Current Challenges regarding the International Refugee Law, with focus on EU Policies and EU Co-operation with UNHCR. CEPS Paper on Liberty and Security in Europe No. 59, September 2013

From an examination of the instruments of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) and related policy measures regarding border surveillance and migration management, two interrelated issues stand out as particularly sensitive: Access to asylum and responsibility for refugee protection. The prevailing view, supported by UNHCR and others, is that responsibility for the care of asylum seekers and the determination of their claims falls on the state within whose jurisdiction the claim is made. However, the possibility to shift that responsibility to another state through inter-state cooperation or unilateral mechanisms undertaken territorially as well as abroad has been a matter of great interest to EU Member States and institutions. Initiatives adopted so far challenge the prevailing view and have the potential to undermine compliance with international refugee and human rights law. This note reviews EU action in the field by reference to the relevant legal standards and best practices developed by UNHCR, focusing on the specific problems of climate refugees and access to international protection, evaluating the inconsistencies between the internal and external dimension of asylum policy. Some recommendations for the European Parliament are formulated at the end, including on action in relation to readmission agreements, Frontex engagement rules in maritime operations, Regional Protection Programmes, and resettlement.

Ukraine and Russia: a hindered rapprochement. OSW Commentary No. 44, 2010-12-15

The policy of rapprochement with Russia that President Victor Yanukovych and his entourage had been actively promoting in the first months of his presidency has slowed down notably. One of the reasons for this lowered pace is that current talks between Russia and Ukraine concern the spheres in which Kyiv is not ready to make concessions to Russia. Despite numerous top-level meetings, recent months have failed to bring a breakthrough in energy issues of key importance. First of all, no compromise was reached in gas issues where the divergence of interests is particularly large and where Ukraine has adopted a tough stance to negotiate the best conditions possible. Even though some agreements were signed during the October session of the inter-governmental committee presided over by the prime ministers (the agreement on linking the two states’ aircraft production and on the joint construction of a nuclear fuel production plant), these resulted from prior agreements. Economic negotiations will continue in the coming months but the observed deadlock is not likely to be broken any time soon. The results of these talks are likely to reflect the interests of both Russia and Ukraine, as well as the competition among Ukrainian business groups, some of which opt for closer cooperation with their Eastern neighbour. Ukraine’s consent to send oil to Belarus along the Odessa-Brody pipeline shows that the government in Kyiv is ready to engage in projects they consider profitable, even those that run counter to Russian interests. Ukraine’s adoption of this stance may trigger irritation in Moscow and lead to a cooling in bilateral relations.

Preventing Social Death in Long Term Care: Fostering Social Connectivity in the U.S. and The Netherlands. ACES Working Papers, July 2012

Long term care (LTC) is both costly and of increasing concern as baby boomers age and more people live longer with chronic conditions. Today, people receive formal and informal LTC supports in homes, nursing homes, and alternative settings around the world. Where people live and the way LTC is delivered has an important impact on whether person’s receiving care thrive as they age. This paper is about how different LTC environments in the U.S. and The Netherlands foster or impede social connectivity, suggesting that quality of life will be impeded and types of social death, or disconnection from social life, more often the result in environments that limit choice and self determination, limit access to privacy and social connection, and limit access to reciprocal exchanges, a key component of participating in relationships typical of the concept of “the gift” introduced by anthropologist Marcel Mauss in 1954. Building on ethnographic data from a 15-month study of LTC in The Netherlands and a review of staffing practices in LTC environments in the U.S. and The Netherlands, I will explore concepts of reciprocity and social connectivity impacted by various LTC environments in two countries known to experiment with different models of care. This research builds on social constructivist notions of death and dying explored throughout this edited volume and adds to this effort examination of social death in anthropological perspective.