• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Saving Refugees or Saving Borders? Southeast Asian States and the Indochinese Refugee Crisis

    Author(s)
    E. Davies, Sara
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Davies, Sara E.
    Year published
    2006
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    This article charts the response of Southeast Asian states to the Indochinese refugee crisis between 1975 and the 1979 Geneva conference. The purpose of this article is to understand why the outbreak of Southeast Asia's largest refugee crisis since World War II did not prompt the region's states to accede to international refugee law. It is argued that most Southeast Asian states continued to reject international refugee law during this period because they believed that their interests were best served by this policy. That is, Southeast Asian states conducted a form of 'refugee manipulation' because their persistent refusal ...
    View more >
    This article charts the response of Southeast Asian states to the Indochinese refugee crisis between 1975 and the 1979 Geneva conference. The purpose of this article is to understand why the outbreak of Southeast Asia's largest refugee crisis since World War II did not prompt the region's states to accede to international refugee law. It is argued that most Southeast Asian states continued to reject international refugee law during this period because they believed that their interests were best served by this policy. That is, Southeast Asian states conducted a form of 'refugee manipulation' because their persistent refusal to sign the instruments compelled Western states (the United States in particular) to provide material assistance to the refugees and offer resettlement places. Thus, the Southeast Asian states' strategy placed the onus for responding to the crisis on international institutions and Western states. Furthermore, many Southeast Asian states justified their refusal to sign the instruments by referring to the latter's Eurocentric character. Ultimately, this argument allowed many of the region's states to absolve themselves of responsibility for taking the lead in responding to the crisis.
    View less >
    Journal Title
    Global Change, Peace and Security
    Volume
    18
    Issue
    1
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14781150500453153
    Subject
    Policy and Administration not elsewhere classified
    Criminology
    Policy and Administration
    Political Science
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/32383
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander