Iran (Islamic Republic Of)

This research examines the religious and political ties between 'official' Iran and UK-based Muslim communities. Based on a case study of Iran's institutional presence in the UK that will discuss its multifaceted religious, educational, and political programmes for coreligionists, it seeks to analyse how the Islamic Republic transfers, negotiates, and reformulates its norms and values transnationally. The British scene offers an interesting case study primarily because it is host to many Sunni and Shi‘i Muslims from different ethnic and national backgrounds, communities to which the Islamic Republic of Iran has paid particular attention from the 1980s onwards. Looking specifically at the effect of transnationalism on the state, this research will analyse the Islamic Republic’s use of cross-border activism as a soft power resource. In general terms, Iran’s transnational interactions with Muslim communities have mainly been studied with regard to Islamic political movements in Arab and Central Asian countries, while its reach to coreligionists living away from their country of origin has largely been overlooked in the literature. Yet, Iran’s involvement in the lives of Muslim migrants, refugees, and exiles is characteristic of its quest for religious and political leadership outside the country’s borders and, I argue, has much to say about the use of religion to advance state interests. As such, the benefits of state-sponsored transnationalism cannot only consider the direct ties Iran creates and maintains with Muslim believers, but also its relations with both their country of origin and the state hosting them (namely the UK), as well as with other transnational actors involved in transnational activities on the British scene.

Since the late 1970s, international wars and intra-state violence have battered the country of Afghanistan, generating several waves of mass displacement. According to the United Nations Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR, 2011), a tragic consequence of this violent legacy is that currently one out of every four refugees in the world is from Afghanistan – making it the leading country of origin for refugees. Although 2.7 million Afghans are now scattered across 79 countries, the majority of them sought refuge in neighboring or nearby countries such as Pakistan, the Islamic Republic of Iran and Turkey. Finding “durable solutions” to resolve the plight of displaced people has become a priority for the UNHCR and the international community. While voluntary repatriation remains the most preferred solution, continued instability, the threat of persecution, and the inability to access basic services prevent many refugees from returning to their country of origin (UNHCR, 2011). This is particularly the case for Afghan refugees. Since almost half of all Afghan asylum claims have been lodged in Turkey or Germany (UNHCR, 2011), reliance upon the cooperation and protection of these two governments has become critical.Due to its unique geographical location, Turkey has been a key transit country for migrants. UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants, Francois Crepeau, noted in his 2012 Human Rights Council report that Turkey has become a hub, particularly for migrants from Asia, the Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa and Northern Africa. Many refugees cross over Turkey on their way to Europe. It is estimated that approximately 55,000 migrants crossed from Turkey into Greece via the Evros River in 2011 (UNHCR in Turkey: Facts and Figures, 2010). Unfortunately, cooperation between the EU and Turkey to address the issue of these undocumented crossings has primarily focused on securing the border rather than addressing the needs of those migrating. In the last two decades, economic growth and political stability have strengthened Turkey’s appeal as a destination for migrants and asylum-seekers instead of a mere transit country. Continuing upheaval in neighboring countries such as Iraq and Syria has also added to the large influx of asylum seekers and refugees. By the end of 2011, UNHCR had processed 35,000 individuals as a “population of concern” in Turkey and this figure does not include the approximate 200,000 Syrian “guests” now living in camps along its southern border (UNHCR, 2011; Davutoğlu, 2012). Turkey’s geo-political position in the region is significant, and its support of the UNHCR’s goal to seek durable solutions for the thousands who migrate through the area is necessary. However, due to its current migration and border management policies and practices, those who find their way inside Turkey are often caught in a tenuous mixture of uncertainty and bureaucratic entanglements. This article seeks to examine, in particular, the plight of Afghan refugee women who have been caught between Turkey’s internal migration policies and international community’s reluctance to host their resettlement. A team consisting of a scholar-practitioner, two graduate students, and one translator researched how complex humanitarian experiences and exposure to war affected the emotional well-being of Afghan women in their home countries, during their migration to Turkey, upon their arrival in the Turkish city of Van and later during their second displacement to Mersin. In order to conduct this research, focus groups and individual interviews were conducted in the city of Mersin in 2012. A total of 20 Afghan refugee women participated in this project. The women who participated in the project were selected because (a) they had fled from Afghanistan due to the violence and war between 2006 and 2011, (b) they had chosen to come to Turkey and currently awaited resettlement to a third country, and (c) they had survived two earthquakes in Van and were re-settled again in Mersin1. Research analysis indicated that as one of the receiving countries, Turkey has not been particularly flexible throughout this vulnerable group’s migration process. Turkey’s internal border management and migration policies, along with the international community’s reluctance to permanently resettle Afghans have negatively and repeatedly impacted the lives of these refugees.

Each year the Member States of the European Union issue around 500,000 return decisions to persons who do not, or no longer, have legal stay. A return decision requires the person to leave the territory of the state issuing the return decision and to go to a country where he/she does have legal stay, usually his/her country of citizenship. If persons do not leave themselves, they risk being returned by force. The implementation of assisted and forced return often requires cooperation by the countries of citizenship of the person receiving the return decision, and thus partially depends on the intergovernmental relations between EU+ (EU Member States plus Norway, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom) and non-EU+ countries. The WODC has conducted three interrelated studies on the influence of these relations on return. this study explores whether or not the Netherlands and Norway can learn from the experiences and strategies of one another by comparing the experiences and strategies of the two countries in relation to enforced return to Afghanistan3, Iran, and Iraq. Such comparisons may lead to useful new insights as different EU+ countries – despite the EU’s attempts at harmonisation – have developed somewhat different approaches to enforced return (cf. Leerkes & Van Houte, 2020). This raises the question of how different EU+ states strive to accomplish enforced return to the same origin states, and with what ‘quantitative’ and ‘qualitative’ outcomes (e.g., what rates of enforced return do they achieve, and do states enforce returns within the norms that matter in liberal democracies, including migrants’ fundamental rights and a commitment to accepted principles of sound administration?). This exploratory study was thus guided by two research questions: What are the experiences of the Netherlands and Norway with regards to enforced return (forced and assisted return) to Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq? What (inter)governmental strategies have the Netherlands and Norway developed with a view to effecting enforced return to Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq?

The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (henceforth Afghanistan) is part of the wider region of South and Central Asia. It is a region with a long and complex history, not only politically but also in the area of migration, whereby the main characteristic is the mobility of tribes and nomadic populations between neighboring countries. For at least two decades (1980 and 1990), Afghanistan was known for its geopolitical importance, but also for being one of the leading countries in the production of refugees and migrant flows, heading primarily to Pakistan and Iran. The present report aims at framing the discussion around immigration from Afghanistan to Greece, the reasons for migrating, the push factors for their arrival and the composition of arrivals. The report begins with an overview of the geopolitical and historical context of Afghanistan, and recent developments that have shaped and continue to shape immigration today. A discussion of the two main destination countries- Pakistan and Iran- for Afghan immigrants follows, since current Afghan migratory flows are largely a result of the political changes in these countries and particularly the change towards the Afghan refugee population hosted until recently. Therefore their importance and role cannot be ignored. The report will close with an overview of Afghan immigration in Greece, the problems encountered and the particularities of the group.