Pushing Syrian Migrants into Assimilation

• In Event: Highlighted Session: NGO and Community-Based Education: Global Migration and Identities

Proposal

After the internal conflict in Syria, about four million refugees migrated to Turkey and 1.2 million of them are at the primary education age (Temporary Protection, Directorate General of Migration Management, n.d.). As a result of this situation, many local, national, and international non-governmental organizations [NGOs] have started working with Syrian migrants. This situation has given power to NGOs, and they started to organize different activities that mainly aim at social integration, adaptation, inclusion, or cohesion. It could be argued that education is the most practical way to support refugees to provide social adaptation and cure trauma amongst all refugee groups (Celik and Icduygu, 2019). In Turkey, most Syrian migrant parents prefer to send their children to immigrant schools that Arabic is the language of instruction. Although parents' desire to protect their children from foreign cultural influence and assimilation is understandable, full integration into Turkish culture, as well as continuous cognitive development, are significant advantages that only public schools can provide (Turan, 2021).
Non-profit organizations are the symbol of philanthropy culture, and they undertake different roles around world related social requirements, such as raising awareness, activisms, and promoting social integration of migrant groups (Bano, 2008; Strokosch & Osborne, 2017; Sunata & Tosun, 2019; Xiong & Li, 2017). While international NGOs focus more on humanitarian needs, regional and national non-profits organizations deal with children's trauma and their social adaptions problems in Turkey's refugee context. This paper explores cultural hegemony in Turkey and it offers a critical perspective on NGOs and their workers' role in the refugees' integration/assimilation process. The study is guided by the following research question: How do NGOs use power to assimilate refugees under the face of humanitarian aid in Turkish context?
Method
This research is a comparative qualitative research study and data includes online interviews (Morgan & Lobe, 2011) with five social workers working with youth and children. Interviews (30-45 min) were conducted online in Turkish. Questions focused on the participants' professional experience, culture, and thoughts about the Syrian integration process. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim in Turkish, and later translated to English. We used ethnographic discourse analysis (Blommaert et al., 2003), to interpret how hegemonic culture and power produced different cultural discourses. We borrowed from Gramsci who proposed that dominant class’s values, beliefs, and ideologies spread via social institutions like schools, religious spaces, and media turning the values, norms, and customs of the ruling groups to a common culture (Gramsci & Hoare, 1985).
Preliminary Findings
Five different discourses, namely discourses of cultural hegemony, victim blaming, citizenship status, forced integration and cultural deprivation were identified as a result of data analysis. Three of these discourses will be introduced in this abstract.
As a part of non-spoken discourse of cultural hegemony many Turkish citizens believe that Syrians are one major cause of immigrations problems and thus should be responsible. This data illustrate how language regulates the relationship between social workers’ behavior and hegemonic cultural power they claim. For example, Cemre stated her ignorance of Syrian culture. It was important for Cemre to connect Syrians with Turkish traditions and heritage. From her perspective, having trouble with the education system and communication with classmates and teachers characterizes Syrian children. Therefore, supporting Syrian children to become a part of mainstream culture and education system provides a solution. Kadir, in turn, talked about Syrian culture by using words like ‘problems and issues’. His goal as a social worker is to help Syrian children “to gain social skills so it will prevent culture shock or cultural conflict… and the place for Syrian culture is not school”.
This data also addressed the discourses of victim blaming. According to Cemre's experience, Syrian children do not like school due to the language barrier, bullying, and absent sense of belonging. “Because of having language problems, they [children] don't understand what's told in school”. However, she believes that the root of the problem is the Syrian children, not the educational system. When Cemre noted that Syrian children don't understand the language, she increased her voice to note how the children from refugee background do not make enough effort to solve their problems and they don’t realize how privileged they are.
Additionally, discourse of citizenship status was essential for these social workers. Data illustrated how some social workers may lose their awareness and sensitivity to human rights and cultural differences. For example, NGO workers that we interviewed labelled Syrian children as the problem and they described Syrians as insufficient culturally and intellectually because they are not Turkish citizens. Despite the historical and cultural conflicts between a dominant and minority cultures, Kadir ignored the existence of minorities' cultures and noted there is only one culture in Turkey without any room for other cultures. Thus, it is important to teach Syrian kids how they can be Turks.
Conclusion
Teaching Turkish and Turkish culture are the two crucial missions of the Turkish education system. In addition, discourses exist which separate upper identity from sub-identity because white-Turks expect minorities to accept Turkishness as supra-identity and their own ethnicity as a sub-identity. Therefore, language, customs, beliefs, and items that belong to Turkish culture become a symbol of cultural superiority. Migrant children are forced to assimilate by hegemonic culture's power to reveal their "real capacity." As a result of this situation, NGO workers believe that existing in Turkey is directly related to speaking Turkish and knowing Turkish culture. Similarly, in these interviews, Cemre and Kadir wanted to help Syrian refugees, but they ignored Syrians’ own culture and needs in the hegemonic Turkish educational spaces.
Overall, NGOs in Turkey are powerful institutions and agents in the current migration management system. Besides economic power, humanitarian aid workers promote monolingual policies and they control spaces which offer opportunities to migrants speaking Turkish and Arabic at the same time. When we consider the monolingual service policy, along with the impact of NGO employees on Syrian children, we can argue that non-formal education also has an impactful effect that builds assimilation.

Author

• Adnan Turan, Arizona State University