Taking a step away from the specifics of the situation in the Dominican Republic, an issue that warrants conversation is the power of terminology in the shaping of arguments and public perception. Andrew Shacknove provides that insight in his article “Who is a Refugee” (1985), employing the term ‘refugee’. He argues that the current definition of refugee is too narrow, excluding a large number of people from assistance; instead, he argues that refugee-hood’ should be based on the premise of a severed relationship between the citizen and the state, while acknowledging that the bond can be severed in diverse ways, persecution being but one physical manifestation out of many (Shacknove, 1985). In this article, there is a reluctance to use the …show more content…
In, “The Forces Driving Global Migration” (2013), Castle makes the argument that migration can mostly be attributed to growing inequality between less and more developed countries but also recognizes that other factors contribute to migration as well, although they are often ignored by policy makers; this results in poor migration policy that does not properly define the realities of migrants (Castles, 2013). For example, it is customary for countries to accept economic migrants and the Dominican Republic has benefited greatly from the influx of Haitian migrants that come to work. However, due to economic difficulties, the Dominican Republic is forcefully expelling Haitian migrants and Dominica-Haitians from the country, a direct violation of the right to nationality enshrined in international law. This poor migration policy can be attributed to a lack of understand of the Haitian population- beginning with the fact that very little distinction is made between Haitian immigrants, Haitian residents, and Dominican-Haitians living in the Dominican Republic. It can also be attributed to the absence of constructive conversation between the Dominican government and ‘Los Haitianos’. As Castle demonstrated in his research, a lack of understanding of an immigrant population results in policies that do not adequately protect the …show more content…
In “Xenophobia, International Migration and Development” (2010), Jonathan Crush and Sujata Ramachandran focus on the increase in global south-to-south migration and its relation to a rise in xenophobia in destination countries, resulting in the marginalization and/or exclusion of minority groups in social and national settings (2010) They also argue that the action or inaction of a government, through denial or encouragement, can exacerbate xenophobia, making discrimination against migrants acceptable (Crush, Ramachandran, 2010). In the Dominican Republic the government has taken the official line that xenophobia does not exist but the culture of the Dominican Republic and the policies passed by government demonstrate otherwise (1). Haitians who are not able to provide proof of their citizenship, a costly and difficult task (1) are exploited and made to work in harsh conditions, earning less than a fair wage (1) and because of xenophobia, Haitian immigrants and Dominican Haitians that are able to prove their citizenship are often subject to similar working condition, being excluded from higher paying professions like law and medicine