The Dictionary of Human Geography

Comp. by: VPugazhenthi Stage : Revises1 ChapterID: 9781405132879_4_M Date:1/4/
09 Time:15:19:41 Filepath:H:/00_Blackwell/00_3B2/Gregory-9781405132879/appln/3B2/
revises/9781405132879_4_M.3d

All of these theories are much better

equipped to understand voluntary migration,

where people make choices about when to

leave and where to go. Actually, the bulk of

international migration is forced: people are

compelled to leave their residence due tocon-

flict, persecution, environmental degrad-

ation, natural disasters or development

projects (Black, 1998; Hyndman, 2000). Cer-

tain types of forced migration are monitored

and, to a degree, regulated by international

agencies, particularly the United Nations

High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

and the International Organization for Migra-

tion. These organizations assist migrants by

helping build and service refugee camps, fa-

cilitating repatriation when circumstances in

conflict zones improve, and arranging resettle-

ment in other countries in cases when conflict

or persecution persists. In 2006, the UNHCR

estimated that there were approximately 20

million ‘persons of concern’, or refugees,

worldwide. The UNHCR and other agencies

attempt to ensure that the principles of the

1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status

of Refugees, and the 1967 UN Protocol Re-

lating to the Status of Refugees are upheld.

Note that other types of migration are mainly

regulated bynation-statesrather than inter-

national agencies. That is, nation-states gen-

erally have the right to decide who can enter

theirbordersand on what terms (Castles and

Miller, 2003). However, signatory states to the

aforementioned UN Convention and Protocol

are obligated to provide asylum to refugees.

Since the 1980s, researchers have sought

to understand theethicalissues involved in

migration. This sub-field tends to concentrate

on three major issues. First, is migration a

human right? That is, should individuals

have the right to live where they choose

(based on an individual rights perspective;

Carens, 1987), or should states have the right

to control their membership by selective ad-

mission policies (based on a collective rights

perspective; Weiner, 1996)? Second, who

should realize the rewards of migration and,

conversely, pay the costs associated with it: the

migrant, the destination society, or the source

society (Castles and Miller, 2003)? Generally

speaking, governments of countries that

receive migrants create admission policies

that are intended to secure the benefits of mig-

ration for their societies, and pay little atten-

tion to migrants and virtually none to source

countries. For example, affluent countries fre-

quently encourage highly trained medical per-

sonnel to immigrate without consideration for

the difficulties involved for the migrants (in

re-establishing their credentials) or for the

consequences for source countries (which are

losing scarce individuals who have typically

been trained in public education systems).

Third, what should be expected of migrants

once they join a new society? Should they be

required toassimilateor be encouraged to

retain their cultural traditions? Each of these

questions has generated vigorous debate in the

scholarly and policy-oriented literatures. dh

Suggested reading

Black (1998); Castles and Miller (2003);

Massey, Arango, Hugo, Kouaouci, Pellegrino

and Taylor (1993); Weiner (1996).

militarism The extension of military influ-

ence into civilian political, social and cultural

spheres. This is achieved through both the

direct extension of the immediate influence

of state militaries and the indirect influence

of military agendas on political institutions,

social norms and cultural values (see

Woodward, 2005). In his farewell address to

the nation in 1961, US President Dwight

D. Eisenhower warned against the ‘acquisition

of unwarranted influence’ by what he called

‘the military–industrial complex’: since then,

the connections between militaries, defence

industries and the global arms trade have

become ever more intimate, but over the

same period the multiple extensions of militar-

ism have prompted many analysts to identify

an even more extensive military–industrial–

media–entertainment complex (MIME).

Geographically, militarism is manifest in mili-

tary control ofplace,spaceandlandscape;

military influence over civilian law enforce-

ment and legal geographies, and the militar-

ization ofsecurity; military research within

universities and research and development

organizations (for militarism ingeography,

see Barnes and Farish, 2006; Barnes, 2008b);

and military themes in populargeopolitics,

linked to the dissemination of distinctive

imaginative geographies through films,

novels, video games, web sites, and television

drama and news (see, e.g., Power, 2007;

Stahl, 2006, and Stahl’s documentary film

on the militarization of American popular cul-

ture, ‘Militainment Inc.’: description and

trailer at http://www.freewebs.com/apocali-

cious/militainmentinc.htm). In these various

ways, militarism serves as anideologythat

makes particular claims on notions ofcitizen-

ship(Stahl, 2006; Cowen and Gilbert, 2008)

and, not least through its appeals to particular

Gregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_M Final Proof page 464 1.4.2009 3:19pm

MILITARISM