Last week, the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union in a vote that divided the country by “age, class and geography.” The decision send shock waves through the rest of Europe, and it remains to be seen how many of the aftershocks will play out. The question of the nation’s response to migration played a fundamental role, as perhaps best visualized by the misleading Brexit poster below. The poster features images of Syrian refugees at the Slovenian border. The Brexit campaign purposefully misconstrued the image to imply that all these refugees will overrun Britain. Racist in nature and likened to Nazi style propaganda, the poster visualizes how central xenophobia and the fear of loss of control of national borders was in the Brexit campaign. The leave campaign encouraged xenophobic fears. The Leave faction distorted the humanitarian tragedy of Syrian refugees arriving at Europe's border to imply that they will overrun Britain, unless it leaves the UK. In reality, Britain has pledged to take in less than quarter of what its EU quota would be, amounting to 20,000 Syrian refugees by 2020. Since the Brexit vote, the UK witnessed a spike in xenophobic attacks. Anonymous right-wing attackers chose Polish and Muslim residents as clear targets. They defaced Polish cultural centers and embassies and posted posters and postcards asking Poles to leave on a number of properties in Cambridge. Of course, the Brexit vote exposed deep divisions within the United Kingdom beyond the attitudes around immigration. Underlying these divisions are many uncomfortable truths. For one, many European citizens perceive the European Union as elitist and non-democratic, suffering “a dramatic deficit of democracy, as well as of loyalty.” This sense of alienation reverberates across Europe: it feeds the right wing parties’ rise in much of Europe, but it also reflects centrist and leftist frustration’s across Europe’s disparate countries. Whether the Brexit will fuel these nationalist sentiments remains to be seen. I am worried about this possibility, as both Germany and France will head into elections campaigns soon. Another poignant truth is that an underclass of rural, working class and older people, who have benefited far less from European integration than their young and urban counterparts, championed Euro-skepticism and Brexit. According to the exit polls, youth and those with higher education and/or median income voted to stay. In the UK socioeconomic status and education often correlate. Despite the association between economic hardship and the preference for a Brexit, in the campaign, immigration was central. In a similar project to mine, Mike Carter walked across much of Britain, and described industrial communities left behind, poverty, healthcare problems and a feeling of economic defeat. In the words of many, immigrants were the scapegoat for larger economic malaise. Thus, immigration is the prism, through which some of the country’s other divisions crystallize. In the words of Guardian Commentator Owen Jones: Above all else, it was about immigration, which has become the prism through which millions of people see everyday problems: the lack of affordable housing; the lack of secure jobs; stagnating living standards; strained public services. Young remainers living in major urban centres tend to feel limited hostility towards immigration; it could hardly be more different for older working-class leavers in many northern cities and smaller towns. According to opinion poll research conducted by Oxford university, roughly three quarters of Britain's population wishes to reduce immigration. While these are particularly high levels, it appears that some popular opposition to immigration dates back to the 1960s. However, in terms of electoral politics, the issue gained salience in the last two decades: only recently have the British people cited it as one of the most important public policy challenges. In this campaign, the leave campaign and sympathetic media constructed a narrative, in which the migrants were at the forefront Britain’s rural economic hardship. The Leave campaign actively stoked the resentment by misrepresenting the root causes of economic hardship. In the words of Asad Rehman, chair of the London-based anti-racist Newham Monitoring Project: It’s been a systematic, month after month of the mainstream rightwing newspapers running story after story of the threat of migrants, to create the concept that the answer is about the borders, not about inequality, neoliberal globalization or the [potential] drivers of the anger. This focus on immigration persisted even though scientific data debunks most claims of migrants hurting the British economy. Statements that do not stand up to scrutiny include, whether it migrants cost the UK government more than nationals (migrant workers rely less on the British welfare services, but pay more taxes); whether migrants cause a rise to housing prices (there is no proven correlation between immigration and London’s housing market, other than the increase of skilled construction labor helps the helps the expansion of housing) and whether immigration deflates the wages of those, who voted for Brexit. Instead, data indicates mass immigration fueled the British economy, and Britain sports some of the highest educated migrants, who bring innovations and industrial growth. It remains to be seen, whether immigration will slow post Brexit. Should Britain enter a recession, immigration will likely decline naturally, as those with options will look for economic opportunities in more vibrant economies. In the short term however, there may very well be a surge in immigration, as EU residents try to access the labor market before the divorce. Simultaneously, migrants and refugees in the notorious Calais border camp expressed new hope: The French Calais mayor called for Britain to take back its border to its mainland and process asylum requests there. Many migrants are hoping that France will be laxer in patrolling the access to the British tunnel, and they rejoice in the fact that if Britain does leave the EU, the government opts out of the possibility to send migrants back to the first receiving country (the current EU regime under the Dublin treaty). In terms of policy, Britain is now left with the unenviable task of designing an alternative immigration system. Currently, immigration levels from within and without the European Union are almost exactly half, so the Brexit would potentially restrict the 49.5% if European immigration. The proposed alternative is an Australian point system to attract skilled migrants, which is similar to the current system for non-EU migrant visas. In another irony, this system was initially designed to attract more migrants. Already, questions about whether the UK can deliver on the Leave’s campaign’s promise to restrain migration to a third of its current levels abound. The Leave Campaign is backpedaling on this promise: politicians are admitting that immigration will be unlikely to fall even with a new system, and stress that immigrants already in the UK will be allowed to remain. The reason for this pivot is a recognition that migration is key to UK’s economy and trading arrangements. Leave campaigner Daniel Hannan admitted this weekend that in order to keep the current level of trading, the UK may need to accept free movement of EU migrants. Many of the EU’s countries have vested economic interest in keeping the open movement of labor. Poland, which accounts for 850,000 immigrants to the UK, already vowed to make the status quo on labor access a key demand for Eu trade negotiations. Personally, I am worried how the Brexit will influence EU policy towards the current the biggest humanitarian crisis of our era, the Syrian refugee crisis, and the increasing flows of desperate migrants arriving on EU’s shores. Many European countries are undergoing the same rise in populism, right-wing tendencies and Euro-skepticism, which fueled the Brexit campaign. If the rise of right wing parties around Europe are any indication, a significant portion of Europe is pushing for a focus on deterrence and interdiction, rather than policies to tackle the humanitarian crisis, or to absorb and integrate the refugees and migrants. These popular demands lead to Europe’s current incongruent policy responses: an EU Turkey deal, which treats migrants as chess pieces, shipping them back to Turkey to process their claims there; and a system, in which border countries like Greece and Italy bear the brunt on the burden of the current crisis. Will European leaders, like Merkel and Hollande, look at the Brexit, and move towards more border control and scattered nationalist responses? Or will they look at the Brexit as a sign that Europe should work towards finding a common solution to a protracted humanitarian crisis as a way to assuage the sense of powerlessness among its citizenry?
2 Comments
There are so many sad news lately, I will write a blog post with more topical information soon. In the meantime, I wanted to write a little bit about the preparation it takes to plan this journey. Route Planning Route planning is key, and much more cumbersome then just plucking in destinations in google maps. In fact, since I will be crossing so many countries, I will not have access to a local cell phone data plan, and will rely solely on local bike maps. From experience I know that detailed, bike friendly maps are key. Google cycling directions are not well developed in Europe, but luckily European governments accommodate bike travel as a way of human transit. Thus, Europe invests in bike routes and trails, and provides good signage for lost cyclists. Luckily, many stretches on this particular bike tour are on historic bike routes: Once in Dresden, I can follow the Elbe Radweg- a European cycle route- which follows the Elbe river, and will bring me to Prague either on trails or low traffic streets. For this stretch, there are detailed maps through bikeline. From Prague, I can take the Prague-Vienna greenways, another European effort to connect these two capital cities through trails and low traffic streets. My understanding that some of these trails are truly more rugged, so at times I will have to spontaneously plan for alternative routes. I could not find good maps ahead of time, so my hope is to find the information once in Prague at a tourist information. Once in Vienna, I can catch the Danube bike path to Bratislava and on to Esztergom and finally Budapest. This is another well-travelled and demarcated bike route along the Danube river. That leaves me with two stretches, where I will be biking on the roads: Berlin to Dresden, and Budapest to the Serb-Hungarian border. I plan to buy detailed maps locally for those stretches, and rely on the kindness of strangers, should I get lost. From experience I know that most German roads have either adjacent bike paths or signage for bike friendly directions to the next village, so as long as I know the general direction, I will arrive. My hope is that by the time that I arrive in Budapest, I will get a feel for Hungarian cycling conditions and can plan from there. Getting the bike ready Readying the bike for a first time tour can be overwhelming: there is so much research and preparation when it comes to making decision on the best equipment. Since this is my third tour, I am not too worried about this part: I own much of the equipment. My Ortlieb panniers have carried me through rainstorms and sunshine. My bike, Jamis Xenith Endura Femme, or as I call her Athena, has proved herself to be a steady partner on over 2000 miles already. A full bike tune-up is a crucial bit of preparation before a bike tour. I have done two tours with no hitches, and I credit the excellent mechanical work that my local bike stores did ahead of time. They ensured that cables, break-pads, wheels and tires were all in good working order. A good mechanic will spot any parts, which are too worn. In the DC area, I value the expertise of two stores: the Brookland Bike Rack (Kate is a fantastic mechanic) and Freshbikes in Arlington. On a side-note, the latter has the best women’s saddle collection, I know. My saddle is unfortunately due for an upgrade, so I will be chatting with the Freshbikes experts sales people very soon. The last part of preparation is planning for the bike transport. For the flight, the Washington Area Bike Association provides travel bike boxes for its members, for which I am incredibly grateful. Training In my experience, the most important part of training is to get used to biking several days in a row. The trick to a good training plan is to build the stamina for mileage in a way that makes it all enjoyable. In order to make up for the fact that a tour requires a heavy loaded bike, I built my muscles through other strength training, such as hill repeats for example. On this trip, I expect to end up covering around 750 miles by bike, and averaging around 250 per week. That means that before I get there, I need to get very comfortable with at least half of that mileage weekly and I need to build my ability to ride multiple days in a row. So far, I am off to a good start: For example, this week, I did about 175 miles, riding Wednesday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday – balancing off days with multi-day riding. To keep all this pedaling fun and interesting, I combine three different styles of riding: group rides, which build my stamina and motivate me to push on the miles; multi-day touring trips; and easy days on Washington DC’s beautiful trails. The latter reminds me how calming and enjoyable biking through nature can be. Luckily, the Washington DC area can provide all these. Group Rides as a fun way to make the miles fly by: Group rides are often a different kind of riding. While touring, one often pedals slowly through the day, with plenty of breaks and time to appreciate the beauty. Group rides on the other hand are often fast-paced, which can be quite challenging. Simultaneously, other riders often cheer one on, and the camaraderie can make the mileage and tough climbs pass in a heartbeat. Thus, they are just an enjoyable way of training for mileage. Here are two of my favorite group rides in the Washington DC area:
To train up for slow and fully packed riding, my friends and I are planning a mini-cycle-tour: We plan to bike from Pittsburgh to Washington DC via the Great Allegheny Passage and C&O Canal Towpath. That’s a 335-mile non-motorized route, so no traffic and just nature! I will be sure to post updates from this beautiful trip over the July 4th weekend. Additionally, I have some favorite Washington DC’s trails and neat bike friendly routes to help me remember that slow biking is rejuvenating: I have wonderful friends, with whom I ride certain routes and trails, like the Hills of Anacostia and additional loop to Alexandria and the Arlington loop. Plus, DC is blessed with beautiful trails. The Mt Vernon trail is my personal favorite, but can be too busy during peak hours. Beautiful alternatives are the rarely traveled Northwest Branch trail, the Anacostia River Walk Trail, the Capital Crescent Trail and the Washington & Old Dominion trail. The most important lesson: enjoy the ride, take a moment to find joy in each one, whether it is the thrill of riding in a pack, or the beauty of finding butterflies on a trail.
As already stated, my plan is to bike from Berlin to Budapest, and on to the border, and write my reflections on the migrant movement and local responses along the way. I wanted to write a bit on my current planned route and the migration situation in each country: An overview of the route and the time-plan: July 18th to July 25th – Berlin. July 25th- 26th on to the German Border I will start in Berlin, where I should arrive sometime around July 18th. Below, I will outline in (very) brief, why I decided that Berlin would be my starting point. On July 25th, I will start a three-week journey towards Budapest. The first day biking (85 miles) will bring me to the German town of Torgau, and the next day should bring me to Dresden (65 miles). Dresden will be my last major stop in Germany. July 27th – August 1st Czech Republic From there I will cross into the Czech Republic and stay the night in Decin (65 miles) before I make it to Prague (50 miles). I hope to stay two days in Prague, to learn about the city, and the local migrant situation. Next stop would be Tabor (80 miles). That would bring me to the end of July. August 1st, I will cycle on to Vratenin, on the border with Austria (75 miles). August 2nd - August 4th Austria August 2nd will take me into Austria, and I will spend a night at Krems an der Donau (42 miles) before heading to Vienna (50). In the hopes to learn more about the migrant situation, I will stay one or maybe two days in Vienna, before crossing into Slovakia. August 5th -August 6th Slovakia Around August 5th, I should be in Bratislava (40 miles), where I also hope to stay a day. August 7th – 15th Hungary August 7th will be my longest day: almost 100 miles to cross into Hungary and to reach the town of Esztergom. After a night’s rest, I will just have 30 miles to get to Budapest- where I will stay at least three days, before finding a way to the Serb-Hungarian border. Here is a little bit about each of the countries and their stance towards migration Why Berlin? Germany & Migration in brief I could have chosen many starting points for my journey. Berlin stood out, and not only because it is my hometown. Chancellor Merkel’s monumental role in setting a tone for Europe’s migration policy cannot be understated – she is one of EU’s rare leaders, who are pushing for more human-centered responses. Her decision last September to advance an open-border policy electrified Europe and weakened her popularity and her political party. In response opposition at home and abroad, Merkel made a moral and economic argument. As a consequence of her political choices, Germany took more migrants in than other EU nations last year. While internationally, Merkel gained accolades, many European countries expressed criticism – Hungarian senior officials described Merkel’s policy as “moral imperialism" and added that “Germans think they’re the Americans of Europe.” Merkel was also a driving force behind the EU-Turkey deal, which since looks weakened. More on this deal to come at a later time. Throughout the evolution of the blog, I will write in more detail about migration policies of each country, but I wanted to lay out a brief overview of the situation. Germany has born a large share of the burden: In 2015, 2 Million people migrated to Germany, which once we account for emigration, amounts to net in-migration of 1.1 Million in just one year. Those arrivals increased the number of foreign born German residence to 9.11 Million, which is more than 10% of its population. Per consequence, 2015 marked a 49% increase in in-migration. This trend is continuing: In May of 2016, Germany already registered half a million of new asylum claims. In response to the migrant influx, the right-wing national party Alternative für Deutschland (AFD) rose in popularity: In March, when three states had their state-parliamentary elections, AFD garnered two-digit percentage points in all three states. The migration influx to Germany is likely to change Germany’s culture and political landscape in the near and long future. Next stop- Czech Republic. The Czech Republic joined the European Union in 2004, and three years later, joined the border-less Schengen area. Currently, migrants don’t seek out the Czech Republic directly, but rather treat it as a transit country. This may explain why I could not find any detailed numbers on how many refugees and migrants have transited, or remained in the Czech Republic- just vague statements that few choose to remain and that the Czech Republic sports some of the lowest numbers of asylum requests. The Czech government helped along that trend when they decided to no longer detain any migrants in route to Germany last fall. Despite comparably small numbers of asylum seekers, the country exhibited a rather checkered response: At best, the Czech government has appeared rather unprepared to be a migrant-receiving country, as evidenced by such historically-insensitive moments at Czech border guards writing numbers on migrants arms in train station- a move which echoed the Nazi practice in concentration camps and caused international outcry. At worst, the country’s president has made overt-xenophobic statements and anti-migrant comments, warning that the Muslim migrants and refugees would want to ‘cut of the hands of thieves’ and ‘stone unfaithful wives.’ Late last fall, thousands of Czechs protested the arrival of migrants. Despite the popular opposition, right-wing parties have consistently failed to garner the 5% margin to enter the Czech Parliament. Together with Hungary and Slovakia, the Czech Republic opposes the recent European Commission proposal for an EU quote system, in which 26 out of the 28 EU countries would be mandated to take a quota of refugees from Syria, Iraq and Eritrea (note that these would be individuals whose claim to protection has already been deemed valid). The quotas would relative to their population and GDP of the country. Interestingly, according to the 2015 statistics, migrants appear to be economically well integrated in the Czech Republic: 78.7% foreign born migrants work, almost on par with the nationals, 79.2% of whom are employed. Austria- at the forefront of Europe’s right-wing movement. From the Czech Republic, I will cycle across to Austria. The country has seen one of the most dramatic rises of right-wing political parties, and its response to the migration crisis has been progressively deflective. After receiving 90,000 migrants last year, Austria announced earlier this year that it will cap its acceptance of migrants at 37,500 this year. The cap inspired a domino effect of border closures in the Balkans, and caused backlogs at the border. Additionally, Austria reformed its asylum laws to restrict access: the laws would allow Austria to evoke a state of emergency should the government decide that it lacks the capacity to receive, house and integrate the incoming migrants and refugees. Since this law, the government may block entrance to the masses of desperate people, on the presumption that Austria’s neighbor states are safe countries for the migrants. This week, the country’s Foreign Minister called for an Australian, off-shore solution to the migrant crisis calling for Europe to send all asylum seekers on boats back to North Africa. Less than a month ago, Austrians almost voted a right-wing candidate to the country’s presidency: The Austrian Freiheitlichen Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) (Freedom Party) gained 49,65 % of the vote, breathtakingly close to a majority. The recent elections caused political commentators to describe the right-wing party as the country’s new majority party, right in a European wealthy social-democratic country. A streak of well-publicized crimes committed by migrants fueled the right-wing rhetoric further. Slovakia Onward, I will cycle through Slovakia, which is traditionally not a destination country for migrants. In fact, within the EU, Slovakia has the sixth lowest proportion of foreigners, and more than half of these are from fellow EU countries. Last year, Slovakia only received 260 asylum requests. So why stop in this country, might you ask? Well, Slovakia is set to take the rotation seat at the helm of the EU: it will take the rotating EU presidency July 1st, in the midst of the time when Europe will be grappling with how to respond to the summer influx of migrants. The position will be crucial to create consensus on the challenge and a momentum for a more effective response. However, my hopes are tempered: Despite negligible migration to Slovakia, its Prime Minister (PM) Fico ran his reelection campaign on xenophobic and anti-Islamic slogans: his campaign to “protect Slovakia” from Muslim threats successfully deflected attention from problematic thematic areas such as unemployment, the economy and healthcare scandals. The PM publicly vowed to let no Muslim refugees and migrants in, asserting that “multiculturalism is a fiction” and that Muslim migrants would endanger Slovakia. If Fico’s right-wing statements were an attempt to contain a burgeoning popular right-wing political movement, this political calculus backfired. In fact, the election diminished his party at the expense of right-wing, and openly neo-Nazi parties gaining parliamentary seats. Thus the entire political landscape in Slovakia is moving towards the right, just as Slovakia will be at the helm of the European Union. To date, Slovakia has worked to block current proposals for solutions on the EU level: Slovakia vehemently opposed the aforementioned proposed plan for migrant re-distribution through quotas, going so far as filing a lawsuit at the European court of Justice challenging the plan. On towards Hungary: To treat Hungary in a few sentences will not do it justice, so I will write a brief introduction: Hungary has been at the forefront of the migrant crisis in so many ways: Before erecting a border fence, Hungary was a significant transit country: around 400,000 migrants crossed Hungary in 2015. Simultaneously, Hungary is at the forefront of political opposition to admitting and integrating migrants: Its president Viktor Orbán continuously argues for the importance of preserving a Christian Europe and for the need to protect this besieged Europe from migrants. Orbán is the most vocal opponent of the moral obligation to help, which Merkel proposes. Often, his policies have inspired other right-wing politicians in Europe, building a coalition of those opposed to letting migrants into Europe. On a personal note, Hungary’s hard-line response to the masses of migrants is what inspired me to do this trip: Last year, Hungary hardened its response to the migrant crisis: in the spring, the government enacted a state of emergency and soon thereafter, used used its military to block the border. The move resulted in masses of desperate people beings stuck in limbo without accommodation, food or any provision of human dignity. The images of migrants stranded at rail stations, as Hungary refused to let them travel through to Germany, deeply affected me and started the questioning that drives me now. I will include just one picture of a women clinging in desperation to the tracks before being detained by the police. During Hungarian's attempts to stop migrants from traveling on to Germany, many protested fiercely. Since Hungary also filed a lawsuit against the proposed EU quota system. Additionally, Hungary build a fence, which has slowed but not stopped the in-migration: in February, Hungary arrested 2,500 people for sneaking through the fence at the Serbian border. Once arrested, migrants go through a trial in Hungarian, are ordered to pay a penalty and serve prison time, and then theoretically expelled- except that Serbia refuses to take the migrants back. Thus, ironically, due to Hungary’s tough law enforcement, migrants are stuck in legal limbo in detention camps. Below, a moving picture of the border fence, which I hope to visit during my trip. I will continue to write on Hungary, as the country’s hardline response warrants a much more detailed treatment.
Over three days last weekend, many Americans took time away from the bustle of their daily lives to enjoy beautiful weather, a picnic, and a contemplation of wars past. For a holiday that remembers those who gave their lives to the death and destruction of war, Memorial Day is, in practice, often peaceful. But over the course of the three days prior to this quiet weekend in the United States, 700 people drowned in the waters of Europe. Many were trying to escape the horrors of current wars; others risked their lives for more nuanced reasons: a desire to escape the authoritarianism, or corruption, or poverty, or even the erratic weather patterns that are undermining livelihoods around the world. And though people risk their lives on these perilous journeys of necessity, current asylum criteria denies them legal access to Europe. Last week’s events bring estimates of migrant deaths in Europe this year to 2000. In just one day, last Thursday, 500 individuals died, even as 4000 were saved. With warming temperatures and a safer route through Turkey blocked, these numbers are likely going to increase. That increase is challenging the current response from Europe, making clear that rescue operations are insufficient, the archaic laws defining refugee status are too narrow, and the challenges that humanitarian providers face in responding to the crisis are too vast. Additionally, the political challenges are great, with swaths of the European population anxious about the potential ramification of an influx of migrants, and political organizations of every stripe pushing for solutions, some durable and some short-term. The crisis requires a human-centered response, but such a response requires us to truly see and empathize with the people behind the numbers. Yet how do we comprehend the people behind such astronomical numbers? How can we work to imagine what desperation drives people to attempt a journey that risks their lives and those of their children? One way to humanize the numbers and bring individuals into relief is through emotionally jarring photography. The German humanitarian organization Sea-Watch made the drastic decision to publish a picture of a drowned baby in the hopes that this human image would serve as a call to action. (Picture included at the bottom, scrolling down is optional.) But there is inherent danger that such an image will focus on a narrative of victimization, dehumanizing these migrants, denying their agency, and reducing their potential for positive contribution in their prospective host countries. The concept mirrors some of the problems of poverty porn, the use of extreme imagery of economic victimhood for political and financial gain. In response to images like these, European relief and development organizations have designed a code of conduct for messaging to respect human dignity. More moving for me and, perhaps more respectful of these migrant people, was the response of an individual rescuer. He, himself a father, and a music therapist, described his own reaction:
"I began to sing to comfort myself and to give some kind of expression to this incomprehensible, heart-rending moment. Just six hours ago this child was alive.
For a moment, these words transported me to the anguish and powerlessness this man felt, and thus to the pain of the human tragedy.
The truth, however, is that even to attempt comprehension of this tragedy is deeply disturbing. Doing so inevitably moves us, bringing to life a mixture of emotions: sadness, fear, powerlessness, and perhaps guilt, to name just a few. It would distress us and so we avoid it. Because who among us wants to feel more powerless, guiltier, more upset in our lives? Automatically, we turn away from the discomfort of any new human suffering; like ostriches, we face only the immediate problems of our daily lives, rarely acknowledging that our global society is facing immense challenges, which inevitably will affect us, too. Sometimes I wonder if we are wired to tackle only our own daily challenges at the expense of long-term challenges, or collective challenges. But how can we work toward solutions if we fail to acknowledge the problem? In order to find the energy to act, we must break from our impulse to protect ourselves and instead nurture a collective understanding, a collective acknowledgment, and a sense of urgency driven by compassion for an inclusive humanity that embraces ‘the other,’ these people risking everything to arrive on safer shores. Perhaps the beginning is to make room for naming the suffering, collectively. In the words of the poet Denise Levertov, naming sorrow is the first step to reconnect to the human soul:
To speak of sorrow
works upon it moves it from its crouched place barring the way to and from the soul's hall
I don’t pretend to have all of the answers. But through this blog, I hope to create a space for contemplation, for questioning, and for fostering empathy for those affected by this current situation.
Caution- jarring picture. Scroll at your own emotional risk The Biking Migrant
Humanity is in crisis —- and there is no exit from that crisis other than the solidarity of humans. The first obstacle on the road to the exit from mutual alienation is the refusal of dialogue: that silence that accompanies self-alienation, aloofness, inattention, disregard and indifference. Instead of the duo of love and hate, the dialectical process of border-drawing needs to be thought therefore in terms of the triad of love, hate and indifference or neglect that the refugee, in particular, continues to face. Zygmunt Bauman, May 2, 2016 Here I am sitting down to write my first blog announcing my intention to gain further insight to how Europe is changing in face of refugees coming into borders, and how that translates to the policies that European governments currently being designed. I am deeply moved by the number of refugees coming to the shores in Europe: their arrival inspires a turbulent mood there. Without a doubt, many Europeans welcome the migrants, and feel empathy. However, there a vocal minority, and a larger group express a range of opposition and hesitation: per consequence, right-wing movements form, calls for restrictions to the migrants’ movement dominate public debate, and governments pass policies that seem to play chess with the human lives of staggering numbers of displaced people. To better understand the mood of the affected countries, the visual changes to border areas, and the journeys of the migrants, I am proposing a bike tour from Berlin to Budapest, traveling on to Greece, to write about what I see. Along the way, I want to meet with locals, with politicians, with organizers and advocates to tell a multi-faceted story. I will be blogging and posting short videos. My writing will be a mix of personal impressions, and policy. I will bike from Berlin to Budapest and on to the Serb border. Along my route, I intent to locals, asylum centers and politicians grappling with the situation. But first…. Why the Biking Migrant? As many people, I carry many identities: I am a professional focused on conflict and human rights; I am a PhD candidate in Law, Justice and Criminology; I am a European, an American, and humanist. I am also a migrant myself, and a passionate bicyclist. I was born in West Berlin to Polish parents. My early childhood was influenced by the political context of the time: The Iron Curtain, which separated us from our Polish family. As a result, I straddled cultures, becoming both German, and a child of immigrants. Growing up as a first generation German in a context where many folks perceived Poles as migrant workers and treated them as the butt of jokes formed my own sensitivities for identity politics as societies change. Later, I moved a lot; living in France, Senegal, Denmark, Belgium, The Netherlands and the U.S. I learned from each culture and country. Today, I am a dual-national in Germany and the United States, and continue to straddle cultural divides, every day. Why Bike? Long-distance biking, so-called touring, is my passion. It’s my favorite way to get to know a country and its people more intimately: people find cyclists more approachable, and are more open to talk and even open their homes to a passing cyclist. As a cyclist, one traverses through small villagesthat tourists avoid or simply don’t come in contact with, yet I find that these villages reflect the state of a country as much as its metropolis does. Finally, it is an affordable way to travel. |
AuthorThe thoughts of a passionate biker, migrant, humanist and human rights expert on the current migration waves in Europe. Archives
July 2017
Categories |