Refugees, Identity and the State: Tibetan and Tamil histories of citizen becoming in South Asia
Lead Research Organisation:
London School of Economics and Political Science
Department Name: International Relations
Abstract
How does refugee participation in the politics of recognition change citizenship? Foregrounding
refugee attempts in the reconstruction of identity to assert group rights, by the two largest refugee
communities in India: Tibetans and Indian Origin Tamils from Srilanka as an entry point, I attempt
to introduce ground up, identity specific nuances in the study of citizenship. I examine how
refugees in India tactically emphasize or downplay their particular transnational and transcultural
identities, as per the demands of recognition. Refugee self-fashioning as citizens to fit into
categories of positive discrimination in the state as - scheduled tribes and scheduled castes-
point to a complex process, by which, despite histories of unfathomable precarity, refugees attempt
to assert themselves as agential actors for inscription in the state. While the primary focus of the
project is to decode refugee claims to Indian citizenship and group rights along centre-state
negotiations, the project is also positioned at the interface of multiple citizenship regimes in South
Asia: international, regional and distinct national regimes. The figure of the refugee juggling
multiple political-legal regimes amidst the demands of recognition of the complex identity
centered, yet liberal constitutional architecture in India forces us to rethink singular narratives of
refugees as bare life. Refugee endeavours at reconstruction are in many ways, attempts to
ameliorate their collective misrecognition which was foundational to their forcible displacement/
expulsion or assimilation in their former states. I trace the plurality of refugee political-legal
assertions, many of which 'demand' increasing state recognition, or rectification of former
misrecognition, to make legible: refugees as citizens and further, citizens as subjects of special
rights. I also examine the counter-intuitive ways in which the politics of recognition induces
competition of marginality; in rare occasions even cooperation, between citizens and refugees. This
way, while refugees do not have "the right to have rights"1
, I argue that they have nevertheless
attempted inscription in the state in interesting, often unexamined ways
refugee attempts in the reconstruction of identity to assert group rights, by the two largest refugee
communities in India: Tibetans and Indian Origin Tamils from Srilanka as an entry point, I attempt
to introduce ground up, identity specific nuances in the study of citizenship. I examine how
refugees in India tactically emphasize or downplay their particular transnational and transcultural
identities, as per the demands of recognition. Refugee self-fashioning as citizens to fit into
categories of positive discrimination in the state as - scheduled tribes and scheduled castes-
point to a complex process, by which, despite histories of unfathomable precarity, refugees attempt
to assert themselves as agential actors for inscription in the state. While the primary focus of the
project is to decode refugee claims to Indian citizenship and group rights along centre-state
negotiations, the project is also positioned at the interface of multiple citizenship regimes in South
Asia: international, regional and distinct national regimes. The figure of the refugee juggling
multiple political-legal regimes amidst the demands of recognition of the complex identity
centered, yet liberal constitutional architecture in India forces us to rethink singular narratives of
refugees as bare life. Refugee endeavours at reconstruction are in many ways, attempts to
ameliorate their collective misrecognition which was foundational to their forcible displacement/
expulsion or assimilation in their former states. I trace the plurality of refugee political-legal
assertions, many of which 'demand' increasing state recognition, or rectification of former
misrecognition, to make legible: refugees as citizens and further, citizens as subjects of special
rights. I also examine the counter-intuitive ways in which the politics of recognition induces
competition of marginality; in rare occasions even cooperation, between citizens and refugees. This
way, while refugees do not have "the right to have rights"1
, I argue that they have nevertheless
attempted inscription in the state in interesting, often unexamined ways
People |
ORCID iD |
| Taylor Sherman (Primary Supervisor) | |
| Noel George (Student) |