MAN-MADE LINES (ENG)

MAN-MADE LINES a spatial investigation on the “European Migrant Crisis”

Table of Contents

- INTRO_p.5 - BORDERS, PERIMETERS, LINES_p.12 - AN OVERCROWDED ANSWER_p.18 - 2 PROCESSES COMPARED _Italy, the Netherlands_p.29 - THE PROJECT OF A LINE_p.45 - references_p.55 - images_p.61

3

INTRO

This paper is the first step of an ongoing investigation on the so-called refugee crisis from a spatial and legislative point of view: in the following sections borders, humanitarian aid, legal status and opposite migration will be explained and discussed. A focus on two specific processes - in Italy and in the Netherlands, respectively the border and the heart of Schengen - will unfold the intricate lines and spaces that migrants have to pass to obtain a piece of paper, the paper that will give them a legal status, the Refugee Residence Permit.

My final aim is to create awareness on aspects not always taken in consideration but at the core of the “European migration crisis”, the Man-made Lines. Through these two words I want to identify the abstract lines drawn by men that have real consequences on our lives. My purpose is to open a different discussion on the “European migration crisis” from a spatial and design point of view: the final chapter will analyze some of the design solutions provided so far in Europe, which allows me to introduce an important topic to me and my future practice, the role of design in the turmoil of today’s world. (1) My ambition is not to provide a solution myself but to raise awareness and denounce some aspects not always considered as part of the problem.

5

Migration is the act of leaving the birthplace to settle in another location to find better living conditions. (2)

Nowadays we are still witnesses of huge migration flows all over the world. Historically we already experienced this event before, but now it’s something beyond our control.

The reasons behind these journeys can be economical, political, social and environmental, but what we usually tend to forget is the role of “Western” countries and their interests in these crises.

From the 1980’s onward, our global economy has been hit by an ever larger discrepancy between rich and poor countries. Alongside economic migrations - coming from Africa, but also East Europe and South Asia - in the XXI century the rise of repression throughout the world added another problem to the situation: one of the biggest migrant wave since II WW.(e.g.the answer to the Arab Spring movements in North Africa and Middle- East)(3)

7

“Wars in Syria, Libya and Iraq, severe repression in Eritrea, and spiralling instability across much of the Arab world have all contributed to the displacement of around 16.7 million refugees worldwide…A further 33.3 million people are “internally displaced” within their own war-torn countries, forcing many of those originally from the Middle East to cross the lesser evil of the Mediterranean in increasingly dangerous ways, all in the distant hope of a better life in Europe.”(2015) The aforementioned data are from 2015, in one year and a half more than 6 millions people became refugees and the number of Internally Displaced People (IDP) almost doubled. This tendency is not going to end soon (4) : Between January 1 and March 31, 2017 24,241 people have landed in Italy. This value is significantly higher than the same period of 2016, when they reached 18,784 persons (+ 29%).

In March 2017 they arrived by sea in Italy 10,802 migrants, 12% more than last year, five times more than in March 2015.

The rise of these migrations saw in parallel the boost

8

of humanitarian and development aid, but again with some differences: Michael Barnett, author of Empire of Humanity, A History of Humanitarianism (2012), describes humanitarian aid as an answer to emergency situations, while development aid started with Colonialism and “morphed into development assistance after the war”(5).

Both aid systems are funded in a different way and with different time cycles: humanitarian aid requires the money to be spent in 6 to 18 months, while the development assistance has a three-to-five years time frame. Which one is the “best” way to reach a stable solution faster?

Remarkably, there is an unexpected answer to this question from the OECD Development Assistance Committee Chair Erik Solheim that stated in 2015 (6) : “I am glad that we have reversed the recent declines in aid to the poorest countries and that most countries aren’t spending large amounts of their ODA on hosting refugees.”

In other words: more investments to the poorest countries and less on hosting refugees in Europe. Following this line of thinking, it is better to help refugees in their place of origin

9

instead of providing long term development programs in ours. This is a possible answer but also the “least of possible evils� response (7)(8) for the so-called Western world because in this way we refuse to find effective integration models to include foreigners in our societies, pretending to give a fast response in politically and economically destabilized areas of the non-Western world - if we think about Syria, in some cities there is not even one settlement intact.

Since 2011, Europe had become the promised land for thousands of people; from 2012 the incredible amount of 65 millions people worldwide had been starting to migrate, 22 millions of them are refugees of which one half are less than 18 years old. (9) They leave everything behind to survive. Some of them have relatives and friends in European countries and their aim is to reach these connections and start from scratch.

For those heading to Europe, Schengen border is the line to cross: (10) - Schengen is an area composed by 26 European countries where the free movement of people is guaranteed. In force since 1995, The Schengen Treaty (1990) is part of the Schengen Agreement (1985) and it’s the inter-

10

national convention that defines the application conditions and guarantees of the free movement in the European Union. The Agreement allows also a suspension of the Treaty for a limited amount of time and for specific reasons - for example borders checks due to an immigration crisis.

International Laws should regulate migrants passages and processes - “should” because each country is allowed to interpret the law in a personal way, resulting in totally different approaches to policies and rules for asylum seekers - once again, Europe wants to help but in the “less dangerous” way for the safety of each EU country. (11) This is translated in strict national welcome policies discordant with the general European line. The first step to become a refugee is to cross the border of your own country to head towards a country in which you have no legal status - the sum of rights and privileges that a member of that society is given by law.

11

BORDERS, PERIMETERS, LINES

Borders are not only abstract “official lines that separate one country from another�(12), they draw real gaps (political, economical, and social) between adjacent physical spaces. Unfortunately crossing a border is not as easy as we may think from a European perspective; the effects of this decision are catastrophic in terms of human rights, not only because of the dangers but also for the implications of this action.

Once the individuals have crossed Schengen border and are inside another country, Europe would have to do a relocation in line with the Schengen Agreement (in case of arrival from Serbia and Croatia, migrants would be relocated to Hungary, which is less far away from Germany than the Balcans). Unfortunately at the end of 2015 the European Union had been overwhelmed by more than 1 million immigrants arriving at the same time and by the beginning of terrorist attacks by the IS (DAESH): a culture of fear spread panic out (13). Macedonia closed its borders after Serbia anticipated this action. Hungary is another country that built a wall as a quick answer to the policies in regard to the EU migration flows. These decisions of specific

12

states are the cause of a larger and larger chaos: the aforementioned routes changed in favor of more dangerous paths - since 2014 the Mediterranean routes saw an increase of migrants. Moreover, the EU-Turkey agreement in 2015 brought a decrease in the Eastern Mediterranean Route from Turkey to Greece, and an increase in the Central Mediterranean one, from Libya. (14) According to Mohammed Abdiker, IOM’s (International Organization for Migration) Head of Operation and Emergencies, in Libya, where the government has not enough power to control illegal movements, slave market, abuses, tortures are serious threats for migrants.(15) Complex structures in crises allow for all sort of corruption to happen, by state but also by criminal organizations: another example is the recent arrest of a priest and a family in Isola Capo Rizzuto, Italy; they were illegally managing and exploiting the migrants reception center. (16) The aforementioned borders are not only a geopolitical perimeter but also a social barrier: once crossed, a migrant has to deal with the process of the hosting country and most of the time individuals are subjected to discrimination

14

during the process of applying for legal status. The right for adequate housing for example is one of the possible discriminatory acts they suffer. (17) There are different borders and scales involved here: the country of origin, which they are escaping from, Schengen - between these two there can be several more perimeters to cross, in line with the migrants routes and the amount of cash available. Once they are in the EU, the lines change scale and regulate their status and permanence with walls and buildings in which they are confined, waiting. The EU has a responsibility for these people that arrive through the Mediterranean route, landing in Lampedusa, or waiting at the Aegean borders of Turkey for the end of Greek’s reinforcement of border controls. (18)(19) Once migrants are recognized and accepted, the hosting country is the one responsible for these people and their rights. Everyday newspapers and media show the spaces where they are hosted but what they often don’t show are the rules and policies that regulate these spaces. As aforementioned, each country has its own guidelines, if the number of arrivals is too high, these regulations can be bypassed in order to

15

accommodate everyone.

Once we take a closer look into humanitarian assistance and its system, the difficulties that these kind of emergencies bring with them become more visible.

16

AN OVERCROWDED ANSWER

When we think about refugees and humanitarian organizations we must not forget the role of the governments involved and their interests. There are several hierarchic and hierarchical relations between all the actors, for every camp/detention center also the hosting nation government has a fundamental role. To clarify the general situation, countries have four main roles and responsibilities regarding humanitarian aid: - Responsible for ‘calling’ a crisis and inviting international aid - Provide assistance and protection - Responsible for monitoring and coordinating external assistance - Set the regulatory and legal frameworks governing relief assistance The state’s primary responsibility in responding to disasters is clearly recognized both in law and from the UN Resolution 46/182, that states: The sovereignty, territorial integrity and national unity of

18

States must be fully respected in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. In this context, humanitarian assistance should be provided with the consent of the affected country and in principle on the basis of an appeal by the affected country. Each State has the responsibility first and foremost to take care of the victims of natural disasters and other emergencies occurring on its territory.

Hence, the affected State has the primary role in the initiation, organization, coordination, and implementation of humanitarian assistance within its territory.

After a crisis is officially announced, several smaller actors enter the game. The UN agencies detected different clusters and for each of them a different NGO is involved.

Everyone has its role but not all the camps are managed and stocked in the same way. This is the list taken from the Cluster Approach Diagram made by OCHA: Nutrition - UNICEF Emergency Shelters - UNHCR & IFRC Logistics - WFP Camp Management & Coordination - UNHCR & IOM

19

Health - WHO Protection - UNHCR Food Security - FAO & WFP Emergency Telecommunication - WFP Early Recovery - UNDP Education - UNICEF & Save the Children Sanitation & Water Hygiene - UNICEF On an higher level we can find The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), part of the United Nations Secretariat. Its role is to bring together humanitarian actors to ensure a coherent response to emergencies. (20) The aforementioned data is one example of how complex the aid system can be. On one hand there is only the UN approach to humanitarian assistance and on the other hand development aid is not even considered.

The Cluster approach provide a list of needs related to specific NGOs but one of the problem is that some of these NGOs are not operating in the crisis areas. Each country has the responsibility to initiate, coordinate and

20

organize humanitarian assistance, placing itself above UN. National and local associations are not cited but in some countries, for example in Italy, they have a major role in the migrants assistance and accommodation.

What we should also remember is funding. These organizations are almost comparable to a federation of countries.

The UN calculated that the overall funds of the NGOs would be the fifth largest economies in the list of countries by GDP. 1. USA 2. China 3. Japan 4. Germany 5. NGOs 6. France (Furlanetto 2013, Polman 2009) (21) Another interesting point of view is expressed by Andrew Herscher, in an e-flux article he refers to the “humanitarian� working class housing problem during the Victorian Age, in Great Britain. In his text we can see how the housing problem is usually described through the depiction

21

of specific situations and communities, moreover how this crisis was used as a political tool. (22) Quoting: - “...Housing, in the guise of rookeries and model homes alike, was the medium in which Victorian reformers represented the social problems they addressed and, in many cases, the solutions they proposed…in the 1853 book The Million-Peopled City, Reverend John Garwood declared to his readers that “wherever in London (…) a Rookery exists, we may be assured that it is inhabited by the Irish.”

In the latest lines he used Engels’ analysis of the architectural phenomena to explain how housing was the primary example to critique an uneven distribution of wealth, instead of being an opportunity for ameliorative interventions.

It’s clear how complex the emergency aid system can become. On a migrant point of view, another problem in addition to the situation is the state of exception.

Giorgio Agamben explains this problem in his Homo Sacer, Sovereign Power and Bare Life (1995): in the Ancient

22

Rome each citizen life has two separate aspects; bios identified the political life in the society, and zoe was related to the bare life given by God and outside the law of men. The Roman Homo Sacer was a man punished with the exile from the society, he could be killed by anyone but not be sacrificed in a religious ritual. He was still “a sacred man that cannot be sacrificed” - he was expelled from the civil life, left just with his bare life. In the age of monarchies, the sovereign had the power to decide who could be legally killed, placing the king at the top of the society.

His power was legitimized by God and so his right to kill.

After the Declaration of Independence all men became equals and the sovereignty and right to kill became part of the Nation responsibilities. Through a discussion on bio-politics, biology and bio-power, analyzing also the terms of Foucault’s point of view, Agamben goes on and explains how in our modern societies biology is an emergency, a totalitarian ideology in its nature: on one hand it measures life with eugenics and genetics identifying people with their animal qualities, “bestializing” them; on the other hand it defines the norm and so the abnormal. Science describes men and women as objects (zoe) while nations define

23

them subjects (bios), the result is a biological object, bare life with political rights, zoe with the right of bios. This is the paradox of the modern nations: their identities are made by the citizens, by their bare life. This is defined by the author as bio-politics, political control over bare life (and so over death). Therefore, if compared with the Ancient Rome, men and women lives have not a double aspect anymore, without citizenship there is no bare life, they can be killed without committing crimes. To avoid this condition a new category is born, the state of exception: it allows modern nations to give bare life to the citizens expelled - e.g prisoners and asylum seekers. Ten years later, Agamben’s State of Exception (2005) investigates how the suspension of laws in an emergency or crisis can become an extended condition and how it can deprive humans of their citizenship and rights. Analyzing the legal theory of Carl Schmitt and Walter Benjamin’s notion of “pure violence”, Agamben concludes: “The exception has ceased to be the threshold that guarantees the articulation between an inside and an outside, or between anomie and the juridical context, by virtue of a law that is in force in its suspension; it is, rather, a zone of absolute

24

indeterminacy between anomie and law, in which [life and law] are caught up in a single catastrophe.” (23)(24) “Life and law are caught up in a single catastrophe.”

Does it sound familiar?

The state of exception is translated in a categorization by status: IDP, Refugees, Returnees, Stateless, Asylum Seekers.

These are just some of the officials names but when bureaucracy comes in, the categories multiplies; as the rish architect Gráinne Hassett said in a talk at HNI, Rotterdam, looking into the official papers of different countries and NGOs online, new and new definitions pops up, in line with nationality, religion and more subcategories that just make everything more complicated. (25)(26) These categories imply a different approach on the humanitarian assistance.

These facts are another evidence that instead of simplifying the process for people in need of help, UN, EU, NGOs and nations tend to look at the problem with their own interests, most of the time discordant between themselves. Borders are political tools used here to discourage migrants to come

26

and status is a secondary tool used to reconcile the interests of everybody’s side - apart from the one most interested, migrants. If they can make it, once inside Schengen, refugees have to deal with extenuating waiting time and countless re-locations. In the following section there is a focus on two specific situations: Italy and the Netherlands, respectively the border and the heart of Schengen.

27

2 PROCESSES COMPARED

The two case studies that are of my interest are respectively Italy and the Netherlands, they are investigated with a focus on specific steps of the integration process.

The EU and the European leaders have been several times scolded for their conduct; Italy has been denounced

by Amnesty International for bad treatments towards refugees in 2013 and three years later for its “Italian reticence when it comes to the co-financing of Syrian refugees in Turkey” by the European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. In the same year Médecins Sans Frontières published the reportage “Out of Sight” to explain and denounce why Italian process is a “reception system that excludes”. (27)(28)(29) In 2015 Italy received 83.245 asylum requests, the 7% of the total amount of Europe. The failed EU relocation plan was able to move the 20% of 106.000 people, of this 20%, only a 7% from Italy (2.917 people). All the migrants that have to deal with Italian policies have been identified in Italy and are unable to move in other countries.

Migration and Employment for Foreign Citizens are regulated by the Bossi-Fini (2002) law that replaces the

29

Turco-Napolitano (1998) to which the recently approved law decree (April 2017) of the Interior Minister Minniti was added, this law decree includes further amendments. (30) In Italy, some of the organization involved are UNHCR, Ministry of the Interior, Regions, Local Prefecture, Court, Provinces, Local Police, City Halls, Local Cooperatives.

Below is a list of the Italian centers for immigration, they are structured in order to identify a different process level in each one of them: CDA - CPSA, CPA Reception, First Aid, First Assistance Centers. There are 10 all over Italy with a higher concentration near coasts and borders, 4196 people can be hosted in these structures. The stay should be limited, few days to rest plus the time to find out more through interviews - “to ascertain the legality of his/her stay in Italy.�

CARA After CDA, the second step are CARA, centers that host only refugees landed in Italy as asylum seekers, or without

31

identity papers, waiting for recognition of their refugee status or international protection. 6 centers should host for 4 to 8 months a total of 980 people and provide first integration activities.

CAS, DIFFUSO, SPRAR An extraordinary procedure opened the number of structures available as CARA: CAS, DIFFUSO and SPRAR are a chance offered to refugees waiting for the residence permit. Each one of these spaces is part of a growing process for the migrant independence (from the supervision to the pocket money). This is an interesting aspect of Italian policy because it opens up also the opportunity to private owners to open their second residence to migrants - doing researches and investigations to ensure that everything is legal. There are also initiative as “Benvenuti Rifugiati� that opens the process to families, allowing them to host migrants, contributing actively to their integration process.

(Previously CIE) CPR Approved in April 2017, part of the new law decree from Minister Minniti is the passage from CIE (Centers for Iden-

32

tification and Expulsion, 10 centers all over Italy, 1290 places) to CPR, Centers for Permanence and Repatriation, “with a wider network all over the nation - possibly outside urban centers - with a limited capacity, max 100 - 150 people�, with a forecast of 1600 total places. Migrants are not allowed to cross the perimeters of these centers, while in the previous cited they have the opportunity to leave. (31)(32) As aforementioned, in Italy some of the spaces given to host migrants can be former retirement homes, public housing, buildings, flats owned by the church, etc. Architecturally speaking, this kind of spaces have most of the time a strong history behind: for example few minutes from Biella, Italy, there is Villa Ottino, one of the CAS that closed (March 2017) as part of the national extraordinary procedure. This building is a XVIII noble house that was used until 2005 as a retirement home. The three-story villa has a courtyard of about 1500m2, large rooms (20 in total) with frescoed ceilings and additional rooms for the keepers next to the building. It was donated and now it is administered by a religious institute from Turin. The space hosted a total of 27 people, it is not poor nor in

33

decay, there is mold on some walls but the interiors and the details of the house are still interesting and elegant. The building is not an unpleasant space and there are more like this one throughout the Italian territory; this is an important aspect to keep in mind if compared to the Dutch following case.

Looking closer into the legal system, there are some spatial rules that regulate the approval and opening of the aforementioned spaces. One regulation about dimensions is that each space can accommodate until 6 people for each bathroom. Even without diving into space/time/use issues one bathroom for six adults that don’t know each others and have to co-live for months, probably is not enough. Moreover, each rooms should accommodate a maximum of 4 people (minimum of 2/3); once again a decision that force migrants to live together. (33)

34

In the Netherlands in 2015 the requests from asylum seekers were less than 4% of the EU total and there are no data available from the first trimester of 2017. The Government has been warned by Amnesty International and UNHCR for its attitude towards migrants residing illegally in the Netherlands - after the asylum request is rejected. (34) A letter from Dr. K.H.D.M. Dijkhoff, the State Secretary for Security and Justice, is available online for whoever wishes to apply for asylum in the Netherlands. The paper is divided into small paragraphs explaining in detail things like the “Accommodation” or the “Family Reunion”, but it also describes what “Nuisance” and “Personal Contribution for Reception” implies. (35) Some of the organization that collaborates with refugees in the Netherlands are UNHCR, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs and COA. The last one is the Central Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers, main responsible of the centers. It is “an independent administrative body that falls under the political responsibility of the Ministry of Security and Justice. COA gives account for its operations to the Ministry”.

35

As in Italy, centers are organized in line with the different process level: COL First stop where there is identification, registration and health tests, this procedure last from 2 to 5 days. There are a total of three centers (+1) that can accommodate up to 3200 people. - “Sometimes they were asked questions like - can you draw your national flag? The name of your president? But also where were you going to do grocery shop? Can you describe the path? - to be sure they were not lying. It is not a welcoming approach� (36) POL With a total amount of 24 centers for 13.286 people, these are the spaces where asylum seekers are sent waiting for the general asylum procedure.

The stay may vary between 12 days to few weeks.

Food and drinks are provided but no pocket money.

37

AZC In this centers “refugees are eligible for assistance during their request for asylum�. There are 32 centers for 20.404 people, these are most of the times existing facilities that COA rents from Dutch government - former prisons, military bases, recreational parks. Visitors are not allowed unless previous request. For safety regulations refugees are often not allowed to hang things on walls or put a carpet on the floor.

BED BAD BROOD As a as a result of international pressures, the Dutch Government decided to create the BBB, (bed-bad-brood) Bed Bath and Bread program which consists in accommodations open daily from 5 pm to 9 am in the 5 major Dutch cities - Amsterdam, The Hague, Utrecht, Rotterdam, Eindhoven. These facilities are (partially) paid by the National Government but there are different interests between the central authority and local municipalities; this response is still a hot topic in the country and it is just about providing or not shelters to rejected asylum seekers - waiting to repatriate - that don’t have any right. (37)

38

As aforesaid, most of the centers are former prisons, military bases, recreational parks. The number of places available is huge if compared to the Italian process but then, the number of arrivals and asylum seekers’ requests is inversely proportional. In the photographic project “Retour Afzender”, kindly shared by Lou Muuse, there is a closer focus on the spaces used for the process: divided in section, the collection is an informative document that show the different buildings and structures where everything happens. In “Arrival To the Netherlands” is obvious the difference with the Italian centers, the rooms have the same furniture, they are neutral, cold, not welcoming and there are strict rules on decorations - mostly for safety reasons.

At page 55 there are cited some spatial policies taken from a national factsheet sent by COA to the City Halls“The COA’s guideline specify an area of 5m2 per resident. An accommodation unit for 8 people has a floor are of approximately 90m2, including shared spaces…when there are too many applications these guidelines cannot always be followed”.

40

Here the situation is even more narrow than in Italy: 5m2 are equivalent to a room of 2 x 2,5m (there are not rooms with these dimensions but there are room of 10-15m2 per 2,3 persons).

The use of those specific measurements in both processes is again a political tool. On one hand, those rules and dimensions are part of a world that does not belong to migrants and probably never did - culture and social differences are not taken on account. On the other hand, the reason behind providing different rules from the existing national one is simple: on the paper, migrants have not the same rights as citizens.

Z. A. and M. R. are two migrants from Syria, they went through the Dutch integration process and now they are officially learning Dutch to find a job. During their experience, they were forced to move several times in one year while they were waiting for their residence permit - Z.A. was moved 10 times. Sometimes the center had not enough space forcing them in bunk-beds distributed over long corridors - as results several hundreds of people were sleeping together.

41

A stunning aspect that they bring to light during our conversations is the “opposite migration”. As mentioned in the State Secretary for Security and Justice’s letter to asylum seekers, it is not possible for migrants to apply for their family to come to the Netherlands. Some of Z.A. and M.R. friends preferred to go back to Syria, but here comes the problem: once in Europe they applied for the refugee residence permit, this document allows them to stay usually between 3 to 5 years in the country and participate to the integration process. The document in some European countries -e.g. Hungary - gives refugees the same rights as citizens, so the free movement in the Schengen area.

If they have to cross Schengen to go back in Syria, they need a passport that they don’t have. Remarkably, the only solution is to pay an illegal and dangerous journey, crossing the same lines in the opposite way.

The aforementioned information is necessary to understand how the European approach is not working: both processes discriminate on the ground of spatial regulations migrants and the opposite migration marks the lowest point of this system.

42

THE PROJECT OF A LINE

Retracing the facts mentioned earlier, this crisis is all about lines: starting from the biggest scale, there are national borders that divide countries, these lines regulate our status and rights. Once in Schengen area the lines become smaller and more intricate, to each country correspond a different integration process - that is not a linear mechanism to identify migrants and give them residency but it looks more like a system used as a political tool to obstruct integration.

The “opposite migration” show how this approach is a failure: migrants get stuck in a country in which they were assigned, if for a specific reason they want to go back - for example to reach their family - they have to risk again their lives.

Architecture and Interior Architecture have a strong role in this situation. Fences, walls, tents are just the beginning, also former retirement homes, old villas, leased facilities, etc. play a fundamental part in the humanitarian game.

To make these spaces “habitable” for refugees need to be considered eligible by law. These rules are obsolete and created to obstacle people that look for better living condition. The lines drawn by these guidelines represent

45

the discrimination of a certain category of citizens.

“We have to get away from the concept that, because you have that status – migrant, refugee, martian, alien, whatever – you’re not allowed to be like everybody else.”

K. Kleinschmidt (2015) (38) This status is “gained” crossing the perimeter of the origin country to avoid persecution and death. This seems to be the first thing that architecture and design forget: the tendency to think about refugee as possible clients automatically creates a system of needs and the impulse to assign them life qualities that they don’t own - for example why we design temporary dwellings if they are looking for better stable living conditions?

An important aspect is that temporariness can also recall impermanence and roughness. The famous solution by IKEA for refugees, titled Better Shelter, won the Design of the Year 2016 award, issued by The Design Museum’s Beazley Design of the Year. The prize shows an actual current focus areas of the design business world. Despite

46

the award, one of the world’s leading authorities on humanitarian aid, previously working in Zaatari - I will not indicate his name - in a talk at HNI, Rotterdam, said that the 18m2 solution by IKEA is not that “better” from others.

Infact, he stated, that sand enters and the materials are likely to melt in the sun. One of the “shelter consultants” for the IOM saw that many people ended up using them as chicken shelters. Textile tents, metal sheds, old dilapidated factories that serve as shelters, gas bottles that replace the kitchen; apparently these are the spaces that European designers want to provide migrants. (39) In this chaos an interesting architectural discussion started to address the issue but still remains vague. Among all the analysis on shelters, housing, vacant buildings and policy changes, what comes up is Ruben Pater’s opinion on Dezeen (40); talking about contests as theme, he said that competitions like What Design Can Do are exploiting Design as a tool because those solutions are possible on a bigger scale only with the support of governments and NGOs. How many of those solutions have been realized so far?

47

“…It is also absurd to suggest that design can come up with solutions for a crisis that is political and socio-economic at heart.”

Design here is mainly a political tool, on one hand shelters and temporariness are “exactly how neoliberals hope to discourage refugees from coming to Europe” and on the other hand this kind of contests push on the students that mainly desire to win the contest prize. One more time the interests of the affected side are not considered.

“VVD party member Halbe Zijlstra has been quite explicit on this: “We should make the conditions for refugees as austere as possible, to discourage others from traveling to the Netherlands… ...Designers should be wary that their work does not end up being used to legitimize a state of permanent temporary living, deliberately created to prevent refugees from coming to Europe…the refugee crisis is very much designed - designers have played an active role in creating the digital and physical borders to control and

49

prevent refugees from entering Europe‌�

The aforementioned facts show that Design is not properly used to achieve a real solution: it is used to legitimize a system that is not working anymore.

50

My interest as designer is not to provide a solution, I don’t believe this is possible: Architecture and Design will never solve the so-called “refugee crisis� because this is only the tip of the iceberg, the roots of this emergency cannot be healed by humanitarian or development aid. The lack of information about these policies and legal subterfuges obstruct the EU citizens to see the real conditions of migration in the EU. The cited facts and legal papers show the alarming attitude to discriminate on the ground of spatial regulations people that is waiting for their request/status. The act of drawing a line to define an area becomes here an injustice towards people.

In my opinion, instead of feeding a sick mechanism to design shelters and temporary dwellings, Design and Architecture should create awareness on specific issues to foster more support from citizens. The problem has to be approached also in a social and political way and designers and architects should be aware of this.

Housing is not the only obstacle, a complex system of intricate lines is preventing people to find a stable solution for them and their families, far away from the wars.

51

My aim is to give a physical aspect to some of these lines to open a discussion and foster awareness. “To help” means for me to bring to light the spatial discrimination to which refugees are subjected. In line with the Dutch COA guidelines, my act of recreating a “space for refugee” becomes a way to denounce a fragile system exploited by all parties.

It’s clear that the so-called “European migrant crisis” is also the result of hostile policies perpetrated by European countries. Hostile because they prevent the migrants to come and stabilize in EU territories. Borders, state of exception and spatial policies are some of the tools used to obstruct the path; opposite migration is the lowest point of the humanitarian aid system. Design and Architecture should not support the convenient (for the EU) solutions that incite temporariness and instability. They should denounce this kind of injustice and foster a shared dialogue between the parties. Design and Architecture should be the tools to break a formal system that is made to feed a sick mechanism that relies on people.

52

REFERENCES

1.The Guardian (2015) The Turmoil of Today’s World: Leading Writers Respond to the Refugee Crisis. The Guardian [Online] Available from:https://www. theguardian.com/books/2015/sep/12/the-turmoil-of-todays-world-leadingwriters-respond-to-the-refugee-crisis 2.G. Andreotti (2006) Scorci di uomini in movimento. Migrazioni, pellegrinaggi, viaggi. Geografia umana, Trento, Artimedia-Trentini 3.P. Kingsley (2015) Arab spring prompts biggest migrant wave since second world war. The Guardian [Online] Available from:https://www.theguardian. com/world/commentisfree/2015/jan/03/arab-spring-migrant-wave-instability-war 4.F. Colombo (2017) Quanti migranti stanno arrivando nel 2017?. Lenius [Online] Available from:http://www.lenius.it/migranti-2017/ 5.E. Anyangwe (2015) Is it time to rethink the divide between humanitarian and development fundings? The Guardian [Online] Available from: https://www. theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2015/dec/04/ funding-humanitarian-assistance-development-aid

55

6.A. Biernat (2015) Development aid rises again in 2015, spending on refugees doubles. OECD [Online] Available from:http://www. oecd.org/dac/development-aid-rises-again-in-2015-spendingon-refugees-doubles.htm 7.E. Weizman (2012) The Least of All Possible Evils: Humanitarian Violence from Arendt to Gaza. London.

8.H. Arendt (1963) Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. Viking Press 9.UNHCR (2017) UNHCR Population Statistics - Data - Overview.

[Online] Available from: http://popstats.unhcr. org/en/overview#_ga=1.205509144.941880396.14534 62779 10.EUR-Lex (2009) The Schengen Area and Cooperation. [Online] Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/IT/TXT/?uri=URISERV%3Al33020 11.L. Acosta (2016) Refugee Law and Policy In Selected Countries. The Law Library of Congress, Global Legal Research Center. [Online] Available from:https://www.loc.gov/law/help/ refugee-law/refugee-law-and-policy.pdf 12.Macmillan Dictionary, definition of Border.

56

13.J. Butler (2004) Precarious Life, The Powers of Mourning and Violence. Verso 14.A. Alexandridis, M. Dalkiran (2017) Routes Change, Migration Persists: the effects of EU policy on Migratory Routes. Alsharq Forum [Online] Available from: http://sharqforum.org/2017/03/28/ routes-change-migration-persists-the-effects-of-eu-policy-on-migratory-routes/ 15.E. Graham Harrison (2017) Migrants from west Africa being “sold in Lybian slave markets”. The Guardian. [Online] Available from:https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/10/libya-public-slave-auctions-un-migration 16.Il Messaggero (2017) ‘Ndragheta, smantellata Cosca Arena: gestiva il CARA dei migranti a Isola Capo Rizzuto. Il Messaggero.

[Online] Available from: http://www.ilmessaggero.it/primopiano/ cronaca/migranti_ndrangheta_capo_rizzuto_cosca_ arena-2440818.html 17.UNHCR (2009) The Right to Adequate Housing. UN. [Online] Available from:http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/ FS21_rev_1_Housing_en.pdf

57

18.BBC News (2014) Mapping Mediterranean Migration. BBC News. [Online] Available from:http://www.bbc.com/news/worldeurope-24521614 19.Frontex (2017) Migratory Routes Map. Frontex. [Online] Available from:http://frontex.europa.eu/trends-and-routes/migratory-routes-map/ 20.OCHA. Coordination. UN, OCHA. [Online] Available from:http:// www.unocha.org/what-we-do/coordination/overview 21.S. Scavino (2014) The summerisation of Jordanian Shelters.

[Online] Available from:https://issuu.com/scavinos/docs/the_ summerization_stampa2 22.A. Herscher (2015) Humanitarianism’s Housing Question: From Slum Reform to Digital Shelter. E-Flux. [Online] Available from:http://www.e-flux.com/journal/66/60745/humanitarianism-s-housing-question-from-slum-reform-to-digital-shelter/ 23.G. Agamben (1995) Homo Sacer, Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Meridian.

24.G. Agamben (2005) State of Exception, Bollati Boringhieri Editore srl. Torino.

58

30.Internazionale (2015) Le norme che regolano l’immigrazione in Italia. Internazionale [Online] Available from:http://www.internazionale.it/notizie/2015/08/13/italia-immigrazione-leggi 31.Fortress Europe (2008) Ecco la mappa di cpt, cara e centri emergenza. Melting Pot Europa. [Online] Available from:http:// www.meltingpot.org/Ecco-la-mappa-di-cpt-cara-e-centri-emergenza.html 32.Frontex (2017) Migranti, via libera a decreto Minniti: basta Cie e nuove regole per i richiedenti asilo. La Repubblica. [Online] Available from: http://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2017/04/12/ news/basta_cie_e_nuove_regole_per_i_richiedenti_asilo_ecco_ cosa_prevede_il_decreto_migranti-162794563/ 33.ANCI (2016) Manuale operativo Per l’attivazione e la gestione di servizi di accoglienza e integrazione per richiedenti e titolari di protezione internazionale. Ministero dell’Interno. [Online] Available from:http://www.sprar.it/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ manuale.pdf 34.UNHCR (2016) Mandates of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights; 35.K. H.D.M. Dijkhoff (2017) Letter “Concerning Asylum Application in the Netherlands”. Ministry of Security and Justice.

59

36.L. Muuse (2015) Retour Afzender [Online] Available from:http:// www.retourafzender.eu/ 37.C. Pelgrim, S. de Voogt (2017) Groningen zet nieuwe ‘bedbad-brood’-locatie neer. NRC. [Online] Available from:https:// www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2017/04/05/groningen-zet-nieuwe-bed-badbrood-locatie-neer-a1553279 38.T Radford (2015) Refugee camps are the “cities of tomorrow”, says humanitarian-aid expert. Dezeen. [Online] Available from:https://www.dezeen.com/2015/11/23/refugee-camps-cities-of-tomorrow-killian-kleinschmidt-interview-humanitarian-aid-expert 39.S. Zang (2015) Helping Refugees Isn’t Just About Designing Better Shelters. Wired. [Online] Available from:https://www.wired. com/2015/11/helping-refugees-is-not-about-designing-better-shelters/ R Pater (2016) Treating the refugee crisis as a design problem is problematic. Dezeen. [Online] Available from:https://www. dezeen.com/2016/04/21/ruben-pater-opinion-what-design-can-do-refugee-crisis-problematic-design/

60

IMAGES Cover. T. Sandigliano (2017) Man-made Lines. Illustration p. 6 - T. Sandigliano (2017) Migrants Routes Map. Illustration p. 30 - T. Sandigliano (2017) Italian Immigration Centers Map. Illustration p. 36 - T. Sandigliano (2017) Dutch Immigration Centers Map. Illustration (EN VERSION) p. 13 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “Culture of Fear”. Illustration p. 25 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “Homo Sacer vs Refugee”. Illustration p. 39 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “POL’s Basic Package for Refugees”. Illustration p. 43 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “We got used to Pain”. Illustration p. 48 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “What Design Can Do”. Illustration (ITA VERSION) p. 13 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “A Dangerous Travel”. Illustration p. 25 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “Legal Status”. Illustration p. 35 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “6 men and 1 toilette”. Illustration p. 43 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “Opposite Migration”. Illustration p. 48 - T. Sandigliano (2017) “Not so Better” Shelter. Illustration

All the photographic material and the legal documents not included in the book can be found online at www.teosandigliano.com/man-made-lines

61

MIARD | master of Interior Architecture: Research + Design PZI, Willem de Kooning Academy Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences.

Man-made Lines Š 2017 All Rights Reserved to Teo Sandigliano