Interweaving #22 - Claudia Hoffmann on Ukrainian Refugees

Moldova - People fleeing the military offensive in Ukraine (March 1, 2022). Photo: UN Women/Aurel Obreja via UN Women Europe and Central Asia’s photostream under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/.

In this episode of Interweaving, host John Collins talks with Claudia Hoffmann (University of Miami) about how a critical understanding of race and xenophobia can help us understand public discourse surrounding Ukrainian refugees. Drawing on her experience in Germany, Hoffmann insists that European hypocrisy regarding migrants from different parts of the world can be overcome if we focus on the humanity of the migrants themselves rather than the polemical debates surrounding them.

Featured in this episode

Claudia Hoffmann, Lecturer at the University of Miami
Twitter: https://twitter.com/clhoffmann 

Bree Newsome - 3/8/2022 Tweet
https://twitter.com/BreeNewsome/status/1501208649087262721 

Danish MP comment on Ukrainian vs. African migrants
https://twitter.com/jakobplaschke/status/1497376842541584384 

New York Times (Jeffrey Gettleman and Monika Pronczuk), "Two Refugees, Both on Poland’s Border. But Worlds Apart"
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/14/world/europe/ukraine-refugees-poland-belarus.html 

The Guardian, "On the Road with the Migrant Caravan"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLkbOOIwlFM 

The Guardian, "We Walk Together: a Syrian refugee family’s journey to the heart of Europe"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubGhzVdnhQw 

Transcript

John Collins: Welcome to interweaving. I'm John Collins. As the war in Ukraine drags on, the public debate continues to be dominated by official talking points that are often difficult to disentangle from state propaganda campaigns and the operation of dominant ideologies. At Weave News, we are always seeking to provide an independent voice, and now is no exception. We're in the midst of a series of interviews examining how a focus on white supremacy and the politics of race can help us identify some of the limitations in the narratives of geopolitics that tend to dominate the public conversation.

In our last episode, we heard from sociologist Mark Ayyash, who brought a Palestinian Canadian perspective and who emphasized the hypocrisy of powerful states that claim to speak and act on behalf of civilization and human rights yet who consistently fail to speak up for the rights of Palestinians to resist Israel's settler colonial project. Now we turn our attention to one of the most important issues in contemporary geopolitics: migration. As we record today, the United Nations estimates that more than 2.5 million Ukrainians have already fled their homeland in the midst of Russia's brutal military assault. The need for the international community to support these refugees is urgent and undeniable. But what is the record of the international community, especially the dominant Western states, on this issue? Why are some refugees viewed as more deserving of our sympathy, and what role do news media play in reinforcing these patterns? To explore these and other questions, I'm very happy to welcome our guests today. Claudia Hoffmann. She's a lecturer at the University of Miami with a background in film studies and English, and she has written and taught extensively about undocumented migrants and refugees, their stories, and their representations in contemporary culture. She was also a participant in the St. Lawrence Citizen Journalism Incubator organized by Weave News in 2018. So it's especially nice to welcome her to our airwaves here on Interweaving. Claudia Hoffmann, thanks for joining us today!

Claudia Hoffmann: Thank you for having me, John. This is very exciting!

John Collins: It's great to have you here. As I've been doing with all of the conversations I've been having recently, I just wanted to ask about your response to what's happening in Ukraine. As I mentioned in the last episode, our views of these kinds of major events, such as the war on Ukraine, are always influenced by our identities and our experiences. So how does the Ukraine story look for you, and what are some of the main factors shaping your view of the situation?

I think there are probably several starting points for me, but they're all coming from a position of privilege in my case, so I am European, I am German. I've lived in the US for 22 years, but my passport is still German, so I'm also a privileged immigrant to the United States. I'm married to an immigrant, so I feel in many ways that I've had it pretty easy in life because of my German citizenship, because of my immigrant experience. And I still have strong emotional ties to Europe. So based on my identity and based on my own research, I have been following migration movements to Europe, within Europe, and also, especially most recently since 2015, refugee movements into Europe.

And right now I think I'm looking at the current refugee movement out of Ukraine vis-a-vis the 2015 refugee movement into Europe from Syria, from Afghanistan or from Iraq. No matter how hard I try, I cannot really disentangle these two movements. And I think that's basically my perspective right now and has been for the past few weeks as I'm watching that both from a personal level and from a professional level.

The numbers quite staggering in terms of the Ukrainian refugee crisis. The numbers are already higher than the numbers of Syrian refugees. And at the time that was called a crisis that Europe allegedly couldn't handle. And we're seeing now the ability of European states to respond very quickly and proactively and empathetically, I guess I would say, to the Ukrainian refugee wave. I'm reminded here of a quote from Bree Newsome, who's an activist who I follow on Twitter, and on the 8th of March, this is what she tweeted: "Who gets to move freely around the globe at their leisure? Who is confined to their place of birth? Who is forced from their homelands & why? Who is allowed to migrate elsewhere & who isn't? The controls placed over human migration & movement are another feature of colonialism." So with that in mind, how would you assess the international community's response to the Ukrainian refugee crisis so far and the European community's response in particular?

I don't think I have ever experienced something that I find so simultaneously heartwarming and heartbreaking. So I'm watching the response. Poland, especially Poland right now is kind of standing out as the country that's showing the most hospitality, which stands in such stark contrast to 2015. And I was just curious, and I looked up the numbers before our meeting here. And in 2021, you had 4,000 asylum seekers in Poland. Poland is not traditionally a country that is quote unquote attractive for asylum seekers.

I'm still trying to get my head around it because it's only been a few weeks and I, often need longer to process, but I think there are two things going on here. There's of course one, the response on part of politicians, on part of, of leaders who are saying everyone can come here, we are welcoming everyone. And there's also the hospitality of European citizens who will literally drive to the border to pick up Ukrainian refugees and to take them to their homes, who will drop off supplies. And I keep thinking, this is wonderful, and this is how it should be, but it just isn't like this normally. And I have a lot to say of why it isn't like this.

I think a lot of this is, of course, racialized. Europe still self-identifies as a white continent and has implemented over the years violent border policies and border protections, quote unquote, especially against migrants crossing the Mediterranean from the North African coast. We've all seen the reception of Syrian migrants in 2015 and Syrian refugees. The way that these movements are framed in Europe are based on similarity, cultural similarity, proximity. A lot of it is about proximity, so you will hear leaders say "They're our neighbors, they're European, they are like us, they're civilized, they are educated." Of course, many, many Syrian refugees were also educated. I mean, apart from the fact that that's entirely beside the point and I can get to that later. But there is a real effort going on right now to frame Ukrainian refugees as one of us, they're part of us, they're like us, they're no threat.

And this is very distinctly different from 2015, where the rhetoric was about the numbers. Which is ironic, right? Because like you said, comparatively you have a lot more refugees right now than you did in 2015, already. But I remember conversations in Germany about it's a threat to the cultural homogeneity of European countries. Which is also ironic because you already have, for example, a Turkish population in Europe and you've had for a long time, you have a North African population in France, and you've had these populations for a long time. So it is not that culture and religion would newly be introduced to Europe by accepting refugees.

These are the fronts that are being put up to accept what is acceptable to us because they are like us and to keep out those who we don't want. And that all, I would agree, that all goes back to a colonial history that has created these conditions in the first place. But Europe would have to acknowledge that if it were to really dig deep into the historical reasons for why people are fleeing Syria, for why people are fleeing Afghanistan, Iraq, that the US would also have to do a little soul searching. But they don't. So until that happens, I think we will continue to have this demarcation of not just the deserving refugee versus the undeserving migrant, but also the refugee who can be most easily integrated versus the refugee who is a danger to cultural homogeneity and Europe for some reason, which is really ironic, really likes its cultural homogeneity.

I'm looking here at another quote from the 25th of February from Denmark, where a member of parliament from the Conservative People's Party stated, and I'm quoting here, this is a translation from the Danish, "We must open our arms as much to Ukrainians as we are tough and rejecting against migrants from Africa." That of course is saying the quiet part out loud in a way, right, in terms of the kind of racialized construction that you were talking about earlier. And it's really interesting, of course, because if you're in Spain or France, migrants from North Africa are your neighbors when compared with people coming from Ukraine. And so the construction of who's a neighbor and who's not a neighbor, it seems, cannot be separated from questions of racial and cultural identity.

I was just thinking of African history and Spain. We go and we look at the Alhambra, we look at buildings that were built by people who were coming from places from which people are coming now. But now we're keeping out the descendants of those people. That is exactly what is happening. We're keeping out the other, it is not about numbers, we're seeing this now. So in a way, it is perhaps an opportunity to point that out, to say, you told us in 2015, it's not possible. You told us these are too many people, and we are seeing now this was not the case.

Germany did take in a million refugees. And Germany still celebrates Christmas. So it has not had a detrimental effect on whatever that means, the homogeneity of German culture. Quite the contrary, I think. Refugees are an asset to any country, just like any migrant is an asset to any country. But even that is beside the point, because I think at the core of the problem is to assign a value to anyone who is moving around the world. So whether it's a refugee or it's a migrant, whether it's an economic migrant or it's a refugee fleeing from war, it's not about value. It's not a political issue, it's not an economic issue, it's not a cultural issue. It's a human issue.

Much of the problem is in the representation and in the way people are represented. On the one hand, of course, I'm also heartbroken when I see a little boy from Ukraine who's walked many many miles on his own to reach a safe border. And then I think of all these Syrian children who traveled more distances, who traveled across waters and who were not afforded the right for their story to be told.

It has to do with the way Europe perceives itself. It has to do with national anxieties across Europe about the other. But it also has to do with the way we are meant to look at it. We see the humanity of some people, but we don't see the humanity of other people in the media, unless we really, really know where to look.

Could you tell us a little bit about how those hypocrisies, or those constructions are reflected on the ground level in terms of policy? If I'm someone from Ukraine and I'm fleeing my country right now, and I'm seeking refuge in, let's say, Poland. What is my experience like on the ground level in terms of being able to cross the border and so forth when compared with someone who's coming from outside the European continent?

So this is tied to the border policies and migration requirements, so if you are a Ukrainian citizen with a Ukrainian passport, you are able to enter the European Union without a visa. So on a bureaucratic level, of course, that makes the process easier. And that was also the problem for many people who are students in Ukraine from outside of Europe. We've heard the stories about Indian students, Nigerian students, you know, a lot of people who are not Ukrainian and who are not European were not let on trains to leave Kiev. They were turned away at the Polish border, and part of that was because they did not have Ukrainian passport that does allow them to cross the border without a problem.

Now, of course, that's also beside the point because they are fleeing war, and seeking asylum is a right. Everyone has the right to seek asylum. They are able to stay for 90 days without the need for a visa. So it also is an interesting conflation. Yes, they are refugees, but you could also frame them as visitors. They would not even have to go through the asylum application process. They would have to afterward.

I think the way it plays out on a policy level right now is it doesn't really play out because the border crossing bureaucracy is so different than it is for refugees from Syria, from Afghanistan, etc.

I think what we don't understand often is that if you are fleeing violence, if you're fleeing because you're afraid for your life or for any reason, often people don't want to settle in other countries. Often people really just want to stay for a while until they can go back home. So this narrative that people will be coming to "our" countries and they will take up the resources and oh my, will they integrate or not, does not apply to everybody because not everybody wants to stay. That is the same for undocumented workers in the US. It's not like everyone wants to stay. A lot of people just want to come, make money, go back. Much of this conversation is framed in ways that are not precise enough to have an honest conversation about what are the consequences of people seeking refuge for a nation state.

We're going to take a break now. We'll come back in a few minutes for more conversation and analysis with our guest, Claudia Hoffmann.

[Break]

We're back with Claudia Hoffmann discussing the politics of migration and how migration is represented in relationship to the ongoing war in Ukraine. Before we dig deeper into these issues, I wanted to remind our audience that now would be a great time to subscribe to Interweaving on Spotify or Apple Podcasts. We're continuing to build our audience and we would love to have you on our list of subscribers. I hope you'll have the chance to check out our previous interview with Mark Ayyash and of course our upcoming conversations as well. In each case, you'll find information about people, resources, and other topics mentioned on the podcast in the show notes for each episode. Just go to weavenews.org/podcasts/interweaving.

So Claudia, welcome back. We were talking earlier about some of the cultural constructions that shape the way migration is viewed, particularly in the European context. You of course are a German citizen, have close connection with Germany. I think there's a perception out there that Germany has been maybe more open to refugees than many other countries in Europe, some would argue even a bit of a success story in that regard. What's the reality on the ground?

So I think from a German perspective, there was this pivotal, in a way groundbreaking moment in 2015, where Chancellor Merkel said, " Wir schaffen das" (we can manage this). And said that Germany will take in one million refugees. That was a moment where I felt, for the first time in my life probably, very happy that my country is being welcoming.

Of course there was a big backlash politically. There was a shift to the right-wing party, AFD gained traction following this, a lot of people were opposed to this. But I remember traveling home in 2015. I am from Hamburg, which is Germany's second largest city, and of course, cities are always perhaps a little different than other parts of a country. But I saw these welcoming signs in the city, "refugees are welcome here," and to me, it was shocking in a positive way, because I also grew up with German xenophobia. I did research for which I interviewed West African migrants to the city who had a distinctly different experience. So it was a very positive surprise.

And I think from my perspective too, so talking to friends, to relatives, I think for people on the ground, it was really "okay, now we are going to do the work." There were two major narratives going on, one was the political one where it is about issues. And then one was the personal one where it's about, okay, now we have to, as individuals, do something. We have to hand out water. We have to teach German classes. We have to welcome families. And to me in my realm among my friends and my family, it was all very hopeful and very positive. I did meet several Syrian refugees who were happy to be there, who were much more grateful than I thought they need to be.

I think now we see that it was a success story. To me, that's not even the point, like I said earlier, it's not about success or not. It's not about we accept refugees because they can do something for our nation. It should be, we accept refugees because that's what needs to be done. That's the human thing to do. But yeah, I would say, I mean, if I wanted to appease anxieties, I do think that 2015 showed us that it is possible for Europe to take in and take care of refugees.

I just looked at the numbers. In 2021, 10% of the world's refugee population were in Europe, and given Europe's economic prowess, that's really not that many. The refugee population in Europe makes up 0.6% of the entire population, less than 1%. That's not a lot. So I think what we're seeing now is, it's not only possible, it's not only a great thing for Europe, it is also possible to do it without the anxiety ,without the xenophobic rhetoric, as we're seeing right now. It is possible to step up and do it and not attach to it any political talking points. I think in a way there might be an opportunity here for later where we can say look, it's possible. It was possible in 2015 to integrate these refugees, it would have been even better if other European countries had stepped up to a similar extent . It's possible to do this within a few weeks for even more people. So now there are no more excuses. So in the future, if you have countries saying we can't do this, then we can now say, oh yes you can. We know you can. And we know it's good.

It's a really important reminder that you've provided us here, right? To understand that in a global perspective, most refugees are taken in by countries outside of Europe. The huge numbers of refugees, for example, just to mention one country, Jordan, that has taken in significant numbers, not without tensions, of course, within that country surrounding that, but the endless discussion about Europe and Europe's identity and so forth may be in part a reflection of Eurocentrism itself.

I think that this leads us directly to the question that I'd like to finish up with today, which is really about media representations of all of this. At Weave News, we consider ourselves to be independent media. We always have a critical eye on the way things are being covered and represented in more establishment and mainstream forms of media. Given what you know, and what you've experienced and what you've seen in terms of the way that migration is covered as an issue, what would better media coverage of geopolitics look like?

I think better media coverage would show conflicts and suffering and war equally. I think part of the reason why we see this outpouring of empathy for Ukrainians, part of the reason is because they're Ukrainians and they're Europeans. But I think another part is also because we see exactly what is going on on our TVs every day. We see the pictures of bombed maternity hospitals. We see people sitting in basements. We hear about the woman in the picture who died.

I did not see that about Syria in 2015. I did not see the same pictures. I did not hear the same stories. I think that the emphasis back then in the media was on all these people, people pushing against fences, it was presented as a threat. We did not exactly know where people are fleeing from, again, unless we went to look. But if we are talking about the easily available media coverage that maybe our students consume, you don't get the same idea of what people are fleeing from. The same with the US border, the southern border. We don't see gang violence in Honduras on our TVs. So the conditions people are fleeing from, they remain so abstract to us often, and this is different now, right now it's so concrete. And it's also, of course, in the context of here it's so close.

But also I think, along the same lines, what I am really missing in the media are the human stories. The faces. It's still always framed as a political issue, it's framed around asylum, it's framed around economics, or framed around a war, but it's not really showing us the humanity of people. And I can, I want to point to two pieces that the Guardian made. One was about the quote unquote "migrant caravan" that was traveling through Mexico to the US border, and the other was about a group of Syrian refugees, also a few hundred, quite a large group, walking from Hungary to Austria on their way to Germany in 2015. And what these two pieces by the Guardian did is they showed laughter, they showed frustration, they show people joking. People tell their story, but they also say "I'm putting on my makeup because even here now I need to look good."

So they're showing these people as regular people in really, really unusual circumstances, but it makes such a difference. And I showed one of these pieces to my students, and you could just kind of see the lights come on. These are not some other people from some other countries, they have the same reactions, concerns, even under these circumstances. They're still so recognizable as just like us. And I think that's what we're really missing in the media coverage. I would really like to see the human face.

And then one other thing, because I did read this article just before I met with you today. It's a New York Times article from a few days ago, and it is about two women, one from Sudan and one from Ukraine, trying to get into Poland through Belarus. And that is the type of media coverage that is also so important because the woman from Sudan is in the forest, relies on smugglers. She makes it to Poland, and then she gets caught by police and she gets sent back. And then simultaneously we have the story of the Ukrainian woman who crosses the border, who is welcomed, who is truly moving into safety and is even moving into comfort.

And so I think to call out the hypocrisy, not by just saying we are being hypocrites, but by showing we are hypocrites, and by introducing us to the people who we are harming with this, is really important. Because like I said earlier, it's a human issue. It's not political. It's not cultural. It's not any of that. If we are making it a political issue, an economic issue or cultural issue, then I think we are creating excuses for continuing like this. But if we are saying this is about our humanity, this is about people who are fleeing from conditions that are untenable for them, then we don't have an excuse.

Claudia Hoffmann, thank you so much for joining us today and opening up these essential questions about the politics of migration, the fundamental humanity of migrants, and the need for a more humane approach to migration and the way that we represent migration in public discourse. We appreciate your perspective. Thank you for being part of our conversation here on Interweaving.

Thank you so much for having me. Thank you. I appreciate the work you do.

Thank you.