by 2 students, Nielson and Riiskær (2006) from the Roskilde University in Denmark.

The students did the interview to assess the efficiency, success and the durability of voluntary repatriation. I had used some of the interview responses to look at the repatriation of Iraqis from a totally different point of view, thus, what might have contributed or caused the Iraqi refugees to repatriate in the first place, instead of why the repatriation was failed. I believe that the post-repatriation factors might have also affected the repatriation. I used information from contextual data, for example, from the DRC, from brochures, and webpages12 as well as from books and articles. As well as answers to questions I posed to reliable officials from DRC, which gave a lot of nuances on the repatriation process, as they also became my guide.In short, my corpus includes:

a) answers or narratives from the refugees (--- from the problem centered-interviews).b) Newspaper articles relating to the Iraqis, especially from and around 2006

—‘infomedia’c) Information from the internetd) Books, brochures & articles by diverse authors

I did not personally get the chance, the finance or time to conduct interviews among the refugees. However, I am confident that, the data, due its source and being of such relevance to the repatriation of the Iraqis, is credible and have the advantage of allowing me save time and cost. Furthermore, the information, the political discourses, from the website (for example, ‘infomedia’) and other brochures relating to the topic, gave me the opportunity to compare, interpret, (Smith, 2008) and made easy the analysis of the reasons given by why the Iraqis, as they also helped me get answers to my research question.One precaution I took was not to consciously make alterations on the original statements. I maintain that, the original interpretations of the discourses and the subject’s objectivity (Cooper, 1998), had been respected throughout this writing, I admit though that, the mere choice of using some of the interview answers and not all leaves room for selection biases, that said I suppose, other forms of biases are consciously avoided.

3.3 The MethodThe method used in the study is discourse analysis. It is a discourse analysis of one of the reasons given by the Iraqi refugees by using both political discourses, rhetoric, the Danish migration policy and legislation as well as experts’ views to understanding why the Iraqis said they wanted to abandon exile—Denmark. The analysis is based on the four themes in the answers to would want to leave or abandon13

Denmark, out of the twelve reasons (see appendix 1) given by the Iraqi refugees, namely: 12 http://www.danskflytningehjælp.dk and http://www.nyidenmark.dk/13 Reason number 5.

employment, the chances of getting family reunification, economic hardship and social isolation. These themes are also what the V-K government‘s politics were mainly centered. I have therefore used selected political discourses and rhetoric as well as experts’ view in analyzing these themes. For example, I used political presupposition, implications, metaphors, comparisons and polarization used by the Danish politicians in attempting to classify immigrants and refugees in order to make them look different from the ethnic Danes. Thus, analysis of rhetoric used in the V-K-O’s politics of the ethno-cultural emotionalism (Kvaale, 2011; 226) as expressed in language,---be it spoken or textual. I have chosen to use some of the political verbal language used by the V-K government and its support party, the Danish peoples’ party, which I see to fall under the category of the act of ‘Otherness’, especially if they seem to add to the divide ---the ‘we’ and ‘them’. According to Volmert, (1989), politicians, who are interested in formulating or constructing the ‘we’-versus-‘them’ group, always have something they use to construct these differences:“A speaker has at his disposal a whole range of clever options with which to present the interests and affairs of ‘we-groups’. With the context of election campaigns, for example, a speaker can unite his audience into a single interest group by replacing differences in origin, confession, class and life-style with a simple ‘we’. This interest group may be bound by different degrees of intimacy and familiarity: from the common economic interests of society a s a whole to the emotional needs of a family-type community”. (Volmert, 1989; 123: cf; Wodak, et al., 1999).Again, the method chosen in the study was directed by the kind of data and the objective (Bryman, 2008), of this paper. I used also prominent writings by respected anthropologists in Denmark in analyzing the discourses and the practices, as I also used some internationally laid down principles and regulations in the refugee field.I had relied on quotations from various Danish newspapers, for example, those from the “infomedia” and other forms of literature on the repatriation of the Iraqis in particular, and the situation of refugees and immigrants in Denmark during the ten year governance of the V-K government from year 2001 to 2011, in general. Because, I think that, the contingent factors such as ‘cultural background’, the untenable forms of stereotyping and marginalization of refugees and immigrants in Denmark, in that period, form the basis of most of the arguments in the paper.

3.4 Analysis strategy Based on the concept of ‘Otherness’, and by using what the Iraqis said, what some politicians have said and what academic experts have said and written, I hope to be able to make analytic generalizations (Curtis, 2000; 1002), and come up with conclusions on why I think the Iraqis opted to leave Denmark. A potential limitation to this strategy is the fact that I did not take all the reasons given by the refugees because, I felt that they do not directly pertain to my chosen themes, I have

though, linked the individuals directly with what they said in the interviews, what the politicians, according to the media have said and what the experts have written on the issues all in the analysis. For example, who said what on residence and family reunification or on which treatments by social workers and so on, and so forth, can be discerned in the analysis. In short, I have chosen to “let the Iraqis, the politicians, the experts speak” in the analysis and made sure that, their formulations are kept intact, be it a critique or a praise, peaceful or perilous. I use the infomedia, as a sort of an archive, for all sorts of information that relates to the Iraqi repatriation issue in Denmark, by searching with keywords such as (Iraqis, Denmark, DF, Arbejdsmarkedet, integration voluntary repatriation, security in Iraq etc etc).

The analysis, therefore, is centered on the following themes:

a. That they were offered insufficient money (economic hardships).b. That they were unable to reunify with their spouses (family reunification).c. That they were housed in isolation from the entire population and therefore felt lonely, due,

perhaps to the so-called “bopælspligten” in the Danish asylum law (social isolation).d. That they felt a sense of sabotage, or pressure from their contact persons in the municipality

(forced repatriation).

3.5 Situating the use of narratives, Discourses and storytelling. I have chosen to use narratives and storytelling, from both the Iraqi returnees and the Danish politicians in the paper, and thereby making narratives as a form of an anthropological research tool, in order that I can elucidate the personal experience (Tony Fielding, 1992; 201, see also Ginsburg, 1987 and Herzfeld, 1985), expressed by the people involved. This view is supported by many anthropologists, for example, in her book on the interplay between lives and words, anthropologist Sara Lamb, sees storytelling as “a practice by which people reflect, exercise agency, contest interpretation of things, make meanings, feel sorrow and hope, and live their lives, a narrative presentation of self and culture” (Sara Lamb, 2001, 28).The French philosopher, historian and sociologist Michel Foucault, sees discourse use as being about the use of languages and practices in diverse forms. According to Foucault (1972) discourses could be “practices that systematically form the objects of which they speak”, (Foucault,

1972, 49), thus, discourses constitute individuality, subjectivity and power relations in societies. He believes that power is established or consolidated through the production, circulation and the construction of discourses, not only in political context, but also in the social one. I intend to be inspired by these observations made by Foucault in my deconstruction of the political discourses that might have resonated well with the 13% DF members in the Danish

population, the V-K government politicians and the refugee social workers in the municipalities. The use of certain forms of languages and discourses by the Danish politicians and the media, I argue, might have directly or indirectly impacted the way the municipal asylum workers handled the refugees and hence their decisions on the repatriation.

Chapter 4

Theoretical Framework

4.1 The build-up of ‘Otherness’ theoryAccording to the researchers, the 30 Iraqi refugees who participated in the interviews mentioned that they did not feel welcome in Denmark, (Reason #5, appendix 1). In other words, the treatments given them by the Danish asylum social workers in the municipalities made them feel that, they did not ‘belong’ here in Denmark but elsewhere (Hervik, 2004; 258), a situation that fits well into the perceived notion of ‘we’ and ‘them’. This form of notion among certain Danes, and how it has been used politically, was made explicit in an extensive study conducted by Peter Hervik in 2004 on different kinds of Danes, with different kinds of profession, class and interest. The author observed the tendency of ‘we’ and ‘them’ as the ‘them’ are also perceived as only strangers and not naturally belonging to Denmark. As Herviks writes: Residents are ‘we’, the Danes, the indigenous Danes’, those who were here to begin with, or those who belong ‘naturally’ to the territory and imagine themselves as a homogenous cultural community. Danes are at home in this cultural sameness. Newcomers are those who arrived for various reasons, as refugees or guests and have settled to become the target of official programs of integration” (Hervik, 2004; 258). On the basis of this explicit ‘we-them’ tendency in the society, I considered using the concept of ‘otherness’ to illustrate the theoretical framework of this study. Here is one of the many facts, which support my choice. The following is what 12 prominent authors and academicians, who were invited into a committee to enact the Danish Cultural Canon, and who were alarmed by the intentions, because, according to them, the move was unprecedented, if not “undanish” and in their view, that was not the Denmark, they had known or could identify with: Når Dansk Folkeparti med regeringspartierne som garanter og ikke mindst som aktivt lovgivende medspillere udpeger en befolkningsgruppe med en anderledes fremtoning, dvs. indvandrere og flygtninge, som syndebukke, krænkes medmennesket i os alle. Vi glemmer, hvem vi er, og den rolle, vi som danskere tidligere i historien har spillet, som hjælpere og beskyttere af de svage og forfulgte. Vi tvinges til at se et etnisk mindretal udelukkende som en anonym, ansigtsløs gruppe og ikke som mennesker, dvs. som vidt forskellige individer med vidt forskellig

oprindelse og personlighed, med hver sin særlige livshistorie og tolkning af tilværelsen. Individet viskes ud, tilbage står den fordomsfulde kliché. Vi er i risiko for ikke længere at betragte vores muslimske medborgere som mennesker på godt og ondt som os selv. I stedet er der i det politiske liv og i medierne en tendens til udelukkende at se på dem som kriminelle, samfundsskadelige elementer og som potentielle voldtægtsforbrydere eller sociale klienter. Fremtrædende højrefløjspolitikere hæfter uvilkårligt i offentligheden mærkater på vores muslimske medborgere som 'pest', 'baciller', 'kræftknuder', 'der venter på at blive mange nok til at slå os ihjel'. Vi kender denne retorik fra historien, senest fra Balkan, hvor den var en bebuder af de kun alt for velkendte etniske udrensninger. Der er tale om en glidebane af moderat racisme, der allerede i flere henseender er slået over i diskrimination og dobbeltlovgivning baseret på et: 'dem' og 'os'. En regel for 'os', en anden for 'dem'. (14/12-2005).That is to say, the choice of ‘othering’ or ‘selfing’, had been based on the explanation and the descriptions of the experiences the Iraqi refugees claim, they had with those Danish authorities, (sagabehandler) in the municipalities. For example, one of them said he was even ‘bribed’ with material goods (a refrigerator and electronic equipment) to admit to repatriate. Some others said, they were isolated from everyone in the community, a demarcation, while some complained about the inability to get to reunite with their spouses in Denmark, these, in my estimation were attempts to prevent them from having a ‘home’ here in Denmark.

4.2 The Concept of “Othering” or “Otherness”: Definition and application

4.2.1 Definition of ‘Othering’:In order to discuss the issues pertaining to the repatriation of the Iraqi refugees, it is essential to understand the “notion of Otherness”, which I intend to use to illustrate to the situation the Iraqis said they experienced in Denmark, before they hastily chose to go back to Iraq. This concept refers to a process where people are identified as being different from ‘oneself’ or from the mainstream as it also do refer to situations where according Weis (1995, 17), people are able to construct their own identities in reference to the people, they are ‘Othering’. ‘Otherness’ was first used in the relationship between the former ‘slaves’ and their ‘masters’, as it is still constructed to divide people into where “we” (those who are “Othering”) assume, “they” (those who are being “Othered”) belong, and as Andre Gingrich phrases, ‘Othering’ is an act of “introducing ‘differences’ as the fundamental dividing line among humans” Gingrich (2004; 12). ‘Othering’ could also be used to reaffirm ones identity (Lister, 2004), as it could also accordingly, be used by some to distinguish between ‘gender’, human skin coloration and even to designate ‘hierarchical order’ in a family (cf: Jensen 2009; Simone de Beauvoir’s, 2004; 15-16). ‘Otherness’ is also applied in many instances, including the existence of ethnic identity and diversity, between diverse cultures and numerous religious disciplines practiced by humans.

4.2.2 Theorists behind OtheringThe term had since been used by Hegel to explain dialectic master-slave relation. In the post-colonial era by Edward Said coined the term Orientalism in 1978 to elaborate the term. Edward Said is an exiled Palestinian-American intellectual of double identity, well respected but also criticized by other scholars. After his work on Orientalism, Said had released many works including ‘the question of Palestine (1979)’ and ‘covering Islam (1981)’. For the purpose of this study, I intent to describe in brief how said have referred to the ‘Orient-Occident’ dichotomy form the ‘Orientalism’ (1978; 52-72). In Said’s Orientalism which is also of interest to this writing, Said introduces the dichotomy of ‘the Orient’ and ‘the occidental’ to initially represent the ‘east’ and the ‘west----‘the us’ and the ‘them’ respectively. Said had used these terms to refer to these to the western colonialism, imperialism, and according to him ‘Orientalism’ is a style of thought based upon the ontological and epistemological distinction made between the ‘Orient’ and the ‘Occident’, which Said had used these two terms to refer to the interaction between the ‘Orient’ as the antithesis of the colonized culture and not a subject that involves the freedom of thought whereas the ‘Occident’ as of the west, the strange, civilized, writers, novelists, philosophers, political theorists, economists and the imperial administrator. In other words, according to Said, ‘Orientalism’ is all about discourse, such as making statements about, teaching the ‘orient’, ruling over it, a discourse of dominating, restructuring and having authority over the ‘orient’. Said introduces the so-called “imagined geography”, which denotes the ‘orient as the ‘Other’ which dramatizes the distance and the difference between what is close and what is far away—‘out there towards the east’ (Said, 1978, 52-72). The term ‘Othering’ was first coined by G.C. Spivak, was used it philosophically in her article entitled the “ Rani of Sirmur” in 1985, and applied it to the master- slave relationships between the British and the Indians in the so-called ‘manipulative pedagogy’ (Spivak, 1985). Current developer of the concept include Andre Gingrich of the Institute of Social Anthropology, the Austrian Academy of Sciences, who with Gerd Baumann, who have worked extensively on conceptualizing identities from an essentialized use of ‘Othering’ to differentiation of Grammars, from anthological viewpoint. In their book “Grammars of Identity/ Alterity, a structural approach”, which I have quoted from and referred to many times in this paper, these two authors reviewed several major trans-disciplinary aspects of identities and alterity----say, extended clarifications on ‘Otherness’.

4.2.3 Application of Otherness in the Danish Political DebatesEvidently, ‘Othering’ has also been observed by writers such as Hervik, (1999), Diken, (1998) and Schierup, (1993), in the Danish public debates, which according to them, are dominated by ‘Othering’ discourses on the ethnic minorities.

In fact, the unwarranted struggle for self-identity, may see the construction and application of ‘otherness’ as there is the likelihood that people, especially politicians, would play the “we” and “them” card to win elections, if not that of the “superiority” and “inferiority” one. Take for example, the creation of the westerners, ‘we’ and the non-westerners ‘others’ on the international scene. Many of us see the world, in the words of Lisa Malkki, ‘as spatially segregated, cultural gardens separated by boundary- maintaining values’ (Malkki 1997; 58), and tend to see certain territories as belonging to certain type of people, (‘the family of nations’—Malkki, 1994) with a certain specified type of culture----‘cultural sameness’. According to Malkki, this claim or notion is a long tradition among people because, we belief that our way of life and the understanding of it, seem to be linked with where we dwell or originate. I argue that, this kind of notion is not different from that of some of the politicians in Denmark, especially those on the right-wing of the aisle, not to totally exclude those leaning left. The attitudes of these politicians towards the unprivileged minorities in Denmark could best be described as being based on the fact that these politicians and their backers, in the words of Kvaale, (2011): ‘seemingly conceive of themselves as an indigenous people whose unique and territorialized natural culture is threatened from the outside by a foreign, aggressive culture’. According to Malkki, people think that culture emanates from soils: “It has to do with the fact that, like the nation, culture has for long been conceived as something existing in “soil”. Terms like ‘native’ ‘indigenous’ and ‘autochthonous’ have all served to root cultures in soils: and it is, of course, a well-worn observation that the concept of ‘culture’ derives from the latin word for ‘cultivation’.” (Malkki, 1997; 58). The V-K government had earmarked non-westerners, in general, and people from specific countries in particular, who they do not want to come to Denmark either due to their religion or their background. As a newspaper in Denmark reveals: Stopklods: Barsk kur skal bremse indvandringen: Venstre vil slå massivt ned på familiesammenføringer til herboende tyrkere, pakistanere og somaliere. I princippet gælder udspillet alle danske statsborgere. Men Venstres sagde det selv helt åbent, da partiet på et pressemøde i går fremlagde sit forslag til voldsomme stramninger af reglerne for familiesammenføring: Målet er ikke at få færre amerikanere eller italienere til Danmark. Målet er at sætte en stopper for, at personer med tyrkisk, pakistansk eller somalisk baggrund bliver ved med at hente deres ægtefæller i det land, de stammer fra. »Det er barske regler,« erkendte Venstres udlændingeordfører, Birthe Rønn Hornbech (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001).Observe the aim of the main party in the V-K government coalition. The goal of the political coalition is to forbid the Turks, the Somalis and the Pakistanis from getting family unification in Denmark, and observe what all these countries have in common----Islam, which also does not, in my view exclude the Iraqis. As noted by the Danish writer, Marrianne Gullestad (1997), refugees as well as immigrants are likely to form the subset of the “they” (the “Orients”) and become a problem as long as they leave their country of origin and reside elsewhere (cf. Hervik, 2004; 255). I argue that this statement does not apply to all immigrants, but only do apply to immigrants from the unprivileged worlds and perhaps all

refugees, because refugees, undoubtedly, most commonly also stem from such worlds—the inferior worlds. The aim of V-K government is not to discourage the entry of Italians nor Americans in Denmark; the aim is rather to prevent the Turks, the Pakistanis and Somalis, from bringing their spouses from these countries. In Denmark, as Andersen (2005) has noted, the discourses in both the public and the political spheres “draw on colonial tropes and cultural racism” (cf: Jensen, 2009; 14). First recognized by Said in 1978 (cf: Baumann, 2004; 19-20), this form of ‘Othering’ is not only restricted to the equation; ‘us=good’ and ‘them= bad’ but also depicts seeing the negatives and the backwardness that was once in the ‘self’ to be still existing in the ‘other’, something Said vividly referred to as “orientalist discourses”. Said (1979), saw ‘orientalism,’ another term for “Otherness” as having an ideological link in the cultivation of western superiority over ‘others’, the so-called non-westerners. According to Baumann (2004), ‘Othering’, could be recognized in the realms of politics, religion and aesthetics, it also attempts to emphasize ‘superiority’ of ‘self’ to the ‘other’---as Baumann puts, “dialectical way of ‘selfing’ one’s own and ‘Othering’ the alien” (ibid; 21). Furthermore, according Baumann, ‘otherness’ also does have consequences, ranging from milder ones like social, political and racial exclusion or annihilation to the dreadful, fatal and deadly consequences, such as genocide and ethnocide, (ibid; 42).Again, there had been examples of ‘Otherness’ in many instances in Denmark, and among certain Danes, especially with regards to the foreigners in the country as Hervik (2004) illustrates, there is the ‘we’ the host and ‘they’, the guest, who has to conform to our norms and live their lives accordingly by them. Another example of “Othering” among Danes, is what two Danish scholars observed with the so-called ‘Expo 2010’, where there were exhibition of cultures and artifacts from many countries, organized in China. By using the term ‘orientalism’, Carina Ren and co-worker Ooi, examining how Denmark was represented at the program, observed that, the Danes felt they were superior and perceived the ‘others’ in the audience (the Chinese audience) as “inferior” and “uncivilized” (Ren, at al., 2012; 8).As indicated previously, in order to fully understand this practice of ‘we’ belong here, and ‘they’ belong elsewhere, I will draw again on Gerd Baumann (2004) and his work on the concept of ‘selfing-and-othering’ to explain why the Iraqis chose to get out of exile---Denmark. My take on this, is that, the Danish peoples’ party and the V-K government see non-westerners as inferior, incompetent and as being something else, other than what the Danes are.“ DF: Et stop for indvandring fra ikke-vestlige lande”. (Ritzau Bureau 04/08-2010).In the analysis I use the ‘orientalist’ (“Otherness”) to argue that, the immigration policies and the politics at the time and how these policies and practices had resonated among the

population in Denmark, contributed to the plight the Iraqis refugees as it also did influence what caused them to make those decisions on the failed repatriation.

Chapter 5

Analysis

5.1 The Danish state and refugeesThe plight of refugees in any nation is depended on the government because ‘refugees’ connote a political realm (Hein, 1993, 43-44). I start the analysis by highlighting some of the political issues that surrounded the plight of asylum-seekers, refugees and to a larger extend all other immigrants during the reign of the V-K government between the years 2001 and 2011. And more importantly, try to explain the reason why I have chosen the concept of ‘Othering’, to underpin the analysis in this study. The fact is, as mentioned earlier on, the V-K government became dependent on the populist Danish Peoples’ party, which repeatedly had a new range of political demands on the table before rendering the needed parliamentary support, after succeeding with enacting the “the Aliens Consolidation Act” in 2002.

”Regeringens støtteparti har fundet et columbusæg som kan løse de økonomiske problemer: Et stop for indvandring fra ikke-vestlige lande.Dansk Folkeparti forsøger nu at skabe sig sin egen tredje vej i dansk økonomisk politik. Indvandringen fra lande som Tyrkiet, Pakistan og Irak udgør nemlig en "møllesten" om halsen på den danske økonomi, som det udtrykkes”. (Ritzau Bureau 04/08-2010)

This time, we do not need to assume that the Iraqis due to Islam, were a subset of those demarcated family reunification, here, they aren’t to be given the chance to come to Denmark. As I mentioned in the introduction, the Danish Peoples party see immigrants and refugees from non-western countries as a burden on the Danish economy. I have to say two things here, this perception of immigrants and refugees did not start with the Danish Peoples Party but also with those on the left too, the next thing is not all in the V-K-O coalition supported the views of the Danish Peoples Party. The Social Democratic government under Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, also drew the attention of the UNHCR, before the V-K government came to power.“Flygtningehøjkommissær fastholder kritik af dansk debat: - Hvorfor skulle jeg det? Jeg hævder, at der er en tendens til at tale negativt om udlændinge. Det er den tese, jeg forsvarer her, sagde Lubbers efter sine møder med statsminister Poul Nyrup Rasmussen (S), udenrigsminister Mogens Lykketoft (S), udviklingsminister Anita Bay Bundegaard (R) og indenrigsminister Karen Jespersen (S) Sidstnævntes ide om at isolere kriminelle asylansøgere på øde øer kom således ikke op på pressemødet. Hovedbudskabet var derimod en appel om at undgå, at "rigtige flygtninge konfronteres med et klima, hvor de ses som en slags kriminelle". - Jeg vil på ingen måde komme med

beskyldninger mod enkeltpersoner, for jeg ved, at mange gange bliver der sagt ting i en særlig sammenhæng. Når folk gør den slags ting, så glemmer man at se hele sammenhængen. Det, jeg siger, er: Vær forsigtig, sagde UNHCR-chefen, Ruud Lubbers, (Ritzaus Bureau, 22/06-2001).

The reason for saying that is, some of the main politicians in the V-K government, repeatedly and openly criticized the Danish Peoples’ party, for inhumanity and discrimination. According to Danish newspaperss there was a standoff between a leading member of the Danish Peoples’ party and the integration minister who was responsible for the administration of matters concerning immigrants and refugees, the paper write:

1. ”Samtidig er det også en kendt sag, at Birthe Rønn Hornbech tidligere har været på kant med V-K-regeringens støtteparti. I sin bog "Tale er guld" fra 2006 kritiserede hun Dansk Folkeparti for at være med til at dæmonisere muslimerne i Danmark. I bogen citerede hun netop Jesper Langballe for at sige, at "islam er en pest over Europa". Det fik Jesper Langballe til at trække hende i Københavns Byret for citatfusk, men i september blev hun frikendt (Ritzaus Bureau; 27/11-2007).

2. Rønn angriber DF's forslag om 28-års-regel: Integrationsminister Birthe Rønn Hornbech (V) retter nu en sønderlemmende kritik af Dansk Folkepartis krav om at stramme 24-års-reglen til 28 år. Det vil være direkte skadeligt for både integrationen og den økonomiske vækst i Danmark, hvis DF får sit krav igennem, skriver hun i en mail til Berlingske Tidende.(Ritzaus Bureau 29/07-2010).

To understand how all these might have affected the ordinary immigrant and in particular, the refugees, I will especially touch on the issues relating to, the legal and structural admittance of refugees, as I intent to refer to the political discourses and processes initiated by the V-K government and its support party, which I argue might have caused the ‘Othering’, an example of such fiery political rhetoric, that also caught sharp criticisms is:

Halsløs gerning: ”Dansk Folkeparti forsøger at presse regeringen til for irakiske flytninger at formulere et egentligt hjemsendelsesprogram med en tidsplan. Men det er halsløs gerning at binde sig til en tidsplan på et tidspunkt, hvor man endnu ikke har fået den irakiske overgangsadministration på plads”. (Leder i Berlingske Tidende, 24/04-2003).

I will also examine, among others, whether or not the refugees were given unrestrictive access to education, to the labor market, to housing and to fundamental social life, such as marriage and family reunification, as I, in the same vein, will try to analyze how these private relations among the refugees and immigrants in Denmark, demonstrate the degree to which they are included or excluded from the existing dominant Danish society. According to Baumann (2004), ‘Othering’ can be used politically to create differences among people based on what the ‘self’ means is different from the ‘other’. In his writings, Foucault (2000), explicitly states how discourses could be constructed, based on ones’ self-knowledge and self-determination in relation to identity, especially in contrast to how other identities

are perceived. The language use by certain politicians in the far right-wing in Denmark leaves no doubt about how these politicians see themselves in relation how they perceive their objects---(see Jacques Lacon, identity’s inter-subjectivity through language use14). I have chosen to give examples of some of the utterances by those politicians depicting the ‘Others’ as something else than themselves. Below are few examples of the harsh pronouncements, in the swirling debates on immigrants and refugees:

a. ----from an MP and party spokesperson;“Dansk Folkepartis Martin Henriksen mister ikke sin ordførerpost i Folketingets Uddannelsesudvalg trods udtalelser om at ’frydes over tortur’ ” (Ritzau Bureau, 23/05-2006).

b. --------from a parliamentarian:”Louise Freverts (DF) udfald mod muslimer prægede fra start Folketingets åbningsdebat”. ”Regeringen og Dansk Folkeparti kæmper for de rige mod de fattige og for danskere mod nydanskere, lød oppositionens hovedanklage under folketingets åbningsdebat torsdag” (Ritzau Bureau, 06/10-2005).

c. -------from a municipality politician:"Jeg skal stærkt beklage, at jeg med mine bemærkninger vedr. socialt bedrageri og sort arbejde blandt flygtninge og indvandrere på en uhensigtsmæssig og ikke korrekt måde blandt andet har inddraget Odense Erhvervsråd og andre samarbejdspartnere i en sag, som ligger mig meget på sinde", skriver Erik Simonsen i sit brev, som er offentliggjort af Fyens Stiftstidende (Ritzau Bureau; 11/04-2006).

d. -----from a party member:Muslimer er noget snavs (af Information, Ritzaus Bureau 16/09-2007) Men du lægger ikke skjul på, at du ikke er begejstret for muslimer?"Nej, jeg bryder mig ikke om muslimer. Det er ikke, fordi de er muslimer, men det er måden, de opfører sig på, og måden, de udtaler sig om os, der betaler gildet," siger Merethe Egeberg Holm,

e. ------from a Municipal politician DF-byrådsmedlem:“Men at åbne kassen til alle der kommer, så føler vi det som at de stjæler fra vore lommer«. De mødedeltagere, JydskeVestkysten har talt med, er ikke i tvivl om, at Jette Kristiansen hentyder til indvandrere, der i digtet også beskyldes for at være kriminelle og voldelige.( DF-byrådsmedlem »af Jydske Vestkysten; Ritzaus Bureau 05/10-2005).

f. ----The party members and supporters do not see any difference between Islam and Islamism.Ingen forskel på islam og islamisme: Til gjaldende klapsalver fortalte Søren Krarups datter, Katrine Winkel Holm, på Dansk Folkepartis landsmøde, at der ikke er forskel på islam og islamisme.(Ritzaus Bureau 15/09-2007).

g. ----The party had earlier on in 2001, equated Islam to terrorism.Dansk Folkeparti satte på weekendens årsmøde i Vejle lighedstegn mellem islam og terrorisme og udråbte hovedparten af herboende muslimer som en femte kolonne for islamisk terrorisme (Ritzaus Bureau, 16/09-2001)

It is worth mentioning that, most of the politics have been dealt with differently by the new 14 Lacan, J. (1998a) On Feminine Sexuality. The Limits of Love and Knowledge. 1972–1973. Encore. The Seminar of Jacques Lacan. Book XX Trans. B. Fink, edited J. A. Miller. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Co

Danish government, which came to power in 2011, as they have repealed some of the harsh migration regulations and which, obviously, had also openly been criticized by the politicians from the old V-K one, or by their support party. As one of the prominent politicians from the far right expresses:”De lempelser, som regeringen lægger op til, vil få alverdens flygtninge til at søge mod Danmark, mener DF. Dansk Folkeparti advarer kraftigt regeringen imod at gennemføre et nyt udspil, der skal forbedre forholdene for asylansøgere. Det siger partiets udlændinge- og integrationsordfører, Martin Henriksen, i en pressemeddelelse”. Ritzau Bureau 13/06-2012

The MP is afraid that the changes in the alien acts will lead to attracting all the world’s refugees towards Denmark. As mentioned earlier on, the V-K government and the parliamentary support party, the Danish Peoples’ party, had a political agenda to create a nation for native Danes (Denmark for “we”, the Danes), by insisting on the difference –‘cultural diversity’ between ‘we’ the native Danes with the superior, law-abiding culture and ‘them’, the aliens, plagued with criminalities, subordination, inequality, repression, and an inferior form of religion. As Weber puts, such political activity becomes straight in its formulation, “the belief in common ancestry is a consequence of collective political action—not its cause” (cf; Jenkins, 1997; 8). In this period, there were open negative criticism of Muslims and immigrants, and the members of the peoples’ party could come with anything to demean, deject, detest, dishearten or demonize the minorities. For example, as cited earlier on, one of the members of the Peoples’ party openly asserts that she hates and detests Muslims, drawing a clear distinction between ‘they’ the Danes and Christians and the ‘them’, the Muslims,-----(”Muslimer er noget snavs”)One way of alienating ‘other’ groups, is to embark on the politics of not-wanting them in ones’ country by placing certain stringent immigration regulations to either prevent or restrict them, as well as also saying negative things about them. According to Rytter, (2011; 55), the peoples’ party succeeded in getting the V-K government to enact five main restrictive regulations, which cover the following criteria: first, age (24-års-reglen), that is both partners have to be 24 years of age; second, accommodation (boligkravet), which implies that the applicant should possess an apartment with certain specified area in quadrant meters; the third is financial assistance (forsørgelseskravet), the applicant should be able to prove that he or she will be able to fend for the spouse in a marriage, tied to last a minimum period of seven years, as well as, to also meet the fourth requirement, which is to deposit fifty-seven thousand Danish kroner as a guarantee or collateral (sikkerhedsstillelsen), the fifth is the national attachment demand (tilkyntningskravet), which depends on the administration and estimations by the officials, with aim of preventing coercive or arranged marriages among aliens.

As de Beauvoir, (1997; 24), inspired by Heglian frames it: “when an individual (or a group of individuals) is kept in a situation of inferiority, the fact is that he or she is inferior. But the significance of the verb to be must be rightly understood here……it really has the dynamic Heglian sense of –to become”—(cf: Jensen, 2009). The laws though do not only set the aliens under control and obscured position, they also set them low in relation to the native Danes, as the laws discriminate and favor some, (ethnic Danes) whilst they at the same time disadvantages the others-----“the Others”. A paper reveals:“Danske mænd scorer på udlændingelov: Find dig i hans tæsk, ellers ryger du ud af landet. Det er vilkårene for mange udenlandske kvinder, der gifter sig med en dansk mand. Ifølge udlændingeloven kan kvinderne udvises, hvis de bliver skilt fra manden, inden der er gået syv år. Udenlandske koner må bide vold og ydmygelser i sig fra deres danske mænd. Ellers risikerer de at blive sendt hjem, og manden kan hente en ny kone hertil”. (Ritzaus Bureau 02/06-2010). And as Rytter, (2011; 67) has noted, under the V-K government, Sweden offered suitable conditions for marriage by Danes, irrespective of the fact that these people are ethnic Danes or are of mixed nationality.People can be subjected to ‘Othering’ based on phenotypical, biological, cultural and religious factors, (Baumann, 2004; 21). This is true for the politics by the Danish V-K government (2001-2011) and the Danish peoples’ party, helped by the Danish media, in ‘essentializing’ color, culture and religion and using them in constructing differences between, as they claim, the Danes (Dansker) and the foreigners (indvandrere). The foreigners, in the view these politicians and their backers, weren’t to live in Denmark in their natural or preferred form of human beings, but must be transformed into ‘Danishness’ (Hervik, 2012) through assimilations:

“Med assimilation følger krav. Hvis Thulesen Dahl rådede over 90 mandater i Folketinget havde myndighederne langt større beføjelser til at skride ind og diktere rammerne for indvandrerfamilier i Danmark. Følger familierne ikke kravene, skal samfundet kunne tilbageholde økonomiske ydelser. Han mener, at myndighederne i alt for høj grad er berøringsangste over for at tage et "opgør med kulturen" (21/07-2009). The existence of such extreme far right parties is not only restricted to Denmark alone, according to Gingrich (2006; 197), they are spread all over Europe. The author reveals that most of these parties, if not all, share the same stance: “a restrictive and exclusivist stand on such issues as illegal immigrants, or any further immigration from the EU. In relation to such topics, a narrow ‘law and order’ practice is one denominator that is informed by relatively explicit, if not authoritarian, pro-state ideals, which may then be supported by xenophobic elements of discourse” (ibid; 197). However, quite remarkably, as exemplified in the decline of influence by the Austria Peoples’ party, the negative effect of the politics, particularly the essentialist cultural rhetoric, by these “new right” parties, most often than not, according to Gingrich (2006), are played down by the main stream parties.

The construction of “a Danish identity”, based on ethnic sameness and perceived as being different and better than the identities of the foreigners, was the core of the so-called værdikamp---a sort of ‘cultural relativism exercise’. This strategic kind of identity creation in the view of Malkki (1995; 71), “is always mobile and its procession is partly self-constructed, partly categorized by others, is partly a condition, a status, a label, a weapon, a shield, a fund of memories and so on”. Notably, this political strategic, ‘the weapon’ was used only against immigrants of non-western background and refugees of Islamic decent in particular, as this strategy repeatedly became a real election winner. Different forms of strategies were also adopted including the avoidance of criticism from human ‘watch-dog’ organizations, evident in the closing down of the center for ethnic equality and human rights in 2002, because of their continual criticism of the aliens act. “Ny hård kritik af dansk udlændingelov: I en ny omfangsrig udredning fastslår Institut for Menneskerettigheder, at stramningerne i udlændingelovgivningen krænker konventionerne, skriver Berlingske Tidende lørdag. Institut for Menneskerettigheder retter i en ny udredning, som offentliggøres mandag, en hård kritik mod regeringens og Dansk Folkepartis stramninger i reglerne for ægtefællesammenføring. Eksempelvis konkluderer instituttet, at den såkaldte 24 års regel sammenholdt med tilknytningskravet fører til krænkelser af retten til familieliv i henhold til EMRK ART. 8 (Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedskonvention, red.) .Også udlændingelovens 28-års regel står for skud i udredningen. Tilknytningskravet sammenholdt med 28 års reglen medfører diskrimination på grund af etnicitet og race. Samtidig fører reglen om, at folk, der søger om ægtefællesammenføring, skal kunne stille 53.096 kr. i sikkerhed, til krænkelser af retten til familieliv. Udredningen indeholder flere kritikpunkter og konkluderer sammenfattende, at udlændingeloven har medvirket til at stadfæste skellet mellem majoriteten og minoriteterne, dvs. mellem »os« og »dem (Ritzaus Bureau, 01/10-2004).The center today, has been given the relevant support and services the it needs to function as a human rights ’watch-dog’ by the new S-led government.”Mens V-K i ti år beskyldte Institut for Menneskerettigheder for politisering og skar i bevillingerne, vil den nye regering styrke instituttet og sikre, at Danmark efterlever konventionerne. Vi ønsker at gøre Institut for Menneskerettigheder mere selvstændigt og give det mere frihed. Armslængdeprincippet er vigtigt, og det er vigtigt, at nogle holder øje med os,« siger udenrigsminister Villy Søvndal (SF) til Berlingske”. (Berlingske 15/ 10/ 2011).Other opposition- silencing strategies include the demand in 2006, for a research into the Cold War in order to use the results to criticize the left wing parties in Denmark for their role in the WW II. And in both 2007 and 2008, in order to discourage the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ effort to forge harmony and solidarity with the Arabic world, by initiating dialogue through the establishment of dialogue centers in the middle east, in the advent of the controversy that surrounded the drawing of Mohammed, the Danish Peoples’ party objected to a direct contact between Denmark and the Arab world. Beside all these, they again, used their vote to lure the government to carry out a research into Islamism in Denmark and demanded the creation of a statistic data over immigrants’ children, in order to use the growth rate of immigrants and refugees in politics. ”Vil indvandrere overtage Danmark? Dansk Folkeparti har tidligere fået regeringen med på at undersøge, hvad

indvandringen koster Danmark i kroner og øre. Han henviser til tal fra Danmarks Statistik, som viser, at personer med ikke-vestlig baggrund i 2009 udgjorde 6,6 procent af befolkningen, hvilket svarer til 361.000 personer. Ifølge Danmarks Statistiks befolkningsfremskrivning vil den gruppe næsten blive fordoblet til 12,1 procent af befolkningen i 2050. Det svarer til 728.000 personer. I alt vil 16,6 procent af befolkningen have indvandrerbaggrund i 2050 mod 9,7 procent i 2009. - De tal gør os bekymrede for, at vi får et meget opdelt og multikulturelt samfund. Vi har allerede parallelsamfund i dag, men vi skal værne om det kulturelle fællesskab i fremtiden. Det er forudsætningen for velfærdssamfundet, siger Martin Henriksen. (Ritzau Bureau 20/05-2011).The mere fact that certain groups of people are to be counted and controlled, buttresses the notion of perceived differences and the ‘essentialization’ of the Danish culture and identity, between the ‘ought to be counted and controlled’ and the ‘not to be counted and controlled’….”Otherness”. The apparent, yet subtle de-legitimization of the presence of Islam and immigrants in Denmark, I think is strategically used in emphasizing the claim of cultural difference and ethnic identity----‘ethnic Othering’ (Bauman, 2004), a sort of Otherness’ creation typified in marginalizing and controlling of specific religious and ethnic groups in the country, based on cultural skepticism.Human rights organizations15 in Denmark felt that the Iraqi refugees were forced back into Iraqi due to political pressure from Danish peoples party were warning against the repatriation as the see the repatriation as a bleach of rights, in his view on the protection to refugees in exile, Nobel, (1988) stated that; “Refugee law is inseparable part of the code of Human Rights” Nobel, (1988; 20, cf Malkki, 1995). Indeed, according to a newspaper in Denmark, the government sometimes was not sure of what it was undertaking regarding the repatriation of the Iraqis, but just heeded to the demands from the support party. The paper writes; “udvisninger fortsætter trods tvivl”----meaning “the repatriation continues despite the uncertainty about the security in Iraq” the same paper writes, “Frygt for afviste irakeres liv”,-----translated as “Fear for the lives of the repatriated (rejected) Iraqi refugee”, (Ritzau Bureau, 08/06-2009). This piece of information alone speaks for the claim by the Iraqis that, they were not willing to repatriate in 2006, even though, this refers to other kinds of Iraqis, namely, those who were directly refused asylum in Denmark.Two years after the interviews were given by the Iraqis, another piece of evidence that goes to support the Iraqis’ claim is what has been written in the newspaper in 2008. ”Byrettens afgørelse viser, at der er så stor usikkerhed om disse sager, at vi bør hente de allerede udsendte tilbage og stoppe for tvangshjemsendelser af de øvrige, siger udlændingeordfører Johanne Schmidt-Nielsen (EL), der i samrådet vil kræve at se den aftale, som regeringen har lavet med de irakiske myndigheder om hjemsendelserne”

(Ritzau Bureau 28/05-2008). Other credible evidence in support of this is the recommendations from a fact finding group, or mission from Denmark, which went to Iraq to examine the security situation and came

15 Amnesty International according to Ritzau Bureau (26/04-2010) alarms the civilian Iraqis in Iraq live under fear: “Iraks civile lever i frygt”

back to sound the same piece of warning in 2006, yet the repatriation continued:”Hasard at vende hjem: Organisationen Care4You gennemfører i november en rejse til Irak for afviste asylansøgere, men formanden for Dansk Irakisk Forening fraråder folk at vende hjem” (Ritzaus Bureau, 20/10-2006).In the mean time, attempts to seek other places for sanctuary became the order of the day for most of the Iraqi refugees and immigrants, who were having difficulty with having ‘normal’ life under the erstwhile government. The fact today is, the new Danish government has made changes in the refugee situation in Denmark, even though the basic criteria for gaining asylum in the country remain unaltered:"Regeringen ønsker en mere human tilgang i asylpolitikken. Kriterierne for, hvem der kan få asyl, ændres ikke. Men de, der søger asyl i Danmark, skal behandles værdigt". "Regeringen vil sikre en ordentlig og anstændig behandling af asylansøgere, mens de er i Danmark. Asylansøgere skal have mulighed for at arbejde og bo uden for asylcentrene. På den måde bygges afviste ansøgere op som mennesker og får flere kompetencer. Således vil de have lettere ved enten at integrere sig i Danmark, hvis de får asyl, eller bedre forudsætninger for at starte et nyt liv, når de vender hjem". "Derfor skal afviste asylansøgere, der ikke kan vende hjem, og som har samarbejdet om hjemsendelsesforanstaltningerne, samt asylansøgere, der får deres sag behandlet, kunne arbejde og bo uden for centrene efter et halvt år"(Ritzau Bureau 14/10-2011).

5.2 Political discourse and ‘Othering’

In this part of the thesis, I intent to review, the political rhetoric and practices, driven by indigenousness, used by the politicians and argue that the politics at the time where certain kinds of people weren’t to be allowed into Denmark, or as they became ‘objects of political attacks’ was because of their background--ethnicity, geo-identity—(non-westerners), culture or religion,…..(‘Othering’ based on background and identity)…. And this might have also been felt by the Iraqi refugees and hence their decision on the “false” and “failed” repatriation. I argue that through identity creation and political power----(Spivaks’: Subjects-Versus-Subordinates)----seen in Spivak’s writings on the relationship between the British masters and the subordinate Indians, the V-K government made immigrants and refugees feel different through placing stringent political laws on them, beside those negative political rhetoric that also affected adversely. The political construction of ethnic groups, immigrants, based on culture and religion as well as ascribing these groups of people, as foreigners ----indvandrere, a constructed, conscious demarcation--- as Spivak phrases it, ‘the construction of differences among people’ (Spivak, 1985; 256), can lead to ‘Othering’ of them, as they may also be made to think that they belong somewhere else than Denmark, and not deserving equal treatments, as given to the others---- the ‘masters’.The interviewees said, they were subjected to undue pressures from the state asylum caseworkers in order to coerce them to choose to repatriate, as one of them expresses:

“[…] på grund af alt dette her pres som jeg var udsat for her i to år, var det eneste formål for mig at forlade Danmark. Jeg tænkte ikke videre.” (Ali; page 80)……because of pressure I have subjected to in two years, the only way was to leave Denmark. I did not think any further.This pressure may be borne out of the expressed view amongst some politicians in Denmark, who have the belief that all native or ethnic Danes have common ancestry, a common reference point, and therefore ‘belong’ together and to Denmark, and to the soil; “a sense of belonging associated with the Danish territory” (Kvaale, 2011; 226), and how this view, expressed in political discourse and practice, has been used to create the ‘we’ --the Danes and the ‘them’-- the foreigners, who are perceived to belong elsewhere and therefore must be discouraged from ‘planting’ themselves in Denmark---a sort of fundamental nationalistic political ideology.The ideology of the ethnic ‘we’, who possess ethnic sameness and can claim national-belonging, was made the cornerstone, as well as using the state apparatus, organs, and institutions to facilitate the formation of ‘a super we-group’ of the owners of Denmark as against a ‘they-group’ of intruders, guests, foreigners, who only should deserve to be done favor, and given rights.Weber in 1978 argued; “ethnic membership does not constitute a group, it only facilitates group formation of any kind, particularly in the political sphere. On the other hand, it is primarily the political community, no matter how artificially they are organized, that inspires the belief in common ethnicity” (Weber, 1978; 389, cf: Jenkins 1997; 9).As aforementioned, the migration policy was often attracted the attention of the UN high Commissioner, during his first visit to Denmark few days after the V-K government came to power, she sounded notes of warning against discrimination in Denark: “FN-højkommissær taler om dobbeltmoral og advarer mod diskrimination af flygtninge »Den nye regering i Danmark skal selvfølgelig have lov til at vise, hvad den vil. Men der har aldrig før været et så påtrængende behov for ikke bare at bekæmpe diskrimination, men også for at komme flygtninge og asylansøgere i møde,« siger Mary Robinson til Information. Eksempelvis er spørgsmålet om ikke-diskrimination meget vigtig, især når det gælder familiesammenføring. Der må ikke være forskellig tilgang til forskellige nationaliteter,« siger hun (Information, 28/11-2001). Some elements in the immigration legislations by the V-K government were found to be questionable legality, or, I argue, sometimes clear illegality. The European Union was always finding the political agenda as discriminating and was raising fingers accordingly, at the politics by the V-K government, sometimes also being rejected by the leaders in the government: ”Mindretal i Danmark får en skidt behandling, mener Europarådets racismekommission i rapport, som Fogh krøller sammen og kyler i papirkurven. Det hører hjemme i papirkurven, når Danmark får kritik for at behandle sine mindretal dårligt. Statsminister Anders Fogh Rasmussen (V) sagde tirsdag, at han vil blæse på, at Europarådets kommission mod racisme, ECRI, samme dag frigav en meget kritisk rapport om Danmark.- ECRI laver sin rapport på grundlag af von hørensagen, hvor man hører lidt der og lidt her, og så fører det ind i rapporten. Det kan vi ikke tage alvorligt, sagde statsministeren på sit ugentlige pressemøde” (16/-05-2006).

The outright rejection and rubbishing of the EU- committee’s report by the then Prime Minister, is a direct indication of how segregated the EU is. The union is without any cohesive bond—especially, regarding international affairs, because not all the members are bound by the union’s regulations. As identitied by Luedtke, (2005), EU member states and parties that strongly identifies with their nation-state are less likely to support the general EU legislations on immigration, which in a sense do not look at the differences between people and their identities. It is not wrong to say that, the political agenda during the reign of the V-K-O, was directed towards color and Muslims, and was used to attempt to ‘prune’ the Danish society of aliens, as these groups were perceived as unintelligent and poor. The V-K government claimed that, only the rich and clever aliens were welcome to Denmark….”Orientalism”. And this again put Denmark under barrage of criticisms especially for her treatment of the minorities in the country. The following is an examples of EU’s concern about the politics in Denmark:

1. ”Statsminister Anders Fogh Rasmussen (V) bliver nu presset af Europa-Kommissionens formand José Manuel Barroso i spørgsmålet om en fælles immigrationspolitik i EU. Godt nok vil kommissionsformanden ikke blande sig i Danmarks EU-forbehold i asyl og indvandringsspørgsmålet, men Kommissionens seneste tanker om immigrationspolitikken står i klar modsætning til det nyeste udspil fra den danske regering, som kun indbefatter de rigeste og klogeste indvandrere, mens problemerne med de fattige bådflygtninge ikke indgår i VK-planerne”.

2. Europarådet bekymret over intolerance i Danmark: Europarådets Ministerkomité er bekymret over, at der i Danmark eksisterer en intolerance, der kan føre til øget fjendtlighed mod forskellige etniske og religiøse grupper. I en resolution opfordrer ministerkomitéen, der består af udenrigsministrene fra Europarådets 46 medlemslande, derfor de danske myndigheder til at være mere lydhøre over for disse minoriteter. (Ritzaus Bureau 17/12 2005).

The V-K government was inclined to only admit the rich and clever people into Denmark and leave out people, they see as poor and unintelligent. In other words, the V-K government seems to indicate that the rich and clever people are better human beings than the poor and perceived unintelligent people, a clear division of human beings and a form of ‘Otherness’, as I have consistently insisted.And as I contend, this politics can be used to explain the deliberate laying of pressure on the refugees to get them to self deport from Denmark, through the creation of deplorable conditions in the asylum Camps, a condition that became one too many, and which even attracted the attention of the wife of the Prime minister (stateminister) and very many other concerned Danish people:”Statsministerfrue Anne-Mette Fogh Rasmussen er repræsentativ for en stor del af Danmark, når hun kritiserer forholdene på de danske asylcentre, mener S. - Jeg tror, at der er flere og flere danskere, der mener, at vi skal have en konsekvent udlændingepolitik, men de udlændinge, der er i Danmark, skal vi altså behandle ordentligt. Både når de søger asyl og bliver integreret i samfundet”, siger Lotte Bundsgaard til Ritzau, 27/10-2006.Two things are clear here, the first is both the then Danish first lady and the politician, who commented on the situation agree that the government was not treating the refugees

humanely, or rightly put, treating them in ways, Danes wouldn’t be treated— viz, differently ---hence; ‘Othering’, and that is to say since the refugees are different, they also deserve different treatments. The second is, even when the Danes complain about massive immigration, with majority in parliamentarians supporting the immigration policies, there were many ethnic Danes in the public sphere, who were against the way the refugees were treated. What is interesting among the parties that make coalition to form the majority in the Danish parliament was that, as I have earlier tried to give a perspicuous example on, there was interior disagreement amongst them. An example of the split is:

1. “Mens De Konservative kalder forholdene på asylcentrene rystende, ser statsministeren kun én løsning på problemerne: Afviste asylsøgere skal rejse hjem. Statsminister Anders Fogh Rasmussen (V) anerkender, at der er problemer på landets asylcentre. Men han mener, at problemerne skyldes en mangel på vilje blandt afviste flygtninge til at rejse hjem” (Ritzau 18/04-2006).

2. Det er hjerteløst og under al kritik, at de irakiske asylbørn i Røde Kors Lejren i Sandholm har psykiske lidelser. Dansk Røde kors legitimerer og blåstempler regeringens og Dansk Folkepartis umenneskelige behandling af asylbørnene, når de ikke hjælper, men blot accepterer den urimelige situation i Sandholmlejren. Uanset børnenes nationalitet og deres families politiske situation så skal børnene beskyttes og hjælpes. Vi kan simpelthen ikke være andet bekendt! (Benny Normind, Farum; 16/01-2010).

Immigration into Denmark, or the coming of non-westerners to Denmark is not a new phenomenon. The Danes have over the years experienced all forms migration of people with different ancestry or culture since the late 80s, (Schwartz, 1985), and are also not unaware of the fact that ‘people have always sought refuge and sanctuary’ (Malkki, 1995; 496). The many Danish rescue stories during the WW 2 are told elsewhere in the history, besides the fact that Danes have actively invited non-westerners, Muslim---- through “the guest worker program”. The problem is, this time, the presence of these ‘strangers’, should strangely enough, be politicized, through ‘state colonization of territory, based on territorialized blood, ethnicity and nationhood’ (Kvaale, 2011; 228).The V-K government’s construction of the ‘we’ the Danes and the ‘they’ the uncivilized others, based on having a state of territorial belongingness (Zuniga, 2012; 87, see also Luedtke, 2005), for example, the manufacturing of the “Kulturkanon”, is seen as a clear portfolio of compulsory authorized “Danishness” (Jenkins 2011; 259), in order to emphasize and maintain the dominance of the Danish cultural, deemed also as homogeneous, which also must be a criteria for the ‘divide’----the “Others” and the “self”. National identity and the formation of it, was to be the fundamental basis for the ‘Kanon’ aimed at distinguishing between the ‘home owners’ identity and the identity of the ‘foreigner’ or ‘guest’ (Hervik, and however doubtful such a national identity construction could be, it became a state sponsored project, footed by Danish tax-payers, including those it was also meant to be used against.

Wodak, et al., (1999), believe that, there is ‘no such thing as the one and only national identity’ as they write: “national identities are not completely consistent, stable and immutable. They are, to the contrary, to be understood as dynamic, fragile, ‘vulnerable’ and often incoherent. However, we do assume that there are certain relations (of transfer and contradiction) between the images of identity offered by political elites or the media and everyday discourses’ about nations and national identity” (Wodak, et al., 1999; 154). It could also be due to racism. There is undoubtedly racism in Denmark, (Jenkins, 2011; 261) has asserted. Under the V-K regime racism cases ‘ran’ races in the Danish court rooms, one peculiar case was when the High court dismissed the accusation made by the Danish Peoples Party against a certain man who was charged with calling the Danish Peoples party’s politics, racist, (Ritzau Bureau, 23/06-2003). Besides, many of the party members have been, along the line, accused of racism. And paradoxically, Danish laws are against racism, an indication that, they the members, politicians, and the backers of the Danish peoples’ party have difficulty with keeping the country’s laws at the same time as they accused the ‘Others’ of violating them. As one politician from the left-wing draws attention to this:

Socialdemokraternes kulturordfører, Mogens Jensen, efterlyste en forklaring på, hvordan Dansk Folkeparti - senest i forbindelse med integrationspakken - kan insistere på, at flygtninge og indvandrere skal underskrive erklæringer om at skulle overholde landets love, når partiet godt kan acceptere, at egne medlemmer får racismedomme (Ritzau Bureau, 06/10-2005).

Is the Danish society not busted open by racism? I argue that, brash rhetoric is naïve, as I am scared to call it dangerous. This criticism, I think is erratic, since there was no demarcating line with regards to the accusation----all regular immigrants and refugees for that matter are to undertake a commitment to be lawful. Obvious in this, is the generalizations made often about foreigners which, I believe, has nothing to do with western foreigners, say, the Swedish, the Norwegians, or the Germans in Denmark, but has everything to do with people of color or from underdeveloped countries and Muslims in particular. The Prime minister could not even differ on this as on the 21 st of November 2004, he said the following: “Indvandrere og flygtninge skal respektere ytringsfrihed, lige ret for kvinder og mænd samt adskille politik og religion. Samfundet kan ikke hænge sammen, hvis indvandrere og flygtninge ikke respekterer danske grundværdier som ytringsfrihed, lige rettigheder for kvinder og mænd samt adskillelse af politik og religion. Mange udlændinge er flygtet fra forfølgelse i samfund, som ikke respekterer disse værdier. De skal vide sig sikre i Danmark fra islamiske fundamentalisters trusler” (State minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen).There is no doubt that, this has an address to people with Middle-east and Islamic origins. Interestingly, there were some few in the Danish parliament who also originate from such areas. Additionally, this was precisely the time the Prime minister’s party venstre chose to

reward the Holland politician, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the woman who participated in the “Submission” film, critical of Islam, produced by instructor Theo van Gogh, who was unfortunately killed in Amsterdam. In any case, this form of generalizations and such ironical political approaches are not new to anthropologists, Vered Amit, (2011; 278), writing on “the immigrant Other” and citing a similar situation in Quebec, Canada, believes that what was going on Denmark runs parallel to the so-called “code of living”, where, as an example from the Canadian situation, an ironical attempt was made to remind Muslims ‘that stoning and female circumcision were forbidden in Canada’. According to the author, the reason why the Danish case is not dissimilar to that of Canada is the construction of the Danish culture and its activation into the so-called “Kultur-kanon”. An approach he sees as a deliberate political maneuver for using it to stand not only in contrast to, but also in competition with the ‘perceived’ culture of the immigrants, and this could be liken to what the author refers to ‘legitimizing marginalization and exclusion’ (ibid; 279). And this, I allow myself to imagine to be a classical example of ‘we’ and ‘ours’ versus ‘they’ and ‘theirs’. “In many ways, therefore, constructions of Danishness appear to be drawing on claims to a broader Western enlightenment tradition. And the tendency to assume that Muslim immigrants hold values that are incommensurable with this tradition could similarly be interpreted as an instance of a much more widespread, venerable Western tradition of Orientalism (Said, 2003) as well as more recent versions of European cultural fundamentalism” (Vered Amit, 2011; 280) .Are certain Muslims not Danes? How many native Danes, who are married to or are in a relationship with a foreigner, do not identify themselves with them? The establishment of the “Kulturkanon”, aimed at the construction of a truthful, trustworthy and ‘distinct Danes’ against the ‘not-too-welcomed aliens’ of different cultures and incompatible ways of life (Hervik, 1999), suffice me to say, cannot be less of ‘Othering’.As the Vered Amit has noted, the western tradition of “Orientalism” could be formed in many ways including for example, pointing to certain group of people, non-westerners, of course, as not being able or not understanding the western norms and values. The political motive behind valorizing the Danish culture into the ‘Kulturkanon’, caught the attention of cultural experts, even among those who were to sit in the committee responsible for the formulation of the ‘KulturKanon’. For example, the members on the committee protested against the minister after learning of the intention of the V-K-O politicians. In a letter to the minister, Professor Erik A. Nielsen, from the Nordiske studier at the University of Copenhagen complains, writes:”Det bliver næsten parodisk, hvis man skal lave sådan en 'gave fra de fine'. Vi har betragtet kanon-forsøget som en kvalificeret selskabsleg, men det lå ikke i oplægget, at det skulle bruges aggressivt over for indvandrere” (Erik A. Nielsen).Notice, the Professor’s clear reference to ‘Orientalism here’--- “gave fra de fine”--- “a gift

from the nice” to for example, the “filthy” and notice again, his suspicion that the “Kulturkanon,” was to be used aggressively against the foreigners---“bruges aggressivt over for indvandrere”--‘the foreigners?’---well, “the Others”. The V-K government’s “ethnicity-driven” politics, for cultural differentiation I believe was for the protection of the “fædreland”, variously orchestrated by the Danish Peoples’ Party, to draw a line between those referred to as ethnic Danes—“the we Danes” and the “they foreigners” based on culture, as DeVos has noted “a subjective symbolic or emblematic use of any aspect of culture (by a group), in order to differentiate themselves from other groups” (DeVos, 1975; 16), in his view Burgess (1978, 270) adds that this identity and group formation is also based on the use of ‘markers’ (-----instead of a person’s name, it is the person’s symbols, religion or background, such as Dansk-Pakistaner, indvandrere, Dansk-Tyrker, Afrikaner, and so on), which include cultural, biological, or territorial, forms of Said’s sense, ‘geographical Otherness’, as it also enhances stigmatization. According to de Beauvoir, (1997; 16), “the category of the ‘Other’ is as primordial as consciousness “self”. More so, it emphasizes that ‘we’ --the Danes have a culture and a society perceived as homogeneous, which therefore, must be screened from the ‘contamination’ due to the presence of ‘different’ kinds of cultures, feared to dilute the ‘worshipped’ homogeneity. People who experience ’Othering’ tend to find a ’hiding place’, to avoid the pressure, a sort of antidote, to counteract the unpleasant circumstances they find themselves in, by internalizing, and this might explain the reaction of the Iraqi refugees to the governments’ or the authorities’ pressure or ‘push’ on them in order that they will be compelled to choose to repatriate unwillingly, (a sort of self-deportation).As Jensen (2009; 6) had observed and argued, the strategies used by people who experience ‘Othering’, is the construction of “a third place”, she cites internalizing as an example, in case of the Iraqi refugees, I suppose, running away to Iraq seemed to be the only window opened to them at that time, because, the Dublin accord forbids them from seeking asylum in yet another country in the EU.Some regular immigrants in Denmark, in order to find a ‘third place’ followed up on their marriages and ‘run’ away from Denmark to countries like Sweden, the US, the UK and Germany, including those who have difficulty in seeing themselves as belonging to Denmark (cf: Holmes, 2000).Many, I know, have moved to Malmo in Sweden to escape the Danish alien laws. Anthropology studies in Denmark has revealed that certain immigrants, regardless of the length of stay in the country continue to feel like, they are strangers in Denmark. For instance, in her studies among Palestinians, who have lived in Denmark for years, Kublitz, (2013), found out that Palestinian youth who were born in Denmark, and who might have

been expected to possess a sense of loyalty and belonging to the country, seems to constantly be fighting what they see as “the discrimination by the Danish state16” (Kublitz, 2013; 15).Perhaps, this tendency is not only in Denmark, but all over Europe. Another example of the far right-wing party, is the Jörg Haider’s freedom party in Austria, with ‘pro-state ideals supported by xenophobic elements of discourse’ (Gingrich, 2006; 197). Gingrich has described these parties as the ‘new right’, whose polity is to spread the feelings of identification with the nation-state (Seton-Watson, 1977). According to Gingrich these ‘new right’ parties embark on a more constructivist political approach which is immensely rooted in a deep understanding of the nationhood, hence their rhetoric and narratives of national belonging (Brubaker , 1998; 4), as they do also insist on ‘ancestral claim of ethnical sameness’. “We” are different, ‘we’ are superior and better humans than “them”, and therefore “we” belong together, and to this soil, but “they” don’t.There was no holding back when, Allen (2009), referred such political forms as being a “social and literal constructions and demonization of cultural difference”. The branding foreigners in Denmark as criminals, as dependents on the welfare state, and as having incompatible culture in relation to that of the Danes’ can be likened to the sort of politics that echoes what Gingrich (2006; 212) refers to as ‘we’ as ‘pro-state’ and ‘pro-law and order’ typical of the new right parties.What is interesting and yet, intriguing is that, Denmark is a country that prides itself with ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘freedom of religion’, and was at the same, unlike its neighbors and friends in the Scandinavians, ‘warring’ in Iraq and Afghanistan to promote democracy and freedom of speech, besides treating refugees as if they weren’t the results of such ‘democracy transfer’. Where then do we place this claim? Perhaps, this “freedom of speech” claim is only legitimate when it is used for criticism of aliens17, in Denmark, a group of people whose social construction or mobility is and has always been dependent on the degree of already damaged cordiality and inclusiveness. The disconcerting thing about the whole construction of this ‘divide’, the ‘we Danes’ and the ‘them aliens’, is the enactment of the restrictive laws on the issues this thesis is about, namely, family reunification, isolation, unemployment and other as aspects of the social and political lives of aliens in Denmark.According to many Danish newspapers18, Denmark signed an agreement with the unstable

16 There is an investigation underway on an alleged bleach of the UN convention, which allows for the granting of citizenship to stateless refugees, by the then Danish government with regards to some stateless Palestinians. 17 See the attributes outlined by Fidel (1997); cf: Hervik 2004; 254), in interviews. Fidel, U. H., (1997). Why the difference makes a difference: Some cultural understanding of ethnic differences behind Danish registration practices. A paper presented at the conference; “Structuring Diversity: European response to emerging multiculturalism” Copenhagen, December 5th-6th 1997.18 See also the kristeligt dagblad

Iraq government on the 13th of May 2009 on the sending back the refugees. At the time, the paper reports that 78 on the waiting list were cooperating with the police chief19. The paper further reports that, since the agreement was made the police had been able, on three occasions all by using force to send those Iraqis who were refused asylum in Denmark, back to Iraq: the numbers were 6 on the 25th of June 2009; 7 on the 13 of August, 2009; and 22 on the 2nd of September. Notwithstanding all these developments, the paper reports on the growing dissatisfaction with the Danish Peoples Party, as one of the instrumental MPs behind the Party’s politics which as revealed, is based on obsolete traditional and ancestral order of things, shows publicly, his disapproval of the ‘slow’ deportation process, the paper states:“Det beroliger dog ikke Dansk Folkepartis udlændingeordfører, Peter Skaarup20. Han mener, at det går alt for langsomt med hjemsendelserne.” (ibid). The repatriation continued in November, and yet that couldn’t be enough to please the politicians from the Peoples’ Party, a newspaper writes;“På seks måneder er 35 af 242 afviste irakere sendt hjem. Det er ikke godt nok, mener Dansk Folkeparti, der vil have svar på, hvornår de sidste kan sende hjem.” (Ritzaus Bureau, 01/11/2009).This prominent MP from the Danish Peoples’ Party claim that “the presence of too many immigrants and refugees in Denmark, threatens the Danish cultural values, and thereby advocates for ‘zero political tolerance’ towards immigrants and refugees alike, (Hervik, 2012; 213). The MP goes ahead to further threaten to cut the economic support the Iraqi authorities were receiving from Denmark, if they do not, regardless, quickly take back their people. ”Der skal ikke gå mange uger, hvor der stadig ikke sker noget. Så må vi sige til irakerne: I opfylder ikke jeres del af aftalen, og når I ikke gør det, så kan vi heller ikke opfylde vores aftale om at give jer økonomisk bistand.” (Ritzaus Bureau, 01/11-2009)

5.2.2 Social ‘Othering’ Social ‘Othering’ can be constructed through different ways that alienates people who are perceived as being different and belonging elsewhere than where they find themselves. For example, certain governments may enact discriminatory bills that restrict or prevent certain people’s social mobility and social capital. Certain political practices by host countries in socially restricting immigrants and refugee may be seen as subtlety ‘Otherness’, as Fassin (2011; 124) explicitly puts it “social construction of Otherness implies the social construction of identity. It means imagining borders and boundaries”. The author is referring here, to the construction of ‘others’ and ‘selves’---the divide---based on tradition, culture, race and so on, and not the least, about the construction of migration-related ‘Otherness’. I intend to evoke 19 The rigspolitiets Udlændingafdeling, vicerigspolitichef, Hans-Viggo Jensen20 Peter Skaarup was the spokesperson for the Dansk folkeparty for aliens/foreigners issues

Lister’s definition of ‘Othering’ to emphasize that the V-K governments’ attempt to demarcate the native Danes from the perceived aliens, was purely due to the perceived color, geographical, traditional, cultural, racial differences. Lister (2004): “Othering is a process of differentiation and demarcation, by which the line is drawn between “us” and “them”----between the more and the less powerful—and through which social distance is established and maintained” (Lister 2004; 101 cf: Jensen, 2009; 13). As exemplified in the Aliens Consolidation Act #608 which forbids couples less than 24 years to marry in Denmark. I argue in this section that the V-K governments attempt to legislate ‘love’ by placing stringent regulations, besides those pre-eminent rhetoric from their support party, that forced immigrants with different backgrounds to deflect to neighboring countries in order to get to unite with their spouses, is due to the notion that such people are seen as different from the Danes.The extension of the period for granting permanent residence to spouses from three to seven years, is also another example for discouraging the ‘Others’ from having social life in the country, because they, perhaps are deemed to belong elsewhere and cannot be part of the “We”, the people of Denmark----identity ‘Othering’---hence a restriction on the lives-----restrictions that also differentiate them from those who can freely choose their partners. Other examples include the forbidding of foreigner’s parents over 60 years the requirements of a certain amount of money, to be set aside as guarantee for inviting spouses and so on21. Furthermore, the most insecure aspect of this strict law, is its administration, which can be anything depending on the personality of the applicant through whether or not the applicant have had children with an ethnic Dane to whether or not the applicant is a member of any Danish organization.In order that these stringent bills get an impact as intended, the bills were continually tightened22 as a leading Danish newspaper reveals that the laws were tightened every eight months, this again drew criticisms from diverse human right organizations (Ritzaus Bureau, 01/10-2004), however, all those criticisms were blunted by the government. Udlændingeloven strammes hver 8. måned: Udlændingeloven er ændret 14 gange under VK-regeringen. Kritikere mener, at det hele tiden sætter de borgere under pres, som er omfattet af loven (Ritzaus Bureau, 28/03-2010).

The effect of the politics of ‘them’ and ‘us’’ casts some shadows over the integration, also the social integration of aliens in Denmark. As if the integration, was not a cover up excuses for wanting to curb immigration from non-western countries (Hervik, 2012; 212), but to create spaces for foreigners in, for example, the work places, enhance better social support (social inclusion). This, according to Danish scholars seems unclear, especially regarding what the prospective immigrant has to do, to be seen as being well integrated. The bigger

21 See http://www.inm.dk for more details on the law.22 Ritzau Bureau; 28/03-2010

problem with the integration is the prejudice on the newcomers in the Danish society, a tendency, even the minister of integration in October 2003, couldn’t differ from:

“Når flygtninge og indvandrere kommer hertil, bliver de straks behandlet som stakler, får hjælp til alting og bliver pakket ind i tolkebistand og taxaboner. Der er desværre nogle få læger, der strøer alt for mange lægeerklæringer om sig, og man må forstå, at udlændinge ikke har de samme bremsemekanismer, som danskere har” (Bertel

Haarder; October, 2003).

The minister is here saying that, all refugees and immigrants, even when they might not have come from the same origin nor possess the same cultural and ethnic entity, and do not have the same qualities (‘bremsemekanismer’), like the ethnic Danes. This is not different from what both Baumann has described as ‘Othering’ and Said as ‘Orientalism’.

What I think is left unspoken about the integration is what is perceived as the difference between ‘we’ and ‘them’ and how it is deepened by political rhetoric, like those of the minister. The integration is not the main purpose of this writing, as I now will like to address some of the social issues in Denmark that had had political influence on the lives of immigrants and refugees and what I also contend that it is an attempt to differentiate between and native Danes and aliens, hence ‘Otherness’.

5.2.2.1a. “The family re-unification law” as a form of social ‘Othering’The right for any refugee to live together with the spouse is enshrined in the UN convention, thus, according to the Refugee act, the Iraqis refugee have the right to reunite with their spouses, also in Denmark. The V-K government, as promised during the election, had intentions to block the entry of specific people from entry into Denmark, as a political agenda. As mentioned earlier on, a prominent newspaper in Denmark the Berlingske Tidende has revealed that Turkish, Somalis, Iraqis and Pakistanis are to inhibited in getting family reunification.The intent here is to totally discourage the entry of additional people from the above mentioned countries to Denmark, by putting hindrances in marriages among those who live in Denmark and those back home in such places. I believe that, the treaty of Amsterdam, prohibits this political move as it deals with issues surrounding migration and rights given to immigrants by the EU, the rules on family reunification are enshrined in the Unions’ Family Reunification Directive (Directive 2003/86/EC) and binds Members states ‘to respect family life’. As well expected, one of the Iraqi refugees expressed in the interview that the strict Danish family reunification rules make it impossible for him to get his wife into Denmark: ”Jamen, jeg tænkte på at nu hvor Saddam Hussein er fjernet, så er muligheden for familiesammenføring med min kone her det er nul næsten, det er umuligt. Derfor måtte jeg rejse tilbage til Irak.” (Hamza, page 79).

Hamza sees the reunification with his wife as impossible in Denmark, and therefore decided to leave Denmark, without considering much about the impending security risk and how he could or couldn’t be able to live in Iraq with the family. He wasn’t able to fulfill any of the requirements to be able to have the right to family unification.Unfortunately, the 1951 convention, which Denmark is a signatory to, has the ‘non-refoulement clause’23 and which in the first place, guarantees refugees’ refusal to return to the troubled ‘homeland’, besides the sanctity of the refugee law that gives them the right to family life also in exile. I argue in this section of the thesis, that anything that might force a refugee from utilizing such principle is tantamount to a gross erosion of refugee right, endorsed by the convention, as I also think that the premeditated political agenda on certain selected people, countries---is ‘Othering’. I further argue that the restrictive bills by the V-K government especially in the case of Hamza, renders the convention nebulous, because, he, as a refugee in Denmark, for not being given the right to family life, was also compelled to leave exile because he wanted to have a family life. Below are some of the harsh bills the parties in the V-K coalition government have planned beforehand, and that is why I refer to the politics as being premeditated….and therefore ‘Othering’1: Venstre vil begrænse tilgangen af udlændinge ved hjælp af færre familiesammenføringer til danske statsborgere og ved at bremse tilgangen af flygtninge (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001). 2: Familiesammenføringer af ægtefæller skal fremover betinges af, at parrets samlede tilknytning til Danmark er større end til et andet land. Hvis familiesammenføring har været fast praksis i familien, vil det som udgangspunkt være et nej. Hvis den herboende ægtefælle har deltaget i modersmålsundervisning trækker det i samme retning (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001). 3: Det skal også være sværere at få asyl (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001) 4: For både indvandrere og flygtninge skal det gælde, at ingen skal kunne få permanent opholdstilladelse, før de har været her i syv år. I dag siger lovgivningen tre år (Berlingske Tidende, 07/11-2001).The parties have planned to restrict certain people…..the ‘Orientals’ from coming to Denmark, by enacting impossible bills such as ---attachment to Denmark , seven year period of marriage before given permanent residence, and other conditions such whether or one has been taught his or her own mother tongue in Denmark. My estimation of all these is that, they are a way of differentiating and therefore ‘Othering’. One interesting argument against such alien act is the stance taken by the European court of justice in 2008, in what was referred to as the “Metock-case” (Rytter, 2011; 70), which seems to undermine the Danish foreigners’ legislation. The V-K government fouled on many of her international obligations and couldn’t live by them, due to its inordinate desire to hold on to power, and also continued in 10 years groping for answers to whether or not, those 23 That no contracting state shall expel or return (‘refoule’) a refugee, against his or her will, in any manner whatsoever, to a territory where he or she fears persecution.

alien restrictive laws were right or wrong. Today, there is a case in front of a committee, (the Statløse Komitee), to find out who was responsible for refusing citizenship to Palestinians who were born in Denmark, and therefore have been stateless, as the UN conventions recommends.As indicated earlier on, Denmark is not bound by certain legal obligations from the EU because of its reservations with the EU, and therefore not bound by the EU integration directives regarding family reunification---Directive 2003/86/EC and the EU Pact on immigration and asylum in October 2008 (European council, 2008), which outlines the importance of adopting a policy by the member-states, that enables fair treatment of migrants and their harmonious integration into the societies of their host countriesNot in isolation is the fact that, according to previous Danish laws, refugees have had the right to apply for the reunification for their families. The Danish 1983 Aliens act allowed spouses, minor children and even elderly parents to refugees to unite with them in Denmark. As is always the case, there was a ‘raised’ voice against the discrimination of the Iraqi refugees, from some of the Danish refugee lawyers, as this support my argument on differentiating and hence ‘Othering’--- as reported under the headline, ”Myndigheder beskyldes for at forskelsbehandle iraker”:“Irakere har sværere ved at få familiesammenføring end næsten alle andre etniske grupper. Det siger en række af landets flygtningeadvokater til Information. De beskylder Udlændingestyrelsen og Integrationsministeriet for at forskelsbehandle irakere i forhold til andre ansøgere ved at stille en række krav, som de fleste herboende irakiske flygtninge ikke har mulighed for at opfylde.Advokaterne peger især på det såkaldte tilknytningskrav, som irakiske familiemedlemmer kun yderst sjældent kan opfylde, fordi de ikke kan få visum til at besøge Danmark. Et irakisk par vil derfor altid samlet set have større tilknytning til Irak end til Danmark. Derudover peger advokaterne på, at udlændingemyndighederne stiller så skrappe dokumentationskrav til f.eks. vielsesattester, at det er næsten umuligt at bevise dokumenternes ægthed”.(Ritzau 18/01-2006).The situation, where particular ethnic people, mainly colored, ‘the orients’, are discriminated and hindered from staying in Denmark with their spouses is not new in the Danish polity. As Said (1978), has noted on ‘orientalism’, writes “there is no doubt that imaginative geography and history help the mind to intensify its own sense of itself by dramatizing the distance and difference between what is close to it and what is far away”(Said (1978; 55, cf: Jensen, 2009). The right to family reunification by refugees and immigrants seem to be troubling politicians on the right-wing in Denmark, since this is not the first time there is a case of such calibre has been in the news about foreigner’s family reunification. References are made to the same abuses by the authorities in the early 1990s, a situation called the “Tamil sagen” (Vested-Hansen, 1994), which also resulted in the resignation of the then State minister (the Prime Minister) at the time.

In 1992 this particular act was amended, Vested-Hansen, (1994; 255), writes that, the amendment was to give the refugees open chances for inviting their family depending on the strength of their personal economy, the problem is whether or not refugees have or can get sound and rightful economy, as the Vested-Hansen questions the economic capability of refugees, and calls, this ‘window’ restrictive (ibid; 256).The factor remains that, the intention was to make the family reunification lenient, and that is why the above mentioned dispensation24 was introduced. However, the one thing that is not very clear is the fact that, the Danish Aliens Act’s section 7 or 8, which renders the law administrative. As Hervik (2004), quotes the human rights institute in Denmark, for revealing: “There is NO right to family unification or reunification, but this is granted at the discretion of an administrator’s evaluation of fulfillment of these subjective requirements” (Institut for Menneskerettigheder, 2004). Family reunification for immigrants and refugees in Denmark depends on individual judgments, and even then, the dispensation, offered to the refugees, is only a suspension of ‘one’ or ‘more’ of the strict requirements that applies to the regular immigrants.Another hurdle to refugees, like Hamza, is the fact the an evaluation should first be made on whether or not a refugee applying for the reunification ‘can be able to’ join his or her spouse in their original or home country---and thus, the refugee in question would be asked to leave Denmark, if the answer to the evaluation is “yes”……that is, the refugee has to ’self-deport’ from exile to be able to live with his or her spouse. The V-K government was deeply inclined on restricting the presence of refugees and immigrants in Denmark in a way that utterly unmoored from the realities outlined in both international conventions and human rights requirements. Many experts were in disagreement to this as an expert from DRC, the non-governmental organization which is supposedly a partner to the government with regards to refugee repatriation and integration, in a news item declares: ”Det er i strid med den Europæiske Menneskerettighedskonvention at give flygtninge afslag på familiesammenføring med henvisning til tilknytningskravet,”, (Anne la Cour; jurist og asylchef i Dansk Flygtningehjælp, 18/02-2006).Indeed, these types of restrictive bills targeting certain groups of people is a sort of ideological animosity, well exemplified in, for instance, the ‘24-years-requirement’ marriage law, which I will look at later on in this thesis.Additionally, a prominent refugee lawyer adds his comments on the situation of the Iraqi refugees, admitting that the Danish political practices stand in contrast to a number of international conventions and obligations Denmark is committed to:”Det strider mod filosofien bag FN's Flygtningekonvention, der siger, at en flygtning har ret til at leve et liv i fred og frihed i asyllandet. Det har aldrig været meningen, at flygtninge skulle blive ved med at bevise deres ret til asyl,«

24 Seehttp://www.nyidenmark.dk, under “refugees or persons with protection status”

siger han og mener, at den måde, Udlændingestyrelsen afviser irakiske flygtninges ret til familiesammenføring på, betyder, at de i praksis tilbagekalder deres asylret - ad bagdøren. Signalet er, at hvis du vil bo sammen med din familie, må du rejse hjem”, (Helge Nørrung).Hervik in 2012, exposed the rationale behind V-K-O regimes’ political maneuver as being based on “zero tolerance” politics against people of color (Hervik, 2012; 217)----the ‘Orients’. This, according to the author was done through the waging of the cultural war of values against aliens, mostly Muslims---- the so called “Kulturkamp,” (ibid; 218).

5.2.2.1.b. “The 24-year old law” as a form of social ‘Othering’

To beef up the restrictions on immigrants and refugees from coming to Denmark or from getting their spouses from other countries to come to Denmark, the V-K government, besides making marriages among such groups pricey, also put an age limit on them and aimed deliberately at certain group of people:

Under valgkampen i Danmark luftede Venstres retspolitiske ordfører, Birte Rønn Hornbech, en idé om at gøre det sværere for udvalgte grupper, eksempelvis somaliere, at få familiesammenføring (Information, 28/11-2001).

It is also a kind of discriminatory law the V-K government had several difficulties in selling to the Human right ‘watchdog’ organs in both the UN and the EU. For instance, the V-K government submitted a misleading, wrong and ‘fortified’ report to the UN High Commissioner for Human rights racism committee (CERD) in Geneva. The report was also locally criticized by Danish experts and lawyers for racism."24-års-reglen beskrives som værende designet til at forhindre tvangsægteskaber, underforstået at den kun

rammer der, hvor der er tale om tvang. Og det er jo forkert," siger Jens Vedsted-Hansen25.

Det nævnes i rapporten, at både 24-års-reglen og tilknytningskravet gælder for alle, men i realiteten drejer det sig primært om mennesker af anden etnisk oprindelse end dansk, påpeger både Jens Vedsted-Hansen og Bjørn Elmquist."Det er jo løgn. Her er tale om lodret diskrimination. To danskere kan jo godt gifte sig. Men en dansker kan ikke gifte sig med en udlænding, før man er fyldt 24 år. I øvrigt kan man spørge sig selv, om det er grundlovsstridigt, fordi man her har ret til at gifte sig som 18-årig," siger Bjørn Elmquist (09/08-2006).Leder af den nationale afdeling på Institut for Menneskerettigheder (IMR) Birgitte Kofod Olsen vil være tilstede i Genève til eksaminationen, og hun frygter, at Danmark, ligesom for fire år siden, vil møde skarp kritik fra komitéen for den måde, vi modtager og håndterer etniske minoriteter på. Hun kalder regeringens rapport mangelfuld og mener ikke, at den giver et retvisende billede af Danmark. "I forhold til den kritik, regeringen kom med af Europarådets rapport tidligere på året, er denne rapport overraskende," siger hun (09/08-2006).According to Professor Jens Vedsted-Hansen, these laws had its specified object, ‘the Orients’, I argue. In other words, certain clauses in the law that allows for certain administrative practices in already restrictive law, can give the sense of discrimination, a keen problem in the Danish political discourse (Sjørslev, 2006; 77: see also the ECRI’s 2006

25 Professor of Law from the University of Aarhus, Denmark

Report on discrimination in Denmark). Besides, the fact still remains that policies do not always dictate the ways they are implementation and their effects are not always traced appropriately. I am of the opinion that the administration of such stringent laws and the accompanying preferential treatments, albeit, in favor of the ‘Danishness’, was unambiguously directed by the notion and the construction of ‘Otherness’. For example, aliens who have children with native Danes from previous marriages or relationships, are exempted from depositing money meant to serve as the so-called ‘guarantee’. Those who do not have Danish children are to deposit money as a guarantee to the marriage. Tilknytningskravet sammenholdt med 28 års reglen medfører diskrimination på grund af etnicitet og race.«Samtidig fører reglen om, at folk, der søger om ægtefællesammenføring, skal kunne stille 53.096 kr. i sikkerhed, »til krænkelser af retten til familieliv«.(Ritzaus Bureau, 01/10-2004) The laws are administrated to treat people according to their relatedness or affiliation to Danes, this, I argue gives a feeling of attempting to put native Danes above all ‘other’ forms of people--aliens and refugees, living in the same society---as I argue that, this could also be seen both differentiating and encouraging superiority----inferiority in Said’s sense….hence ‘Othering’.In the case of Hamza, for instance, his wife might have been more than 24 years, but how was he going to meet the other requirements? Be it as it may, the last and the most unpredictable aspect, the nonnegotiable hurdle, I repeat, is the administration of these laws—which could lead to discrimination and hence----‘Othering’. A proper understanding of these laws, the intentions and the expected impacts are made clear by Hervik (2012), who writes: “the V-K government suspended any rights for aliens to acquire family reunification, unless the ‘subjective requirements’ are met, which also depends on the interpretation of the wordings in the law, if not on the discretion, of those who administrate them” (Hervik, 2012; 219). In fact, one cannot predict any outcomes by just reading the text in the law, because they depend on other things than wordings in them.Another clear example pointing to the fact that the V-K government, through the notion of “Otherness” was depriving non-westerners (the Orients) from coming to Denmark, is the Danish Peoples’ Party’s request to change the 24 years to 28 years, as well as demanding that any foreigner who would opt to marry from outside, were to have been a Danish citizen for 28 years. The idea behind making of marriage age-dependent, as explained by the then Minister of integration, Bartel Haarder, was that “the older one is, the better the person can resist the pressure from his or her family might to influence the person’s marriage” (cf: Erdine, 2012; 26) . Do all people of different settings experience such influence from their family? In her paper, Erdine

saw this law as an ‘orientalist discursive construct’ (ibid, 22), which aims to differentiate between people based on their background, a sort of contestation of identities, phrased simply ‘Danishness’ and ‘Others’. Despite the stark warnings of chaos, hostility and insurgency in Iraq, if Hamza, in our example, decides anyway, to repatriate to Iraq because of his inability to reunification of the wife, it can be implied that the creation of ‘otherness’, or ‘Othering’ of people can also trigger ‘involuntary’ repatriation of refugees.

5.2.2.2 “Isolation from the local population” as a form of social ‘Othering’ One of the means of creating the ‘us’ and ‘them’ in any host country is by isolating the ‘newcomers’—refugees or immigrants, from the existing local people through the allocation of housing. This was the experience of some of the Iraqi refugees in the interview, who claimed that they had to live in a place reserved for tourists26 and therefore complained of isolation. For example Basheer narrated his experience as follows: ”Det sted jeg fik tildelt at bo i var et turiststed hvor der kunne bo 2000 mennesker, men jeg var den eneste der boede der. Så det var meget tomt, og jeg følte mig meget ensom.” (Basheer; page 79). This form of social exclusiveness, expressed differently, a deprivation from any chances of socializing by the refugees in the Danish community, I argue, is based on the assumption that, one party is inferior to the other and therefore incompatible. According to Olwig et al., (2011; 12), the construction of societies by socially excluding certain kinds of people can lead to notions of not being part of or belonging to the existing communities. The authors have cited ethnographic case studies among immigrants in Denmark depicting their adverse experiences of exclusiveness in Danish institutions. According to the 1951 convention, and more precisely in article 1 section 21 of the 1951, refugees have right to adequate housing by host nations. The reported situation in most societies is that, refugees, like most immigrants living in western countries, get to group themselves in certain areas in the society because of several concerted policies, especially in the municipalities, and this leads to the grouping of these people and their cohorts. The situation is not different in Denmark, and had even drawn the attention of the legal institution. According Vested-Hansen (1994, 250) the high court in Denmark, had cautioned against discriminatory practices, by grouping and isolating aliens in certain areas, codenamed-ghettos27 by the politicians in the municipality. The practice of discriminatory housing, according to the author has not abated in Denmark, notwithstanding the caution from the High Court. It can be said that, this practice which lends itself to what in Denmark is referred to as “Dem

26 A holiday resort27 The art of clustering people together by housing due to their ethnic identity, exemplified in the American urban ghettoes

og Os” practices, thus separating “Dem” (“they”), the immigrants, and refugees from “Os” (“we”), the native Danes is not coincidental but perhaps by design. Isolating refugees from the population, by housing them in places where they hardly can see people of their caliber, people they can identify themselves with or who they can interact or communicate with, a form of cultivating ‘they’ and ‘us’, can create problems for the refugees and make they feel dejected, as Zahida complains about how they felt lonely in the camp:[...] der hvor vi boede før var der næsten ingen mennesker og vi kendte ikke så mange. Man har ikke noget liv hvis man ikke har nogen at snakke med. Der hvor vi boede før var der ikke så mange indvandrere og flygtninge, og de danskere der boede der havde ikke lyst til at snakke med os for de var ikke vant til flygtninge. Det tror jeg var en af grundene til at vi rejste tilbage. Vi kunne ikke kommunikere med danskerne og jeg vidste ikke hvordan man gjorde det. Så en af grundene til at vi ville vende tilbage, var fordi der var at der ikke var nogen flygtninge og indvandrere at snakke med, og vi følte os meget isolerede i Danmark, (Zahida; 79).Such practices that make refugees in exile live without any form of social capital can be detrimental for them, and in the worst case scenario, cause them break down, Reichelt, et al., (1994, 142), has dealt through therapies with refugees with “suffering and degrading experiences” due to lack of social resources. My argument is, this obviously, wasn’t any experience the Iraqis had wished for and perhaps explains why they will repatriate.

5.2.2.3 Exclusion from the work force as a form socio-economic ‘Othering’There are two descriptions of both the employment situation for immigrants and refugees and their social status in Denmark. The first is, according to scholars, these people have an unemployment rate that is three to four times higher than the ethnic Danes (Thomsen & Moes, 2002; 2). The next is, they live in ghettos as they also do marry amongst themselves (Ryther, 2011; 67). These academic descriptions of the socio-economic situation of immigrants and refugees in Denmark, add yet another dimension, besides political, to make clear the ‘Otherness’ notion……… the ‘they’ and ‘us’. There are other factors that add to these ‘hurdles’, according to studies conducted among these groups. The chances for an average Danish entrepreneur or employer to employ an immigrant or a refugee is measured as a study by the Institute of Social Research has revealed: ”Indvandrere, der kæmper for at få deres første job i en dansk virksomhed, er oppe imod særdeles hårde odds. Arbejdsgiverne lægger nemlig mest af alt vægt på erhvervserfaring fra - en anden dansk virksomhed. Det skriver I dag - Industriens Dagblad. - Både uddannelse og erhvervserfaring skal simpelthen være fra Danmark, hvis en indvandrer skal øge sine chancer for at komme i job. Socialforskningsinstituttets undersøgelse er nedslående læsning for arbejdsivrige indvandrere, der ikke allerede har haft deres første job på det danske arbejdsmarked. Ud over dansk erhvervserfaring og uddannelse peger den på gode danskkundskaber og netværk som de vigtigste adgangsbilletter til et job. Selv peger mange indvandrere ifølge undersøgelsen på diskrimination som årsag til, at de har vanskeligt ved at komme i arbejde - også selv om de ikke personligt har følt sig diskrimineret”, siger Forskningsleder Anders Rosdahl fra Socialforskningsinstituttet (Ritzaus Bureau 05/04-2006).

I hate to use hard words like discrimination and racialization, but I admit and maintain, as I have also always done in this writing that, experientially, there cannot be any credible nor sound arguments against the presence of preferential treatments in the Danish job market. This fact, however wordless in the everyday discourses, is public knowledge and remains that, the Danes prefer appointing ‘those’ who resemble themselves……..”vi ansætter dem der

ligner os” and thus, among many immigrants in Denmark, demography, at times, and to say this quite conservatively, becomes the lead to their destiny, social status and social capital.One striking issue that strengthens the ‘they’ and ‘us’ is the differences in skin color between the native Danes and the heterogeneous newcomers, yet another unspoken fact is, according to (Schierup, 1993), the creation of the ‘we’ and ‘them’ division which has been on an increase since the late 90s, worsened by the fact that any attempts to downplay the notion that skin pigmentation determines behavior has been underrated. The relative deprivation of immigrants and refugees from the Danish work force, I believe, makes easy the stigmatization of them, and hence my point on ‘Otherness’.The situation of refugees and asylum-seekers is even much more worse, as they, until the new Danish government came to power, were not allowed to work at all. According to Vedsted-Hansen (1994, 249), “the legal condition that refugees granted asylum are not also granted work permit is problematic”, this is agreed to by Crepeau et al., (1994; 239), who asserts that, “one of the ways to get traumatized refugees who live in exile to maintain a minimum dignity is to allow that they participate in the workforce and be able to the contribute to the society that has received them”. Though, the act is repealed today under the new government, refugees weren’t to work under the V-K government as this was what the Iraqi refugees experienced in Denmark and which also might have added to their frustration and hence their involuntary repatriation. Some of the interviewees desired to work. Ali talks of his frustration about not being allowed to earn his own money and had to depend on the token offered him by the asylum social workers:

…..afgørende ting for et menneske her i Danmark, det er at have et arbejde. Og når arbejdsformidlingen vil stå i vejen for at jeg får arbejde, så kan jeg ikke leve.” (Ali; pages 79-80)

The idea by the new government of the Radikale Venstre (B), the Solistiske Folkeparti (SF) and the Socialdemocrats (S), that refugees are able to gain a bit of socio-economic capital through working and interacting with people, instead of sitting in their liminal space (Turner, 2012; 2 & 112) in the Camps, could enhance both their integration into the existing society or their voluntary repatriation. Backers to the idea for improving refugee life in exile have advocated for diverse enhancing approaches. For example, Gallagher (1994) has noted and urged for a short alternative to

legal integration, which entails that refugees get access to the labor market of the hosting country, the DRC suggests temporary legal residence permit for refugees under severe circumstances (DRC, Danskeflygtningehjælp, årsreport 2008; 15: www.danskeflytningehjælpe.dk). I contend that this deprivation, as Ali has complained about, is counterproductive with regards to the troubled refugees, because I believe there is a lot to gain by allowing the refugees to participate in the job market. The structure of the formidable Danish labor unit and its regulations alone is sufficient to rebuild these refugees, however traumatized or troubled, and this, I believe is an effective way for refugees’ reconstruction, because it contains everything from social protection and effective management, through equality and non-discrimination, to personal improvement and economic security. The argument by the V-K government was based on the fear that getting to join the Danish workforce will encourage the refugees to remain in the country and even attract more--- “DF: Asyludspil gør Danmark til flygtningemagnet” (Ritzaus Bureau 13/06-2012). I argue that this argument overshadows the fact that the refugees could be able to regain themselves in the long-term, and as the erstwhile V-K government beforehand, chose repatriation over all other options entailed in the refugee welfare and protection.As a means for getting the Iraqi refugees to opt to return home to Iraq, the V-K government embarked on reducing the financial assistance given to the refugees in the Camps. The so-called ‘start-hjælpe’ system for refugees and was to serve the purpose of not making Denmark attractive to other refugees. In the interviews, some of the refugees in the interview said they had repatriated due the unbearable economic situation. According to the students who conducted the interviews, some of the refugee families begun to have mental disorders because of the economic pressure laid on them and that hastened their decision on the repatriation, however unwillingly. Rania tells the interviewers: ”Vi er syv mennesker i denne her familie, og vi fik 900 kroner om ugen28, og vi har været nede ved kommunen, hos sagsbehandleren, og har snakket med dem, og fortalt dem at det ikke rakte.” (Rania; page 78). Her husband Mohammed goes deeper to explain the situation that triggered the repatriation from Denmark:

“Hver dag når jeg kom tilbage fra praktik græd hun, så jeg kunne ikke holde denne her situation ud mere. Derfor besluttede vi at vi skulle rejse tilbage til Irak.” ”Vi snakkede sammen om det. Det var ligesom at vælge mellem pest eller kolera, i Irak er der dårlig sikkerhed, og i Danmark har vi ikke nok mad at spise” (ibid, 78).

28 Dette lave beløb skyldtes, at det kun var Mohamad der fik kontanthjælp, og at kommunen trak ham i kontanthjælp hver gang Rania udeblev fra sin aktivering. Hun udeblev ofte fra aktiveringen, fordi hun var nødt til at blive hjemme med deres fem børn, som de ikke havde råd til at sende i børnehave og vuggestue.

For this family, the only reason why they went back to Iraq, according to the authors, is the economic pressure they were put under. The same economic pressures, as stated before were laid on the instable Iraqi government to receive the forcedly repatriated Iraqis. As I have already indicated, the new S-SF-B government has and continues to repeal some of the harsh regulations on refugees and other immigrants, this time, to the delight of the DRC and other organizations:

“Den nye regering afliver starthjælpen: Dansk flygtningehjælp har siden starthjælpens fødsel i 2002 været kritisk over for starthjælpen.--- Starthjælpen skaber en ulighed, som er svær at forstå. Så det er glædelige nyheder, lyder det fra generalsekretær i Dansk Flygtningehjælp, Andreas Kamm. Ifølge generalsekretæren vil det få stor betydning for indvandrerfamilier, der hidtil ikke har haft råd til eksempelvis at lade deres børn gå til en sportsgren. Dermed får integrationen et løft, lyder det” (Ritzaus Bureau 02/10-2011).

An eminent spokesperson from the V-K government, who thinks the betterment of the refugee conditions in Denmark will attract more refugees, adds her critique to treating the refugee’s right by giving them reasonable economic support. - Man kan jo ikke fortænke asylansøgere i at søge asyl i de lande, hvor det er lettest, det ville jeg også selv gøre. Jo bedre forhold vi giver dem, jo større en magnet er vi, siger Inger Støjberg (V) (Ritzaus Bureau 08/02-2013).Observe the wordings in this statement, the better ‘we’ treat ‘them’, the more attractive ‘we’ become for those others who will want to seek asylum, I think this is a clear division among human beings.

5.2.3 Cultural ‘Othering’Peter Hervik, an anthropology professor from both the University of Aaborg in Denmark and University of Malmo in Sweden in 2004 summaries in his release; “The Danish Cultural World of Unbridgeable Differences” in reference to the V–K government’s handling of the immigrants and refugees: “the contestation of foreign presence in Denmark” and adds “This denial in the popular sphere builds on the same culturalist construction of unbridgeable differences between a ‘we-group’ of ‘alike’ (or invisible) Danes and a visible ‘out-group’ that dominates both popular and political understandings of immigrants and refugees in Denmark in the end of the 1990s” I will talk about racism here. No, nobody is racist, I am and will only talk about differentiating among human beings, because certain people here, in Denmark had to be ’uprooted’ (Malkki, 1992) from the Danish soil, their culture makes them belong elsewhere. In this section, I explore how the Danish culture, norms and values were constructed as ‘posited essence’ (Prakash 1990; 394, cf Malkki, 1997), by the government and the Danish Peoples party and used as a ‘political tool’ to fight the minorities based on the perceived cultural differences as it was also used to buttress and widen the ‘them’ and ‘us’ divide through laws that demarcated the ‘newcomers’ from the native Danes.“FN advarer mod dansk diskrimination: FN-højkommissær taler om dobbeltmoral og advarer mod diskrimination af flygtninge »Den nye regering i Danmark skal selvfølgelig have lov til at vise, hvad den vil. Men der har aldrig før

været et så påtrængende behov for ikke bare at bekæmpe diskrimination, men også for at komme flygtninge og asylansøgere i møde,« siger Mary Robinson til Information. Eksempelvis er spørgsmålet om ikke-diskrimination meget vigtig, især når det gælder familiesammenføring. Der må ikke være forskellig tilgang til forskellig nationaliteter,« siger hun” (Information, 28/11-2001).

The thought about the Danish cultural identity in politics, defined in terms of ‘one-shared’ culture, a collective self, based on shared-history and shared-ancestry, coupled with the perception that all natives Danes are ‘one-people’, quite unchanging and therefore also have the same destiny---oneness, sameness, a tendency that both eases and leads the creation of specific form of Othering---ethnic Otherness (Baumann, 2004). Because, in my view, those who were ‘Othered’ seem to have distinctive characteristics, ‘markers’ such as skin color, eye-color and hair color, that isolate them from the ‘selves’, as they also almost always form the minority, as Schwalbe et. al., (2000) observed that “Othering is a process whereby a dominant group defines into existence an inferior group” (Schwalbe et. al., 2000; 422; cf: Jensen, 2009; 13).

It was to assume that all native Danes belong together, have the same background and even act together, the constructed and perceived ‘sameness’. This stance, which is also the backbone of the divide, as I had argued that it is also ‘Otherness’, is highly disputed, Jenkins (1997) writes: “neither culture nor ethnicity is something people have or indeed, to which they belong. They are, rather, complex repertoires which people experience, use, learn and do in their daily lives, within which they construct an ongoing sense of themselves and an understanding of their fellows.” (Jenkins, 1997; 14). Again, to emphasize the perverse notion that Denmark belongs to the native Danes, the V-K government and the support party in both practice and rhetoric, constructed cultural identities, between the Danes and aliens--cultural demarcation, through what in Malkki’s view is ‘‘the taken-for-granted ways of thinking about identity and territory’’ the author summaries such notions as “a commonsense ideas about countries and roots, nations and national identities” (Malkki, 1997; 166), used in this political context against the aliens in Denmark, the so-referred to as the ‘intruders’ who are only aiming at invading the welfare state.

The perceived differences in culture became one of the easy and discernible arguments used by the Danish Peoples’ Party in that continuum, as their utterances are not only subtle racism, (van Dijk, 1995), but also do attach people to their perceived culture, to their birthplace seen as being their origin.“To claim that people and cultures are not inferior initially enables the users of neo-racist rhetoric to deny racism; humans are seen as always part of cultures and cultures are naturally tied to certain landscape and climates. If people of different cultures are in the ‘wrong place’, their culture will be incompatible with the culture of the new context, which inevitable generates conflict and xenophobic

reactions. An implication of this naturalization of culture is that ‘living among one’s own kind is natural’ and therefore mixing is undesirable” (Hervik, 2012; 214).The aliens were not only deemed as having a different and incompatible culture, but also a sort of culture that stands in contrast to that of the Danes and will compete with the Danish culture “mod-kultur”, (opposite culture). As if culture is fixed, and not porous (Barth, 1969), this question has driven into the arguments on the integration of immigrants. The perception and the stigmatization of immigrants as being “different” and “incompatible” within the Danish society, I think, makes the integration quite vague and unidirectional, as Kvaale (2011; 226), exposes on the confusion that exists between what the politicians refer to as integration which perhaps seems like assimilation. Nevertheless, the author sees the integration process as, “the conducting of culturalized national politics with the intension of complete assimilation of immigrants rather than civil state politics with the intention of functional integration” (ibid 231). The problem however, is whether or not all the foreigners in Denmark have a common culture or even common religion, and this makes it difficult to envisage which particular culture, the kultur-kamp was directed against. My take, however vaguely, is that the target perhaps was the Islamic culture, leaving behind the question of whether or not all the foreigners are Muslims or will even desire to be. OSCE: Danmark diskriminerer muslimer: Danmarks behandling af den muslimske befolkning bliver igen udsat for hård kritik fra en international institution. Denne gang fra OSCE, der i en ny rapport, som Dagbladet Information er kommet i besiddelse af, skarpt kritiserer muslimers stilling i Danmark. OSCE -ambassadør Omür Orhun kritiserer den danske regering for på en række områder at have forværret danske muslimers stilling gennem de seneste fem år og afslører, at han flere gange i efteråret advarede udenrigsminister Per Stig Møller om, at regeringens håndtering af karikaturkrisen var uklog. (Information, 03/04-2007).Muslims in Denmark, regardless of how modest, fanatic or whatever they may be, they all have to constantly listen to critics and suspensions as their presence in the country also became questionable. The state backed campaign based on the notion and experience of culture as territorially and ethnically rooted with certain indigenous people, (Kvaale, 2011; 242) and as if the Danish culture and how the citizens adopt and use them is patentable to the Danish state. A campaign championed by the far right Peoples’ party, with their uncompromising stance and which was only to discriminate between the native Danes and the aliens in the country. In his collections, Sewells’ (2005; 156) had defined culture in two ways, according to the author culture is “a concrete and bounded body of beliefs and practices” and two, “culture evolves social life”. In any sense, I argue that beliefs, practices and social life, are not restricted to or owned by any specific group of people nor do they have any patent over them, as these are also not static but dynamic. As Connor (1994, 92), has noted, the imprecision of the use of the terms ‘nation’, ‘state’, the

‘nation-state’ and ‘nationalism’ in ‘Othering’; and the claims by certain political parties, which associate themselves with particular territories as belonging to them, thereby seeing ‘Others’ as also belonging elsewhere, creates a divide among people in the same country. Culture can be used as a strategic tool to constructing ‘we’ and ‘them’ which can also lead to discrimination. Culture is not fixed as do also identity, according to Castells (1997), both culture and identity formation are the same with regards to what people are faced with, it ‘is people’s source of meaning and experience’ (Castells, 1997; 6). Notwithstanding all these assertions, culture identity and ethnicity, still seemed to be the political arguments that directed the V-K government restrictive bills on immigrants and refugees. The V-K government and the Danish Peoples party in their process of using the perceived cultural difference between the native Danes on one hand and the minorities on the other, strategically, put the existing Danish cultural institutions in the country under political control. “Stram styring af dansk kultur: Der sættes i disse år nye politiske rammer for de danske kulturinstitutioner, der går i retning af øget politisk styring af de statslige midler.” En meget anti-liberal politisk styring af dansk kultur," som betyder, at man fratager de danske kulturinstitutioner deres autonomi”, (Elsebeth Gerner Nielsen; 28/06-2006)This form of political agenda, whereby culture and its perceived differences, are used as a dividing-line, as I have outlined throughout this paper, has been disputed by many anthropologists including Eller (1959; 8), who has referred to this as an “odd paradox”, because according to him, the relation between ethnicity and culture is not perfect. In other developments, DeVos (1975) adverted to such processes and described them as: “subjective symbolic or emblematic use of any aspects of culture by a group, in order to differentiate themselves from other groups”, (DeVos, 1975; 16; cf, ibid; 8). It could be argued that the V-K government that prides itself with liberalization could place such restrictions on free thinking cultural institutions. I think, this explains the enormity of the attempt to draw a cultural line between ‘we’ the Danes and ‘them’, the refugees and the immigrants, or call them the ‘Orients’ as this also attracted a critic from a member of parliament. A lecturer from the University of Copenhagen at the institute of Arts and Culture adds:“Oppositionen kalder det anti-liberal politik, der giver mere bureaukrati og mindre kunst Den nuværende regering ønsker at få mere hånd i hanke med de offentlige tilskudsmidler til dansk kultur. Lektor ved Institut for Kunst og Kulturvidenskab ved Københavns Universitet, Peter Duelund, er enig i, at "det helt klart giver mulighed for større politisk detailstyring," hvilket han mener, går ud over princippet om at holde armslængde i forholdet mellem kunst og politik”. (Ritzaus Bureau, 28/06-2006).By attempting to construct national identities for natives Danes, the V-K government backed by, if not directed by the Danish people’s party with their burning desire to oust immigrants from Denmark, succeeded in having a sort of “biopolitical” agenda that only impinged or rested on race, identity, culture stereotyping and gender issues. For example, the verbal tussles and the negative vibes surrounding refugees and

immigrants, the political utterances and practice they are subjected to, in my judgment, are only to depict the intra relationships among aliens as seductive and lacking sexual freedom, as they do also to show that these group of people collectively do not have any affable character.That said, the Danish culture, which already imposes a necessity for its dominance in Denmark, as I draw on my own experience, can co-existence with these sub-cultures, the prerequisite though, is tolerance. “Europarådet bekymret over intolerance i Danmark: Danmark kritiseres nu igen for sin måde at behandle etniske og religiøse minoriteter på. Nu må regeringen lukke ørerne op og gøre noget, mener oppositionen. Europarådets Ministerkomité er bekymret over, at der i Danmark eksisterer en intolerance, der kan føre til øget fjendtlighed mod forskellige etniske og religiøse grupper.” (Ritzaus Bureau, 17/12-2005). However, according to Hervik, (2004; 249), the intolerance for aliens, especially Muslim aliens by certain Danes begun with the wars in the Balkans and in Somalia in the 1990s, and the subsequent rise in neo-nationalism in the country in the late 90s. The election of the liberal party in 2001, supported by the Danish Peoples Party was only to cement and climax, the already ‘latent’ they-and-us construction. In his view, seeing or much rightly, perceiving people from other cultures as a threat to ‘people’ who deem themselves as having cultural homogeneity, get us close to far-right populism than to just populism (Hervik, 2012; 214). Well in all other respects, this form of populism is what I believe, underscores the enormity of the politics the Danish Peoples’ party practiced with the V-K government, what I had believed to be differentiating, hence ‘Othering’ or ‘Otherness’. Because by demonizing the perceived alien’s culture, which is seen as a type of culture that does not belong to Denmark and even contradict the Danish culture is------a sense of belonging----hence ‘Othering’ or ‘Otherness’. Remember that one central rhetoric in the so-called Kultur-kamp was the “Deres-og-vores” kultur, (meaning ‘theirs’ and ‘ours’ culture), with the ‘western’ superiority as opposed to ‘non-western’ inferiority’ as an undertone in the ‘conduction of the culturalized national politics’ (Kvaale, 2011; 231). Allen (2009), inspired by the German writer Schnitzler, refers to this form of seeing oneself as not being what the others are, as an act of “the underpinning of the imperialist power” well as being “attempts or strategies to stereotype and thereby marginalize and control specific national, ethnic, religious, or linguistic groups” in the society (ibid; 44). He continues to see this type of politics, as it also in Denmark in the V-K governments’ era as “using objectifying representational strategies in constructing otherness” (ibid; 45).The repatriation of the Iraqis happened at a time when the government had constructed the so-called “kultur canon” ---the ‘cultural canon’ project, believed to be used in waging a “kulturkamp” ---the ‘cultural war of values’ (Hervik 2012; 218), by emphasizing the notion of ‘identity’ relative to other ‘identities’—‘Othering’ or ‘Otherness’, (Spavik, 1985).

The ‘preaching’ of these ‘blatantly essentialist culture concepts’ (Kvaale, 2011; 136) and how these discourses resonated with the voters in the Danish community, in my view, also can be used to determine and explain the pressures mounted on the Iraqi refugees and which also triggered the irrational decision on the repatriation and I say quite experientially. The consequences of the ‘biopolitics’ in Denmark for the ten years still await an eminent Danish writer or historian.It was in this period, where the V-K government deliberately attempted to create some sort of ‘unity’ or ‘sameness’ through the enhancement of cultural relativism, as they were also emphasizing cultural incompatibility (Gingrich, 2004; 12). This form nationalism in the words of Andre Gingrich, fakes internal division among people, as he states: “Most versions of nationalism aggressively construct, and mobilize for, an emotionalized ‘us’ thereby downplaying all kinds of internal conflicts among such an ‘us’ which is usually defined along narrow and rigid cultural lines. Simultaneously, the minds and feelings of ‘us’ are directed against stereotyped and stigmatized forms of ‘them’, by downplaying all common factors that ‘us’ and ‘them’ do, or could, share” (Gingrich, 2006; 199) In his earlier works, Hervik (1999) pointed to the construction of ‘cultural others’ in referring to with the presence of the Somalis in Denmark, these people were perceived as distinctively different and unable to be integrated into the Danish society. The distinctive nature of Black people, Somalis for example, and non-Christian denominations, say Islam, as I have argued before, is a factor on which, the Danish Peoples Party, the ‘new right’ generate forces justifiable by the easy identification of these ‘objects’, to subject them to discrimination and nepotism. Perhaps Hervik is right when he writes, “I contend that a Danish cultural understanding of immigrants and refugees follows the general pattern of figured worlds and contains a set of agents, a set of typical progressing events, and specific set of motivating forces” (Hervik, 2004; 253).This sort of divide, again I argue, might have reflected how the authorities in the municipality “sagsbehandler” might have perceived and treated the Iraqis. According to one of the Iraqis called Basheer, who found the atmosphere in the camp as uncongenial and didn’t feel like continuing to be in Denmark, the social workers, (Sagsbehandler), wanted to entice him in order for him to say ‘yes’ to repatriation. Basheer explains his experience with the Asylum social workers in this way: ”Han bekrigede mig psykisk. Han pressede mig til at rejse tilbage. Han sagde for eksempel til min praktikvært at han havde tilbudt mig et køleskab og et fjernsyn hvis bare jeg ville rejse hjem til Irak.” “Det var sagsbehandleren der drev mig så langt ud at jeg ikke kunne se noget håb i Danmark, der var ikke anden udvej end at forlade Danmark.” (Basheer; 80).It could be example of the effect of the mainstream V-K-O’s politics, as this campaign might have resonated among the entire population. Hervik, (2004; 261), observed among a group of Danish people he studied that, if foreigners do not ditto-ditto comply with the Danish way of life or directly copy them, they are deemed as being unruly—unruly guest.

The author observed from these interviews, that, the notion of ‘we’ the Danes and the ‘host’ on one hand; and ‘they’, the aliens and the ‘guest’ or out-group, as he called it, on the other hand (ibid; 253) , are perceived as existing with ‘irreconcilable cultural differences’….a sort of the reinforcement of the notions of “cultural Others”. On ‘otherness in Europe’, Gingrich (2006), illustrates how nationalism had influenced the ‘carving of’ or the formulation and the mobilizing of ‘us’ by ignoring the internal conflict and the differences that might have also existed within this ‘us’, in his opinion these construction are mainly based on culture, (ibid; 199) leaning utterly on the ‘perceived differences and commonalities’ (ibid; 200), of such cultures. The author cites Holland et al., for coining a well and befitting modern terminologies “culturally-figured worlds” (Holland et al., 1998), and “cultural models” (ibid, 1987) to describe these tendencies.

5.2.4 Religious ‘Othering’

There is not much in the V-K government that was against other forms of Christianity beside the national Danish Christian-orthodox church, no, the problem is Islam. “At the same time, Denmark’s Christian culture is regarded as inseparable from democratic society, yet with freedom of religion expunged in the face of Islamic incompatibility” (Hervik, 2012; 221). The growing disconnect, however is the disagreement between the government and the support party, which is categorically Christianity-inclined, as it is also deemed as a core element in the quest for “Danishness” (Jenkins, 2011; 260). As I gave examples earlier on, the members of the party have a special feeling for Islam and do not believe that Muslims can follow democratic norms……democracy is a Christian norm and not a process. According to Baumann (2004), ‘Othering’, could be recognized in the realms of politics, religion and aesthetics, it also attempts to emphasize ‘superiority’ of ‘self’ to the ‘other’---“ (see, page 21).

“DF-formand maner til kamp mod islam: Dansk Folkeparti har sat sig nye mål for stramninger i udlændingepolitikken i forbindelse med dette efterårs finanslovforhandlinger. Der skal gang i hjemsendelserne af afviste asylansøgere, ulandsbistanden skal tages fra lande, der ikke vil tage imod deres egne borgere, og der skal oprettes asylansøgningscentre så tæt som muligt på de lande, asylansøgerne kommer fra” (Ritzaus Bureau; 18/09-2004).

The Danish peoples’ party opposition and objection to Islam on Danish soil also led to in two not-too-easy to understand actions taken by party during the V-K government’s regime. 1. Their unequivocal mandating the government to participate in the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars, and 2. Their opposition to using Danish money in the rebuilding the war-torn Islamic countries—“the Others”, and categorical opposition to supporting the renovation29 of 13 Mosques in Afghanistan.

29 Ritzau Bureau 09/07-2008

This form of intolerance stands alone with regards to what we read from countries, Denmark claims to be friends with. For example, in the US and Canada, two of the main refugee receiving western countries in the world, the prohibition of discrimination based religion is clear and explicit under what is referred to as “reasonable accommodation” (1972 in the US, and in Canada under the Canadian Chapter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982; cf. Bribosia et al., 2011 and Ringelheim et al., 2010). In much the same way, as the European Commission’s convention on Human Rights in 1978 and the EU’s Equality Directive of 2000, is also expected to prohibit religious discrimination, even when, according to Bribosia et al., (2011), this EU directive has been subjected to varying interpretations in different courts30

from one Member state to the other. Albeit, Member states that are bound by the EU’s legal obligations are inspired by them. It suffices though, to say that, Denmark is not bound by any EU regulations and makes its own decisions on whether or not to adopt any of the EU regulations.

Besides, Denmark, according to Olwig et al., (2011; 2), perhaps in contrast to most of the western countries, like Sweden and the UK, Canada and the US, is perceived as a “modern egalitarian, culturally homogeneous and mono-religious state”, therefore, it may be understandable to experience an iota of resistances in allowing plurality of religious practices and beliefs in the country. That said, detesting Islam, or discouraging its presence in Denmark in the 21th century, in my sense, my goodness, could best be expected as only for winning elections, and not winning elections to practice such politics, and without attempting to decry the polity in the country, well, that is far from my intention, however I was stock to witness that, this kind of politics could be practiced in 10 years. I say this because the influence of the Danish Peoples’ party seems diminishing now; at least, this politics, in 2011 was not a winner in Denmark, after ten years of its use and practice. The reluctance to recognize immigrants’ religion, I believe, is no longer on the political agenda, despite the sporadic references to it, due to the unabated outcry on migration from certain quarters in the Danish Parliament.

The debated Kulturkanon had Christianity as a prime element, and I think that, it makes the “Others” indignant because it appropriates the dominant Danish culture. In Said’s ‘Orientalist’ sense, they are politically powered by the re-thinking and the re-visiting of history, ancestral holdings, to make certain groups in the Danish society see themselves as different and ‘Others’. The ‘Kanon’ which Jenkins (2011) had referred to as a centrally proscribed cultural canon, has since 2006 been the cornerstone of the religious education for schools, the kristendomskunskab, which was to be leaned towards the Lutheran church,

30 1981 in the UK; 2000 in Greece and 2008 in France, just name but few.

(Jenkins, 2011; 259). It has since drawn sharp criticisms:

”Krav om nationalistisk- kristen folkeskole kritiseres skarpt: Dansk Folkeparti (DF) står tilsyneladende isoleret med sine ønsker om, at folkeskolens værdigrundlag ændres, så det alene fokuserer på dansk kultur og kristendom” (Ritzaus Bureau, 13/02-2006).

Where will the Islamic religion stand in the face of the so-called integration of immigrants? As mostly perceived among the politicians on the far right of the political aisles in Denmark, the integration may not meet severe difficulties among people with European background, Jenkins (2011; 257). To some degree, I dispute, it is deeply due to their background as they are perceived as being readily able to integrate, and not incompatible to the Danish norms and values because they, generally are not Muslims. As anthropologists, like Grillo, have observed as a problem, immigrants with ethnic backgrounds, who live transnational live and insist on maintaining their own values and norms can be at ‘odds’ with the news societies which they live in (Grillo, 2011; 267). A tendency the Danish integration system cannot escape. Grillo seems to get it right as his point hits the core of the belated, yet impending integration in Denmark. In his view, the minorities can be ‘in the Danish society but different’, with individual freedom and choices and social engagement (ibid; 268), aided underway by the cessation of those cinematic negative discourses on the disfiguration of immigrants and refugees in Denmark, I argue.In the same vein and quite understandably, Jenkins (2011), debates how the integration process may be different and uneasy, for instance, for ‘visibly’ different, religiously challenging (mainly Muslims) migrants, who mostly arrived in Denmark from the mid-1980s onwards, and who are or who will find it, difficult to integrate’. These things, I dispute, can only be challenges and not hindrances, far from that. Jenkins debunks the impossibility of integrating such groups into the Danish, the stance of politicians from the Danish Peoples’ Party based on the notion of “Otherness” have taken. They have any forms of descriptions for Islam and one can only hope that they have acquired enough knowledge about the religion.“Islam er den største trussel mod verdensfreden siden kommunismens fald” (Per Dalgaard, DF; 29/04-2007).

The Danish Peoples’ Party’s politicians perhaps reserve the integration to Christians immigrants (ibid; 259). Or perhaps, the integration demands immigrants to give up what they came with and take up the Danish way of life or are the immigrants, to maintain for example, their—culture, language or traditions.In any case these “new right” politicians construe the Danish integration as a process of becoming an ‘ethnic Dane’, or as becoming “the imagined national (native) citizen” (Grillo, 2011; 274)…… their emphasis is unchangeably on we the Danes with ‘vi Dansker’ an

untainted attitude, as against the immigrants of unstinted characters, an argument aided by anti-Islam, ethnic profiling and the politics of no tolerance for immigrants and their religion. The reason can maybe be spotted in what the current leader of the Danish Peoples’ Party said in 2009: ”Det handler om assimilation, hvis samfundet skal fungere. Om at folk med anden etnisk baggrund entydigt skal tilpasse sig danske traditioner. tørklæder være forbudt i offentligheden, 24-års-reglen var afløst af en 28-års-regel, og Danmark ville primært modtage flygtninge fra den vestlige kulturkreds, mange indvandrere ville blive tvangsflyttet væk fra ghettoer, og muslimer stillede helst ikke spørgsmål til indholdet af pølsehornene ved den lokale byfest”. (DF's magtfulde gruppeformand Kristian Thulesen Dahl: 21/07-2009).I personally wait to see how the conversion of these Muslims into the Danish Christian religion would look like or the form of assimilation the party had wished, will be, insomuch as the fact remains that any effective integration, in the words of Jenkins is ‘not the prerogative of the state’ (Jenkins, 2011; 264).

5.2.5 Media ‘Othering’The expected neutrality among the news media is slowly being eroded, as most journalists and newscasters, according to Cook (1998, 85), do not only communicate political information but also have assumed the role of the construction political agenda. It is revealed (Hervik, 2004) that the perception of immigrants and refugees by most ancient Danes in the population, are only drawn from the media. In his extensive studies on the relationship between native Danes and immigrants and refugees in Denmark and how the Danish media has contributed in getting the Danes to seeing the immigrants and refugees as ‘the Others’---“Orients”--- Peter Hervik, writes: “Few Danes know any immigrants and refugees personally. Since the Danish media have been saturated by negative stories about immigrants, it is therefore hardly surprising that the distinction between a ‘we-group’ of Danes and a ‘they-group’ of immigrants is present in all of our interviews” (Hervik, 2004; 253). An interesting counter reaction to the negative perception of immigrants and refugees by most in the population due to both political and media influence is what a Danish artist exhibited during the early years of the V-K-O reign in Denmark to ironically tell people that immigrants and refugees are also human beings:

Flygtninge er også mennesker: ”Postkort fra Paradis” kalder fotograf Anders Clausen sin udstilling på Platformen, Brandts Klædefabrik. Den varer til 18. april og fortæller med egne fotos, hvordan flytninge på Dansk Røde Kors’ asylafdelinger ser sig selv.- Flygtninge-billeder i medierne fokuserer på ydre begivenheder: På flugt, på sagsbehandlerens kontor, i tolden. Disse stereotyper er med til at forstærke indtrykket af, at flygtninge ikke er individer, men en gruppe. Og som sådan bliver de bedømt, siger Finn Thrane, direktør på Museet for Fotokunst, der har givet plads for Anders Clausens udstilling. Den viser derfor flygtninge som de forskelligartede mennesker, de er i virkeligheden Fyens Stiftstidende, 09/03-2004). In Denmark, the media joined in the political move to see immigrants and refugees as different and not belonging to Denmark, but elsewhere. Gåsholt and Togeby, (1995),

observed that the increase and decrease in intolerance for immigrants and refugees relates to how much is written about this ‘they’ group (cf. Hervik, 2004; 248), whereas Rikke Andersen, a media lecturer from the University of Malmø, did not miss words in her description of how the Danish media helps create not only the division but also the emphasis on the ‘superiority’ and ‘inferiority’ among native Danes (the ‘we’) and ethnic minorities (the ‘them’) respectively, and how these tendencies resonate amongst the population.”Det drejer sig om landets indvandrere, som igen er blevet hovedtema i en valgkamp. Men danskernes viden om deres medborgere fra Pakistan, Somalia eller Irak kommer næsten udelukkende fra medierne, og det er bekymrende. For journalisterne videregiver stereotype og negative billeder af indvandrerne. Det siger Rikke Andreassen, lektor i medie- og kommunikationsvidenskab på Malmö Universitet, efter at have undersøgt, hvordan danske medier siden 1980'erne har beskrevet de etniske minoriteter. Mediernes beskrivelser påvirker dels danskernes opfattelse af etniske minoriteter, dels deres selvopfattelse. Når medierne fremstiller tyrkiske Hassan på en bestemt måde, f.eks. som kvindeundertrykker, får det danske Lars til at fremstå som det modsatte. (Ritzaus Bureau, 07/11-2007).The media, today, cannot be expected to perform the role of monitoring power, and the giving of attentions to views and opinions, nor to only providing information to the public (Caparini, 2004), it goes a step further by taking sides on all aspects of issues including social, cultural and political agendas. The Danish media did not only aid politicians to change opinions and perceptions of the masses on immigrants and refugees, they articulated the negative political ‘outburst’. For instance, Hervik, (2012; 216) reveals how the leader of the Danish Peoples party’s message about the demand for a referendum on whether or not the Danes should accept immigrants in Denmark: “Ask the Danes: ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to immigrants”, was made a broad story in a tabloid newspaper on the 22 of April, 1997, even before the V-K government came to power [----I challenge that, this is an undisputed form of ‘imaginative’ geographical kind of “Otherness”, (Said, 1979), even though it seems insensitive to media manipulation----]. The author also reveals how the media aided in forcing an immigrant politician from politics in Denmark, by labeling the person as an ‘enemy’ among the politicians (Hervik 2012; 216-217). The Danish media was only articulating the negative rhetoric on immigrants and refugees, as they also were setting the political agendas they favored as well as pushing them through the public sphere.

“In the first half of 1997 the tabloid paper Ekstra Bladet ran the aggressive campaign which’s objective was to create a debate about what the paper saw as the most salient topic for the Danes: the presence of immigrants and refugees”………….In response to whether there should be a debate or a referendum of the immigrants and refugees…….”In response to this implicit demand for free political debate, Extra Bladet started the campaign, which could serve the democratic function, (31 March, Ekstar Bladet)” (Hervik, 2012; 217).

This amounts to the preliminaries of putting refugees and immigrants on the Danish political

agenda, a contrived kind of political agenda, which sits deep in minority marginalization and stereotyping, supported by the media, and which also became an election winner. Remarkably, during the reign of the V-K government, the politics was restricted to ‘blocks’---the right-wing parties ‘block’ and the left-wing parties ‘block’ of the political aisle. It was also in this period that two classic events, besides the internal migration one, dominated the Danish politics, namely the Iraq war in 2003 and the caricature depiction of Mohammed by the JP, on 30/09-2005. By examining how neutral, or supportive or objective, or critical the Danish media are, with regards to these two issues, Hjarvard, (2006) found that the JP and the Berlingske Tidende, seem to lean towards the right-wing, whereas the Information and the Politikken were found to be left-leaning. It was also the Jylland Posten that brought the Mohammed caricatures, meant initially to be a national conflict (Christoffersen, 2006; 21), but exploded and assumed global dimension. As noted by Gingrich, (2006; 196), since the 1980s and the 1990s, the media, politicians and intellectuals have been engaged with what he calls the ‘new right’ all over in Europe, and have had immigration and anti-multiculturalism as one of their main items on the agenda. This is also true for the V-K government’s regime, according to Elkjær and Bertelsen (2006), the chief-editors of the major Danish public media concurred to the V-K government’s cultural wars, as Hervik cites: “The prime minister’s value and interest-based politics was closely accompanied by new initiatives to strengthen value-based journalism. With a new emphasis on values, Jyllands-Posten joined the ‘culture war’ in summer 2003 by deciding to widen the concept of culture from ‘high culture’ to include and debate ‘habits, ways of thinking and life ways’” (Elkjær & Bertelsen, 2006; cf. Hervik, 2012; 218).It may not readily be easy to understand, nor measure the impact of the media-aided political discourses on the public and how they resonate with the people, how it is received by the people, adopted and adapted by them and even how these discourses, peaceful, discriminating, perilous and so on, have been re-conceptualized by the people at large, without also looking at their manifestations among the immigrants and the refugees, of which the Iraqi refugees are not an exemption.The enormous political influence the right-wing Populist Party, the Danish Peoples Party, gained under Anders F. Rasmussen’s V-K government in the early years of the 20s, was due to the support by most Danish media (Gåsholt & Togeby, 1995). As the politics of categorizing and repressing immigrants and refugees ethnocentrically based on culture is one of the many examples of the outcomes of such influence.The media hype on the minorities and more specifically around certain elements such Islamic headscarf, rape and terrorism, aided the V-K government to win three consecutive elections in Denmark, by simply tagging such, ‘marked terms’ or signs, say problems, with immigrants in the political discourses,---“the marked term is in fact necessary for the primary term

to be defined”, (Diken, 1998; 41, cf. Jensen, 2009; 11),--- Danske medier videregiver fordomsfulde billeder af indvandrere og har gjort det i 25 år, viser ny undersøgelse. Billederne skinner skarpt igennem i valgkampen. Alle taler om dem. Alle har en holdning til dem. Det drejer sig om landets indvandrere, som igen er blevet hovedtema i en valgkamp. Men danskernes viden om deres medborgere fra Pakistan, Somalia eller Irak kommer næsten udelukkende fra medierne, og det er bekymrende. For journalisterne videregiver stereotype og negative billeder af indvandrerne.Det siger Rikke Andreassen, lektor i medie- og kommunikationsvidenskab på Malmö Universitet, efter at have undersøgt, hvordan danske medier siden 1980'erne har beskrevet de etniske minoriteter. Mediernes beskrivelser påvirker dels danskernes opfattelse af etniske minoriteter, dels deres selvopfattelse. Når medierne fremstiller tyrkiske Hassan på en bestemt måde, f.eks. som kvindeundertrykker, får det danske Lars til at fremstå som det modsatte. - Vores nyhedsmedier giver os en række negative og generaliserende historier om etniske minoriteter, og vi ser den samme type historier igen og igen. Det er bl.a. historier om etniske minoritetskvinder udsat for hustruvold, tvangsægteskaber og æresdrab. Om etniske kvinder, der går med tørklæder, og at tørklæder er undertrykkende, og unge muslimske mænd, der er meget kriminelle og voldtager, siger Rikke Andreassen (Ritzaus Bureau, 07/11-2007). By bringing such stories to the public sphere, thanks to the Danish media, the Danish peoples’ party always succeeded in depicting the newcomers as not being worthy to live among Danes. The Danish media, as exemplified in the publication of the Mohammed caricatures, under the wide protective arms of ‘Freedom of Speech’ and the eminent criticism embedded in ‘self-censoring’, publishes every thing they think, they should publish also when these materials sometimes, are disdainful. As Rytter (2011; 69) has observed, both the public and the media discourses in Denmark, was not only to disqualify a number of people based on their family histories, but also to make their presence in the Danish society problematic,-----geographical ‘Othering’ (Said, 1979). What is quite unfortunately about this, is that the main national news media, which everybody in the society contributes towards---the DR- --Denmark’s Radio--- could not differ on this but joined in the creation of the ‘division’ by demonizing the ethnic minorities:

Til Ritzau siger Ole Hyltoft, at han gerne vil støtte Dansk Folkepartis "indsats for at holde en dybt reaktionær og voldsorienteret ideologi som islam lidt på afstand af dansk kultur". Og at Ole Hyltoft på den måde går til angreb på islam som sådan og ikke islamisk fundamentalisme, viser ifølge Mogens Jensen, at Hyltoft dæmoniserer en hel religion. - Det er skammeligt, at DR, der har en vigtig opgave med integration, har en næstformand, der dæmoniserer alle muslimer - også dem, der arbejder og integrerer sig i det danske samfund. Det viser, at kulturministeren begik en kæmpe fejl, da hun for nyligt udpegede Ole Hyltoft som næstformand for DR's bestyrelse, siger Mogens Jensen til Ritzau og tilføjer: - Hans udtalelser viser, at han ikke arbejder for et DR for alle, men ønsker at ekskludere en stor gruppe i Danmark, (20/04-2009).Scholars who studied the Danish media in those times, assert that the success of the polity in that period, was also due to the fact that the negative statements made to ‘demean’ and ‘demonize’ the immigrants and refugees by the politicians, were not only forwarded unaltered, but were also concurred to and magnified by the Danish media. In her book

entitled “Der er et yndigt land. Medier, minoriteter og danskhed", after anlysizing 300 news articles and 300 news items in the Danish television stations (Denmark radio and TV 2) Rikke Andreassen, (2007) as fore mentioned, revealed how the Danish media mostly writes negative things about aliens in the country to aid the politics. These intensified negative rhetoric on how unfit the aliens cultures and lifestyles was because the media took political blitzes against foreigners in general and Muslims in particular, into alarming proportions, as they always won the battle by choosing the best trope, to depict the minorities as unfit for being accepted into the Danish society. According to Grillo (2011; 272), most western media, referring to the murder of van Gogh in 2004, through for example, the trope “ritual murder”, propagated this tragedy into confrontational levels, resulting in deepening the ‘we’ and the ‘them’ in many societies. In the post-caricature era, it became public knowledge that moderate Muslims around the world, more especially in Egypt and Denmark, believed that there is a lack of knowledge about Islam on the part western journalists, and for instance, these moderate Muslims opted to help broaden the understanding and tolerance for Islam among Danish journalists:

Den muslimske, egyptiske organisation Bridges Foundation har sammen med Islamisk Trossamfund i Danmark besluttet at holde en konference for danske journalister om islam hvor de kan lære om islam (Ritzaus Bureau, 02/01-2006). I contend that, this form of ‘freedom of speech’ exercises by the Danish media, could never have come off, in any other period than that of the V-K government, where there were a conscious effort to socially and political marginalized people based on again, culturalized-national politics (Kvaale, 2011; 231), where cultural incompatibility is on the lips of many politicians, where there is resistances to multiculturalism (Hervik, 2012; 212), where the creation of ‘unnatural communication’ between people of different cultures had been paramount, (cf: ibid; 213, Danish Peoples Party, 2007; 1), and where immigrants and refugees from developing countries are treated as being a threat, and are the main items on the political agenda.

Chapter 6

Conclusion

I have attempted to draw supportive arguments to show that successful assisted voluntary return and reintegration could be affected by many factors such as, the experiences and the treatments meted out to refugees in exile. In my view, as it is also the recommendations by the DRC, a steep repatriation demands thorough counseling or advices as well as ‘a feel of admittance’ into the new ‘home’ of the refugees in question. I conclude, that practices that

make refugees feel unease or unrest in exile, for example, the feel of being ‘Othered' by the host authorities, may result in the making of wrong decisions on repatriation. The politics of wanting to ‘push’ the Iraqi refugees to yield a ‘yes’ on repatriation by isolating them from the local population, depriving them from working, excluding them from effective social support and above all, not allowing them to get family comfort can lead to the making of wrong decisions on repatriation. According to the answers given in the interview, the finding of a middle ground between staying in Exile-Denmark, and repatriating to troubled Iraq, was non-existing for the interviewee, hence their hasty decision on repatriation, which was far from being voluntary. Therefore, I suggest that voluntary repatriation should not be induced, but can be enhanced (see also the DRC recommendations—‘hjemsendelse’, 18/05-2010), through dialogue, besides, security evaluations of the refugee’s homeland, in order to be able to gain beneficent effect, from the program. I do also suggest that security concerns in the refugee’s home country must precede any thoughts of voluntary repatriation. As Muggeridge, et al., (2006), found from her interview of with British refugees, ‘security in home country’ was the main hindrance, otherwise most of the refugees had strong desire to return to their home country. Further, I have argued, that if the Iraqi refugees had had to feel at home in Denmark- a sense of belonging31, the decision would have been different, let alone if they had been given the opportunity to earn their own income, as a morale booster, or as an enhancement of their lininality (Turner, 2012, 43). And even when, admittedly, refugee admission is only a humane sacrificial burden on the part of the host country, the politics of religious sentimentalism, nationalism, party ideologies and self, become obstacles to the well being of refugees in exile.

6.1 RecommendationAllowing refugees to earn their own income, besides also granting them enough money, while in exile, hopefully, can avert their destitution as it could also eventually enhance their, integration or repatriation and ease up on an eventual reintegration.“Regeringen afskaffer ifølge Politiken de såkaldte fattigdomsydelser som starthjælp, introduktionsydelse og kontanthjælpsloft. Det fremgår af regeringens forslag til finanslov for 2012, der fremlægges torsdag”. (Ritzau Bureau 01/11/2011).Lukewarm attitudes with dealing with asylum cases may create frustrations among the asylum-seekers. Figley, (1989), sees swift reviewing of asylum cases, as being a requirement for refugees to regain control over their lives, namely, as an empowerment to them. Additionally, authors such as Andersson and Goolishian (1992), had written on the 31 Hargarty et al., (1996; 242-244), had examined sense of belonging in relation to loneliness, involvement in community activities, relation to social support among others, and concluded that sense of belonging has both social and psychological person effects.

significance of therapy (cf; Reichelt, 1994; 26), that help refugees gain control over their lives. Again, it becomes eminent that the exertion of undue pressures (Stepputat, 2004, 5) by host governments on refugees could make them unsafe about making rational decisions on repatriation- and may get the repatriation look like ----a sort self-deportation, as some of them may choose to decamp instead. Even when some do not agree, incentives given to refugees in exile could enhance their voluntary repatriation. In her accounts on the Ethiopia refugees, who were to go back ‘home’ from Sudan, Hammond, (1999, 241), was not sure if the incentives were a motivational factor, why the refugee will go back. In their study on why repatriations fail, Allen and Morsink, (1994), found out that one reason why repatriation fails is the presumption or the taking for granted on the part of the host authorities, that the refugees by themselves want to go back home. In supporting of this view, Bakewell writes:

“Repatriation is often seen as the optimum outcome for refugee situations as if by definition and the ‘obvious’ thing for refugees to do. The fact of their wanting to return is taken for granted so their motivation for repatriating does not necessarily arise a question” (Bakewell, 2002, 47)Refugees after being relieved of the traumatic experiences of war and other persecutions may wish to either avoid the repeat of their experience in future or will wish to resist return. According to Malkki (1992), ‘the “myth of return” is not a natural and inevitable belief shared by all refugees’.Finally, it is documented that Iraqis in exile, who get education, voluntarily return to Iraq. According to Romano (2004; 137), some of the Iraqis who exiled to Europe decided to return home by themselves, after the 2003 war. These are people were educated, prosperous professionals and businessmen, who saw a renewed hope in their country and made a voluntary return in order to use their skills, knowledge, foreign contacts and investment funds, they hope to utilize in the nation rebuilding. The author had interviewed some of the returnee between 2003 and 2004, who said that they had sold their homes and businesses in the US and the UK, to be able to return.

6.2 PerspectivesThroughout the paper, I have tried to argue that the Danish politician and authorities in the municipalities alienated through subtle ‘Othering’ the Iraqi refugees, in a way that, they felt that they were different and belonged elsewhere than Denmark. On the contrary, I think that, such treatments may not have happened out of the blue moon, they might have been triggered by certain activities among the refugees and immigrants. For instance, refugees, asylum and migration connote security realm.

Reports upon reports indicate that many of the refugees, like some immigrants, resort to diverse forms of criminality. For example, a news media32 in Denmark reports on the massive criminality in Denmark, twenty percent of all refugees were involved in criminality in 2011, and that asylum seekers in Denmark are twenty three percent more criminal than the entire Danish population.”813 asylansøgere fik afgjort sager om kriminalitet i 2011. Det svarer til hver femte, Asylansøgere som gruppe er langt mere kriminelle end danskerne som helhed. Det viser tal fra Kriminalregistret og Danmarks Statistik”. TV2 Nyhederne, (Ritzau, 25/02-2013).Another aspect of the paper that needs attention is the repatriation, which was based on recommendations and advices from experts in the UN organization. It must be noted that voluntary repatriation in itself conforms to the recommended durable solutions and therefore is a normal practice in the refugee world. I therefore argue again, that the request by the government and/or those accused Danish asylum social workers, for example, be it coercive or persuasive, voluntary or involuntary, and could be due to misleading information from the United Nations on the peace situation in Iraq. Take for example this notice from the UNHCR:

FN: Irak kun flygtningesikkert i nord: Mens regeringspartiet Venstre mener, at store områder i Irak er uden problemer for flygtninge, som vender hjem, kan FN's flygtningeorganisation kun anbefale, at flygtninge vender tilbage til det nordlige, kurdiske Irak. UNHCR anbefaler imidlertid kun, at flygtninge vender tilbage til den nordlige, kurdiske del af Irak, og kun kurdiske flygtninge. Det oplyser Paal Aarsaether, chef for eksterne relationer på UNHCR's nordiske kontor i Stockholm. .(Ritzaus Bureau, 16/01-2006).

Whereas the organization claims that Iraq was unsafe, they in they also recommended that certain parts of the country were peaceful. And this recommendation was followed up by one of the parties in the V-K government, the liberal party (venstre).

“Venstre mener, at der er store områder i Irak, hvor flygtninge kan vende tilbage. FN anbefaler, at det kun sker til det nordlige, kurdiske Irak.Mens regeringspartiet Venstre mener, at store områder i Irak er uden problemer for flygtninge, som vender hjem, kan FN's flygtningeorganisation kun anbefale, at flygtninge vender tilbage til det nordlige, kurdiske Irak” (16/01-2006).

Again, from the interviews, it became obvious that not all of the Iraqis would have wanted to go back to Iraq, for reasons outside the recommended processes with the voluntary repatriation. For example, it could be difficult not to believe that after experiencing the comfort of being in peaceful Denmark, some of the Iraqis might have found a means to remain in the country.

32 TV 2

It is not wrong to motivate refugees to accept repatriation by other lawful means. Because certain factors, such as the refugees’ love and affection for their home country, can naturally make them choose to repatriate with ease and they may need help in realizing such patriotic endeavor. An example of this is seen in the study made by Bakewell (2002). According to the author, the ‘conception of national identity’ felt among the Angolans in exile in Zambia, was the driving force for repatriation, whereas Roger in 1994, saw material motivation as an enhancement. Albeit, I agree to the fact that the vitality of nationalism in any nation-building, national solidarity and configuration, as envisaged in Gellner’s assertion that ‘nationalism’ procreates ‘nations’ (Gellner, 1983; 55), can be a political agenda and depends on how the politicians handle it.

References

Allen, J. K, (2009). “Dreaming of Denmark: Orientalism and Otherness in Schnitzler’s Traumnovelle” Modern Austrian Literature and Cultural Association’ vol. 42. No. 2., pp 41-59.

Amnesty International Annual Report (2004): War on Global Values.

Anderson, M. L. (2005). “Thinking about Women-a quarter century’s view”, Gender and Society. 19 (4), 437-455

Andersen, H., & Goolishian, H., (1992) ‘Client is the expert: a not-knowing approach to therapy.’ In McNamee, S. & Gregen, K.J. (eds), Therapy as social construction, London: sage Publications.

Andreassen, R., (2007). “Der er et yndigt land. Medier, minoriteter og danskhed, Tiderne Skifter. Fårlag, utgivningsår.

Appadurai, A., (1988), “Putting hierarchy in its place” Cultural Anthropology : Vol. 3 (1), pp 36-49

Barth, F., (1969). “Introduction” In Barth (Ed) ‘Ethnic groups and boundaries’. The social organization of cultural difference, 9-38. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

Baumann, G., (2004) “Grammars of Identity/alterity: A structural approach.” In: Baumann, G., & Gingrich, A., (eds) “Grammars of Identity/alterrity” A structural approach.

Black, R., Koser, K., & Munk, K., (2004). “Understanding voluntary return” In home office online reports London: Home Office; Geneva

Borjas, G. J., (1994). The economics of immigration. Journal of economics literature. Vol. 32 pp 1667-1717

Bribosia, E., Rea, A., Ringelheim, J., & Rorive, I.,(2011). “Reasonable accommodation of religious diversity in Europe and in Belgium: Law and Practices. In Saakia Bonjour, Andrea Rea & Dirk Jacobs (Eds). “The Others In Europe” Editions de la Universite de Bruxelles: Bruxelles.

Brubaker, R., (1998). “Citizenship and Nationhood In France & Germany”, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Bryman, A. (2008). “Social Research methods”. 3rd Ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Caparini, M., (2004). “Media and the security: oversight and accountability”. In M.caparini (ed). ‘Media in security & governance. Baden-Baden: Nomos, pp 15-49

Castells, J., (1997). “The power of identity” Vol II of The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell

Cook, T. E., (2006). “Governing with the News: The News media as a political Institution”. Chicago. University of Chicago Press.

Cooper, H., (1998). Synthesizing Research: “A guide for Literature review”. 3rd Ed. Sage publications: Thousands Oaks.

Constants, A., & Massey, D., (2002). Return migration by German guest workers: neoclassical versus new economic theories. International Migration. Vol. 40 pp5-38

Connor, W (1994) “Etnonationalism”: The quest for understanding. Princeton University Press.

Crisp, J., (2003). A new asylum paradigm? Globalization, migration and the uncertain future of the international refugee regime. New issues in refugee rearch: Working paper no. 100. Geneva: UNHCR evaluation and policy analysis unit.

Crepeau, F., & Barutciski, M.,(1994). “Symposium on the Human rights of Refugees” Journal of refugees studies. Vol. 7 No. 2/3

Curtis, S., Gesler, W., Smith, G., & Washburn, S., (2000). “Approaches

to sampling and case selection in qualitative research: examples in the geography of health.” Social Science and medicine Vol. 50 1001-1014

Danish Peoples Party (2007). Arbejdsprogram udlændinge-asyl- og integrationspolitik. http://www.danskfolkeparti.dk

Davenport, P., Healy, P.J. & Malone, K., (1995), ‘Vulnerable in the village: a study of returnees in Battambang province, cambodia, with focus on strategies for the landless’ Lutheran World Service, UNHCR, Japan Sotoshu Relief committee---an unpublished report.

Debenedetti, Externalization of European Asylum, op. cit 10

De Beauvoir, S. (1997). “The second sex”. London: Vintage 1949.

Diken, B. (1998). “Strangers, ambivalence and social theory”. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Djajic, S., & Milbourne, R., (1988). A general equilibrium model of guest-worker migration: the source country perspective. Journal of International Economics. Vol 25, pp 335-351

Duffield, M., (1996). Social reconstruction in Bosnia and Croatia: An exploratory report for SIDA. Birmingham: Center for urban and regional studies, university of Birmingham.

Dumont, L., (1980). “Homo Hierarchicus: The case system and its implication”. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Dustmann, C., (2003). Return migration and optimal migration duration. European Economic Review. Vol 47 pp 535-369.

Eller, J. D., (1959). “From Culture to Ethnicity to Conflict”. An Anthropological Perspective on International Ethnic Conflict. Pp 7-48

Erdine, M., (2012). “ The subject and governmental action: A Foucaulian analysis of subjectification and the 24 year-old rule in Denmark. Fem Leg Stud. 20: 21-38. London UK.

Evans-Pritchard, E. E., (1937). “Witchcraft, oracles, and magic among the Azande”. Oxford: Clarendon Press.------(1940). “The Neur”. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Fassin, D., (2011). “The Social construction of Otherness”. In Saakia Bonjour, Andrea Rea & Dirk Jacobs (Eds). “The Others In Europe” Editions de la Universite de Bruxelles: Bruxelles.

Fielding, T., (1992), “Migration and culture” In ‘Migration Processes and Patterns’ Eds. Vol. 1 by Tony Champion & Tony Fielding. London: Belhaven Press. Pages 201-212

Figley, C.R., (1989) “Helping traumatized families” London: Jossey-Bass.

Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the prison. New York: Vintage

Foucault, M. (2000). ”Subject and Power” In: James D. Faubion (Ed). ‘Essential works of Foucault 1954-1984- Power. Vol. 3 London: Penguin Books, pp 326-349

Gaasholt, Ø., & Togeby, L., (1995). I syv sind: Danskrenes holdinger til flytninge og indvandrere. Århus: politica.

Galal, E., & Thunø, M., (2009) “Global medier I verdens brændepunkter: religion, politisk og kultur” Museum Tusculanums Forlag. København.

Gallagher, D., (1994). “Durable Solutions in a new politicalera” Journal of International Affairs Vol. 47 No. 2 the trustees of Columbia University in the city of New York.

Gellner, E., (1983). “Nations and Nationalism”. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Gil de Zuniga, H. (2012). Modeling the process of political participation in the EU. In: Friedman Rebecca. (Eds). European identity and culture: narratives of transnational belonging. Burlington; Ashgate.

Gingrich, A. (2004). “Concepturalising Identities: Anthropological alternatives to essentialising difference and moralizing about othering” In Gerd Baumann & Andre Gingrich (Eds) “Grammars of Identity/Alterity” A structural approach.

Gingrich, A. (2006). Neo-nationalism and the reconfiguration of Europe. Social Anthropology, 14(2), 195-217.

Goodwin-Gill, G., ed. (1991). The 1951 convention relating to the status of refugees: Principles, Problems, and Potential. Int. Journal. Refugees Law 3(3) (Special Issue).

Grillo, R., (2011) “Danes and Others” an epilogue. In Karen Fog Olwig &

Karsten Pærregård (Eds) ‘The Question of Integration: Immigration, Exclusion and the Danish welfare state’ (2011), Cambridge scholars publishing, Newcastle, UK.

Gullestad, M., (1997). “Home, local community and nation: Connections between everyday life practices and constructions of national identity” Focaal, No. 30/31. Pp 39-60

Hagerty, B. M., Williams, R. A., Coyne, J. C., & Early, M. R., (1996). “Sense of belonging and Indicators of Social and Psychological functioning” Archives of Psychiatric nursing. Vol. 10. Isssu 4 pp 235-244

Hammond, L., (1999) “Examining the discourse of repatriation: Towards a more proactive theory of return migration” In: Black, R. and Khoser, K, The End of the Refugee Cycle?Repatriation and reconstruction, Berghahn Books, Oxford and Providence.

Hathaway, J., C., (1990). A Reconsideration of the Underlying Premise of Refugees Law, 31 Harv. Int L. J 129. (Highlighting the overriding importance to donor states of issues that affect their own countries).

Harrell-Bond, B.E.,Voutira, E., & Leopold, M., (1992). “Counting the refugees: gifts, givers, patrons and clients”, Journal of Refugee Studies Vol. 5 ed ¾ pp 205-225

Hein, J., (1993). Refugees, immigrants and the state. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 19: 43-59

Hervik, P., (1999) Den generende forskellighed. Danske svar på den stigende multikulturalism. (ed.) Copenhagen: Han Reitzals Forslag.

Hervik, P., (2004).”The Danish cultural world of unbridgeable difference”. Ethnos, Routedge journals Vol 69 (2) pp 247-267

Hervik, P., (2012) Ending tolerance as a solution to incompatibility: The Danish ‘crissi of multiculturalism’. European Journal of cultural studies, 15 (2) 211-225

Hill, J. K., (1987). Immigrant decisions concerning duration of stay and migration frequency. Journal of Developemnt Economics. Vol. 67 pp 351-372

Hjarnø, J., (1991). Migrants and Refugees on the Danish Labour market. Journal of Ethnic and migration studies. Vol. 18 Iss. 1 pp 75-87.

Hjarvard, S., (2006). “Medier og Religion I mediernes’ offentlighed” In: Lisbet Christoffersen (Ed). Gudebilleder, København. Tiderne Skifter.

Holland, D. C., & Quinn, N., (1987). Cultural models in language and thought. (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Holand, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C., (1998). Identity and Agency in cultutral worlds. (Eds). Boston: University of Harvard Press.

Holmes, D. R., (2000). Integral Europe. Fast-capitalism, multiculturalism, neofascism. Princeton: Princeton University Press

Jenkins, R., (1997). “Rethinking Ethnicity”. Arguments and Explorations. Sage publications. London

Jenkins, R., (2011) “Integration Of the Folk and by the Folk” an epilogue: In Karen Fog Olwig & Karsten Pærregård (Eds) ‘The Question of Integration: Immigration, Exclusion and the Danish welfare state’ (2011), Cambridge scholars publishing, Newcastle, UK.

Jensen, S., (2009). ‘Preliminary notes on Othering and agency—Marginalized young ethnic minority men negotiating identity in the terrain of Otherness’. Social working Paper, nr. 27.

Kaye, R., (1994). “Defining the Agenda: British Refugee policy and the role of parties” In Roger, Z., & Black, R., (1994), “Journal of Refugee Studies” Vol. 7 No. 2/3 Oxford University Press.

Kirdar, M. G., (2009). Labour market outcomes, savings accumulation and return migration. Labour economics. Vol. 16. Pp 418-428

Kourula, P., (1997). Broadening the edges: Refugees Definition and International Protection Revisited, 209.

Kublitz, A., (2013). “Siezing catastrophes: the temporality of Nakba among Palestinians in Denmark” University of Aalborg, Denmark (unpublished).

Kvaale, K., (2011). “Something begotten in the state of Denmark? Immigrants, territorialized culture, and the Danes as an indigenous people”. Anthropological theory. Sage publication. 11 (2) 223-255

Leonard, S., (2009). The creation of Frontex and the policies of institutionalization in the EU external borders policy. Journal of

contemporary European research 5 (3) 371-388.

Luedtke, A. (2005). European integration, public opinion and immigration policy: testing the impact on national identity. European Union politics 6(1), 83-112

Malkki, L. H., (1992) ‘National geographic: the rooting of peoples and the territorialization of national identity among scholars and refugee’, Cultural Anthropology vol. 7 (1) pp 13-45

……….(1997) “National Geographic: The Rooting of Peoples and the Territorialization of National Identity among Scholars and Refugees. In Akhil Gupta & James Fergusen (Eds): Culture, Power, Place. Explorations in Critical Anthropology. Durham. Duke University Press. London, pp 52-74

Malkki, L.,H., (1995). Refugees and Exile: From “Refugee Studies” to the National Order of Things. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 24: 495-523

Martin, S. F. (2004). Refugee Women. (2nd Ed.). New York: Lexington Books

Muggeridge, H., & Dona, G., (2006). Back home? Refugees’ experiences of their first visit back to their country of origin. Journal of Refugee Studies. Vol. 19 NO. 4. University of east London. London, UK

Nielson T., & Riiskjær, H. B., (2006). ”Irak tur-retur” En analyse af, hvorfor en gruppe irakiske flygtninge har valgt at fortryde deres repatriering til Irak og igen er vendt tilbage til Danmark. Speciale på Socialvidenskab. Roskilde Universitetscenter, Denmark.

Nobel, P., (1988). “Refugees and other migrants viewed with legal eye…or how to fight confusion. Pp 18-31

Pottier, J., (1996) “Relief and Repatriation: Views by Rwanda Refugees; lessons for humanitarian aid workers’ African Affairs Vol. 95 ed. 380 pp: 403-429

Prakash, G., (1990). “Writing Post- Orientalist histories of the Thid World: Pespectives from India historiography”. Comparative studies in Society and History, Vol 32 no. 2 pp 383-408.

Ragin, C. C., (1994). “Constructing Social Research”: The Unity and Diversity of Method, Thousand Oaks, London & New Delhi: Pine Forge Press.

Ren, C., & Ooi, C.S, (2012) “Auto-communication and Micro-orientalism at the Shanghai expo 2010-Perfrming and regulating ‘Danishness’. CLCS Working Paper 2012

Reichelt, S., & Sveaass, N., (1994). “Developing meaningful conversations with families in exile” In Roger, Z., & Black, R., (1994), “Journal of Refugee Studies” Vol. 7 No. 2/3 Oxford University Press.

Rytter, M., (2011) “‘The family of Denmark’ and ‘The Aliens’: Kinship images in Danish Integration Politics”. In Karen Fog Olwig & Karsten Pærregård (Eds) ‘The Question of Integration: Immigration, Exclusion and the Danish welfare state’ (2011), Cambridge scholars publishing, Newcastle, UK.

Said, E., (1978) “Orientalism”. New York: Vintage Press.

-----------(1979). “Zionism from the standpoint of its victims. Social text No. 1 pp 7-58

-------- (1984). “Reflections on exile” Granta 13; 159-172

Salehyan, I., & Gleditsch, K., S., (2006). Refugees and the Spread of Civil War. International organization 60. Pp. 335-366.Seton-Watson, H. (1977). Nations and States: “An enquiry into the origins of Nations and the Politics of Nationalism. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Schierup, C. U., (1993). På kulturens slagmark: Mindretal og størretal taler om Danmark. Esbjerg: Sydjysk universitetsforslag.

Schnitzler Arthur (1997) “Arthur Schnitzler und schriftsteller seiner zeit” Traumnovelle; 1926. Frankfurt a. M.:Insel 2002. Print.

Sepulveda, D., C., (1995). “Challenging the assumption of repatriation”, Courier Vol 150 pp 83-85

Sewell, Jnr. W. J. (2005). Logics of History: Social theory and social transformation. Chicago, University of Chicago

Sjørslev, I., (2011). “The paradox of Integration: Excluding while claiming to integrate into Danish society”. In: Karen Fog Olwig & Karsten Pærregård (Eds) ‘The Question of Integration: Immigration, Exclusion and the Danish welfare state’ (2011), Cambridge scholars publishing, Newcastle, UK.

Smith, E., (2008) The pitfalls and promises: The use of secondary data

analysis in educational research. British Journal of Educational Studies. Vol. 56. Issue 3 pp 323-339

Spivak, G. C., (1985). “The Rani of Simur” in Europe and their others. Volume 1, Eds. In: Francis Baker et al., Colchester: Uessex 1985.

Stark, O., & Fan, C. S.,(2007). “The analytics of seasonal migration” Economics Letters. Vol. 94. Pp. 304-312

Stein, B. N., (1987). ICARA ॥: “Burden Sharing and Durable Solution” In Rogge, J (Eds). Refugees: ‘A third world Dilemma’ Totowa, NJ USA: Romani Littlefield, pp 47-59

Stepputat, Finn. 1992. Beyond Relief? Life in a Guatemalan Refugee Settlement inMexico, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Copenhagen.

Stepputat, Finn. 1997. 'Repatriation and everyday forms of state formation in Guatemala', a draft article. In: Black, R. and Khoser, K, (ed) The End of the Refugee Cycle?Repatriation and reconstruction, Berghahn Books, Oxford and Providence.

Stoddard, A., Adele, H., DiDomenico, V., (2009). Providing Aid in insecure environments: 2009 update’ humanitarian policy group policy brief 34 London: Overseas Development Institute.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J., (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research, grounded Theory Procedures and techniques: Sage, London.

Szuchewycz, B., (2000). “Re-Pressing Racism: the Denial of racism in the Canadian Press” Canadian Journal of Communications, vol. 25 no. 4

Turner, S., (2012). “Politics of Innocense: Hutu Identity, Conflict and Camp Life”. Studies in Forced migration, Vol. 30., Berghahn Books: New York & Oxford

Turner, V., (1967) “The forest of symbols: aspects of Ndembu Ritual, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

UNHCR, Annual Report , January 2011

UNHCR, (2010) Global Trends 2010

UNHCR, (2009). 2008 Global Trends, UNHCR, June 2009, page 7

UNHCR (2003) Declarations under section B of article 1 of the Conventionhttp://www.unhcr.ch/cgi

Vejledning til repatrieringsloven (Juni 2010): Ministeriet for flygtninige, indvandrere og integration. Nye regler, January, 2010. http://www.nyidanmark.dk

Vested-Hansen, J., (1994). ”The legal condition of Refugees in Denmark” (eds). In Roger, Z., & Black, R., (1994), “Journal of Refugee Studies” Vol. 7 No. 2/3 Oxford University Press.

Van Dijk, T. (1997). Discourse as a social interaction, Sage: London

Van Dijk, T A., (1995) “Elite discourse and the reproduction of racism. In: Rita Kirk Whillock & David Slaydon (Eds). ‘Hate Speech’. Thousand Oaks CA, Sage: pp 1-28

Van Dijk T. A., (2004) “From text Grammar to Critical Discourse Analysis”. A bief academic autobiography. Universitat Pompen Fabra, Barcelona.

Volmert, J., (1989). “Politikerrede als kommunikatives Handliungsspiel. Ein integriertes Modll zur semantisch-pragmatischen Beschreibung Öffentlicher Rede. Munich: Fink.

Wodak, R, (1989) (Eds.) Language, power and ideology. Philadelphia; John Benjamins.

Wodak, R., De Cillia, R., & Reisigl, M.,(1999). “The discursive construction of national identities” Discourse and Society, Vol. 10 (2): 149-173

Weiner, M., (1993). International migration and security, westview Press. Pp 333

Weis, L. (1995). Identity formation and the processes of “othering”: Unraveling sexual threads. Educational Foundations, 9(1), 17–33.

Zetter, R., (1988), ‘Refugees, repatriation and root causes’ Journal of Refugee Studies, Vol. 1 (2) pp 99-106

Appendix

Appendix 1:

The 12 reasons given by the Iraqi refugees on why they returned to Denmark:

1. Lack of Security -the unabated conflict. 2. Status as returnees from the western countries and the local perception of them. 3. Lack of employment and the difficulty with starting up a business.4. Insufficient information on home country, especially, prior to making the decision to repatriate. 5. A wish to abandon Denmark, rather than a real wish to return to homeland. 6. The undergone changes in homeland during time in exile. 7. Shortages of electricity, water, oil and gas in home country. 8. The fear of losing of ties to Denmark.9. Internal disagreement among family members, regarding the decision to repatriate. 10. A lack of public, social services in home country.11. The feeling of being perceived as a stranger or an outsider in home country. 12. Personal perception as not belonging to ones homeland after being influenced by other

cultures-‘Denmark has changed them’.

Appendix 2:

Number of repatriated refugees from Denmark (2000-2006)Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Number of refugees 232 224 170 194 249 164 45Total 1,278

Appendix 3: Number of people repatriated from Denmark from 2006 to 2011

Year2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Status Refugee

Immi-grant

253 117Total

148 111 206 138 370 613Source: Danskflytningehælpe

Appendix 4:

Number of Refugees who have used the return right in the law since 20082008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total

From January 15 to August 27

1 15 36 40 31 231Source: Dansk flygtningehjælpe

Appendix 5:

3.5 The interviews

The interviews were conducted on 73 Iraqi refugees, who regretted their ‘planned’ decision to return to Iraq. Among the interviewees were 33 above 15 years of age. Most of them said the main reason for agreeing to repatriate was circumstantial and not well thought through. It is worth noting that even when these people came back to Denmark, five households who initially came up their repatriation and came to Denmark had disappeared again from Denmark for which reason and destination the authors of the thesis could not give.The following interview guide was used in interviewing 15 households of the 73 refugees who gave up their repatriation and came back to Denmark. Vil du starte med at præsentere dig selv?

........Could you please start by presenting yourself? Kan du fortælle om, hvordan du havde det i Danmark, inden du valgte at repatriere?

.....Could you please tell about how you felt before deciding to leave Denmark for Iraq? Kan du fortælle om, hvordan du besluttede dig for at vende tilbage til Irak?

........Could you please tell about why you decided to go back to Iraq? Kan du fortælle om, hvordan det var at være tilbage i Irak?

.......Could you please tell how it was to be back in Iraq? Kan du fortælle om, hvordan du besluttede dig for at vende tilbage til Danmark?

.......Could you please tell about why you decided to come back to Denmark?