Master thesis Ilva Veul. An exploration on why and how Syrian refugees settle down in Diyarbakır city

Transcription

1 Master thesis Ilva Veul An exploration on why and how Syrian refugees settle down in Diyarbakır city

2

3 An exploration on why and how Syrian refugees settle down in Diyarbakır city Looking at social networks and livelihood strategies Name : Ilva Veul Student number : adres Supervisor Second reader Program Chair group : Elisabeth.veul@wur.nl : Joost Jongerden : Bram Jansen : Master International Development : Sociology of Development and Change Course code : SDC Date : The cover photo was taken by Joost Jongerden in the old city of Diyarbakır where I conducted part of my research.

4

5 Abstract The number of refugees is increasing worldwide, largely due to mass displacement caused by the Syrian War. Turkey currently hosts the greatest number of Syrian refugees, estimated at 2.2 million. Increasingly, refugees are tending to flee to non-camp settlements, while Turkish refugee policy is mostly focused on hosting refugees in camps. The aim of this research is, therefore, to contribute to urban refugee policy. To do so, information is needed on the current situation of urban refugees, as previous research has mostly focused on camp refugees. This research examines why Syrian refugees prefer non-camp settlement in Diyarbakır city and what kind of livelihood strategies they employ. To answer this, I have analysed relevant literature and completed first hand fieldwork over three months in Diyarbakır city, a Kurdish city in the South-East of Turkey. I used a qualitative data method which consisted of interviewing, observing and conducting informal talks with twenty Syrian families. I also had informal talks with Syrian refugees, non-government organizations, the local municipality and governmental organizations. The results demonstrate that social relations, ethnic background and a desire for self-reliance are three important factors in explaining both why Syrian refugees prefer non-camp settlements in Diyarbakır city and which livelihood strategies they use. The Syrian refugees had come to Diyarbakır city because of chain-migration, meaning that they had followed family members and co-nationals with the same ethnic background who had previously moved to this place. Other reasons that were mentioned as influencing the decision of the interviewees to relocate to Diyarbakır city were the availability of economic opportunities and social services. These were all factors that they perceived as unavailable in the camps, of which they had a negative view. The interviewees expressed a desire to be in a place where they would be able to be self-reliant. Once they arrived in the city, family and co-nationals with the same ethnic background and the local community seemed to serve as important networks in finding a house and a job and engaging with economic and social opportunities. Existing institutions (such as the local municipality and governmental organizations) only seemed to be engaged from time to time, as this was dependent on the refugees ability to find these institutions and the willingness of the institutions to assist. Besides making use of social networks, another livelihood strategy used by the respondents was making use of policy inconsistencies and regulation loopholes. Although refugees are forbidden to formally work or receive education in Turkey, those individuals interviewed had found ways to access income and education through other means. While this enabled the respondents to be selfreliant and to survive in the short-term, the ways in which they did so are not ethically justifiable. Besides, these survival strategies did not seem useful for the long-term. It is therefore important to create an urban refugee policy for Turkey that offers durable and ethical solutions. The main recommendation of this thesis is that the Turkish government reform existing legislation to grant refugees working permits and ensure that Syrian children can receive a formal education. In this way the needs of refugees are better fulfilled and the host-country can also profit from the human and economic potential of refugees. Keywords: Syrian refugees, non-camp settlement, livelihood strategies, social networks, chainmigration, self-help, self-reliant, urban refugee policy, Diyarbakır i

6 Acknowledgement In the winter of 2010 I was in Ankara, Turkey for a university exchange program and got the chance to visit both Syria as well as the Eastern part of Turkey. Both of these places impressed me because of the beautiful landscapes and the friendly people who were so hospitable. I am therefore grateful that I was once again able to go back to Eastern Turkey in the summer of 2014, in order to conduct qualitative research for my thesis. Talking with people from Syria reminded me of my amazing trip in their country. It is sad to hear what has happened to Syria, a country with so much beauty. Even though my respondents had experienced horrible things and were deprived from home, they were all willing to tell their stories about their lives then and now. Sometimes these stories were told with tears and sometimes with a smile, but one thing these stories had in common was that they were told by friendly and hospitable people. I would like to thank all of my respondents for their stories, warmth, coffee and tea. I wish you all the best for the future, inshallah. Besides my respondents I also would like to give a big thanks to Erhan, my translator, who really was of great help. Without him I would have been hopelessly lost in the narrow streets of Diyarbakır city. Besides being my translator and guide, he also became a friend with whom I liked to talk and play a nice game of backgammon. Erhan, zor sipas. I would also like to express my gratitude to Murat, Dilan and Atalay, my colleagues at DISA, who made it a lot easier for me to do my research in Diyarbakır. Firstly, because they offered me a place at their office so I could do my daily work, but also because they had some contacts to which they could introduce me. Special thanks go to Atalay and Dilan, who really did their best to make me feel at home. I had a great time living together with Atalay, meeting all his lovely friends, and going on trips to places such as Mardin, Hasankeyf and Suruç. Also Dilan introduced me to all her friends and family, and took me along to several wedding parties and pubs. Without them, my time in Diyarbakır probably would have been quite lonely, since there were hardly any other people with whom I could communicate. I am therefore grateful for the nice talks and moments I shared with them. Furthermore, I would like to thank my supervisor Joost Jongerden. It was nice to have a supervisor who was familiar with the place and culture I was living in. He therefore was able to give me some valuable contacts that led me to, for instance, my translator and DISA, which proved very important for both my research and for me personally. Next to that, he also could give me good advice on what to do when the situation in Diyarbakır became a bit unsafe. It gave me a safe feeling to know that he had gone through similar situations before. Thank you for all your time, help and patience. Finally, I would like to thank my parents and Zoran for supporting me from back home. During my time in Diyarbakır I would Skype with Zoran almost daily and tell him all my stories. I really appreciate that he took the time to listen to me. I know my parents were worried from time to time, especially during my trips to Suruç and when the situation in Diyarbakır became unstable. But still, they supported my decisions and had faith in me. Zoran, mom and dad, thanks for being there for me and for your unconditional love and support. ii

7 Table of contents Abstract... i Acknowledgement...ii 1. Introduction Problem statement and theoretical background Research aim and questions Choosing a place to settle down Livelihood strategies How refugees perceive their living conditions Method of data-collection Research design and participants Data-collection Orientation phase Interview phase Data-processing and data-analysis Limitations and reflection Results The migration stories of Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır city and the choice for non-camp settlement Reasons for choosing a non-camp settlement over a camp settlement Pull factors for Diyarbakır How Syrian refugees settle down and get access to economic and social factors in Diyarbakır Finding a place to settle down Settling down with the help of others Getting access to income Getting access to social services The role of gender and its implications for survival in Diyarbakır The perception of Syrian refugees on their living conditions in Diyarbakır Living conditions in Diyarbakır Ethnic differences Perception on local community and institutions Discussion and conclusion Discussion on why Syrian refugees prefer non-camp settlement in Diyarbakır Discussing the livelihood strategies used by Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır Discussing the perception of Syrian refugees on their living conditions Conclusion and recommendations A reflection on this research References

8 2

9 1. Introduction This research identifies the variables to explain why refugees choose for non-camp settlement and how they survive in such settlements. A lot of research has already been done on refugees before, but most of this research has focused on camp refugees. It appears, however, that many refugees also flee to non-camp areas (UNHCR, 2014 a ) a trend that has been notably underresearched. This thesis aims to explore why and how Syrian refugees settle down in Diyarbakır city. The reason why Diyarbakır is scientifically interesting is that it has not been a focus of such research before and the United Nations High Commissioner for Research (UNHCR) does not have any data on this place at present. Another reason for the particularly interesting dynamic in Diyarbakır is the Kurdish background of the city. Diyarbakır is seen as the capital city of Kurdistan and most inhabitants are Kurd, which brings in an ethnic aspect to my research. In this research I will therefore take this ethnic dimension of non-camp settlement into consideration which might yield interesting and new results. I will start this chapter by discussing the relevance and outline of the thesis. As Figure 1 shows, global forced displacement has Figure 1. Displacement from been growing and has currently reached the highest number on record. At the end of 2014 more than 59.5 million people were forcibly displaced, which is 8 million more than the previous year (UNHCR, 2015). Figure 2 shows that this increase in displacement numbers is caused by different wars such as those in Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan and South Sudan, but predominantly by the war in Syria (UNHCR, 2015). Syria is a country located in the Middle-East and shares borders with Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, Israel and Lebanon. Syria has approximately 22 million inhabitants which are ethnically and religiously diverse (Fisher, 2013). The population are mainly Arabs, but also Kurds, Armenians, Yezidis and Turkmen (CBC news, 2014). These ethnicities follow different religions of which the majority is Sunni Muslim. Others identify as Christians, Jews or Druze, and the country is run by members of a minority group known as Alawites (also Muslim, but they follow a smaller branch of the Islam) with Bashar al-assad as leader (Fisher, 2013). In March 2011, some of these different ethnic groups started peaceful protests against the minority and Alawi dominated Figure 2. Major source countries of refugees regime of Bashar al-assad, because they felt deprived of their democratic and social and economic rights. The movement for political reform eventually escalated into an armed conflict, which has been growing in intensity and scope for almost five years now. Several hundreds of groups are thought to be fighting against the al-assad regime, although the war is 3

10 increasingly characterized by sects and the opposition is dominated by Sunni radicals. In June 2014, Islamic State (IS) entered the conflict, not only fighting the regime but also fighting other parties. This war has thus far caused 4.3 million people to flee Syria and 7.6 million people to become internally displaced, as of December 2015 (UNHCR, 2015 a ). The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights counts more than casualties in this same period. Most of the Syrians who fled the country Figure 3. Major refugee-hosting countries moved to Turkey. Because of this enormous influx, Turkey became the biggest refugee-hosting country worldwide (UNHCR, 2015). As can be seen in Figure 3, at the end of 2014 Turkey hosted around 1.6 million refugees. The statistics of 2015 indicate that there has been an increase and that currently Turkey hosts almost 2.2 million displaced Syrians. This is 1.1 million more than Lebanon, the second largest Syrian refugee-hosting country (UNHCR, 2015 a ). Of these Syrian refugees, around live in the 25 government camps (see Figure 4 for a map of these camps). The majority of the Syrian refugees in Turkey (around 1.9 million) stay in non-camp settlements (see Figure 5 to see where most Syrian refugees are settled). From the start of the Syrian war until the present, the Turkish government has spent more than 6 billion on the Syrian refugee crisis (Human Rights Watch, 2015). While Turkey used to refuse outside assistance, since April 2012 they have been part of the UN Regional Response Plan in the hope of receiving some extra aid (Amnesty International, 2014). They required around $ 624 million for 2015, through the Syria Regional Refugee and Resilience plan (3RP), a UN led plan, of which 35% is covered up till now 1. This aid money, both from the Turkish government as from the UN, is mainly spent on camps. Refugees in non-camp settlement are excluded from formal methods of assistance and often have limited access to public services like education, healthcare and employment (European Commission, 2014). Thus, it is important to also consider this refugee crisis from an urban point of view. This research aims to explain why Syrian refugees have chosen for non-camp settlement despite the lack of formal assistance, and what kind of strategies they then use to survive. The core question therefore is: Why do Syrian refugees prefer non-camp settlement in Diyarbakır city and what kind of livelihood strategies do they use? In Chapter two, I discuss my problem statement and theoretical background. I state the importance of this research, define my research questions and discuss what is already known on this topic. In the third chapter, I give an explanation of my method of data-collection. In Chapter four, I set out the results of my research which are then discussed in the final chapter, where I conclude that social relations, ethnic background and being able to be self-reliant are the three variables which explain why and how refugees choose for non-camp settlement in Diyarbakır. I conclude with recommendations on how to improve urban refugee policy and on the need for future, focused research _November_2015_(16_08).pdf, retrieved on 9 December 4

11 Figure 4. Syrian refugees registered in camps in Turkey 2 Figure 5. Syrian refugees (both camp and non-camp) in Turkey retrieved 9 September retrieved on 9 December

12 6

13 2. Problem statement and theoretical background This chapter outlines the importance of the research conducted in this thesis, by explaining the problem statement and aim of this research. This is followed by an examination of the existing academic literature concerning refugees choice of settlement and their livelihood strategies. This literature study is divided in three parts: part one will look at the reasons why refugees settle down somewhere; the second part looks at livelihood strategies used by refugees; and the final part looks at how people can perceive certain things. The concept of refugee is defined in the Geneva Convention of 1951 and refers to: any person who[,]...owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it. Often a refugee is only formally recognised as such if it receives this official status. In this research however, the term refugee will refer to both people with or without an official status. This paper defines refugee as any person who had fear for their life due to war and therefore decided to flee their country. Many governments seem to distinguish different types of refugees. They, for instance, see camp refugees as prima facie refugees and urban refugees as economic migrants (Jacobsen, 2005). The label prima facie is given to refugees who did not have the chance to get an individual asylum interview but of whom the reason for fleeing is evident. Often these are refugees who moved during mass movements, as a result of conflicts or generalized violence. 4 Because of these different labels (camp and urban refugees), the two groups are often treated differently which results in the situation where camp refugees often have more entitlements than urban refugees. Camp refugees mostly receive assistance and services from host communities and humanitarian actors because these refugees are seen as unable to make meaningful choices about their own lives (UNHCR, 2014 a ). UNHCR assumes that urban refugees are more able to support themselves since they otherwise could have gone to the camps where they would be provided with humanitarian assistance. Many governments and international organizations do not formally recognize urban refugees, and without recognition from the host government and assistance from international organizations it becomes difficult for urban refugees to survive in such places. This compromises the credibility of the refugee label, as international organizations that are supposed to give legal protection and material aid do not seem to play a role in the lives of urban refugees (Malkki, 1995). This is consistent with the situation in Turkey, where there seems to be a lack of recognition of urban refugees. The Turkish government, with the Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD), has mainly focused their financial means towards camp refugees. Normally it is the mandate of UNHCR to protect refugees and search for long-term solutions (UNHCR, 2015), however the refugee crisis in Turkey is coordinated by the AFAD. AFAD is an institution within the Turkish government which works to prevent disasters, minimize disaster-related damages, coordinate post-disaster response, and promote cooperation among various government agencies. In the past few years they have established 25 refugee camps, hosting around Syrian refugees, at a total monthly cost of 2 million (European Commission, 2015). Although most national and international non- 4 retrieved on 8 July

14 governmental organizations are not allowed to enter these camps, credible sources have confirmed that these camps are of good quality, offering shelter, health, education, food security and social and other technical services (Amnesty International, 2014; European Commission, 2015). The majority of Syrian refugees, though, are staying in non-camp settlements where they often are left to survive under very challenging circumstances, with less assistance from the government and other humanitarian organizations (European Commission, 2015). As the above analysis shows, the Turkish government offers different treatment for camp and urban refugees. The government also offers different treatment for registered and unregistered refugees and for European and non-european refugees. After the commencement of the Syrian war, Turkey implemented a temporary protection regime for Syrians (see Textbox 1 for an explanation of this concept). This implies that Turkey has an open-border policy in which Syrian refugees cannot be sent back (non-refoulement). In reality, however, it appears that refugees without Syrian passports are regularly denied access at official border crossings (Amnesty International, 2014). If the refugees are granted access, the authorities are supposed to support them, but only inside the borders of the camps (Özden, 2013). This temporary protection status is quite different from an official refugee status, since the refugees are not legally allowed to apply for resettlement, nor to participate in the work force (Jessen, 2013). The reason why these refugees cannot apply for full refugee status is because the Turkish state grants refugee status and the right to asylum only to persons who have become refugees as a result of events occurring in Europe (Özden, 2013). People who are not from Europe should be assessed by the UNHCR, who is supposed to resettle these displaced people in other countries. Until this time, they are granted temporary protection. Therefore, Syrian refugees in Turkey are seen as guests who are only meant to stay for a short term. Naturally, however, UNHCR has difficulty in efficiently resettling such an overwhelming number of people and thus, many of these guests remain in Turkey (Özden, 2013). The Turkish government has only come up with shortterm solutions to what is proving to be a long-term problem. It is therefore important to think about long-term solution for Syrian refugees in Turkey. Various long-term solutions which can be considered are voluntary return to the country of origin, integration in the host country and resettlement in third countries (UNHCR, 2014). As already stated, resettlement in third countries has become more difficult: firstly, because Syrian refugees with temporary protection status are not allowed to apply for resettlement through the Turkish government and; secondly, because UNHCR has difficulties in efficiently resettling these refugees. This can be explained by the failure of non-neighbouring countries to honour their resettlement commitments (Amnesty International, 2014). Resettlement options have become scarce, especially in Europe and America where, because of the ongoing crisis and rising xenophobic discourse, migrants are refused entry and many borders have been closed (Amnesty International, 2014; Voruz, 2012). Up until November 2014, less than 7000 Syrian refugees had been resettled outside of neighbouring countries (Oxfam, 2014). Looking at voluntary return, statistics show that worldwide 6.4 million refugees were in a protracted situation by the end of 2014, with an average duration of 25 years (UNHCR, 2015). In 2014, only refugees returned to their countries of origin which was the lowest level of refugee returns since It is ironic to see this number fall so low, since many refugees flee to neighbouring countries with the idea of returning as soon as this becomes possible. Syria s civil war can be called protracted as well, with extensive destruction within the country (Judson, 2014). Voluntary return to Syria has become almost impossible due to the dangerous living situation in the country. Local integration is realized when refugees integrate as members of the host 8

15 community through legal, economic, social, and cultural processes. This places obligations on both refugees and host governments (UNHCR, 2015) - refugees need to accept different norms and values, while host governments also need to give the refugees the same rights as the local population. Existing research shows that integrating refugees seems to be a difficult process, especially for urban refugees since they are often perceived by the local population as an economic burden on the city (Campbell, 2006). This perception creates resentment and hostility from locals towards the urban Syrian refugees (Judson, 2014). Textbox 1. Temporary protection status 5 The Law on Foreigners and International Protection in Turkey, which entered into force in April 2014, has the following subcategorizations: refugees, conditional refugees, subsidiary protection and temporary protection. In this Turkish law, a refugee is defined as someone from Europe who shall be granted refugee status upon completion of the refugee status determination process (Article 61). A conditional refugee is a person from a non-european country, who shall be allowed to reside in Turkey temporarily until they are resettled to a third country (Article 62). Subsidiary protection is given to a foreigner or stateless person who is unable or for the reason of such threat is unwilling, to avail himself of the protection of his country of origin or country of former habitual residence (Article 63). Temporary protection is the legal status for the Syrian refugees in Turkey. It may be provided for foreigners who have been forced to leave their country, cannot return to the country that they have left, and have arrived at or crossed the borders of Turkey in a mass influx situation seeking immediate and temporary protection (Article 91(1)). With this temporary protection, it is not possible to be resettled through the Turkish government, except when refugees face multiple layers of discrimination and when they are marginalized in society and isolated from their homes, such as in the case of lesbians, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) refugees (Dromgold, 2015). The temporary protection status has been granted towards all Syrian refugees, however it is unclear what exactly is meant with this. According to Article 91 (2), the reception of such foreigners into Turkey; their stay in Turkey and rights and obligations; their exit from Turkey shall be stipulated in a Directive to be issued by the Council of Ministers (Dromgold, 2015). On the 22 nd of October 2014, the first Directive regarding the rights of Syrian refugees in Turkey was issued. In this Directive it was regulated that Syrian refugees with a temporary protection status had admission to Turkish territory as unobstructed, forced returns as not permitted and Syrians rights to access to basic needs including shelter in camps, food and medical support and psychosocial services, education and the possibility to apply for work permits in certain sectors and regions (Dromgold, 2015). The regulation did indicate the possibility to apply for work permits, however the Turkish government never introduced an explicit right to work (Human Rights Watch, 2015). Research also shows that many of these rights are actually still unknown among the Syrian population and in some cases have not yet been (completely) implemented (Dromgold, 2015). For instance, it appears that 75% of non-camp refugees still do not receive any formal education due to language barriers, economic hardship and a lack of social integration (Human Rights Watch, 2015). Overall, it seems as if the situation for urban Syrian refugees is becoming precarious. While there is an increase in the number of urban refugees there seems to be a decrease in places where they can settle and the Turkish government, nor international organizations, seem to focus adequate aid on these urban refugees. Syrian refugees cannot go back to Syria because of the war and because of the prohibition on resettlement through the Turkish government. They are willing to integrate, which can be identified from the fact that 87 percent of both camp and outside camp refugees are very willing 5 My research was conducted before the Directive on the 22 nd of October 2014 came through and therefore my results might be different then if this research would have been conducted today. The rights of Syrian refugees might have been improved. 9

16 to learn the Turkish language (AFAD, 2014). However, they are not granted with certain rights, which makes the integration process more difficult. This is worrisome, since the Syrians in Turkey are no longer refugees waiting for a war to end but rather immigrants who are ready to write a new chapter in their lives (Kirişci & Salooja, 2014). A refocus of protection and programming strategies from institutions and the Turkish government is required so these urban refugees are, indeed, able to write these new chapters and effectively integrate. If this is not reconsidered and this group of urban Syrian refugees is left aside by the Turkish government, a consequence might be that more and more refugees will illegally move to Europe in the hope of finding a better place to write this new chapter (Kirişci, 2015). Another consequence, both for those refugees who stay in Turkey as well as those who move to Europe, might be that they become outsiders whose lives are wasted (Bauman, 2003). This would not only be a significant cultural and humanitarian loss, but also, as earlier research has shown, an economic loss for the host country as refugees can have a positive effect on a countries economy (Alix-Garcia, 2009; Brees, 2010). 2.1 Research aim and questions The aim of this research is answering the main question why do Syrian refugees prefer non-camp settlement in Diyarbakır city and what kind of livelihood strategies do they use? To answer this question, I have devised three sub-questions: - What are the migration stories of Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır city? - How do Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır city settle down and get access to economic and social factors? - How do Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır city perceive their living conditions? By answering these questions, the aim is to obtain more information on the situation of non-camp, and in this case urban refugees, in Diyarbakır. This information gives insights into important considerations such as what Syrian urban refugees needs are, what goes well, but also which problems are faced. If it is known why and how Syrian refugees settle down in an urban area, an indication can be given on the best way to manage and support these refugees. This is important for both international organizations and the Turkish government, in order to consider if a refocus of their protection and programming strategies is required, and if so, how such reform can meet the needs of refugees in their diverse locations (UNHCR, 2013). By doing this research, this thesis aims to contribute to the creation of a better urban refugee policy. According to Campbell (2006) no clearly defined urban refugee policy has ever been developed, which also accounts for Turkey. With such a written policy, it becomes easier to structure and maximise aid from NGOs, governments and other institutions which, in turn, might contribute to better integration between host and guest community, offering refugees a long-term solution. Developing an urban refugee policy which can structure aid from NGOs, governments and other institutions involves difficult considerations. Firstly, it appears that aid agencies have a declining funding level since most aid goes to emergencies instead of protracted refugees situations. Secondly, aid agencies are often required to follow host government policy, which often requires them to only provide assistance in camps. Thirdly, urban refugee policy is context specific, meaning that for every city the (political) situation is different (Jacobsen, 2006). In practice, urban refugee policy often follows one of the following coexisting approaches: one based on government s official restriction and control policies, the other making use of policy inconsistencies and regulation loopholes to cater 10

17 for illegal, mostly poor, migrants (Jacobsen, 2006). The aim of a clearly defined urban refugee policy is to reduce the need for refugees to search for such loopholes or to be dependent on the good will of local authorities. 2.1 Choosing a place to settle down When refugees decide to flee from their home place they often do so in search for security (AFAD, 2014; Chaterlard, El-Abed & Washington, 2009). Other reasons might be political, economic or health related (AFAD, 2014). These refugees might not always have a full plan in mind of where to go, or how to get there. This is particularly true of asylum seekers in Europe, who often just follow the routes used by the agents whom they have paid to take them to Europe (Crawley, 2010). In that sense, some refugees might just end up in a place by coincidence instead of making a fully aware choice for a particular country, land or area. Others are able to make a deliberate choice and save money for this journey. Most refugees seem to move to neighbouring countries (Czaika & Mayer, 2011). Neighbouring countries often have cultural similarities and most refugees do not have enough money to make the journey to more remote countries. The same accounts for Syrian refugees, most of whom are hosted in neighbouring countries. The main reason why Syrian refugees choose Turkey over other countries is because of ease of transportation (AFAD, 2014). Other reasons include the perception that Turkey offers better conditions, a level of trust towards Turkey and religious reasons. Looking at the literature, it appears that social networks are an important pull factor for a certain place (Chatelard, E-Abed & Washington, 2009). Refugees prefer to go to places where family or conationals have moved to before, in a process called chain-migration. This seems to happen in Turkey as well; Syrian refugees try to find residence with family members in Turkey (Jessen, 2013; Kirişci & Salooja, 2014). Next to family networks, refugees might also use co-national networks for chainmigration (Jacobsen, 2006). This means that refugees flee to places where community or country members have moved to before. In the case of Syrian refugees, these co-national networks might consist of different ethnicity networks. Syria s population consists of several ethnicities such as Arabs, Kurds and Armenians (CBC news, 2014). Kurdistan is the land of the Kurds and consists of parts of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Since their land has never been formally recognized, Kurds have a history of regular migration. For instance, during the 1920s, thousands Kurds from the Turkish part of Kurdistan fled to Syria since the government had a plan to move and resettle all Kurds (Vahé, 2005). Also during the first Gulf War (1991), around Kurds from the Iraqi part of Kurdistan had to flee to Turkey (Galbraith, 2003). This suggests that Kurds seem to flee to parts where other Kurds live and receive help from them. As Diyarbakır is known as the capital city of Kurdistan it is possible that many Kurds have fled to this city, following Kurds who have moved to this place before. Syrian Arabs, on the other hand, might have a lower density in this city while preferring places where more Arabs are staying. Earlier research for instance, shows that camps in Turkey are often under control of people with a Sunni background. Therefore certain groups such as Christians, Alawites, Kurds, Romans etc. are afraid for ethnical or religious discrimination in these camps and thus might choose for settlement in non-camps, while people with a Sunni background feel more comfortable to go to such camps (Taştan, n.d). Besides having access to social networks such as family and co-nationals, there seem to be several other pull factors for refugees to move to a certain place. The most important reasons why Syrian refugees in Turkey choose to live in a camp are economic, security and accommodation; a camp ensures having a shelter and food (AFAD, 2014; Jacobsen, 2006). It is interesting to see that 11

18 economic reasons are mentioned as a pull factor for camp refugees, as it appears that this might also be a reason for others to choose urban settlement. Earlier research states that access to economic resources and opportunities, such as jobs and education, and social services such as healthcare, are reasons to move to an urban area (Jacobsen, 2006). Once refugees have found a place to settle down, it does not mean that this is the only place they have settled, or will settle in the future. Mobility is a strategy used by refugees to secure their livelihoods (Campbell, 2006). Some refugees move from one place to another, in search of a better life. Refugees might first move to another place within the home country, then go to a neighbouring country, and from there, maybe to a third country, taking high risks by employing the services of human smugglers in the hope of settlement in a new place (Kirişci, 2015). This is currently a regular occurrence with the refugees from Syria places within the country are becoming more unsafe and the situation protracted, and therefore many refugees have decided to flee to neighbouring countries. These countries, such as Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey are becoming crowded and the governments cannot provide the necessities to survive, such as healthcare, education and working permits. Therefore more and more refugees decide to flee to Europe in the hope of a better life (Kirişci, 2015). By looking at the migration stories of Syrian refugees, this thesis aims to better understand why they choose to live at certain places. It will also answer why they have chosen to migrate to Diyarbakır. The first sub-question therefore is: what are the migration stories of Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır city? 2.2 Livelihood strategies Livelihood strategies are often defined as how people access and mobilize resources enabling [refugees] to increase their economic security, thereby reducing the vulnerability created and exacerbated by conflict (Jacobsen, 2003). For the purposes of this thesis, livelihood strategies do not only refer to economic security, but also strategies used to secure the basic necessities of life, such as food, water, shelter and clothing. It also refers to strategies used to access public services such as healthcare and education. When looking at the existing literature concerning the livelihood strategies of refugees, it appears that transnational family networks are among the most frequent means among displaced people to mobilize financial resources (Neidhardt, 2013). Such resources can be in the form of remittances, social capital or information which circulates between the host country, the home country and third countries. Jacobsen (2006) does not only look at the importance of family networks, but also at the importance of the social network in general and relations of conationals to secure livelihoods. There are several ways in which people make use of these networks and relations - for instance, through chain-migration and by self-help (Jongerden, 2007). As already discussed earlier, chain-migration seems to happen in Turkey as well and may be a reason why certain Syrian refugees chose to settle in Diyarbakır in the first place. Secondly, self-help means that refugees can live somewhere without state assistance through informal support of these social or conational networks. By creating community structures, refugees can find financial and other support (Jacobsen, 2006). By accessing social or co-national networks it therefore becomes easier for refugees to find housing, employment and other ways of earning money and also to integrate into the host community. Another way in which refugees can receive livelihoods is by making use of the locals or institutions who seek to help refugees for personal reasons (Jacobsen, 2006). These networks are more likely to be established in urban areas and might give access to a wide range of resources. Obtaining this access depends on various factors such as knowing how the system works and the political position of these refugees. In the case of Diyarbakır, it is imaginable that Syrian 12

19 Kurds can get access more easily than Syrian Arabs, due to the fact that Syrian Kurds share the same language and culture as the majority of the local population. Friends, clan networks and relatives who are resettled or who have moved to third countries (diaspora) can also be a source of income, since they often send cash (Campbell, 2006; Horst, 2008; Jacobsen, 2005). These remittances do not necessarily have to go from host or third countries to the home country, but sometimes also go from home country to host or third country (Neidhardt, 2013). Also, mobility is used as a strategy in securing livelihoods (Campbell, 2006). Through mobility, refugees can, for example, commute between a camp and a city. In this way they can have the benefits of both a shelter in the camp where they can safely leave their family, and the city where they can go for trade or work to pursue livelihoods (Jacobsen, 2005). Some people also make use of cross-border mobility meaning that they go back and forward between their host and home country. In this way, they can keep in touch with their families and get access to resources in both areas (Chaterlard, El-Abed & Washington, 2009). Another livelihood strategy might be to obtain employment. Although some refugees might find a job in the formal sector, most refugees often engage in the informal sector in which they earn money through trade and services. This is clearly reflected in the research of Campbell (2006) in which she looks at mechanisms of survival for urban refugees in Nairobi. She compares refugees with transnational corporations which have widespread networks which they use for business. Refugees are therefore called transnational individuals engaging in global trade and commodity networks (Campbell, 2006). Through my research, I would like to better understand which livelihood strategies play a role in the survival of Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır. The second sub-questions therefore will be: how do Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır city settle down and get access to economic and social factors? To give an answer to this question, this research will also consider the influence of different people within the possible network of a refugee such as family, co-nationals with the same ethnic background, locals, aid actors, the local municipality and the government. 2.3 How refugees perceive their living conditions The AFAD has done a profiling survey on the Syrian refugees in Turkey with the aim of obtaining demographic socio-economic and socio-cultural information about both the refugees living in and out of the camps. Although this research is conducted by the AFAD itself, and must therefore be treated with due caution, some interesting results have emerged which seem to suggest that camp refugees might perceive their living conditions as better than non-camp refugees in Turkey. This research from AFAD shows that 41 percent of the camp refugees in Turkey stated that they received aid from humanitarian agencies, in contrast to only 13 percent of non-camp refugees (AFAD, 2014). It appears that 83 percent of the camp refugees between 6-11 years old attend school, while this figure is only at 14 percent for the same age-group of non-camp refugees. Looking at the accommodation conditions refugees are living in, it seems that these are often better for camp refugees. Camp refugees live with an average of 5.6 people, while non-camp refugees live on average with 8.6 people (AFAD, 2014). Non-camp refugees therefore live under more crowded conditions. It furthermore appears that one out of four of these non-camp refugees lives in a ruin or plastic coverage in which they can hardly fulfill their basic needs such as having sleeping materials, heating, basic foodstuff, kitchenware and clothing materials. Other non-camp refugees who live in a house, apartment or flat can better fulfill these basic needs, though still they consider their basic needs 13

20 worse than camp refugees (AFAD, 2014). It also appears that camp refugees can more readily access health services since field hospitals are based in their camps (Jacobsen, 2006). Therefore they make more use of these services compared to non-camp refugees (respectively 90 and 60 percent). The low percentage of non-camp refugees can partly be explained by the fact that many of them are unregistered and therefore lack an identification number, which is necessary to make use of Turkish hospitals (AFAD, 2014). Despite this, it appears that these non-camp refugees are helped through other ways when they need hospital services, and that the quality of the health care is rated more highly among the non-camp refugees than among the camp refugees (AFAD, 2014). Overall, the research conducted by AFAD suggests that camp refugees are living under better conditions than most non-camp refugees and that they also perceive their living conditions better. It therefore is interesting to see in what kind of conditions these non-camp refugees, in this case Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır city, are living and how they perceive these conditions. The last sub-question, therefore, is: how do Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır city perceive their living conditions? The answer to this sub-question might give an indication as to what extent the Turkish government and other institutions are protecting and taking care of urban refugees. 14

21 3. Method of data-collection In this chapter, I explain how I obtained my research data. This chapter is divided in four subchapters, of which the first examines the research design (ie. how I did my research in general and how I found my respondents). In the second sub-chapter, I explain which data-collections I used in more detail (ie. how I actually received my data). The third sub-chapter then explains how I did my data-processing and data-analysis. It shows how I transformed my raw data into usable quotes. In the last sub-chapter, I reflect on my method of data-collection and discuss some limitations. 3.1 Research design and participants To give answers to the research questions, I made use of an ethnographic approach in order to obtain insight into how Syrian refugees live their daily lives in Diyarbakır, Turkey. Through ethnographic research, it is possible to document the culture, the perspectives and practices, of the people in these settings. The aim is to get an inside in the way each group of people sees the world (BMJ, 2008). Unfortunately, I was not able to follow my respondents on a regular basis since I constantly needed a translator, which I had to pay for at my own expense. For this reason, I could only meet most of the Syrian families once or twice, and by exception a third time. I was able to get access to these families through two important people my translator, Erhan and a civil servant at the local municipality in Sur, Selman. First, I got to know Erhan, a 24 year old Kurdish man who had been studying English and who was now an English teacher. I obtained his contact through a contact I received from my supervisor. Erhan was living in Diyarbakır and had done some translation work before for a Dutch and Greek journalist. The first day we met, we discussed my research and what he would earn for his assistance. We came to an agreement and the second time we met, he took me to Sur municipality. Here we met with Selman, a man in his fifties, who was responsible for social issues in the Sur district. This meant that he dealt with the poor people of Diyarbakır, including refugees. Selman, who did not speak English, knew some Syrian families and was willing to take Erhan and myself to them. The next day I met ten Syrian families in Sur district who were all willing to help me with my research. Erhan had remembered where they were living, and later we went back to five of the families for an interview. Selman also brought us in contact with the muhtar of one of the neighbourhoods in Yenişehir. The muhtar is a head of a neighbourhood the person who is governing the area. This muhtar also knew some Syrian families, and introduced us. One of these families then introduced us to their extended family network and thus I made use of this snowball method, in which I interviewed 5 different families who were all related to each other. Some of my other meetings with Syrian families occurred more randomly. While Erhan and I were walking on the streets we would ask some beggars about their situation. Also, Erhan sometimes heard people speaking Arabic of Kurdish and then asked them if they were from Syria. In this way, I was able to meet even more refugees. I made use of qualitative data collections, which included participant observation and interviewing. The data-collection took place with Syrian Arabs and Syrian Kurds in Diyarbakır city. Diyarbakır city is the administrative capital of Diyarbakır province and is one of the largest cities in southeastern Turkey. Diyarbakır province consists of 17 districts of which Sur, Yenişehir, Bağlar and Kayapınar form the city. Diyarbakır city has a population of a little less than 1 million people 6 (excluding refugees) of which more than 90 percent are Kurd. However, these official numbers may not be accurately 6 retrieved on 27 October

22 representative and it appears that the real number of inhabitants is significantly higher. Different local people estimated the number as 2 million excluding refugees. It appears that many people are not officially registered or still registered in other districts. My interviews were conducted in Sur and Yenişehir. These two districts were chosen since they were close to my apartment and therefore easy to reach by foot. Kayapınar and Bağlar were a bit further away, and I was told by my translator that Bağlar was not so safe due to high crime rates. In total, I conducted twenty in depth interviews which had a total length of 24 hours, of which the shortest lasted 28 minutes and the longest 145 minutes. Sometimes these interviews were with one person, but often other family members were in the room joining the conversation or just listening. I did not always make notes, so as not to disturb the flow of the interview and actively listen, and therefore in my results I might attribute certain quotes to two persons or a family. My respondents were between the ages of 22 and 55 and the majority was Kurd. Mostly the household of the respondents would consist of a family with a mother, a father and children, and sometimes an aunt, uncle or grandmother or grandfather. In a few cases, there were households in which the family was taking care of the bride of their sons, while their sons were fighting in Syria. In one case a woman and her children were living with a family friend while her husband was fighting. For an overview on the background of my participants see Table 1. In addition to these in depth interviews I also had more informal talks with some Syrian families, beggars and street sellers. I also had talks with several people from the local municipality in Sur and with two persons working with the government in Yenişehir. Furthermore, I spoke with Göz-Der and Göc-Vakfi two NGOs operating in the area. I talked with some local friends and my translator about the situation. I also visited a camp in Diyarbakır which was built by the local municipality for the Yezidi refugees from Iraq, and a camp in Suruç which was hosting Syrian refugees from Kobane. Table 1. Background information of participants Interviewee Gender Living place Living with Flee from Age Ethnicity Bahar Woman Sur 6 people Qamishli 24 Kurd Mehmet Man Sur 11 people Aleppo 48 Kurd Samira Woman Sur +/- 10 pple Aleppo 55 Kurd Omar (1) & Hude Man + woman Sur 6 people Aleppo 45 & 39 Kurd Old man Man Sur 12 people Aleppo - Kurd Selwa Woman Sur 5 people Deir El-Zor 40 Arab Fedwa & Aniy Woman Sur 5 people Aleppo 22 & 23 Kurd Zeheyya Woman Yenişehir 6 people Aleppo 47 Kurd Family Suleyman Men and women Yenişehir +/- 15 people Hasseke - Kurd Kobane family Woman Sur 18 people Kobane - Kurd Nariman Woman Yenişehir 8 people Hasseke 30 Kurd 16

23 Minas Woman Yenişehir 7 people Hasseke 31 Kurd Serivan Woman Sur 5 people Amuda 21 Kurd Muhammed & Feriah Man + Woman Sur 5 people Hasseke - Arab/Kurd Seyhmus Man Sur 9 people Aleppo 41 Kurd Kamiran Man Sur 9 people Aleppo 47 Kurd Aliye & Munfed Women Sur 10 people Aleppo 35 & 25 Arab Omar (2) Man Sur 8 people Aleppo 55 Arab Aliy Man Yenişehir 7 people Qamishli 49 Kurd Emina Woman Yenişehir 5 people Hassake 38 Arab/Kurd 3.2 Data-collection For the data-collection in this research I used a qualitative approach. The reason for choosing this approach is that qualitative data is known for best capturing the perceptions and experiences of participants because they can tell their own story and can be observed in their natural setting (Cambré & Waege, 2001). Within the qualitative approach, there are three methods to choose for data collection. These are examining records, use of self-report measures and/or conducting observations (King, Morris & Fitz-Gibbon, 1987; Cambré & Waege, 2001). For this research the last two methods were used. The method of self-report involved asking key figures, in this case Syrian refugees, what their daily life looked like. This can be done in the form of a questionnaire, through interviews or a combination of both (King, Morris & Fitz-Gibbon, 1987). For this research, I used interviews with open questions because then the participants could tell their true perceptions and experiences without interruption. Although the method of self-report is valuable, it also has drawbacks, such as the fact that answers provided by respondents are interpreted through the interviewer, which may have implications for the validity and reliability of the information (Cambré & Waege, 2001). For this reason, I also used the observation method. Observation can be valuable because the observer can also watch the participants, and gain a more integrated and holistic understanding of their daily lives (King, Morris & Fitz-Gibbon, 1987), making the data more reliable. The data-collection for this thesis took place in Diyarbakır city, Turkey. This city was chosen for several reasons. Firstly, because earlier research on Syrian refugees has not focused on this city or province, despite the fact that many Syrian Kurds fled to this Kurdish city, as one of the largest cities in southeastern Turkey. Secondly, research in this city is thus particularly interesting due to the Kurdish influence. Diyarbakır has also been chosen because of the possibility to work together with Diyarbakır Institute for Political and Social Research (DISA). DISA is an NGO that aims to conduct indepth research on the economic, social, political and cultural problems in Turkey, first and foremost the Kurdish issue in Diyarbakır, a city with a distinct identity and a shared significance for the Kurds retrieved on 22 July

24 DISA has also undertaken limited research on Syrian Kurdish refugees before and therefore, have been helpful in providing relevant contacts. The qualitative data-collection can be divided in two phases. The first is an orientation phase, focused on understanding the backgrounds of the Syrian refugees. The second is an interview phase, in which the expectations, perceptions and experiences of the Syrian refugees on Diyarbakır are examined. The aim of having these two phases is to first establish a trust relationship with the respondent before interviewing them, in the hope that they feel free to speak the truth. In a few cases, I did the orientation and interview phase simultaneously, again due to the fact that I constantly needed a translator whom I had to pay for myself Orientation phase I usually had only one prior meeting with most of the Syrian families I spoke with, prior to interviewing them. At the first meeting, I confirmed that they would agree to be interviewed and then proceeded to gather some background information. This information was collected both by asking them some questions and by observing the participants in their houses. These questions were mainly concerning the number of people in their household, their backgrounds and origins, age and ethnicity. Through observation, it is possible to register information about what happens at the setting, providing a greater insight into where Syrian refugees exactly stay at the moment and what they do (King, Morris & Fitz-Gibbon, 1987). After obtaining this information, I decided if the respondent would fit in to my research, and if so, I made an appointment for the second meeting. In some cases I would immediately start with the interview phase. There were some cases in which I decided not to start the interview phase, mostly for reasons such as being unable to communicate well with the respondent or because I already had enough respondents from that area or ethnicity Interview phase During the interview phase, it was important to gain knowledge about the expectations, perceptions and experiences of the Syrian refugees and to ascertain what they thought the facilitating and limiting factors of the city were. To obtain this information, I interviewed twenty families. Through interviews, it is possible to understand the lived experience of other people and the meaning they make of that experience (Seidman, 2013). There are several ways to conduct an interview, however for this research, I chose to follow the format of an in-depth interview. In the in-depth interviews, I asked Syrian refugees to reconstruct a day in Diyarbakır, to talk about their relations with others and their perceptions and experiences towards their lives in Diyarbakır etc. (Seidman, 2013). A negative consequence of interviewing is that the validity of the results obtained may be affected. People can give answers that they feel the interviewer wants to hear, instead of giving their true opinions and feelings. Alternatively, the interviewer might misinterpret the answers of the respondents. To ensure the reliability of my findings, I made observations of participants as well, which expanded and validated the information obtained through the interviews. In most cases, I conducted only one interview with my respondents, though in two cases I also had the chance to talk with the husbands of the primary respondents. I asked them some questions to check if the information I obtained earlier was correct, which appeared to be the case. In this way, I could validate the data obtained earlier. 18

25 3.3 Data-processing and data-analysis In this ethnographic research, the data has been obtained through participant observation and interviewing (in-depth interviews). In all cases, except one, interviews were recorded to ensure that no information would be lost or forgotten. These interviews were transcribed afterwards. One of the respondents refused to be recorded, and therefore I wrote his answers down and, immediately after the interview, tried to re-write the whole interview using the notes I had made. All these interviews eventually were analyzed by using the program ATLAS.ti. This is a program that can be used for analyzing qualitative data by sorting through large quantities of data and highlighting relevant parts. The program also helps with coding and grouping codes. While analyzing the recordings, the privacy of the participants was considered. Data was only used if the participants had given permission. After coding the interviews, a total of 40 codes were created. Not all codes appeared to be useful for this research and therefore these codes (including the quotes) were removed. In the end, 32 codes remained to use for the results. A list of these codes can be found in Table 2. Some of these codes overlap with each other. Table 2. Codes used to categorize the quotes of the respondents Able to cope? Hardship in Diyarbakır Negative perception towards Arabs Changing circumstances between arrival and now Conditions to go (or not) to a camp Healthcare as pull factor for Diyarbakır Help because of ethnicity Negative perception of camps Neighbourhood conditions Discrimination Help from family Perception of local community Education Help from government Perception of local municipality Ethnicity Help from local municipality Perception of NGOs Ethnicity as pull factor for Diyarbakır Family as pull factor for Diyarbakır Help from NGOs Identification in Diyarbakır Perception of Turkish government Possibilities as pull factor for Diyarbakır Fleeing stories Lived in Diyarbakır before Remittances Future Livelihood strategies Social life Gender Mobility Besides these recorded interviews, I also had some unrecorded talks with people from the local municipality, governmental organizations, NGOs and some local friends. I tried to make notes during these talks, but sometimes these talks were spontaneous and informal, and therefore I was not 19

26 always able to write things down. In these cases, I tried to remember the information and write it down as soon as possible. Observations took place constantly, especially when my respondents were answering in Arabic or Kurdish. Since I could not understand what they were saying, I tried to pay particular attention to what was happening while they were speaking and made notes of these observations. During the conversations I had in English, I was often busy writing down the answers and therefore it became more difficult to also record my observations. I tried to remember my thoughts and write them down afterwards. I also kept a diary in which I wrote my thoughts and feelings, sometimes about a particular interview, but often more generally about my daily life in Diyarbakır. These notes are also used in my results. 3.4 Limitations and reflection During this research there were some constraints, including the need for a translator. I had been in Turkey (Ankara) and Syria before and many people I talked with were able to speak some English. Therefore, I thought that when I would go to Diyarbakır it would be possible to do most of my interviews myself in English. This soon proved to be overly optimistic. From all the interviews and talks I conducted, there was only one Syrian man and three Turkish persons who were able to talk with me in English. All the others spoke Kurdish, Arabic or Turkish. For this reason, I had a translator who knew Kurdish, English and Turkish. A translator can bring some disadvantages to research. One of these disadvantages is that the validity of the answers cannot be checked. Although my translator was competent, his English was sufficient, he knew what my research was about and I trusted him to be honest, it is possible that he misinterpreted some of the answers of the respondents. He also admitted that he sometimes had difficulty understanding the Kurdish of some of the respondents. For the interviews I did with Arabic speaking respondents, I often had an extra translator who we would find at the spot and who translated the Arabic part in Kurdish to my translator, who then translated it to me. Clearly this had even greater disadvantages as now it was not only me who was not sure about the validity of the information, but also my translator could not guaranty the validity either. This was one of the biggest limitations of this research method. I tried to safeguard the validity of the answers by also observing the situation. After my interviews, I would also evaluate the interview together with my translator, and often we had similar feelings about the interviews. Although we mostly had a positive feeling after an interview, there were some cases where we both felt the interviewee did not understand the question or that the second translator was not giving the right translations. I have carefully picked out my quotations in the results chapter (Chapter 4) so that the particular statements were not used. Another disadvantage of having a translator is that people might have lied about certain things because they did not feel comfortable to talk with a translator or because they thought the translator wanted to hear certain things. My translator was a young educated Kurdish man. This might in some cases have resulted in a situation where women hid certain information about, for instance, prostitution or personal concerns. Similarly, the Arabic respondents may have felt uncomfortable to talk about ethnic aspects. I myself am obviously a European, blonde, young woman and could have caused equal constraints. Certain respondents might have had the idea that since I was from Europe I would be able to help them. Therefore they may have made their living conditions look worse than they truly were. Although it is difficult to control if people are telling the truth, I tried to safeguard this by also using observations. I also tried to create an atmosphere where people felt comfortable to talk freely about anything. I did so by 20

27 introducing myself and my translator, explaining why we were there and that the information would be used anonymously. Most respondents liked talking to us and were happy that we would listen to them. In a few cases, there was a situation in which respondents did not want to give an answer or where my translator did not feel comfortable to ask something. In these cases, I would simply continue to the next question. Another constraint was that I was not able to meet my respondent on a regular basis as I had suggested in my proposal. This, again, was because of the fact that I constantly needed a translator and that I had to pay for this translator myself. Once I went to the local market on my own and coincidently met one of my respondents there. We tried talking with each other, but were not able to communicate effectively. She invited me for tea, but because of the struggles during our communication I decided not to do so. This shows the extent to which I was dependent on my translator to talk with people. Because of a lack of money to pay the translator constantly, I decided to only meet the respondents once or twice, and exceptionally three times. If it had not been necessary to pay for the translator, it would have been possible to get a more comprehensive picture on the situation of Syrian refugees and their daily lives in Diyarbakır. This said, I believe my data gives sufficient information to give answers to my research question and sub-questions. The third and last constraint of this research is that I was only able to do three interviews with Syrian Arabs and two with families consisting of both Syrian Arabs and Syrian Kurds, while the other fifteen were with Syrian Kurdish families. I wanted to examine whether there would be a difference in how Syrian Arabs and Syrian Kurds were treated in the Kurdish city of Diyarbakır. It was difficult to get in touch with Syrian Arabs for several reasons. Firstly, my translator did not speak Arabic and I was unable to find an Arabic-English translator. If we would meet Arabic speaking people on the street it was quite difficult to understand each other. Often we were able to understand where the person was from and how long he or she was in Diyarbakır, but making an appointment for an interview seemed to be impossible. Of the five Syrian Arab respondents I talked with, three were able to speak Kurdish and for those two who were not able to speak English, we used a second translator. We found most of these respondents through the snowball method. A second reason why it was difficult to get in touch with Syrian Arabs was because there were not many Syrian Arabs known in the neighbourhoods where I conducted my research. When I asked people if they knew any Arabs most would reply that they did not. They told me that there were more Syrian Arabs staying in the Bağlar district, but because of the distance to this district, the fact that I could not find an Arabic-English translator and because my translator told me it was a bit dangerous there, I decided not to conduct research in this place. The information on ethnic differences is therefore limited. 21

28 22

29 4. Results In this chapter I will set out my results, in answer to my research questions. I will do so by using quotes from the interviews with respondents and constructing a story out of these quotes. In addition to these quotes, I will add some of my observations. The chapter is divided into three subchapters, of which each can again be divided into different parts. Part one will elaborate on the migration stories of my respondents and will consider why Syrian refugees chose for a non-camp settlement such as Diyarbakır, instead of going to a refugee camp. Part two shows how my respondents have settled down and found access to economic and social factors in Diyarbakır. Part three elaborates on the conditions the respondents are living in and on how they perceive their lives. 4.1 The migration stories of Syrian refugees in Diyarbakır city and the choice for non-camp settlement Listening to the respondents stories on how they had fled from their home areas to Diyarbakır, it became clear that most had made a conscious choice to come to Diyarbakır. Many respondents had planned this trip before leaving and had been saving money. They were informed and knew where to find the right person to bring them to their destination. Kamiran: We came from Gaziantep, the border there, I was working first for saving money to come here [Diyarbakır]. With the bus we just passed the border gate. We did not come illegal, we all had passports. Because of this, we did not came illegally. I had enough money for the traveling. With the bus we just traveled from Aleppo to Gaziantep. In Gaziantep we just asked some people that we wanted to go to Diyarbakır, and then with the bus we came to Diyarbakır. As the previous quote shows, Syrian refugees who have a Syrian passport can simply cross the border legally at the crossing points (see Figure 6), though refugees without these Syrian passports need to do this illegally. These illegal trips need considerable planning since they are dependent on several factors, such as police controls and sometimes human traffickers who have to take them to the other side of the border. Traveling from their hometown to Diyarbakır, therefore, might be more expensive, take extra time and come with risks. Despite this, my respondents were more than willing to accept these circumstances, since staying in Syria was often not an option. Minas: At first my husband told us that we will go to Turkey. But we said no we do not want to go to Turkey, we do not want to come. Later when I saw there is war, they are killing each other, there is no water and there is no electricity, and my husband could not work anymore, he could not earn any money, and there was not anything that we could buy or we could eat. That is why we decided to come and later my husband went to that guy [human trafficker] and they talked to each other and made the price. We paid about Syrian Pound [for the whole family] for the passing. Later we came with a bus, we took a bus and came to a village near the border. There we waited till the night and the guy told u to wear black clothes and also not to take anything with us. And with our family, there were about 30 other people, in total about 40 people. We came to the village and from that village we walked till the border. We just passed the Syrian border and between Syrian border and Turkish border there is a railway. And when we came to the railway the Turkish soldiers saw us and shot us, firing on us. So we went back that night. That night when we returned it was December or January, it was cold and we waited there outside till 10 PM, we thought that the soldier would go 23

30 away and [we could] pass the border, but at that night we could not pass and we returned back to the village. In the morning that guy came to us and told us we will try in the evening again, and in the evening we left home, we left the village again we walked to the border. On that evening no one could see us and we passed the border. Also we walked through the river, the Tigris River, after passing the river the soldiers saw us again and the guy told us lay down, and when the soldier was gone again we stand up and we run. We run to the cornfield. We just waited there, hide there, till the car, the bus came and took us to Kiziltepe and from there we came to Diyarbakır. The previous story shows the problems Syrian refugees face while trying to cross the Turkish border. They had to pay high prices to the human traffickers, while still being at high risk of getting caught by the police. The Turkish police were instructed to make sure that people were not able to cross illegally, with permission to shoot if they did. A report of Amnesty International (2014) confirms these shootings of Turkish police, which in some cases unfortunately have caused casualties. This contradicts Turkeys open-border policy in which they are supposed to accept all Syrian refugees. In the case of Turkey, there seems to be different treatment for Syrians with and without passports. Many Kurds (both Turkish as Syrians) also thought the Turkish government had purposely closed the border crossings with Kurdish cities, thereby allowing less Syrian Kurds to come to Turkey. It also appeared that Syrians who need healthcare are more easily allowed to enter Turkey, than those who are healthy. Due to the fact that some Syrian refugees were not able to cross at official border crossings, and because some Syrian refugees fear certain parties occupying these border crossing points on the side of Syria, these Syrian refugees are forced to take high risks by crossing the border illegally. Mehmet: I went to Urfa, but before going to Urfa we stayed on the border for three days. We came to Turkey illegally me and my family, because we could not go to the border in Hatay, the IS and Al nusra people were there, that s why we could not go there. The gate near the Kurdish place, in Nusaybin, there is a gate, but it is closed. Turkey closed it for not letting Kurdish people come to Turkey. Almost all of these people came illegally. We had to pay for passing to Turkey to the people, they asked ten thousand Syrian money [Syrian pound]. We went by foot to the border, at the border we stayed for two days. At first we tried to pass the border at 1 AM illegally but the soldier saw us and fired on us. We went back and slept there. The second day, again we tried to set, but then the commander just told us to go back, we cannot help you, you have to go back. On the third day we were able to pass. When we passed the Turkish side the man who took us to the border called a friend of him, they were working with each other. That man took us with the car to a village, we slept there till the morning and then we went to Urfa. Though most of my respondents made a conscious choice to come to Diyarbakır, it was not always the first destination that they had fled to. Some respondents had first fled from their home areas to other places in Syria (see Figure 6), looking for a safe place with opportunities. Eventually they moved to Turkey because it became too unsafe within the country and there were hardly any opportunities left. Omar (2): Firstly I was living in Aleppo and there we were selling some goods, some things on the street and some people made some lie about us and that is why some government 24

31 people, Assad s people, detained me and took me in jail. I stayed there for 15 days, and later they understood I had nothing with the government or nothing with the others, I was just innocent, later they released me and I just took my children and family and went to another place, there I stayed a while, but there were also bombs and no work. That is why we went to Ragga, and we stayed one year in Ragga, also we could not work there, there was not work. I had a pickup there and I was firstly working in Ragga, I was carrying people s goods. Later the war began there because IS attacked there and that is why we went back to Aleppo, and from Aleppo we came to Turkey. Firstly the people against Assad, the opposition, they said we will take you to Turkey we will help you to pass the border, and they took 2000 Syrian money [Syrian pound] for each person, and also 2000 for each bag, and they took us to near the border and there they stole our bags and also our money and we were just alone there, near the border, and we walked to the wire. There the soldiers saw us and the soldiers did not let us pass. We went back and stayed a while, later we tried again, and still we could not pass. Another time we went to the soldier, and she [his wife] has some problem with her hart and she was ill, and she lay down and then the soldiers were afraid so we could pass quickly and then with a car we came to Diyarbakır. Even if someone had made a conscious choice for a certain place, this decision still could be interrupted due to unforeseen circumstances. One respondent had actually planned to go to Istanbul, but because of illness was forced to stay in Diyarbakır. Other respondents had family members or heard stories about people who were sent to camps by Turkish soldiers, while planning to go somewhere else. Turkey has a policy in which they want Syrian refugees to stay in the government hosted camps and therefore they send refugees to these places. Omar (1): also when soldiers of Turkey saw them [Syrian refugees] on the border, sometimes they just get them and they put them in the camp. When asking them about their future plans in light of the continuing conflict in Syria, a few respondents replied they were willing to go back to Syria or to Europe, since they did not see much hope or opportunities in Diyarbakır. Seyhmus: I want to go to Europe, to Sweden. My wife s elder sister is living there and one of my uncle s son is in Holland If we can, if we have a chance to go to Europe, we will go to Europe. I later discovered that the family of Bahar, was eventually able to move to München, Germany around April This shows that, even though some chose Diyarbakır consciously, this was not intended to be the final destination for all respondents. However, most respondents did state they would stay in Diyarbakır as long as the war continued in Syria. For those Syrian refugees who were able to make a conscious choice and to follow it, it appeared that this choice for Diyarbakır was mainly based on chain-migration. Social networks such as family and ethnicity played an important role. Other factors that were mentioned by respondents were job opportunities and public services such as healthcare and education. These were services that they thought they were not able to get in a refugee camp and therefore they preferred non-camp settlement to camp settlement. I will elaborate on this in the following two sub-chapters. 25

32 Figure 6. Movement of respondents 26