Securitization of Migration and Limited Protection of Refugees in Tanzania

This article reviews the implications of negative discourses on refugees for durable solutions. The paper argues that overemphasis on security concerns by the host states is not only contrary to the very protection of refugees it claims to safeguard, but also leads to restrictions on movement and limits refugees’ access to fundamental rights and ultimately bars the possibility for alternative durable solutions. The article shows how an overemphasis on security is made possible by negative discourses about a certain group of refugees, limiting them from accessing even local help, given the dwindling global humanitarian aid. As such, the refugees in the global south are contained in the camps, and their movement is restricted. Access to mobility not only allows refugees to adapt to cuts in food rations but also acts as an alternative, durable solution

Human rights · Limiting · Perception · Refugee · Securitization · Climate Change, Adaptation, Migration · Migration, Refugees, and Integration · Peacebuilding and International Security