International Migration - 2002 - Koser - Asylum Policies Trafficking and Vulnerability

Asylum Policies, Trafficking
and Vulnerability
Khalid Koser*
ABSTRACT
This article is located at the intersection of three recent debates on asylum

in Europe: the efficacy of asylum policies; the trafficking of asylum seekers,
and their growing vulnerability. Most commentators agree that there are
relationships between these three debates, but the nature of those relation-
ships remain unclear. Yet the need properly to understand the nature of these
links has become especially pressing in the context of a raft of new policy
initiatives on both asylum and trafficking, and concerns for their consequences
for asylum seekers.
At least part of the reason for this lack of clear understanding is significant
gaps in empirical research. This article begins to fill some of these gaps, and
in so doing to unpick some of the relationships between asylum policies,
trafficking and vulnerability. It focuses on the experiences of asylum seekers
in Europe, thus presenting a “bottom up” perspective on trafficking and
asylum policies. The findings are derived from research among Iranian
asylum seekers in the Netherlands, conducted between 1994 and 1996.
The article discusses some of the reservations that surround this approach,
including methodological issues such as trust, and the difficulties of applying
more widely a narrow case study. Within the context of these reservations,
it draws three main conclusions. First, empirical evidence to support the
view that increasing proportions of asylum seekers are being forced to turn
to traffickers in order to negotiate restrictive asylum policies. Second, the
ways in which trafficking is exposing asylum seekers – including at least
some “genuine” refugees – to new forms of vulnerability. Third, that direct
links exist between asylum policies, trafficking and vulnerability, and that
the blame for growing vulnerability lies more with asylum policies than with
traffickers or with asylum seekers themselves. Finally, these empirical
conclusions are targeted on a series of policy implications.
* Migration Research Unit, Department of Geography, University College London, UK.
Published by Blackwell Publishers Ltd., © 2000 IOM

108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK, and International Migration, Special Issue 2000/1
350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. ISSN 0020-7985
14682435, 2000, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-2435.00116 by Roskilde University, Wiley Online Library on [23/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
92 Koser
INTRODUCTION
As asylum has surged back towards the top of political agendas in Europe, three
debates stand out. One concerns asylum policies. While a raft of generally
restrictive policies during the early 1990s led to a fairly immediate and
significant reduction in asylum applications, their numbers have rebounded
sharply in recent years, leaving policy makers rather unclear about the impact
of their policies and how next to react. A second debate revolves around
trafficking. Relying largely on anecdotal and journalistic sources, there seems
to be a growing consensus that increasing proportions of asylum seekers in
Europe are being trafficked. This has evolved into a particularly sensitive
debate, as it runs the risk of further fuelling a tendency in the press and popular
perceptions to conflate asylum seekers with illegal migrants. And a third
debate, in which human rights activists in particular have taken the lead,
highlights the increasingly precarious and vulnerable situations in which
asylum seekers find themselves in Europe, both before and after arrival in their
destination country.
Few would disagree that links exist between these debates; many would
disagree over their exact nature. Some commentators suggest that restrictive
asylum policies have effectively forced asylum seekers with no other alter-
native to turn to traffickers for assistance. Others might argue that trafficking
has taken on the form of a transnational business which actively recruits clients,
including asylum seekers and other migrants. Some suggest that where asylum
seekers are concerned, traffickers can be viewed as “white knights”, providing
assistance to escape from persecution where no other assistance exists. For
others, asylum seekers, like other migrants, are exploited by traffickers and
may find themselves in debt bondage or working involuntarily in the sex
industry.
The need properly to understand the nature of these links has become especially
pressing recently, in the context of a raft of policy initiatives in the domains of
both asylum and trafficking. One particular concern is that the link between
trafficking and asylum has not been fully realized, with the result that anti-
trafficking polices may impact negatively upon – and even ultimately
undermine – Europe’s asylum regime. For example, there is a danger that
border enforcement regulations (a central plank of anti-trafficking strategies)
are in contradiction to safeguards to access to European territory – a central
plank of asylum (Morrison, 2000). From the opposite perspective, there is a real
concern that restrictive asylum policies are excluding “genuine” as well as
“bogus” refugees. The fear is that the social construction in policy agendas of
all asylum seekers as illegal migrants is becoming a social reality as asylum
seekers are forced to turn to traffickers in order to enter Europe and apply for
asylum. Without proper integration of asylum and trafficking policies, and
without a clear understanding of their implications for asylum seekers them-
Asylum policies, trafficking and vulnerability 93
selves, Morrison has gone so far as to suggest that we may be approaching the
“end game” in asylum in Europe (Morrison, 2000).
Significant gaps in empirical research do not help, and there is a real danger that
current policies are being made in what at times approaches an information
vacuum. On the whole, academic debate about asylum policies has been limited
to placing policies in international perspective or assessing their efficacy
(Muus, 1997), and only rarely has it meaningfully touched upon their con-
sequences for those seeking asylum. Gaps abound in the trafficking literature,
but they include on the one hand analysis of the wider context in which
trafficking is flourishing, and on the other hand analysis of the narrower
impacts of trafficking on individual human rights (Salt and Hogarth, 2000).
Finally, research on both asylum policies and trafficking has tended largely to
follow a political agenda, without proper consideration of the outcomes for the
migrants involved in their contradictions.
It is in this context that this article returns to empirical research conducted

amongst Iranian asylum seekers in the Netherlands between 1994 and 1996.
This still remains one of the few published studies on the trafficking of
asylum seekers, although other research has focused on the experiences of
refugees (Morrison, 1998). As some of the more quantitative results of this
research have been published elsewhere (Koser, 1997a, 1997b), the focus in
this article is upon its more qualitative aspects: on the experiences of the
asylum seekers, and thus represents a “bottom up” approach which tries to
escape the political agenda. The advantages of such microcosmic approaches
have been found in other migration contexts to be multiple: they can avoid the
pitfalls of generalizations (King and Reynolds, 1994), and can allow
researchers to investigate questions determined by migrants’ own agendas as
opposed to those set by states or institutions (de Jong and Gardner, 1981). In
this way, this article tries to unpick some of the links between asylum
policies, trafficking and vulnerability.
The article proceeds from two important conceptual bases. The first is that the
term asylum seeker is considered to be essentially a social construction, with
little conceptual validity. The paper is therefore not concerned with seeking
distinctions between asylum seekers and other migrant types; nor with seeking
differences between asylum seekers which might correspond with a distinction
between “genuine” and “bogus” refugees. Instead, it tries to focus on the social
realities associated with trafficking.
An associated second precept is an emphasis upon the entire migratory profile

of the respondents. In the political debate about asylum seekers, the reason for
leaving the country of origin is of central importance. However, this one
dimensional emphasis belies the true complexity of the migration experience,
which can only truly be understood by studying the entire migration cycle,
94 Koser
including events before leaving, during migration and after arrival, and in some
cases during return too (Byron, 1994; King et al., 1983).
This article is structured in four main parts. The first describes the changing
political context in which asylum seekers are migrating in Europe. The second
introduces the respondents, and critically describes the methodology adopted.
The third examines their experiences of migration, focusing on the three key
themes of lack of control, changing social worlds and crises of identity. The
fourth section turns to an analysis of some of the links between changing
asylum policies, trafficking and vulnerability, and thus demonstrates how
empirical research might inform current policy-making.
THE CHANGING POLITICAL CONTEXT
A brief analysis of the interaction between asylum policies and asylum mig-
ration in Europe is necessary to understand the obstacles in response to which
asylum seekers seem increasingly to be turning to traffickers. Focusing specif-
ically upon their implications for migration, recent policy initiatives can be
categorized in a number of ways (Table 1, page 109). First, a distinction can be
drawn between policies that impact directly and those that impact indirectly
upon the migration of asylum seekers. There is a range of policies aimed quite
explicitly at preventing the arrival of asylum seekers in Western Europe in the
first place. These include the growing list of countries from which visas are
demanded; the promotion of so-called “safe havens”; the requirement that
asylum seekers submit their applications at a consulate or embassy in their
country of origin (“in-country processing”), and carrier sanctions. Another
such initiative is the designation of certain countries as “safe” and from which
applications for asylum can therefore be considered to be unfounded. At the
same time, other policies have resulted in increasing restrictions upon asylum
seekers once they have arrived in a European country, for example, concerning
access to the refugee procedure or to refugee status, or access to state welfare.
A supplementary aim of such measures is to make these receiving countries less
than attractive destinations for asylum seekers, and so they can be considered
to impact indirectly upon their migration.
All the above asylum policies are aimed at the scale of asylum migration. A
second distinction might be made between them and other policies aimed at
changing the spatial distribution of asylum migration. For example, there have
evolved a number of initiatives that shift the responsibility for dealing with
asylum applications to other countries, usually outside Western Europe. One
set of policies, which has impacted in particular upon countries in Southern
Europe, involves the closure of traditional channels for resettlement in Western
Europe so that “transit” countries have become “target” countries. Another
example is the series of Readmission Agreements, signed on a bilateral basis
between countries in Western and Central or Eastern Europe, which have

facilitated the return of asylum seekers from the former to the latter (King, 1994).
These agreements are one example of the institutionalization of the notion of
“safe third country” (also known as “country of first asylum” or “host third
country”). This notion denies access to national asylum procedures when an
asylum seeker can be demonstrated to have travelled through other countries,
deemed as safe.
Another way of analysing the interaction between asylum policies and asylum
migration is to consider their impact through the asylum cycle (Koser, 1997a).
The asylum cycle can be conceived of as beginning when the need arises for an
individual to consider making a claim for asylum. It can be thought to be
coming to an end upon a decision about the claim. Certain policies, such as visa
requirements, can cause the country of origin of an asylum seeker to be an
initial obstacle in asylum migration. Others policies, such as the notion of “safe
third country”, can place obstacles in the way of migration routes chosen by
asylum seekers. Still other policies, such as channels for resettlement, can
influence the choice of migration destination. The implication is that migration
strategies are needed to overcome obstacles at each stage of the asylum cycle.
METHODOLOGY
Given the aim of the research, namely to try to understand how trafficking is
experienced, qualitative research methods were adopted. In-depth interviews
were conducted, each lasting about two hours. Interview data were supple-
mented by information gathered during open-ended discussions with opinion
formers and representatives from inside the asylum seeker populations. The
interpretation of such qualitative data is always difficult and perhaps more so
where the respondents can be considered vulnerable, as in the case of asylum
seekers. It is therefore helpful to understand the political context of the
respondents and to assess the validity of the data in this light.
A total of 32 respondents were interviewed in two Azielzoekerscentra (AZCs)

in the Netherlands. Twenty-one were women, the majority aged between
20 and 35. This predominance of young and female respondents reflects quite
closely the demographic composition of the Iranian populations in the two
AZCs visited, although it is a reversal of the gender profile of Iranian asylum
seekers in Dutch AZCs as a whole. Asylum seekers in AZCs have already
passed through two earlier interview procedures in Aanmeldcentra (ACs) then
Opvang en onderzoekscentra (OCs) and are at the stage where they are
awaiting the outcome of a full assessment of their claims for asylum, or in some
cases appeals against previous assessments. All the respondents had left Iran
between one and two years prior to the interviews and the length of time spent
in the AZC ranged from just one week in one case, to 18 months in another.
96 Koser
This context imposed restrictions upon both the interviewing procedure and
subsequently upon data analysis. Several respondents did not speak English,
which is the author’s mother tongue. There was also a more general problem of
trust, operating in two directions. The respondents were generally and, under-
standably, reluctant to discuss issues that might impact directly upon their
claims for asylum. At the same time, given that they had already been officially
interviewed a number of times by the time the author interviewed them in the
AZCs, several respondents appeared to be “practised” at interviews and at
times gave the impression of responding appropriately, as opposed to necessarily
accurately.
A number of strategies were adopted in response to such difficulties. For

approximately one quarter of the interviews, the assistance of an interpreter
was necessary. In each AZC more than one interpreter was employed, as an
attempt to counter the problems which can arise when a single interpreter
becomes too closely associated in the eyes of a study population with a
researcher. The interpreters were drawn from within the Iranian asylum seeker
populations within the AZCs; the assumption being that respondents might be
even less forthcoming in the presence of two “outsiders”, namely an external
interpreter and the author. In most cases, the gender of the interpreter matched
the gender of the respondent. During the interviews, anonymity was guaranteed,
this method being employed with several other techniques in an attempt to
secure a degree of trust among the respondents. Despite such methodological
safeguards, reservations clearly surround the validity of the data gathered. The
following analysis therefore focuses on excerpts from selected interviews with
only eight respondents, with whom the author believes a particularly good
rapport was established.
SEEKING ASYLUM IN EUROPE
On reading and re-reading the interview transcripts, three overwhelming

themes emerge. One was the respondents’ feeling of a lack of control over the
entire migration experience. A second was a sense of isolation from supportive
social networks. A third was a crisis of identity, expressed through particular
concern about what the respondents saw as their “criminalization”. These themes
not only overlap, but also have in common a dynamic element. Loss of control,
isolation from social networks and “criminalization”, were all processes that
became exacerbated as the respondents moved through their migration cycles.
Losing control of the migration cycle
The police were after me because of an article I wrote in the University

newspaper. I left my family, my home, my country... just because I knew what
would happen if they caught me (Ladan).
For Ladan, as for most other respondents, migration represented a last attempt
to exert control over her present circumstances and future prospects. The act of
migration is often depicted thus, even in the case of refugees who have
conventionally been considered powerless. In this context, most respondents
expressed particular frustration at what they perceived as a lack of control
during their migration from Iran to the Netherlands.
In the cases of 29 respondents, control over migration was to varying degrees

ceded to traffickers. Even the other three respondents concurred with the
opinions of the majority that it is increasingly hard to leave Iran and come as an
asylum seeker to Western Europe without the assistance of a trafficker,
particularly when more than one person is travelling. At a practical level,
traffickers served three main functions (Koser, 1997b). First, they proved to be
well informed about changing asylum policies in Europe and often advised
respondents about potential European destination countries. Second, they
arranged for travel documents, which in many cases were reported to have been
forged. Third, they usually took responsibility for physically transporting
respondents between Iran and the Netherlands. For these services traffickers
were reported to have charged between US$4,000 and US$6,000. However,
more recent arrivals among the respondents intimated that the function of
traffickers is increasingly transforming from one of facilitation to a more
proactive one – control over migration.
When I paid him, the travel agent promised to bring me straight to the Netherlands.
He said he would give me a passport and an air ticket, and everything would be
fine. But in the end it took me two months to get here. First he took me to Istanbul,
by car. Then he hid me in the back of a van and took me to Bulgaria. We flew
from there to the Netherlands (Ahmad).
I wanted to go to Denmark – I’d been there before to visit my sons, you see. But
the travel agent told me he couldn’t guarantee anything – only that he’d get me
to Western Europe. I didn’t even know we were going to Holland until I got to
the airport (Zahra).
These quotes show how traffickers, referred to by most respondents as “travel

agents”, controlled both migration routes and destinations. The geography of
individual migration cycles was in this way controlled by traffickers. It is
interesting that only a limited number of routes between Iran and the Netherlands
were used by these traffickers, usually involving transit via either neighbouring
Turkey or Pakistan or via Eastern or Central Europe, and in some cases both.
One respondent indicated that a friend had travelled from Iran to the Netherlands
under the auspices of a “travel agent” about three years before she had, and that
this friend had come via Spain. The implication is that “travel agents” are
responsive to the opening and closing of opportunities for negotiating entry into
Western Europe. Other research has identified other informal or illegal routes
for the smuggling of people, as well as commodities such as drugs, in and
98 Koser
through Europe. Although it was unclear from the interviews whether migration
routes for asylum seekers have converged with these other routes, there does
seem to be evidence that the Netherlands also has a central position in several
other smuggling routes (Skeldon, 1994; IOM, 1995).
The feeling of a lack of control over their migration applied not only to the
geography of the respondents’ migration cycles, but in several cases also to the
time spent in different stages of the cycle and the time taken to pass between
these stages. The following brief excerpts highlight this notion at the first two
stages of the migration cycle, namely before flight and during transit through
Europe.
I contacted the travel agent through a friend who knew him personally. It took
him 15 days to organize everything. This was a terrible time as I expected to be
arrested any minute (Koerosh).
From Iran I came to Romania first. But there was a disagreement between my
travel agent in Iran and his contact in Romania, so I had to wait for two months
in Romania before coming here. My money ran out long before that (Parvin).
However, the respondents’ sense of powerlessness was most vehemently

expressed with regard to the end of the migration cycle. They felt most
frustrated in respect of the pending decision upon their claims for asylum, or in
some cases their appeals. Normally, a positive decision would bring the
migration cycle to an end in the Netherlands, while a negative decision might
necessitate return to Iran, or perhaps to a “safe third country”. A great deal was
felt to depend on this decision – not just personal safety, but also plans for
future employment, promises to family members still in Iran and so on. Such
was the frustration of one respondent, who had been in the AZC for over a year
awaiting a decision, that she had even contemplated contacting a trafficker in
the Netherlands to take her to Canada. She said that she would rather run this
risk than wait any longer in the Netherlands.
Migrating out of social context
Migration always takes place in a social context. In particular, social networks

have been found to underlie much migration. In the context of migration, social
networks are normally understood as existing through family and friendship
and community practices such as festivals and membership in associations
(Gurak and Caces, 1992). They have been found to influence the aetiology,
composition, direction and persistence of migration flows, as well as settlement
and integration processes (Boyd, 1989). They can impact directly upon
individual migrants by serving as conduits for information, social and financial
assistance and cultural norms. Literature on the interaction of social networks
with the process of migration has tended to focus on three distinct areas of
the migration experience. These are the migration decision-making process
(e.g. Ritchey, 1976; Hugo, 1981, 1987); the choice of destinations by migrants
(e.g. Massey et al., 1987), and the adaptation of migrants in host societies
(e.g. Caces, 1987). In this way, the literature on social networks covers the three
stages of the migration cycle.
When I left Iran, I had a son in Denmark, a daughter in Germany and a cousin in
Spain. My husband stayed behind. I spoke to all of them before deciding to leave,
and they helped me. But now I feel so alone (Ladan).
This excerpt from Ladan’s reply to our question about her changing social
worlds raises two important issues of more general applicability. First, the
social context for their migration was important to most respondents. Second,
however, her reply illustrates a theme which recurred through several of the
interviews: the gradual isolation of the respondents from supportive social
networks as they moved through the migration cycle from Iran to the
Netherlands.
Social networks interacted with the respondents’ decision-making before

leaving Iran in two main ways. First, they served as sources of information.
Twenty-seven respondents reported having had friends or relatives who had
been to Europe and since returned to Iran, and while the information obtained
from these sources was often outdated, it proved useful, particularly for those
respondents who had never before been outside Iran. In addition, 22 respondents
had family members in Europe before they left Iran, and 24 respondents had
friends with whom they maintained regular contact. Of the 26 respondents with
friends of family members in Europe, 18 reported having made contact with
them in the context of reaching a decision to leave Iran. A second function
served in the decision-making process by social networks was the provision of
money in order to meet the cost of “travel agents”.
After their departure from Iran, this interaction between their networks and the
migration process began to break down for most of the respondents as they
entered the second stage of the migration cycle. Contrary to the findings of most
research in this area (e.g. King and Reynolds, 1994; Massey et al., 1987), their
social networks largely did not determine the destination of the respondents. Of
the 26 respondents with friends or family members in Europe, in only three
cases were these people located in the Netherlands. This is despite the fact that
all but one of the 26 stated that they had initially intended to seek asylum in a
country where they knew someone. As alluded to in the previous section, the
choice of destination was one of several aspects of the migration cycle over
which most respondents had lost control to traffickers.
As a result, by the third stage of the migration cycle, in the Netherlands, the
majority of respondents felt isolated from the supportive social networks that
had contributed to the earlier stages of their migration cycles.
100 Koser
I’m allowed to visit my mother every weekend. She looks after me, and she gives
me money when I need it. If I’m really depressed, she sometimes takes my baby
away for the night during the week just to give me a break (Nahied).
I’m really lonely here. I miss my husband and my children. Both my sons are in
Denmark, but it seems so far away. I hardly ever see them. There’s no one to help
me with anything. What will I do if they let me stay? How will I find a house and
a job? It frightens me (Zahra).
Nahied was one of the three respondents who did have family members in the
Netherlands when she arrived. As in the case of the other two respondents in
this category, the support provided by her family was highly valued. In the
short-term, this support covered a wide variety of aspects. Family members
provided loans, were sources of information, assisted with child care and
simply by being close provided a shoulder to lean on during times of depression.
In contrast, Zahra was in the majority of respondents without friends or family

in the Netherlands when she arrived. There were quite clear indications that
people like Zahra, without an immediate social network to turn to for general
support, suffered to a far greater degree and far more frequently from depression.
An inquiry into the mental health of asylum seekers and refugees in the
Netherlands broadly confirms this qualitative observation that social networks
can insulate people from depression (van Willigen, 1991). It was also noticeable
that those respondents without relatives or friends in the Netherlands more
regularly expressed insecurity concerning their future in the Netherlands
should they receive some form of refugee status. Of particular concern were
housing and employment. Again, a number of studies have demonstrated how
integration strategies are generally adopted more quickly and with more ease
by refugees through social networks than through institutional programmes
(Dorais, 1991; Veglery, 1988).
It is also interesting to note from Zahra’s response that the adaptive functions
of social networks seemed to depend on proximity. All but two respondents
without relatives in the Netherlands maintained fairly regular contact with
relatives either elsewhere in Europe or back in Iran. However, on the whole,
these relatives were reported as serving no apparent function in terms of short-
term assistance, although one respondent had received some money from an
uncle in Germany.
Criminalization and a crisis of identity
First I went to Istanbul. The agent smuggled me over the border in the hills, at
night. Just in case, he gave me a false Turkish passport. But the police stopped
us in Istanbul and confiscated the passport. We hid in a house belonging to the
agent’s friend for two weeks, while he got me another passport. This time it was
Spanish, and my name was Martin Sanchez. Then I came overland to Bulgaria.
In Bulgaria the agent took away my passport. To come to the Netherlands I was
hidden in the back of a van. We drove all the way from Bulgaria and entered the
Netherlands without anyone knowing (Reza).
Although few respondents were willing to answer questions about their journey
in as much detail as Reza, his experiences did not appear to be uncommon. In
a quite literal sense Reza changed his identity in order to reach the Netherlands,
through using passports and other travel documents in false names. At the same
time, Reza’s response also illuminates a more conceptual transformation of
identity, specifically of migrant identity. His response reveals a process of
“criminalization” underlining a transformation from “legal” to “illegal” migrant.
Reza, along with several other respondents, revealed that in order to reach the
Netherlands and seek asylum, he had effectively been forced into illegality. In
the first instance, the respondents recognized that human trafficking of the sort
in which many had been involved was illegal. The illegality surrounding human
trafficking is often deepened by its association with syndicates involved in the
illegal trafficking of arms and narcotics as well (Skeldon, 1994), or from
evidence that trafficked migrants are recruited into illegal employment such as
prostitution in their destination countries (IOM, 1995). The respondents were
generally unwilling to respond to questions covering such issues. On the other
hand, it was clear that the strategies used by traffickers to facilitate the
respondents’ migration across Europe were illegal in their own right. The three
principal illegal strategies reported were entry without passports; entry with
false documentation; and clandestine entry, and in Reza’s case all three were
used. Illegal strategies were adopted at all stages of the migration cycle, from
leaving Iran to entering the Netherlands (Koser, 1997b).
I am a refugee. I’m not ashamed – it’s not my fault, the way they behave in Iran.
But sometimes it seems that no one else thinks I am a refugee. They treat me as
something different, as a criminal. And there have been times over the past year
when I have wondered whether they’re right (Koerosh).
What was utmost in the minds of most respondents, like Koerosh, was not the
injustice associated with having to adopt illegal migration strategies in a quest
for asylum, but more concern about the implications of being perceived as
illegal. Koerosh’s response reveals why. His impression is that there is an
association between legality and refugee status. Koerosh felt that a crucial
criterion in whether or not he would be granted refugee status was whether he
was perceived as legal or illegal. In fact this is not the case, but Koerosh and
many other respondents were convinced that it is. It was in the context of this
particular perception of the implications of being labelled “illegal” that
Koerosh and others were most upset about the “criminalization” they had
experienced. What is perhaps most significant about Koerosh’s response in this
respect is the implication that at times he too has thought of himself as a
“criminal”.
102 Koser
ASYLUM POLICIES, TRAFFICKING AND VULNERABILITY
Before targeting the preceding case study on a wider analysis, a number of

reservations need to be acknowledged. The first concerns the extent to which
any asylum seeker’s responses to questions about an issue as potentially
sensitive at trafficking can really be trusted. As emphasized earlier in this
article, systematic methodological safeguards were put in place to try to
increase the level of trust between respondent and interviewer. Nevertheless,
the preceding description of trafficking experiences has focused principally on
only a handful of respondents with whom it was felt that a specific bond was
formed. This further reduction of an already small-scale survey raises a second
reservation, concerning the broader applicability of the case study. In the
continuing absence of virtually any other empirical research with trafficked
asylum seekers, it is impossible to assess the extent to which the experiences of
the respondents in this survey were typical or not of asylum seekers generally,
much less of other trafficked migrants, although many of the trafficking
strategies described by the respondents are similar to those reported by a
sample of refugees from various countries of origin interviewed in the UK in
1997 (Morrison, 1998). Still, even from this small case study it is possible to
begin to tease out some of the more systematic issues underlying the relationships
between asylum policies, trafficking and vulnerability.
Asylum policies and trafficking
On the basis of this research, it is not possible unequivocally to state that there
is a causal link between restrictive asylum policies and trafficking. One reason
is that three of the respondents apparently arrived in the Netherlands without
the assistance of traffickers. In this context, it may be instructive briefly to turn
attention to these respondents. It is certainly significant to observe that two of
them were also two of only three of all the respondents who already had
relatives living in the Netherlands. In both cases, these respondents reported
having valid Dutch visas in their passports by the time they had made their
decision to flee. The third respondent, who had arrived independently,
although on the whole reluctant to speak about his experiences, implied that he
had obtained his visa directly through a contact at the Dutch embassy in
Istanbul, where he had travelled quite regularly from Tehran on business.
Another factor that identified these three respondents was that they were the
only ones who flew directly from Iran to the Netherlands – every other
respondent came via at least one other country.
An independent channel through which to obtain a visa made these three

respondents distinct from all the others and, furthermore, it provided them
alone with the possibility of flying directly, and presumably legally, to the
Netherlands. In contrast, several other respondents reported having applied for
visas for several European countries and were then obliged to turn to the
services of traffickers when their applications were refused. In some cases they
were provided with false documentation and visas, in others genuine visas were
apparently procured, and in still others asylum seekers were trafficked without
valid visas. The lack of a genuine visa for most closed the possibility of flying
directly to the Netherlands and led almost inevitably into a chain of further
illegal strategies, such as crossing borders clandestinely.
Even if a causal link between asylum policies and trafficking cannot be read
from these respondents’ experiences, a direct link surely can. The above
analysis implies that for most asylum seekers in this survey, traffickers tackled
on their behalf a series of obstacles to their entry into Europe as asylum seekers,
including visa restrictions and border controls. Without the assistance of
traffickers, for most these obstacles might have proved insurmountable.
However, another reason why a causal link cannot be assumed is because

traffickers also assisted asylum seekers to overcome obstacles which had
nothing to do with the stipulations of European asylum policy. Most importantly,
a number of respondents apparently relied on traffickers to assist them to avoid
apprehension by the authorities in Iran and to smuggle them clandestinely from
the country. What is interesting to note in this regard is that several respondents
who fell into this latter category reported that traffickers were unwilling only to
smuggle them over the border to neighbouring Pakistan or Turkey. Instead they
insisted on a commitment – in the form of an advance payment – that their
services would also be employed for the onward journey. It seems that even if
traffickers were not initially employed to overcome the specific obstacles of the
European asylum regime, that soon became their role.
Trafficking and vulnerability
Within the overall set of reservations posted at the beginning of this section, at
least one more specific reservation needs to be acknowledged in considering
the links between trafficking and vulnerability. That is that this research has of
necessity concentrated only on people who have succeeded in arriving in
Western Europe to seek asylum. In contrast, several respondents provided
anecdotes of others who, for various reasons, had been unable to leave Iran, or
who had become “trapped” in a transit country.
It is clear from the experiences of the respondents that, in a number of ways,

their exposure to trafficking increased their vulnerability. Perhaps the most
important arose from adopting illegal migration strategies. For example, most
respondents crossed at least one international boundary clandestinely – in one
case a respondent crossed a total of six boundaries in this way en route from
Iran to the Netherlands. Often transit countries were also entered without
documents or a passport, and this resulted in particularly precarious situations
where respondents became obliged to spend any length of time in these
104 Koser
countries. As described above, one respondent – Parvin – spent two months,

without documents, in Romania. As alluded to in the excerpt from his interview,
his insecurity was compounded by a lack of money, which obliged him to work
illegally as well. Clearly the penalties for apprehension for these various
transgressions vary in the different countries through which respondents
moved. However, the outcome about which most respondents were most
concerned was being returned to Iran.
The spectre – as it was to many respondents – of being forced to return to Iran,

remained with them even after they arrived in the Netherlands and as they
awaited the outcomes of their applications or appeals. It seems that all those
respondents who had been trafficked to the Netherlands had been advised by
their traffickers not to discuss in detail with any authorities their mode of
arrival, and most had apparently heeded this advice. Still, the respondents were
consistently anxious about the extent to which their involvement with traffickers
might count against them, were it to be discovered. In fact, legal and policy
frameworks have yet to come to terms with how to deal with asylum seekers
who have been trafficked. It is perhaps something of an irony that only those
respondents who flew directly from Iran – and in this case without the
assistance of traffickers – faced the threat of being returned directly to Iran
upon a negative decision on their asylum claims. For those who arrived with the
assistance of traffickers, and via other countries, the most likely outcome would
have been return to a transit country through a Readmission Agreement.
In the absence of longitudinal research, the eventual outcomes for the respondents
involved in this research remains unknown. However, even for those who were
eventually granted some form of permission to remain, there were clear indica-
tions that trafficking might have some longer-term consequences. Specifically,
by determining the destination of so many respondents and thus dictating that
most found themselves in a country where they did not have friends or family,
trafficking isolated them from the benefits of supportive social networks.
Existing research, and even the respondents’ own intuitions, as described
above, suggest that without support they may have faced particular obstacles in
areas such as housing and employment. In the shorter-term, comparisons
between those with and without social networks in the Netherlands suggested
a greater extent of insecurity and depression among the latter.
Asylum policies and vulnerability
One of the best examples of how trafficking is linked to vulnerability is the

exploitation by traffickers of women in the sex industry. What is interesting
about the preceding analysis is that the links described between trafficking and
vulnerability among the respondents were far less direct. They arose in general
as a result of the trafficking process – for example through using illegal
migration strategies – rather than as a result of specific exploitation by
individual traffickers. This observation presents an awkward question: where

exactly does the blame for their vulnerability reside? With the asylum seekers
themselves? With the traffickers? Or with asylum policies?
This article has deliberately avoided asking to what extent the respondents had
any choice whether to leave Iran, as this question focuses attention on their
motivations for flight and their status as refugees or otherwise. However, even
assuming a range of motivations among the respondents, one of the implications
of the preceding analysis would seem to be that in terms of trafficking,
motivations are largely irrelevant. With the exception of just three respondents,
all others turned to traffickers for assistance, whatever their motivations for
leaving Iran. Most would agree that there is a grotesque injustice in exposing
someone genuinely escaping persecution to still more risk in order to apply for
asylum. Just as the blame for their persecution cannot usually be apportioned to
refugees themselves, neither in their case can the blame for their vulnerability
in seeking asylum. A much less clear ethical debate ensues for those who are
not in genuine need of protection. But surely one of the crucial conclusions
from this research is that many asylum seekers, including at least some who are
in flight for their lives, have their vulnerability compounded in their search
for asylum.
A categorical statement is equally unattainable in considering the extent to

which the respondents’ vulnerability can be blamed on traffickers – if for no
other reason that different respondents had different experiences with different
traffickers. Most respondents had negative perspectives on traffickers – the
most common complaints concerned the price charged and their unreliability.
It is interesting that for those respondents who were passed down a chain of
traffickers as they moved through Europe, more specific complaints were
targeted not on the initial contact who facilitated the journey from Iran, but on
traffickers further down the chain. One reason was clearly that the respondents
had exercised no choice in the selection of the latter, while there were also
a series of more practical problems such as an inability to communicate with
non-Iranian traffickers. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most traffickers
were businessmen, for whom the motivations of their clients for leaving Iran
was irrelevant as long as they paid, and for whom protection of their clients
from vulnerability during and after their journeys was not a priority. On the
other hand, beyond their specific complaints, most respondents did not resent
the traffickers. As Ladan put it: “He was not a good man, but I would never have
escaped Iran and got to the Netherlands without him.”
Most respondents displayed a surprisingly sanguine attitude when we discussed

asylum policies. Where resentment did exist, it was directed towards the length
of time which they had spent, or expected to spend, awaiting an outcome on
their asylum applications or appeals. None made a direct link between asylum
policies and trafficking – they simply accepted that trafficking had become an
106 Koser
integral part of applying for asylum in Europe. This is an impression that the
preceding analysis largely supports. It has also supported the perspective that
exposure to trafficking increased both the short- and longer-term vulnerability
of many respondents. In this context, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that there
is a direct – even if not causal – link between asylum policies and growing
vulnerability among many asylum seekers.
CONCLUSION
The article has three main empirical conclusions. First, it has provided limited
evidence, but more importantly a series of possible explanations, to support a
growing impression that an increasing proportion of asylum seekers are being
trafficked in Europe. Second, it shows how, in various ways, trafficking can
expose asylum seekers – including at least some “genuine refugees” – to new
forms of vulnerability. Finally, its analysis implies that there are a series of
direct links between restrictive asylum policies, the growth in asylum trafficking
and vulnerability.
It is in the context of these contradictions that current policy initiatives in both

the realms of trafficking and asylum are developing. At the same time, it is
precisely the evidence of these contradictions that makes it so important that
these initiatives should be fully informed about the relationships between
asylum and trafficking policies, and the consequences of both for asylum
seekers. This makes the significant gaps in empirical research on trafficking
and asylum all the more glaring.
From the preceding empirical analysis, three policy implications can be drawn.
The first is that trafficking has become an unintended consequence of restrictive
asylum policies. On the basis of this research it is not possible to establish a
causal link, and the suggestion is not that trafficking would not exist outside the
context of asylum policies. At the same time, a direct link has been established,
and there are clear indications that trafficking is burgeoning in the stifling
climate of asylum restrictions. An associated second policy implication is the
importance of integrating the aims of trafficking and asylum policies. At the
moment, asylum policies encourage trafficking, and trafficking overcomes
asylum policies, and this is a vicious circle that can be broken only through
closer coordination. A third policy implication arises from the confirmation in
this research of the vulnerability of asylum seekers caught up in this vicious
circle. Trafficking exposes asylum seekers to vulnerability, but at the same it
provides for many their only means of escaping persecution and applying for
asylum. It is only with proper attention to policy outcomes for asylum seekers
themselves that the most pressing policy conundrum can be answered: how to
protect asylum seekers from the vulnerability of trafficking without denying
them the right to asylum?
REFERENCES
Boyd, M.
1989 “Family and personal networks in international migration: recent develop-
ments and new agendas”, International Migration Review, 23(3): 638-672.
Byron, M.
1994 “Labour migration from the Caribbean”, Geography Review, 7(5): 15-20.
Caces, M.F.
1987 “Immigrant recruitment into the labour force: social networks among
Filipinos in Hawaii”, Amerasia, 13(1): 23-38.
De Jong, G., and R. Gardner (Eds)
1981 Migration Decision-Making: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Microlevel
Studies in Developed and Developing Countries, Pergamon Press, New York.
Dorais, L.J.
1991 “Refugee adaptation and community structure: the Indochinese in Quebec
City, Canada”, International Migration Review, 25(3): 551-573.
Gurak, D.T., and F. Caces
1992 “Migration networks and the shaping of migration systems”, in M.M. Kritz,
L.L. Lim and H. Zlotnik (Eds), International Migration Systems: A Global
Approach, Clarendon Press, Oxford: 150-176.
Hugo, G.J.
1981 “Village-community ties, village norms and ethnic and social networks:
a review of evidence from the Third World”, in G. de Jong and R. Gardner
(Eds), Migration Decision-Making, Pergamon Press, New York: 186-224.
1987 “Demographic and welfare implications of urbanization: direct and indirect
effects on sending and receiving areas”, in R.J. Fuchs, G.W. Jones and
E.M. Pernia (Eds), Urbanization and Urban Policies in Pacific Asia,
Westview Press, Boulder: 136-165.
International Organization for Migration (IOM)
1995 Trafficking and Prostitution: The Growing Exploitation of Migrant Women
from Central and Eastern Europe, IOM, Geneva.
King, M.
1994 “Policing refugees and asylum-seekers in ‘Greater Europe’: Towards a
reconceptualisation of control”, in M. Anderson and M. den Boer (Eds),
Policing Across National Boundaries, Pinter, London: 69-84.
King, R., and B. Reynolds
1994 “Casalattico, Dublin and the fish and chip connection”, Studi Emigrazione,
(115): 398-426.
King, R., A. Strachan, and J. Mortimer
1983 “Return migration: a review of the literature”, Oxford Polytechnic discussion
paper in Geography, no. 19.
Koser, K.
1997a Social networks and the asylum cycle: the case of Iranian asylum seekers in
the Netherlands”, International Migration Review, 31(3): 591-612.
1997b “Negotiating entry into ‘Fortress Europe’: the migration strategies of ‘spon-
taneous’ asylum seekers”, in P. Muus (Ed.), The Exclusion and Inclusion of
Refugees in Contemporary Europe, ERCOMER, Utrecht, Netherlands:
157-170.
108 Koser
Massey, D.S., R. Alarcón, J. Durand, and H. González

1987 Return to Aztlán, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Morrison, J.
1998 The Cost of Survival: The Trafficking of Refugees to the UK , The Refugee
Council, London.
2000 The Trafficking and Smuggling of Refugees: The End Game in European
Asylum Policy?, Final Draft Report for UNHCR.
Muus, P. (Ed.)
1997 Exclusion and Inclusion of Refugees in Contemporary Europe,
ERCOMER, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Ritchey, N.P.
1976 “Explanations of migration”, in A. Inkeles, J. Coleman and N. Smelser
(Eds), Annual Review of Sociology volume 2, Annual Reviews, Palo Alto:
363-404.
Salt, J., and J. Hogarth
2000 Migrant Trafficking in Europe: A Literature Review and Bibliography,
Draft Final Report for the International Organization for Migration.
Skeldon, R.
1994 “East Asian migration and the changing world order”, in W.T.S. Gould and
A.M. Findlay (Eds), Population Migration and the Changing World
Order, Belhaven, London: 173-193.
van Willigen, L.
1991 “Psychological issues in refugee integration”, in P. Baehr, and G. Tessenyi
(Eds), The New Refugee Hosting Countries: Call for Experience, Space for
Innovation, Pharos, Utrecht.
Veglery, A.
1988 “Differential social integration among first generation Greeks in New York”,
International Migration Review, 22(4): 627-654.
TABLE 1
A CATEGORIZATION OF ASYLUM POLICIES AND THEIR IMPACTS
Nature of impact Policies
Direct Visas, "safe havens", "in-country processing", carrier sanctions,

etc.
Indirect Exclusion from asylum procedure, exclusion from refugee status,

exclusion from state welfare, etc.
Scale Visas and other direct measures, exclusion from asylum

procedures and other indirect measures
Distribution Closure of resettlement channels, Readmission Agreements,

"safe third country" etc.
Country of Origin Visas
Route "Safe third country"
Country of Destination Closure of resettlement channels

110 Koser
POLITIQUES D’ASILE, TRAITE ET VULNÉRABILITÉ
Cet article s’inscrit à l’intersection de trois débats récents sur l’asile en Europe:
l’efficacité des politiques d’asile, la traite dont font l’objet les demandeurs
d’asile, et leur vulnérabilité croissante. La plupart des commentateurs convien-
nent que ces trois débats sont liés, mais la nature des relations qui les unissent
n’est pas claire. Pourtant, il devient urgent maintenant de bien comprendre la
nature de ces liens dans le contexte des nombreuses initiatives nouvelles de
politique en matière d’asile et de traite d’êtres humains, et des inquiétudes que
suscitent les conséquences possibles pour les demandeurs d’asile.
Cette mauvaise compréhension des rapports unissant les trois éléments tient au
moins en partie aux graves lacunes de la recherche empirique. Cet article
entreprend de combler certaines de ces lacunes, et ce faisant, de mettre au jour
certains aspects des relations existant entre politiques d’asile, traite d’êtres
humains et vulnérabilité. Il met l’accent sur les expériences vécues par les
demandeurs d’asile en Europe, donnant du même coup une perspective de la
traite et des politiques d’asile “vues d’en bas”. Les résultats obtenus découlent
de travaux de recherche menés entre 1994 et 1996 parmi des demandeurs
d’asile iraniens aux Pays-bas.
L’article examine certaines des réserves que cette approche suscite, notamment
au plan de questions de méthode impliquant la confiance, et les difficultés liées
à l’application plus large d’une étude de cas limitée. Sur la toile de fond de ces
réserves, il tire trois grandes conclusions. Premièrement, l’évidence empirique
selon laquelle des demandeurs d’asile en nombre sans cesse croissant se voient
contraints de faire appel à des trafiquants pour “négocier” des conditions
d’asile restrictives. Deuxièmement, le processus par lequel la traite des êtres
humains expose les demandeurs d’asile – parmi lesquels au moins quelques
réfugiés “authentiques” – à de nouvelles formes de vulnérabilité. Troisièmement,
l’existence de liens directs entre politiques d’asile, traite et vulnérabilité, et le
fait que les politiques d’asile sont plus à blâmer pour la vulnérabilité croissante
des demandeurs d’asile que les trafiquants ou les demandeurs d’asile eux-mêmes.
Enfin, les conclusions empiriques qu’en tire l’auteur sont invoquées dans la
perspective d’une série de décisions politiques qu’elles appellent selon lui.
POLÍTICAS DE ASILO, TRÁFICO DE PERSONAS

Y VULNERABILIDAD
Este artículo se sitúa en la intersección de tres recientes debates sobre el asilo

en Europa: la eficacia de las políticas de asilo; el tráfico de solicitantes de asilo;
y su creciente vulnerabilidad. La mayoría de los observadores coinciden en que
existe una correlación entre los tres debates, pero apuntan que la naturaleza de
la misma sigue siendo poco clara. Ello no obstante, la necesidad de entender

adecuadamente la naturaleza de estos vínculos es especialmente apremiante en
el contexto de una serie de nuevas iniciativas políticas tanto sobre el asilo como
sobre el tráfico de personas, y de la preocupación que existe por las consecuencias
que ello tendrá en los solicitantes de asilo.
La falta de un entendimiento claro de la cuestión se debe, en parte, a

considerables brechas en la investigación empírica. Este artículo comienza a
colmar ciertas brechas, y al hacerlo, revela algunas de las relaciones que hay
entre las políticas de asilo, el tráfico de personas y la vulnerabilidad. Además,
se concentra en las experiencias de solicitantes de asilo en Europa, presentando
así una perspectiva ascendente sobre el tráfico de personas y las políticas de
asilo. Los resultados provienen de la investigación entre solicitantes de asilo
iraníes en los Países Bajos que se llevó a cabo en el periodo comprendido entre
1994 y 1996.
Este artículo aborda algunas de las reservas en torno a esta perspectiva,

incluidas cuestiones metodológicas tales como la confianza y las dificultades
de una ampliación de un estudio por casos específico. En el contexto de estas
reservas se llega a tres importantes conclusiones. Primero, ofrece pruebas
empíricas que apoyan la perspectiva de que crecientes proporciones de
solicitantes de asilo se ven obligados a recurrir a traficantes en razón de
políticas de asilo restrictivas. Segundo, describe la manera en la que el tráfico
expone a los solicitantes de asilo – incluidos por lo menos algunos refugiados
“genuinos” – a nuevas formas de vulnerabilidad. Tercero, demuestra el vínculo
directo entre las políticas de asilo, el tráfico y la vulnerabilidad e imputa la
creciente vulnerabilidad más bien a las políticas de asilo que a los traficantes o
a los propios solicitantes de asilo. Finalmente, estas conclusiones empíricas se
aplican a una serie de repercusiones políticas.

International Migration - 2002 - Koser - Asylum Policies Trafficking and Vulnerability

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

International Migration - 2002 - Koser - Asylum Policies Trafficking and Vulnerability

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Migration - 2002 - Koser - Asylum Policies Trafficking and Vulnerability

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Asylum Policies, Trafficking

This article is located at the intersection of three recent debates on asylum

* Migration Research Unit, Department of Geography, University College London, UK.

Published by Blackwell Publishers Ltd., © 2000 IOM

It is in this context that this article returns to empirical research conducted

An associated second precept is an emphasis upon the entire migratory profile

THE CHANGING POLITICAL CONTEXT

between countries in Western and Central or Eastern Europe, which have

A total of 32 respondents were interviewed in two Azielzoekerscentra (AZCs)

A number of strategies were adopted in response to such difficulties. For

SEEKING ASYLUM IN EUROPE

On reading and re-reading the interview transcripts, three overwhelming

Losing control of the migration cycle

The police were after me because of an article I wrote in the University

In the cases of 29 respondents, control over migration was to varying degrees

These quotes show how traffickers, referred to by most respondents as “travel

However, the respondents’ sense of powerlessness was most vehemently

Migrating out of social context

Migration always takes place in a social context. In particular, social networks

Social networks interacted with the respondents’ decision-making before

In contrast, Zahra was in the majority of respondents without friends or family

Criminalization and a crisis of identity

ASYLUM POLICIES, TRAFFICKING AND VULNERABILITY

Before targeting the preceding case study on a wider analysis, a number of

Asylum policies and trafficking

An independent channel through which to obtain a visa made these three

However, another reason why a causal link cannot be assumed is because

Trafficking and vulnerability

It is clear from the experiences of the respondents that, in a number of ways,

countries. As described above, one respondent – Parvin – spent two months,

The spectre – as it was to many respondents – of being forced to return to Iran,

Asylum policies and vulnerability

One of the best examples of how trafficking is linked to vulnerability is the

individual traffickers. This observation presents an awkward question: where

A categorical statement is equally unattainable in considering the extent to

Most respondents displayed a surprisingly sanguine attitude when we discussed

It is in the context of these contradictions that current policy initiatives in both

Massey, D.S., R. Alarcón, J. Durand, and H. González

Nature of impact Policies

Direct Visas, "safe havens", "in-country processing", carrier sanctions,

Indirect Exclusion from asylum procedure, exclusion from refugee status,

Scale Visas and other direct measures, exclusion from asylum

Distribution Closure of resettlement channels, Readmission Agreements,

Country of Origin Visas

Route "Safe third country"

Country of Destination Closure of resettlement channels

POLITIQUES D’ASILE, TRAITE ET VULNÉRABILITÉ

POLÍTICAS DE ASILO, TRÁFICO DE PERSONAS

Este artículo se sitúa en la intersección de tres recientes debates sobre el asilo

la misma sigue siendo poco clara. Ello no obstante, la necesidad de entender

La falta de un entendimiento claro de la cuestión se debe, en parte, a

Este artículo aborda algunas de las reservas en torno a esta perspectiva,

You might also like