Zalette Myey | ယခုဆောင်းပါးကို မြန်မာဘာသာဖြင့် ဖတ်ရှုရန် ဤနေရာတွင် နှိပ်ပါ
Cite as: Zalette Myey. (2025). Factors Influencing Chin Refugees Settling in Aizawl After 2021. Independent Journal of Burmese Scholarship, 6. https://ijbs.online/?page_id=5539
Abstract
More than half of all refugees in the world shelter in urban areas, yet they often live in anonymity and receive less scholarly attention than refugees in camps. This is true of Chin refugees who were displaced by the 2021 Myanmar coup to Mizoram, India, and chose to live in the capital city Aizawl. In this article based on interviews with Chin refugees in Aizawl, I find that a perceived lack of safety and restrictive living conditions in refugee camps are major push factors for choosing to seek refuge in Aizawl. Pull factors include better prospects for children’s education, healthcare services, and livelihood opportunities. Although Chin refugees enjoy some of these benefits, they are faced with a new set of challenges in urban areas, including housing discrimination and language barriers. These barriers hinder access to education and healthcare, forcing refugees to adopt negative coping strategies. Furthermore, they encounter many barriers in finding viable livelihoods or employment, as they are legally prevented from doing business and many lack official documentation or qualifications easily recognized by local employers. They have to rely on savings and financial support from relatives living abroad, as they receive little to no assistance from the government or international organizations.
Introduction
In February 2021, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing staged a military coup in Myanmar. The military’s oppression of the people, violations of human rights, and destruction of property forced millions of people to flee their homes. The number of people displaced since the coup in Myanmar is staggering; it increased from 330,000 to more than 1.8 million in two years.1 The number of refugees and asylum seekers arriving in Myanmar’s neighboring countries is also on the rise. As of 2023, approximately 84,400 more people had joined the already large population of nearly a million refugees since the 2021 coup.2 It was further reported that approximately 52,350 people had fled to India, with around 40,000 living in Mizoram State, across the border from Myanmar’s Chin State.3
Ethnic Chin refugees share history, culture, and languages with the Mizo people, the majority population in Mizoram State. There is a myth of origin that both Chin and Mizo came from the same ancestor who emerged from what is called the chhinglung in Mizo, which means rock or cave in English.4 Up to and during the British colonial period there was general freedom of movement between Mizo and Chin communities.
The first mass migration of Chin people escaping the Myanmar military settled in Mizoram in the late 1960s. The number of migrants increased dramatically after the 1988 uprising,5 reaching a new height after the 2021 military coup.6 Of the Chin refugees that have fled to India, only a few traveled on to the capital New Delhi to seek United Nations protection. The vast majority remain in Mizoram State.7 In the past, there were no refugee camps hosting refugees in the state. Chin refugees mainly lived in the cities undocumented. However, some of the Chin refugees arriving after 2021 have been hosted in makeshift camps.
Figure 1
Map showing Aizawl District and Mizoram State in relation to northeast India and neighboring states in Myanmar.
Despite a shared history, the relationship between Mizo people and Chin refugees in Mizoram State is complex, characterized by the ebb and flow of hospitality. While welcomed by many communities in the state, Chin refugees nonetheless experienced mass deportations from Mizoram State in 1996 and 2003. Some view them as a burden on Mizo society and accuse them of engaging in criminal activities such as drug trafficking, robbery, rape, and murder.8
Some claim that Chin refugees in Mizoram State receive better overall treatment than domestic migrants and other displaced people such as ethnic Bru and Chakma, who unlike the Chin are considered ‘foreigners.’9 The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) is not allowed to operate in Mizoram State, so refugees there have no access to its protection and assistance,10 nor do they have the legal right to access land, own property, or seek employment. Individuals cannot run a business or legally obtain an aadhaar,[11 a voter ID, or a driving license, which are essential for accessing financial services and remittance transfers.12 Although they are allowed to take refuge in Mizo communities based on a shared spirit of brotherhood, opportunities to start a legal, independent life are denied.
Chin refugees in Mizoram State suffer in this state of limbo but there has been little research on their plight compared to other refugee populations in Asia. This article seeks to rectify this and describes the factors motivating Chin refugees to settle in Aizawl City, the capital of Mizoram State, in particular. In so doing, I generate data on the push and pull factors of settlement selection, the benefits and challenges of urban refuge, the coping strategies adopted by refugees day-to-day, and the extent and the nature of aid available to them. I ask the following questions: What factors influence Chin refugees’ decision to move to urban areas in Aizawl and what benefits do refugees gain from moving there? What challenges do these refugees and how do they cope? What kinds of support are available to them?
This article continues in five sections. First, I review the literature on urban refugees, distinguishing between urban/camp refugees and examining the pull and push factors of urban refugee settlement. I also attempt to identify common challenges faced by the refugee communities in other parts of the world, as well as the coping mechanisms they employ. Following this is the methodology section, where I introduce my qualitative methods and semi-structured interviews. After that, I present the interview results, organized into five subsections. I then analyze and discuss my research findings. I conclude by highlighting that further research needs to be conducted on refugees in urban areas with larger and more diverse samples.
Urban Refugee Settlement
The nature and patterns of refugee settlement are shifting. More than half of the 27.1 million refugees in the world now live in cities.13 Urban refuge has evolved significantly since the 1950s, but gained attention from international organizations and researchers only in the 1980s-1990s.14 Initially, negative attitudes toward urban refugee assistance predominated, reflected in a UNHCR policy paper that proposed refugees in urban settings not be assisted, advising that those unable to sustain themselves should move to camps.15 Two factors may be behind this policy thinking: a mistaken belief in the temporary or short-term nature of displacement and the use of refugee camps as a tool of population control by host states.16 More recently, there has been growing recognition of the need for alternatives to refugee camps. In strong contrast to its 1997 offering, the UNHCR’s 2009 policy document acknowledged the reality of urban refugee life and advocated for equal rights and opportunities for urban refugees.17 Despite this, urban refugees face significant challenges.
Push and Pull Factors for Urban Refugees
Research on refugee settlement in urban areas has identified several key push and pull factors for choosing urban refuge over camps. These are shown in table 1.
Table 1
Push and pull factors for refugees settling in urban areas.18
| Push Factors | Pull Factors |
| Lack of personal safety and security | Anonymity |
| Anxieties over children’s education and health | Livelihood opportunities and greater security |
| High population density and crowded living conditions | Better health and education services |
| Low income and limited employment opportunities | The presence of family and relatives in cities |
| Discrimination | Higher income opportunities |
| Shortages of basic services, such as water, sewage, and electricity | Availability of communication and basic services, such as water, sewage, and electricity |
| Psychological factors, such as boredom and hopelessness |
The complex interplay of these push and pull factors influence the movement of refugees to urban areas. These factors, in turn, depend on the particular social, economic, and political contexts of a host country or community. Some factors may take priority over others.
The Role of Camps
The difficult living conditions in camps are often push factors that compel refugees to relocate to cities. Although camps are designed to be widely acceptable for humanitarian assistance and operations, they facilitate a lack of fundamental human rights such as freedom of movement, the right to engage in economic and political activities, and access to basic services such as education and services. In this sense, the camp can be regarded as a place of oppression that dehumanizes refugees. The camp model has contributed to perceptions of refugees as voiceless victims, recipients of aid, and subjects of intervention by aid organizations and host governments.19 To avoid conditions in camps, refugees often migrate to cities, even if it breaks national or other laws.20 Urban areas provide refugees with access to markets, economic opportunities, and public services not available in camps.21 As a result, urban refugees have a higher income than camp refugees.22
Challenges and Coping Strategies for Urban Refugees
Moving to urban areas does not guarantee a better life for refugees, who are often “unseen and unaccounted for”.23 Refugees usually forego present or future opportunities for international assistance when they move to cities. They also face a new set of challenges in urban spaces. Even in South Africa, one of the few countries that allows refugees to move freely and to work, refugees struggle to find reliable livelihoods. They face discrimination in accessing jobs, education, health services and, in some cases, xenophobic violence.24 The recent COVID-19 pandemic exposed the double vulnerability of urban refugees, as their meager income sources in the informal economy were deprived during the freedom of movement restrictions imposed by governments to mitigate the spread of the virus. They received little to no assistance from either host governments or the international community.25
The coping strategies used by urban refugees to overcome their challenges differ according to nationality and the socioeconomic situation of the host country. One significant commonality is the function of social networks, which serve as a source of spirituality and support and are the last resort for refugees in times of adversity. For example, Somali communities are relatively well-off in Uganda and South Africa, owing to the close-knit social networks they form.26 Established Somali businesspeople hire Somali refugees, who in turn offer aid to help the community’s most disadvantaged members.27 In India, refugee communities from Myanmar raise funds to provide all kinds of relief to the most disadvantaged members of their communities.28 Financial support is provided for unexpected circumstances such as accidents, health concerns, surgical operations, or the death of a community member.
Urban refugees may also adopt negative coping strategies such as skipping meals, forcing children to drop out of school to work, asking for jobs door-to-door from factory owners, or, in the case of Congolese women in Uganda, walking throughout the city and knocking on doors to sell clothing and other goods, exposing themselves to harassment, rape, theft, and arrest.29 Due to acute poverty, some Chin refugees in New Delhi pick up and scrape abandoned vegetables such as cauliflower leaves to complement their diets. The market guards also let them pick through leftovers from livestock feed.30
Methodology
In this study I wanted to understand why and how refugees move to urban areas. Because of my own background and interests, I chose the case study of Chin refugees in Aizawl to pursue this. Case study research investigates a bounded system (a case) by collecting in-depth and detailed data.31 Case studies are most appropriate for answering “how” and “why” questions.32 As my main research question relates to why and how refugees move to urban areas, the case study is the most appropriate methodology. My case is bounded by Burmese refugees residing in Aizawl. To set further limits, refugees who arrived only after 2021 were interviewed. Data was collected primarily through semi-structured interviews, which allow for collecting in-depth information about interviewees’ lives, experiences and perceptions better than structured interviews, as participants can express their diverse views freely and at length without being constrained by a set of expected questions or responses.33 Non-probability convenience sampling was used in selecting the participants, primarily because Burmese refugees live in anonymity, making contacting and collecting data on them challenging. I also performed a short survey aimed at collecting demographic data such as age, income, education level, etc. The interview data were complemented and triangulated within the existing literature on urban refugees.
Sample Characteristics
Fourteen participants (eight female, six male) with ages from 20 to 60 years old were purposively recruited to reflect different places of their origin. This sampling methodology was selected in virtue of the difficulty of sampling in the study area, and to ensure the sample reflected different places of their origin.
Table 2
Demographic characteristics of the sample.
| Male (n=6) | Female (n=8) | |
| Age | ||
| 21-30 years | 1 | 1 |
| 31-40 years | 3 | 5 |
| 41-50 years | 2 | 1 |
| 51-60 years | 0 | 0 |
| Over 60 years | 0 | 1 |
| Education Level | ||
| Primary School | 0 | 1 |
| High School | 3 | 2 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 2 | 5 |
| Master’s degree | 1 | 0 |
| Household Head | ||
| Yes | 6 | 5 |
| No | 0 | 3 |
| Fled From? | ||
| Urban area | 6 | 7 |
| Rural area | 0 | 1 |
| Township of Origin | ||
| Hakha | 1 | 0 |
| Falam | 2 | 0 |
| Tedim | 2 | 0 |
| Thantlang | 0 | 2 |
| Mindat | 0 | 2 |
| Matupi | 1 | 2 |
| Kanpetlet | 0 | 2 |
| Former Occupation | ||
| Government | 5 | 5 |
| Private | 1 | 3 |
Twelve participants were interviewed face-to-face and two were interviewed by audio call. Most of my research participants lived in urban areas in Chin State before fleeing and had higher education degrees such as bachelor’s or master’s degrees. Most are former government officers who joined the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) to protest the 2021 military coup.
Method of Analysis
The interviews were undertaken in the Burmese language, which was the mutual language between the author and the interviewees (the interviewees spoke several different Chin languages). The interviews were later translated into English. The English transcripts were used as the target language for coding, and two phases of coding were applied. After all the relevant text data were extracted from the transcripts and formatted in a spreadsheet organized by the research questions, the analysis was conducted in two stages: 1) open codes were generated by reading segment by segment, and 2) themes and sub-themes (depending on the research question) were developed via an analysis of the codes.
Results
Push and Pull Factors for Chin Refugees Choosing Aizawl
Access to education is a significant pull factor for people choosing to settle in Aizawl, with seven participants mentioning it as a primary motivation. For example, interviewees 1, 5, 6, and 13 cited access to education as the primary reason they chose to seek refuge in Aizawl over refugee camps. Interviewee 11, a 36-year-old male, who left a refugee camp for Aizawl after living in the camp for almost a year, explained why education was a primary consideration in his decision.
I chose to self-settle as a refugee because my child’s grown up. When we left Myanmar, he was only three years old. During our time in the camp, he turned four. I had to make a decision in consideration of his education. I wanted to enroll him in preschool. In the camp, educational opportunities were limited for children, unfortunately.
Health, including mental health concerns, also played a key role in the settlement of Myanmar refugees to Aizawl. Six participants responded that mental health concerns for both children and adults was a primary motivating factor, while four participants noted that access to healthcare is what attracted them to Aizawl.
Interviewee 14, a 46-year-old former healthcare worker, stated when living in a refugee camp, her mental health was fragile, and she developed impulsive anger. She decided to move out of the camp out of concern that her anger may worsen and have a long-term impact on her family: “Realizing the potential harm to my children and my family’s wellbeing, I knew continuing to live in the camp was unsustainable … I decided to leave the camp and become a self-settled refugee.”
As discussed above, camp restrictions affected some of my research participants’ mental health, but they also affected other facets of life. Three participants who used to live in the now-defunct Falkland camp34 cited mental health as a main reason they relocated. Camp restrictions include the lack of freedom of movement, the lack of access to healthcare, education, and the market, and exorbitant prices for goods. Interviewee 10, a 62-year-old woman who lived in the Folkland camp for a year, put it this way:
The restrictions in the camp were stifling. We weren’t permitted to step outside. Once, I was severely ill and reduced to lying on the floor, using only a rice bag as cushioning. Despite the money I had, the guards refused to let me purchase a mattress for comfort. For two agonizing months I laid there, debilitatingly sick, and was incredibly fortunate to have avoided a stroke. I remember pleading to visit a hospital due to excruciating joint pain, but this request was denied too.
Other pull factors that influenced my research participants choosing to live in Aizawl were livelihood opportunities, prospects for better housing, and easy transportation to work, as cited by interviewees 1, 7, 14, and 13. However, these factors were less significant than the others highlighted in this section above.
Benefits of Urban Refuge in Aizawl
Thirteen of my interviewees living in Aizawl highlighted an increased sense of security and reduction in fear and uncertainty as significant benefits of living there. This is related to the fact that most participants were CDM participants. Interviewee 1, a 38-year-old woman, said:
When it comes to living in Aizawl, I like the sense of security the most. Although many people are on the streets, I can safely go out even at midnight. And there’s equal treatment of men and women. I’ve never seen women discriminated against or jeered at. Although I speak the Mizo language only as much as I can, no one laughs at me when I get it wrong.
Furthermore, interviewee 11, a 36-year-old CDM participant who fled to Aizawl when he heard the military wanted to detain him, pointed out that the sense of safety and security in Aizawl is better than in rural areas of Mizoram State.
There’s a difference even between Aizawl and Zokhawthar. In Zokhawthar, we constantly hear gunshots and explosions as the border is only a bridge-span away. We were so worried that the fighting would spread to our area. We saw smoke rising from the Myanmar side of the border. In Zokhawthar, we didn’t feel safe at all. But we feel safe in Aizawl.
Six interviewees said improved access to better education was a benefit of Aizawl, while five mentioned access to quality healthcare. Interviewee 6, a former university lecturer, highlighted that despite the lack of documentation, schools officially enrolled his children:
After relocating here for the second time, I was finally able to enroll my children in school. They resumed their education at the grade levels they had previously stopped at. The government officially admits refugee children to schools, so we didn’t face any enrollment issues. Despite lacking proper documentation, schools accepted my children. I enrolled my son in a government school and my daughter in a private one.
Some also highlighted the quality of the education, especially in the English language, in Aizawl, as shown by this quote by interviewee 2, a former primary school teacher.
(Education is) good. Pretty good, especially studying English. (My children’s) English-speaking skill has improved tremendously. Their handwriting practice is very good.
Many participants also reported that their access to quality healthcare has significantly improved, as explained by interviewee 7, who gave birth at an Aizawl public hospital.
In Aizawl, my wife gave birth at the civil hospital without any issues, and the services there were excellent … Not only was care more affordable, but they also treated us without discrimination despite my refugee status. Their healthcare provision is commendable.
Other benefits, though less prominently cited by interviewees, were increased social acceptance, improvement in mental health, and livelihood opportunities.
Challenges Facing Urban Refugees in Aizawl
Housing was the most reported concern of my research participants, with thirteen interviewees citing it as a major challenge. In many cases, refugees are denied housing simply because they are refugees and, when they are offered the lease on a house, they are usually charged higher rent than locals. Interviewee 10, a 62-year-old former schoolteacher, shared their experience:
On several occasions I reached initial agreements with landlords over the phone. However, upon learning about my status as a refugee, they rescinded their offers. Some landlords invited us to view properties, only to dismiss us abruptly once they realized my background. Financial skepticism is another barrier. I’ve been questioned repeatedly about my ability to afford rent … Furthermore, I’m often required to pay rent a month in advance, with landlords explaining that past refugee renters have absconded without settling their dues.
One coping strategy refugees use to mitigate rental discrimination is going through brokers. This causes further problems of inflating already high rents as brokers usually set high rates for their fees. Another coping strategy is reliance on social networks, as discussed by interviewee 8, a 33-year-old woman:
There are some decent landlords. We just search on and on until we find them. Plus, there are some (other) refugees around us. We build up networks and let each other know about available houses. And when we come across a friendly landlord, we make a deal. So, we’re finding houses with the help of our connections.
A lack of Mizo language skills is another significant barrier affecting social relations, access to healthcare and education. This was cited as a main challenge by eleven interviewees. Interviewee 9, a 35-year-old woman, whose father suffered from a mental illness, explained her struggle in communicating with doctors:
As our language is different, we couldn’t describe the details of my father’s condition to the doctor. The doctor tested him with machines and asked questions in Mizo, we responded as best we could, but we couldn’t provide explanations in as much detail as we wanted to.
Due to language barriers, refugees often rely on acquaintances who can speak Mizo to act as interpreters when accessing healthcare. However, such people are not always available when required. As a result, refugees adopt negative coping strategies such as avoiding hospitals and clinics altogether, as evidenced by interviewee 12, a 35-year-old woman with six children who are often ill. She avoids going to hospitals and clinics by relying on over-the-counter medicines and the health advice of neighbors.
Due to the bad weather conditions here, my children frequently get sick. I’ve been avoiding clinics because of the language barrier issue and just purchase over-the-counter medications instead. Rather than seeking a doctor’s advice, I usually consult other individuals familiar with healthcare to recommend medications and dosages.
In addition, both parents and children face language barriers in accessing education. Interviewee 9 expressed that she had to rely on a translator to communicate with teachers at the time of enrollment. Another parent explained that she enrolled her youngest child at a private school but, after some time, had to pull him out because of the isolation created by the language barrier. As a last resort, she homeschooled him. For the children, they faced two language barriers in the classroom, Mizo and Hindi, compulsory in some schools. Interviewee 5, a 46-year-old parent who sent his three children to a private school, said:
The foremost challenge we face is the language barrier. Back in Myanmar, we primarily spoke Burmese. Here, my children have to grapple with both Mizo and Hindi at school, which they find challenging. On occasion, they’ve expressed that their difficulty in comprehending Hindi makes it difficult to follow lessons.
My research participants also faced various financial and economic challenges such as financial insecurity, legal restrictions on economic activity, and unsuccessful entrepreneurship. Of them, financial security is the most prominent as most refugees are employed in the informal sector and have no savings. Interviewee 5, the father of five children, was deeply troubled by the thought of falling ill and the effect it might have on the prospects of his family and the education of his children.
I’m the only breadwinner in my family, and it’s my responsibility to find money. But what would happen if I got seriously ill and couldn’t work? Who would feed my family? These worries are a constant strain. This is the most serious problem I face right now. I’m worried about my family’s future if for some reason I can’t work.
Interviewee 7, a 29-year-old former schoolteacher currently working various informal jobs, also explained that although he wants to see his child go to school like other children, he does not have enough money. He worked mainly as a part-time carpenter and the highest money he could earn was 500 Indian Rupees a day. “Even if I enroll my child in a government school, there are extra costs like uniforms and stationery. Given my financial situation, I can’t cover these expenses, which is why I haven’t sent my child to school yet,” he said.
Compounding these challenges are the legal restrictions on refugees’ business activities. These hinder income opportunities, as demonstrated by interviewee 10, who tried to start a food stall before facing these constraints:
There are no economic opportunities. Nothing. I’ve spent all of my savings. What I mean is, here the government doesn’t allow us to do any business. I tried to open a small Myanmar noodle shop, but they didn’t allow it. So, there’s nothing we can do.
Job scarcity, lack of recognition of existing qualifications and documentation, low wages, and discrimination are all barriers to employment, according to my study participants. Five participants cited job scarcity as the main barrier to employment. Interviewee 1, a 38-year-old single mother and a former food stall owner in Myanmar, looked for jobs at restaurants and discovered that the wage is merely 200 or 300 rupees per day. When she turned to manual jobs such as masonry, there were limited job opportunities for a woman like her.
Some interviewees noted that a lack of documentation and recognition of their qualifications were also barriers to employment. Interviewee 13, a 38-year-old former government official, explained that he tried to apply for jobs requiring education at local companies, but when they saw his degrees were attained in Myanmar, they rejected his application. Another participant, interviewee 7, passed the screening and interview stages at a company, but when the company learned that he lacked an employment visa, the company rescinded the offer.
Whether refugees are low-skilled or high-skilled, the only jobs available to them are construction and masonry. Even in those sectors, it is very hard to get a job, as explained by interviewee 6, a 43-year-old former university lecturer. Refugees also face discrimination when they manage to get jobs.
Others tend to grab the relatively well-paying jobs, effectively monopolizing the job market. We refugees are only considered when there’s a job for which locals aren’t available … Entering their work circles is challenging; they usually work in groups. Even when refugees are hired, they’re often expected to put in longer hours. For instance, if a job typically requires eight hours of work, refugees might be asked to work nine hours.
The Availability of Support
In general, many refugees in Aizawl lack reliable and sustainable support, although some occasionally obtain one-off payments. Notably, the primary sources of such support are Myanmar-based organizations, as highlighted by interviewee 8, a 33-year-old CDM participant:
In the beginning, there was support of around 3,000 rupees for CDM participants. After that, a Myanmar-based organization gave us 5,000 rupees. There was also other payments I don’t remember. Once I received a payment of 1,000 rupees for being a mother. Most support is from Myanmar-based organizations.
The Mizoram government also offers support by ensuring free education and providing school uniforms and stationery, as described by interviewee 1, a 38-year-old woman who sent all three of her children to a government school: “They passed the grade-9 exam and made it to the top ten student list. So, the school pays for all these expenses this year.”
Several interviewees attend a Myanmar-connected church called the Myanmar Fellowship Church which was organized by the refugee community. The church provides payments upon initiation, as described by interviewee 8, a 33-year-old woman: “I attend a Baptist church. The church’s focus is spiritual help, and they do not provide economic or social assistance. However, newly joined refugees do receive a one-time support payment of 1,000 rupees.”
With all this said, most of my research participants rely on their own resources, with no reliable ongoing external support.
Discussion
Overall, a majority of the study participants lived in urban settings before they were displaced, and this finding supports the observation by Kobia & Cranfield that the previous living style of refugees may inform refugees’ settlement decisions.35 In the case of post-coup refugees displaced from Chin State to Aizawl, many participants were former government officers in the CDM, motivated by the need to escape arrest and persecution by the military junta. My data shows push factors affecting refugees choosing to settle in Aizawl include a lack of safety and security in the country of origin, restrictive camp living conditions, mental health concerns, and property loss due to the military raids. Pull factors included access to education and healthcare services, and prospects for housing and livelihood opportunities. This finding also closely aligns with the existing research in the field, as supported by other studies.36
Advantages of Urban Refuge
While there is limited research on the advantages that refugees gain from moving to urban areas, Crisp et al. note that urban refugees typically enjoy access to public services, markets, and economic opportunities.37 This is supported by this study’s findings, whereby most Chin refugees living in Aizawl interviewed reported enjoying an increased sense of security, leading to reduced fear and uncertainty, and improved access to education and healthcare. Access to better public services, especially education, was the second most significant benefit after safety.
Housing
Despite the benefits mentioned above, urban refugees in Aizawl encountered a variety of challenges, from housing, to employment, to barriers complicating their access to valued education and healthcare. Of these challenges, housing was the most significant. My research participants in Aizawl often reported being discriminated against because of their refugee status and being charged higher rents. Interview evidence also suggested that some landlords are reluctant to rent to refugees, suspecting them of being unable to pay. Brokers, often seen as a solution to this discrimination, further inflate rents. Similar housing challenges have been identified in other urban refugee settings, for example, the case of refugees from Casamance living in the urban areas of Gambia.38 However, differences between the two cases are also instructive: in Gambia, Casamance refugees enjoy fundamental economic rights, including the right to own property, whereas Chin refugees in Aizawl lack such rights. A common strategy that Casamance refugees use to secure housing is to act as unpaid watchmen for part-built compounds, in exchange for which they can bring their family to live there. However, they can be evicted suddenly at the owner’s whim. In Aizawl, finding secure housing as a refugee is similarly precarious. To address housing challenges, many refugees in my study reported relying on their social networks and personal connections to find friendly landlords willing to rent to them.
The Language Barrier
Another significant challenge is the language barrier. Many participants in this study, regardless of their township of origin, could notcommunicate fluently in the local Mizo language, affecting their access to health and education services—even though because Chin refugees share similar cultural and ethnic ties with the Mizo host community.39 Chin refugees often struggle to describe health issues to doctors. Many Chin refugees in my study avoid visiting clinics or hospitals due to the language barrier and resort to over-the-counter medicines, seeking health advice from their friends unless they face serious health problems. Effective communication and language skills are crucial to accessing appropriate healthcare services and receiving medical care.40 Poor communication can result in misdiagnoses or misunderstandings, potentially leading to serious consequences such as loss of life or allegations of practitioner negligence.41 In overcoming language barriers, one common strategy among study participants is asking for the assistance of friends and acquaintances, who are not always present or available.
Refugees participating in this study also reported being less involved with their children’s education due to language barriers. This supports observations made in other refugee contexts.42 Refugee children in the present study face the additional challenge of having to understand both Mizo and Hindi in schools, especially in their early years of schooling. The language barrier demotivates them, affecting their overall performance, according to interview participants. Language barriers are one of the main challenges facing refugee children all over the world.43 Dryden-Peterson studied the previous educational experiences of refugee children who resettled to North America, Europe, and Australia, finding that children devote significant time to acquiring languages, often lagging in subjects appropriate to their age.44 Similarly, Seker & Sirkeci report that language barriers negatively impact children’s academic performance, particularly reading in Turkish.45 However, in the study, it was also found that the longer the duration of schooling, the less significant the language barrier, as many children can catch up with their peers academically.
Financial Insecurity
My research participants reported that financial insecurity is a pervasive issue, primarily stemming from their predominant employment in the informal sector, where wages are typically low, leading to a lack of savings. Activities towards generating income are stymied by government restrictions. Added to this is the scarcity of job opportunities in Aizawl and, if the refugees are lucky enough to find a job, they are then discriminated against in interviews and selection, face discrimination, and are required to work longer hours if they are hired. Another significant employment barrier is the lack of recognition for qualifications and documentation originating in Myanmar.46 In Aizawl, many refugees reported adopting a combination of job diversification and relying on remittances to compensate for low wages and job insecurity, and to address other economic/financial challenges. In some refugee households, the household head even tried to travel through irregular means to Thailand or Malaysia to seek employment to support the family in Aizawl.
Access to Healthcare and Education
Refugees also were found to face challenges in accessing healthcare and education services. The right to enroll refugee children at schools is arguably the only legal right that is afforded to refugees in Aizawl. However, although government schools are supposedly free,47 there are hidden costs that some parents cannot afford, such as buying stationery and uniforms. Despite financial hardships, many refugees reported sending their children to private schools, which they perceived as better quality. One common strategy used was taking on debt to pay for school fees. When the cost barrier is too high, some refugees stopped sending their children to school. This is similar to healthcare; many refugees are unable to afford it due to exorbitant costs. As a result, they have to rely on the support of relatives abroad to address their healthcare needs.
Regarding external assistance, Chin refugees in Aizawl live essentially independently, with little external support or assistance. Many refugees reported receiving one-off support payments, mainly from Myanmar-based organizations, and the 1,000-rupee payment for joining the Myanmar Fellowship Church. This is consistent with the findings of Buscher48 and Dey49 who emphasize the importance of social networks and religious communities in helping refugees cope with their day-to-day challenges.
Conclusion
This study explores the motivating factors for refugees settling in Aizawl, the challenges they confront, their strategies for overcoming these challenges, and the extent of external support available to them. Notably, it found that refugees’ decisions to settle in Aizawl are largely shaped by a confluence of push factors, including the lack of safety and security in their home country, restrictive living conditions in refugee camps, and mental health concerns. Conversely, pull factors comprise access to education and healthcare services, alongside prospects for housing and livelihood opportunities. Most of the refugees I interviewed were CDM participants who previously resided in urban areas in Myanmar. This specific demographic profile may be indicative of the wider Chin community in Aizawl and likely plays a pivotal role in shaping both the push and pull factors identified.
Despite the advantages of urban life, refugees in Aizawl face substantial challenges. Most prominent among these are housing discrimination and language barriers. Discrimination based on refugee status prevents many from securing housing, while language barriers impede access to essential public services such as education and healthcare. As a result, many refugees only visit clinics or hospitals when translators are available, resorting to over-the-counter medications or even entirely avoiding medical care. Additionally, refugees in the study encounter numerous barriers finding an income. These challenges stem from legal restrictions, job scarcity, low wages, lack of recognition of qualifications and documentation, and discriminatory employment practices, such as longer working hours.
This study has revealed that refugees in Aizawl largely navigate these daily challenges with little to no external support from governmental or international organizations, despite UNHCR’s 2009 policy, which advocates for urban refugees’ protection and entitlement to rights under the UN Refugee Convention.50 Further research must be conducted to expand our understanding of urban refugee experiences and needs in Aizawl and across Mizoram. Future research efforts could build on this study by considering a mixed-methods approach, with a larger and more diverse participant sample.
Endnotes
1 UNHCR, 2023.
2 UNHCR, 2023.
3 UNHCR, 2023.
4 Satapathy & Lalthansiami, 2021.
5 Satapathy & Lalthansiami, 2021.
6 UNHCR, 2023.
7 Alexander, 2008.
8 Satapathy & Lalthansiami, 2021.
9 McConnachie, 2018; Satapathy & Lalthansiami, 2021.
10 Alexander, 2008.
[11 Aadhaar is an individual identification number issued by the Unique Identification Authority of India. It can be used in accessing various public services including financial and banking services. For more, see Unique Identification Authority of India (2022).
12 PTI, 2022.
13 UNHCR, 2021; Verghis & Balasundram, 2019.
14 Crisp, 2017.
15 Crisp, 2017; Darling, 2017.
16 Sanyal, 2012.
17 UNHCR, 2009.
18 Crisp et al., 2012; Hammad, 2017; Hopkins, 2015; Kobia & Cranfield, 2009.
19 Sanyal, 2012.
20 Crisp, 2017.
21 Crisp et al., 2012.
22 Betts et al., 2017.
23 Lozet & Easton-Calabria, 2020.
24 Betts & Collier, 2017.
25 Lozet & Easton-Calabria, 2020.
26 Betts et al., 2017; Buscher, 2013.
27 Buscher, 2013.
28 Dey, 2022.
29 Buscher, 2011.
30 Buscher, 2011.
31 Creswell, 2007.
32 Yin, 2018.
33 Cridland et al., 2015.
34 The Falkland camp was the first relief shelter those fleeing the 2021 military coup arrived to. These were mainly members of parliament (MPs) and CDM participants. Around July 2021, Falkland residents were ordered to leave the shelter, with many ordinary refugees spreading to other remote areas of Aizawl City. MPs moved to the Youth Hostel in Aizawl. The reasons for the eviction were not given. Since 2023, the Falkland camp has been the main relief center for Kuki families from Manipur State who were displaced due to ongoing ethnic tensions between ethnic Kuki and Meiti people (Kalita, 2023).
35 Kobia & Cranfield, 2009.
36 Crisp et al., 2012; Hammad, 2017; Hopkins, 2015.
37 Crisp et al., 2012.
38 Hopkins, 2015.
39 McConnachie, 2018.
40 Samkange-Zeeb et al., 2020.
41 Saito et al., 2021.
42 Cureton, 2020; Rah et al., 2009.
43 Dryden-Peterson, 2015; Seker & Sirkeci, 2015.
44 Dryden-Peterson, 2015.
45 Seker & Sirkeci, 2015.
46 These challenges are not unique to Chin refugees in urban Aizawl (Crisp et al., 2012; Kobia & Cranfield, 2009).
47 PTI, 2023.
48 Buscher, 2011.
49 Dey, 2022.
50 UNHCR, 2009.
References
Alexander, A. (2008). Without Refuge: Chin Refugees in India and Malaysia, Forced Migration Review, 30,36-37. http://www.fmreview.org/FMRpdfs/FMR30/36-37.pdf
Betts, A., Bloom, L., Kaplan, J. D., & Omata, N. (2017). Refugee Economies: Forced Displacement and Development. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198795681.001.0001
Betts, A., & Collier, P. (2017). Refuge: Rethinking Refugee Policy in a Changing World. Oxford University Press.
Buscher, D. (2011). Bright Lights, Big City: Urban Refugees Struggle to Make a Living in New Delhi. Women’s Refugee Commission. http://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/research-resources/bright-lights-big-city-urban-refugees-struggle-to-make-a-living-in-new-delhi/
Buscher, D. (2013). New Approaches to Urban Refugee Livelihoods. Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 28(2), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.25071/1920-7336.36473
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage.
Cridland, E. K., Jones, S. C., Caputi, P., & Magee, C. A. (2015). Qualitative research with families living with autism spectrum disorder: Recommendations for conducting semi-structured interviews. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 40(1), 78–91. https://doi.org/10.3109/13668250.2014.964191
Crisp, J. (2017, June 6). The Case Against Refugee Camps. Refugees International. https://www.refugeesinternational.org/reports/refugeecamps
Crisp, J., Morris, T., & Refstie, H. (2012). Displacement in urban areas: New challenges, new partnerships. Disasters, 36, S23–S42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2012.01284.x
Cureton, A. E. (2020). Strangers in the School: Facilitators and Barriers Regarding Refugee Parental Involvement. The Urban Review, 52(5), 924–949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-020-00580-0
Darling, J. (2017). Forced migration and the city: Irregularity, informality, and the politics of presence. Progress in Human Geography, 41(2), 178–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132516629004
Dey, N. (2022). Resilience and coping mechanisms of refugee communities. In S. I. Rajan (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Refugees in India (pp. 307-317). Routledge.
Dryden-Peterson, S. (2015). Refugee education in countries of first asylum: Breaking open the black box of pre-resettlement experiences. Theory and Research in Education, 2(14), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878515622703
Hammad, N. (2017). Refugees in urban areas. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 7(3), 123–126.
Hopkins, G. (2015). Casamance refugees in urban locations of The Gambia. In K. Koizumi & G. Hoffstaedter (Eds.), Urban Refugees (pp. 42-75). Routledge.
Kalita, K. (2023, December 3). New Mizoram govt must allow us to stay in state: Manipur displaced. The Times of India. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/guwahati/new-mizoram-govt-must-allow-us-to-stay-in-state-manipur-displaced/articleshow/105690173.cms
Kobia, K., & Cranfield, L. (2009). Literature Review: Urban Refugees. Refugees Branch, Citizenship and Immigration Canada. https://www.acnur.org/sites/default/files/legacy-pdf/4b0a528c9.pdf
Lozet, F., & Easton-Calabria, E. (2020). Counting Urban Refugees During COVID-19. Forced Migration Review, 64, 79–80.
McConnachie, K. (2018). Boundaries and Belonging in the Indo-Myanmar Borderlands: Chin Refugees in Mizoram. Journal of Refugee Studies, 31(3), 314–333. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fey012
PTI. (2022, September 18). Mizoram instructs Myanmar refugees not to purchase land or house without govt permission. ThePrint. https://theprint.in/india/mizoram-instructs-myanmar-refugees-not-to-purchase-land-or-house-without-govt-permission/1133723/
PTI. (2023, August 9). Over 8,000 children of Myanmar, Bangladesh refugees, strife-torn Manipur enrolled in Mizoram schools: Education Minister. Deccan Herald. https://www.deccanherald.com/india/mizoram/over-8000-children-of-myanmar-bangladesh-refugees-strife-torn-manipur-enrolled-in-mizoram-schools-education-minister-2640631
Rah, Y., Choi, S., & Nguyễn, T. S. T. (2009). Building bridges between refugee parents and schools. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 12(4), 347–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603120802609867
Saito, S., Harris, M. F., Long, K. M., Lewis, V., Casey, S., Hogg, W., Cheng, I.-H., Advocat, J., Marsh, G., Gunatillaka, N., & Russell, G. (2021). Response to language barriers with patients from refugee background in general practice in Australia: Findings from the OPTIMISE study. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 921. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06884-5
Samkange-Zeeb, F., Samerski, S., Doos, L., Humphris, R., Padilla, B., & Bradby, H. (2020). “It’s the First Barrier” – Lack of Common Language a Major Obstacle When Accessing/Providing Healthcare Services Across Europe. Frontiers in Sociology, 5. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2020.557563
Sanyal, R. (2012). Refugees and the City: An Urban Discussion. Geography Compass, 6(11), 633–644. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12010
Satapathy, R. K., & Lalthansiami, P. C. (2021). Chin Migration to Mizoram Ethnic Affinity and Changing Perceptions. In H. Srikanth & M. Majumdar (Eds.), Linking India and Eastern Neighbours: Development in the Northeast and Borderlands. Sage Publications.
Seker, B., & Sirkeci, I. (2015). Challenges for Refugee Children at School in Eastern Turkey. Economics & Sociology, 8, 122–133. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2015/8-4/9
UNHCR. (2009). UNHCR policy on refugee protection and solutions in urban areas. https://www.unhcr.org/media/unhcr-policy-refugee-protection-and-solutions-urban-areas
UNHCR. (2021). Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2021. https://www.unhcr.org/media/40152
UNHCR. (2023). Myanmar Emergency Update. https://reliefweb.int/report/myanmar/myanmar-emergency-update-10-april-2023
Unique Identification Authority of India. (2022). What is Aadhaar? https://www.uidai.gov.in/en/16-english-uk/aapka-aadhaar/14-what-is-aadhaar.html
Verghis, S., & Balasundram, S. (2019). Urban refugees: The hidden population. In P. Allotey & D. Reidpath (Eds.), The Health of Refugees: Public Health Perspectives from Crisis to Settlement (pp. 131-152). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/
10.1093/oso/9780198814733.003.0007 Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications. Sage. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/case-study-research-and-applications/book250150