我们从这里往哪里走?

R. Shankle
{"title":"我们从这里往哪里走?","authors":"R. Shankle","doi":"10.4018/978-1-5225-1897-6.ch008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over 100,000 refugees from Myanmar remain in nine camps on the Thailand-­‐Myanmar border, and yet despite the escalation of armed conflict, militarization, and investment-­‐driven tensions on the ground in ethnic areas, the narrative of repatriation is becoming more prominent. Reduced rations and access to basic services in refugee camps, in addition to widespread armed conflict inside the country – including in Karen State just a few kilometres away from some of the refugee camps – are fuelling anxiety and worry in refugee communities about return to their homeland. A high-­‐profile pilot program, which organized the return of 71 refugees in November 2016, backed by the Myanmar and Thailand Governments as well as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), is furthering this narrative of return. Yet the relatively small numbers of returnees overall reflects the concerns that refugees have over repatriation, including security, livelihood, land, health, and education. The lack of clear and accessible information being provided on their rights as refugees, and the lack of consultation in the repatriation planning and preparation process is further fuelling anxiety among refugee communities.","PeriodicalId":76244,"journal":{"name":"North Carolina dental journal","volume":"59 2 1","pages":"7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1976-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Where do we go from here?\",\"authors\":\"R. Shankle\",\"doi\":\"10.4018/978-1-5225-1897-6.ch008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Over 100,000 refugees from Myanmar remain in nine camps on the Thailand-­‐Myanmar border, and yet despite the escalation of armed conflict, militarization, and investment-­‐driven tensions on the ground in ethnic areas, the narrative of repatriation is becoming more prominent. Reduced rations and access to basic services in refugee camps, in addition to widespread armed conflict inside the country – including in Karen State just a few kilometres away from some of the refugee camps – are fuelling anxiety and worry in refugee communities about return to their homeland. A high-­‐profile pilot program, which organized the return of 71 refugees in November 2016, backed by the Myanmar and Thailand Governments as well as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), is furthering this narrative of return. Yet the relatively small numbers of returnees overall reflects the concerns that refugees have over repatriation, including security, livelihood, land, health, and education. The lack of clear and accessible information being provided on their rights as refugees, and the lack of consultation in the repatriation planning and preparation process is further fuelling anxiety among refugee communities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":76244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"North Carolina dental journal\",\"volume\":\"59 2 1\",\"pages\":\"7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1976-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"North Carolina dental journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1897-6.ch008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North Carolina dental journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1897-6.ch008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

来自缅甸的10万多名难民仍在泰缅边境的9个难民营中,尽管武装冲突、军事化和少数民族地区由投资驱动的紧张局势不断升级,但遣返的叙述正变得越来越突出。难民营口粮和基本服务的减少,加上该国境内广泛的武装冲突- -包括在距离一些难民营仅几公里的克伦邦- -加剧了难民社区对返回家园的焦虑和担忧。在缅甸和泰国政府以及联合国难民事务高级专员办事处(难民署)的支持下,一项备受瞩目的试点计划于2016年11月组织了71名难民的返回,进一步推动了这种返回的叙述。然而,总体而言,回返者人数相对较少反映了难民对遣返的关切,包括安全、生计、土地、健康和教育。关于他们作为难民的权利缺乏明确和可获得的资料,在遣返规划和准备过程中缺乏协商,这进一步加剧了难民社区的焦虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Where do we go from here?
Over 100,000 refugees from Myanmar remain in nine camps on the Thailand-­‐Myanmar border, and yet despite the escalation of armed conflict, militarization, and investment-­‐driven tensions on the ground in ethnic areas, the narrative of repatriation is becoming more prominent. Reduced rations and access to basic services in refugee camps, in addition to widespread armed conflict inside the country – including in Karen State just a few kilometres away from some of the refugee camps – are fuelling anxiety and worry in refugee communities about return to their homeland. A high-­‐profile pilot program, which organized the return of 71 refugees in November 2016, backed by the Myanmar and Thailand Governments as well as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), is furthering this narrative of return. Yet the relatively small numbers of returnees overall reflects the concerns that refugees have over repatriation, including security, livelihood, land, health, and education. The lack of clear and accessible information being provided on their rights as refugees, and the lack of consultation in the repatriation planning and preparation process is further fuelling anxiety among refugee communities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
What Is Your Diagnosis? A comparison of Hydron root canal filling material and gutta percha obturation. Ischemic heart disease risk factors. Suggested guidelines for asepsis in the dental office environment. Effects of the elimination of airway interference on some mentally retarded.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1