Memorializing mass deaths at the border : two cases from Canberra (Australia) and Lampedusa (Italy)

This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version may differ from the original in pagination and typographic details. Author(s): Title: Year: Version: Copyright: Rights: Rights url: Please cite the original version: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Memorializing mass deaths at the border : two cases from Canberra (Australia) and Lampedusa (Italy) © 2017 The Author(s). Published version Horsti, Karina; Neumann, Klaus Horsti, K., & Neumann, K. (2019). Memorializing mass deaths at the border : two cases from Canberra (Australia) and Lampedusa (Italy). Ethnic and Racial Studies, 42(2), 141-158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1394477 2019 Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rers20 Download by: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] Date: 15 November 2017, At: 04:38 Ethnic and Racial Studies ISSN: 0141-9870 (Print) 1466-4356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rers20 Memorializing mass deaths at the border: two cases from Canberra (Australia) and Lampedusa (Italy) Karina Horsti & Klaus Neumann To cite this article: Karina Horsti & Klaus Neumann (2017): Memorializing mass deaths at the border: two cases from Canberra (Australia) and Lampedusa (Italy), Ethnic and Racial Studies, DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2017.1394477 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1394477 © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 15 Nov 2017. Submit your article to this journal View related articles View Crossmark data Memorializing mass deaths at the border: two cases from Canberra (Australia) and Lampedusa (Italy) Karina Horsti a and Klaus Neumann b a Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland; b Contemporary Histories Research Group, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia ABSTRACT In this paper, we compare two seemingly verysimilarinstances in which individuals and organizations within the borders of the global North have memorialized the deaths of irregular migrants at sea: the SIEV X memorial in Australia’snational capital Canberra, and the Giardino della memoria (Garden of Remembrance) on the Italian island of Lampedusa. Unlike ephemeral manifestations of grief, potentially these memorials have effects that reach well beyond their creation. We relate the differences between the memorials to the contexts within which they were created: an immediate local response involving people directly affected by the disaster’s aftermath, on the one hand, and a delayed nation-wide response involving people removed from the deaths at sea, on the other. We also discuss the difference between a memorial that names and thereby individualizes victims, and one that does not, and between one that celebrates an alternative, hospitable society, and one that does not. ARTICLE HISTORY Received 1 December 2016; Accepted 10 October 2017 KEYWORDS Borders; migration; refugees; border-related deaths; memorials; memorialization As countries in the global North are making their borders impassable for irregular migrants from the global South, the number of people who die trying to cross these borders continues to mount. For 2016, the International Organization for Migration recorded the deaths of 7,763 migrants en route to international destinations, including more than 5,000 deaths along migratory routes in the Mediterranean (GMDAC 2017). Until recently, only families and friends in the countries of origin and in the diaspora tended to publicly grieve for and remember the dead. Increasingly, however, commemorations are initiated by citizens of the global North with no personal connection to the deceased. They include local eyewitnesses; institutional search and rescue agents; local, national, and world political and religious leaders; © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDer- ivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. CONTACT Karina Horsti [email protected] ETHNIC AND RACIAL STUDIES, 2017 https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1394477 Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 political activists who oppose border controls; humanitarians who operate in the border zone; and others who witnessed deaths at the border through mediation. Scholars are increasingly devoting critical attention to the deaths of irregular migrants. Criminologists, human geographers, and political scientists, in particular, have documented border-related fatalities (Spijkerboer 2007; Weber and Pickering 2011; Brian and Laczko 2014; Brian and Laczko 2016), analysed the biopolitics responsible for migrant deaths (Doty 2011; Albahari 2015; Cuttitta 2015; De León 2015; Vaughan-Williams 2015; Kovras and Robins 2016), engaged with the question of whether or not deaths at the border are “grievable”(Hodge 2015; Ritaine 2015; Albahari 2016; Boudreaux 2016; Rygiel 2016; Squire 2017; Ticktin 2016), and explored what Stierl (2016) has termed the “grief activism”of citizens of the global North. In this paper, we extend the scholarship on recent responses to migrant deaths by exploring two seemingly very similar instances in which individuals and organizations within the borders of the global North have memorialized the deaths of people unrelated to them and from outside those borders. While much of the recent relevant scholarship focuses on the politics of “grievability”, we are interested in a broader spectrum of emotional and political registers. Those creating a memorial may, of course, be driven by grief, but acts of memorialization could also be prompted by a range of other sentiments, including anger, shame, or love. The registers involved also depend on who those involved in memorial activism are: the motivations of survivors and of the members of diasporic communities may be very different from those of political activists from the global North. A memorial tends to project emotional and political drivers towards others –who are imagined to engage with its message when visiting it –and into the future. Somebody who has arranged for the erection of a memorial is often motivated by the desire to make others reproduce her own emotional and political response to what is being commemorated. We bring amemorial studies lens and our disciplinary backgrounds incultural and historical studies to bear on these issues and examine two place-specific memorials. They commemorate people who drowned while trying to cross into the global North by boat: a national memorial in Australia’scapitalCanberra memorializes the sinking of a boat on 19 October 2001 in the Indian Ocean (Mares 2002,199–203; Marr and Wilkinson 2003, 224–238; Kevin 2004), and a local memorial on the Italian island of Lampedusa commemorates the deaths of irregular migrants in the Mediterranean Sea on 3 October 2013. The disjuncture between the genesis of a particular commemorative project (including the intentions of those who initiated it), its ostensible message, its interpretation and use over time, and its location and form is a peculiar feature of memorials. While we suggest our own reading (which may not align with that of the memorials’creators), we do so against the 2K. HORSTI AND K. NEUMANN Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 backdrop of a contextual interpretation of the memorials’genealogy and appearance. A comparative perspective helps us to understand what is specific about the two memorials and to identify commonalities. We demonstrate how different political and mediated contexts have produced different outcomes in the memorialization of the disasters. Drawing on media reports, interviews, site visits, and the relevant literature, we explore the politics that made the two memorial projects possible and the effects they could have over time. The Australian and European contexts of the 2001 and 2013 maritime disasters The 2001 and 2013 disasters became symbols for the violence of the borders shielding the global North. Both took place in spaces that had been constituted as border zones: between Southeast Asia and Australia, and between North Africa and Europe, respectively. The destinations of the two boats, Christmas Island, an Australian territory about 380 km south of Java, and Lampedusa, an Italian island 113 k, north of Tunisia, have been constituent parts of these border zones: the former is not quite in Australia, and the latter is not quite in Europe. 1 On 18 October 2001, an unnamed Indonesian fishing boat left the port of Bandar Lampung in the south of Sumatra for Christmas Island where its passengers intended to seek asylum. The next day, while the boat was in international waters, its engine and pumps failed, it took on water, and capsized. Forty-five survivors were rescued by Indonesian fishermen who chanced upon the scene some 15 hours after the boat had sunk; the remaining 146 men, 142 women, and 65 children perished. Most of the boat’s passengers were Iraqis. This sinking took place in the context of significant changes to Australia’s asylum seeker policies. Some two months earlier, the government had refused permission to the Norwegian container carrier Tampa to land 433 irregular migrants rescued in the Indian Ocean on Christmas Island, ordered special forces to take control of the ship, and transferred the rescued migrants to Nauru and to Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island (Marr and Wilkinson 2003). At the same time, the government vowed that from then on asylum seekers who had arrived by boat would be detained and processed outside Australia, and instructed the navy to turn back boats with asylum seekers that were bound for Australia. The Australian authorities referred to these boats as “suspected illegal entry vessels”, or SIEVs, and assigned a number to each of them. The boat that sank on 19 October is usually referred to as SIEV X. The second instance of memorialization relates to the sinking of a trawler that had set out from the Libyan port of Misrata. Less than 1 km from ETHNIC AND RACIAL STUDIES 3 Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 Lampedusa, it sank on the early morning of 3 October 2013. Of the more than 500 passengers –most of them fleeing Eritrea –only 5 women and 150 men survived. They had been in the water without life jackets for some 3 hours before locals on a leisure boat noticed them and raised the alarm. At least 366 people died. Both disasters occurred when irregular migration by boat and the policy responses to such migration were highly contested, although the trajectories of the debates in Australia and Europe contrasted sharply. In Australia, following the arrival of the Tampa and the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, government and public attitudes towards irregular migrants had hardened significantly, while 12 years later in Italy an almost opposite trend could be observed. Human rights groups had criticized the Berlusconi government’s approach, including its push-back policy, and in the 2011 Hirsi case, the European Court of Human Rights had condemned Italy for returning asylum seekers to Libya without examining their protection claims. Since 2011, Italy had rescued people but had then let them move on, often without registering them, to countries such as Germany, Switzerland, Norway, and Sweden, which thereby became responsible for refugee status determination procedures and integration programmes or, in the case of negative decisions, costly deportations. While Australian and European policy and public responses to irregular migration differed significantly, the two disasters had much in common. The number of fatalities was relatively high –higher than for any other disaster involving irregular migrants in the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean, respectively, up to that time. The dead included many children. In the media coverage and in subsequent court proceedings, the dead were portrayed as victims of unscrupulous people smugglers who had coaxed them onto unseaworthy boats. In both instances, the official response came under intense critical scrutiny. In Australia, refugee advocates accused the navy of not having done enough to save the SIEV X’s passengers. In Italy, Lampedusani who had been the first on the scene were highly critical of the rescue effort of the coast guard and the Guardia di Finanza. In both instances, the asylum claims of most victims would have stood a good chance of being recognized, which meant that the victims were potential future citizens of Australia or Europe. Many of the victims had wanted to follow relatives who legally resided in Australia and Europe, respectively, but were prevented from doing so through regular family reunion channels (see, e.g. Hutton 2013, 46). However, the ability to see the victims as prospective fellow citizens, as relatives of Australian or European residents, and as human beings whose sudden death tore a hole in the social fabric of a community differed in the two cases, as we discuss below. 4K. HORSTI AND K. NEUMANN Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 Memorialization in a mediatized context The mass deaths near Lampedusa attracted immediate attention in the national and global media (De Swert, Schacht, and Masini 2015), whereas the SIEV X disaster was barely mentioned outside Australia and Indonesia, and reported only after a 3-day delay. The visuality of the disasters was also different. In Lampedusa, the coast guard provided footage of the rescue and the landing of the survivors for the media. Images of rows of coffins in the hangar of Lampedusa Airport circulated widely. By contrast, there were no images of the rescue of the SIEV X survivors, and while Lampedusani were feted as heroes on account of their response to the disaster, the Indonesian fishermen who rescued the survivors of the SIEV X were almost immediately forgotten. The sinking of the boat near Lampedusa turned local people into eyewitnesses, and its mediatization created national, European, and global witnessing audiences. Media representations of death and survival prompted moral calls to respond. By positioning the Italian rescue agents at the centre of the drama, the media invited Europeans to join the spectacle as humanitarians. However, the media’s interest in this particular incident waned quickly. Australians, by contrast, were twice-removed spectators of the sinking of the SIEV X. The media showed initially comparatively little interest in the disaster because it happened in the midst of a federal election campaign. But interest in the deaths was rekindled in the first half of 2002 when a Senate committee investigated claims that the Australian authorities had known about the SIEV X and its unseaworthiness and had decided not to come to its rescue (Senate Select Committee 2002, 195–290). In Australia, the government used the SIEV X disaster to justify its hard line approach to asylum seekers. It also denied any responsibility, arguing that the sinking happened in Indonesia’s, rather than Australia’s, search and rescue zone. In Italy, by contrast, the government vowed to adopt a more compassionate approach to irregular migrants, albeit in the understanding that many of them would lodge their asylum claims in other countries. On 4 October, Prime Minister Enrico Letta promised to hold a state funeral for the victims and grant them posthumous citizenship. 2 On 18 October, 5 days after another boat with irregular migrants had sunk near Lampedusa, the government launched Operation Mare Nostrum, during which the Italian military rescued approximately 150,000 migrants in the Mediterranean. In both cases, a wide range of individuals, communities, and organizations soon became involved in commemorating the disasters. In Australia, the first memorial events were dominated by members of the Iraqi community and others who could claim that the dead belonged to them. In Sydney, a ETHNIC AND RACIAL STUDIES 5 Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 prayer vigil was held on 25 October 2001, which was attended by several Iraqis who had lost relatives or friends on the SIEV X (Brown and Harvey 2001). That same day, asylum seekers in Indonesia staged a protest outside the offices of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to call for a speedier processing of their applications for refugee status and resettlement; a girl carried a placard that read “We are mourning the loss of life of our brothers and sisters in the boat accident”(AFP 2001). Following the disaster of 3 October 2013, members of the Eritrean diaspora organized commemorations, which were often also protests against the regime that forced Eritreans to flee their country. For example, on 12 October, over a thousand Eritreans gathered in a Tel Aviv park for a memorial service (Hartman 2013). These commemorations –and the fact that the dead had ties in the global North and could therefore be seen to also belong there – received little attention in the European media. We argue that this is a consequence of the humanitarian framework that informed the reporting of the Lampedusa disaster: humanitarianism constructs a hierarchical relationship between the one who helps and the helpless victim, and therefore the responses of diasporic communities could not be easily accommodated in narratives about the disaster’s aftermath. Lampedusani initially responded to the disaster by participating in a candlelight vigil to express their solidarity with the survivors who were still held on the island (Stefano, Phone interview with Ilaria Tucci, 2017) and as a means of protest against European and Italian indifference to the border deaths (Puggioni 2015). On 4 October, the Italian government declared a national day of mourning; schools were instructed to observe a minute of silence. There were also numerous locally organized events throughout Italy, ranging from a minute of silence observed in all pizzerias and restaurants in Palermo in the country’s south to a commemorative ceremony held in the centre of Parma in the north. In both cases, the deaths have been commemorated since, particularly on the day of the anniversary of the disaster. In Italy, the disaster of 3 October even prompted the parliament’s inauguration of a Giornata nazionale in memoria delle vittime dell’immigrazione (national memorial day for the victims of immigration) in 2016. The two disasters have also spawned temporary and permanent memorials, and have been the subject of numerous works of art. 3 Representations of the two disasters differed in one important respect: while Lampedusani and official rescue agents featured prominently as eyewitnesses and as heroes in narratives of the disaster of 3 October, the stories of the survivors who were taken back to Indonesia and of family members in Australia were central in the case of SIEV X. The testimony of the Iraqi survivor Amal Basry, in particular, amplified by writer Arnold Zable and film-maker Steve Thomas, shaped the way the disaster was represented (see Perera 2006). 6K. HORSTI AND K. NEUMANN Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 The Canberra SIEV X memorial and the Lampedusa Giardino della memoria Both memorials are situated in public spaces away from the built environment. Both are designed to fit into the existing landscape. Lampedusa’s Giardino della memoria (Garden of Remembrance) is located in a nature reserve administered by Legambiente, a national association that promotes the protection of the environment. The memorial is said to feature 366 small shrubs typical in Lampedusa. Most plants cannot be identified as belonging to the memorial. The exact number of the plants is uncertain because in the inauguration ceremony only fifty shrubs were planted. More were added later, but little care was taken to ensure that they took root. The garden has no marked boundaries and most plants had died by October 2017. Originally the plants were numbered, but the numbers had disappeared a year later. In 2017, Legambiente reattached the numbers to some of the plants. Canberra’s SIEV X memorial is an installation of 353 individually painted wooden poles in Weston Park, a public reserve on a peninsula in Canberra’s Lake Burley Griffin (Biddulph 2007; Ware 2007,2008; Stephens 2008; Gibbings 2010; Kleist 2013). The constellation of poles visualizes the number of victims and the outline of the boat that sank. Community groups, schools, and groups of individuals designed the poles. Most are inscribed with the name of a person who drowned; where a victim’s name is unknown, the inscription refers only to their gender and presumed age. The focus on the relationship between an individual victim and the creator(s) of a particular pole is a significant feature of the monument. It recognizes the individuality of the victims and emphasizes the connection between the one who remembers and the one who is remembered. It also offers this connection as an exemplar to an imaginary audience. Both memorials require signage to allow visitors to decipher their meaning. The signs that are part of the memorial in Lampedusa are inconspicuous and resemble other signs in the reserve. Visitors learn only that the 366 shrubs were planted “in memory of the victims of the shipwreck of 3 October 2013”–“lest we forget”–by the municipality of Lampedusa and Linosa, the Sicilian regional authorities, and Legambiente. The sign does not reveal that nearly all the victims were from Eritrea. The signage in Canberra is more informative. Visitors are told about the 2001 disaster and the creation of the memorial; according to the text’s opening line, “The SIEV X Memorial remembers the 146 children, 142 mothers and 65 fathers who died on the refugee boat SIEV X, at the height of the Federal election campaign in October 2001.”Another explains the arrangement of forty-two poles that mark the outlines of the fishing boat that capsized. It encourages visitors to experience the emotions associated with the disaster and its memorialization: ETHNIC AND RACIAL STUDIES 7 Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 attempted to bring together disparate communities of witnesses who had been traumatized by the disaster and its immediate aftermath. Whereas the memorial in Canberra was designed to allow its creators and users to imagine themselves as citizens of an alternative Australia, the humanitarian identities engendered by the Giardino della memoria were commensurate with the official image of Italy that was cultivated by its political leaders: that of a nation which, led by its government, adopted a compassionate approach to irregular migrants. The memorials differ in the way in which they recognize the victims as persons-as-such (Edkins 2011). The different levels of attention devoted to the individuality and relationality of victims reflect the difference between Lampedusa, a community at the margins of the Italian nation-state and of Europe, and Canberra, which is –at least nominally –the centre of Australia. For irregular migrants, Lampedusa is only a first stepping stone on their way to Europe. Lampedusani too do not expect migrants to stay; their hospitality towards strangers is that of hosts towards travellers passing through. Canberra residents –and those who contributed to the memorial –do not have such expectations. They would like those who have successfully sought Australia’s protection to remain in their midst. In both cases, those who remembered felt responsible towards the dead. In their responsibility, they nevertheless distinguished themselves as those who would have welcomed irregular migrants, from those who wanted to prevent them from seeking protection. The act of memorialization functions as a posthumous recognition that the dead are part of the community that authorized the memorial. Memorialization in this sense bestows citizenship on people who did not have the right to have rights, to use Hannah Arendt’s expression. Both memorials celebrate those creating or authorizing them and do not mention the involvement of survivors in the textual material. However, their future social lives are not predetermined. It may well be that Eritreans in the diaspora, together with the Lampedusani whom they befriended, will ensure that the Giardino della memoria remains visited and that likewise the survivors of Australia’s border regime will take ownership of the SIEV X memorial. Such claims would be more difficult to realize in Lampedusa, which is a long way from where most of the survivors and relatives and friends of the victims have settled. But it would also be easier because their claims could not compete with the claims of the locals responsible for the memorial’s creation. For the latter, the Giardino della memoria was largely a by-product of its inauguration ceremony. For the creators of the SIEV X memorial, however, as well as for many of the Australians who have visited the memorial in the past 10 years, the memorial is about them as much as about the men, women and children who drowned in 2001. It does not just commemorate the dead but also celebrates the living: those who would have welcomed the passengers of the SIEV X and who do 14 K. HORSTI AND K. NEUMANN Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 not identify with the asylum seeker and “border protection”policies in place since 2001 (which have the support of the majority of Australians). Thus, any attempt to claim the memorial as belonging to those with a personal connection to the SIEV X and its dead would compete with the claim that the memorial represents an alternative Australia. Unlike ephemeral manifestations of grief, memorials have a life that potentially extends well beyond the process that led to their creation and could in fact become disconnected from the intention of their creators. For example, a war memorial that is ostensibly celebrating the willingness of citizens to sacrifice their life for the nation might become a focal point for anti-war protests. We therefore do not wish to speculate about what the uses of the Lampedusa and Canberra memorials in 20 or 50 years’time might be. Assertions about their potential use in the present, however, do not need to be speculative. In both cases, the memorial’s critical potential lies in their propensity to commemorate a past that is not yet over; an ongoing tragedy (see also Post 2015, 25). Deaths at the borders of the global North continue. Whether or not a visitor’s glance rolls “right off, like water droplets off an oilcloth, without even pausing for a moment”, to use again Musil’s famous words (Neumann 2000, 5) is not just a question of a memorial’s conspicuous inconspicuousness but also depends on a viewer’s ability and preparedness not to see the disasters of 19 October 2001 and 3 October 2013 as singular events –while nevertheless recognizing those who die at the border as individuals who have names and who are embedded in relationships that may be entirely outside of the field of vision of people in the global North. Notes 1. On Christmas Island, see Chambers 2011; on Lampedusa, see Brambilla 2014; Friese 2012,2015; Gatta 2012,2014; Kushner 2016; Mazzara 2015; Orsini 2015, 2016; Reckinger 2013; Rinelli 2015; Puggioni 2015. 2. The government subsequently reneged on Letta’s promise. 3. They include, among others, Dierk Schmidt’s painting SIEV X –On a case of intensified refugee politics, the 2008 documentary Hope, the plays CMI and Two Brothers for the SIEV X disaster, and Emma Jane Kirby’s2016 book The Optician of Lampedusa and Anders Lustgarten’s 2015 play Lampedusa. 4. In 2015, Askavusa’s installation was destroyed in a storm. Acknowledgements The authors are indebted to two anonymous referees for their exceptionally detailed and constructive comments. Karina Horsti also wishes to thank Aregai Mehari and Mohamed Kasim for sharing their insights, all the Lampedusani and Eritreans who participated in her research, and Adal Neguse and Ilaria Tucci, who provided valuable research assistance. ETHNIC AND RACIAL STUDIES 15 Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. Funding The study received funding from the Academy of Finland project Remembering Migration: Memory Politics of Forced Migration in Mediated Societies (grant no 277357). References Agence France Press (AFP). 2001.“Asylum-Seekers Stage Protest at UN offices in Jakarta.”October 26. Albahari, Maurizio. 2015.Crimes of Peace: Mediterranean Migrations at the World’s Deadliest Border. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Albahari, Maurizio. 2016.“After the Shipwreck: Mourning and Citizenship in the Mediterranean, Our Sea.”Social Research 83 (2): 275–294. Askavusa. 2014.“Ogni giorno è il 3 ottobre. No alle passarelle politiche, alla militarizzazione e al business dell’accoglienza.”https://askavusa.wordpress.com/2014/10/01/ ogni-giorno-e-il-3-ottobre-no-alle-passarelle-politiche-alla-militarizzazione-e-al- business-dellaccoglienza/. Biddulph, Steve. 2007.“The SIEV X Memorial Project.”In Fluctuating Borders: Speculations About Memory and Emergence, edited by Rosa Monacella, and SueAnne Ware, 68–77. Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Boudreaux, Corrie. 2016.“Public Memorialization and the Grievability of Victims in Ciudad Juárez.”Social Research 83 (2): 391–417. Brambilla, Chiara. 2014.“Shifting Italy/Libya Borderscapes at the Interface of EU/Africa Borderland: A ‘Geneological’Outlook from the Colonial Era to Post-colonial Scenarios.”ACME 13 (2): 220–245. Brian, Tara, and Frank Laczko. 2014.Fatal Journeys: Tracking Lives Lost During Migration. Geneva: IOM. Brian, Tara, and Frank Laczko. 2016.Fatal Journeys: Identification and Tracing of Dead and Missing Migrants. Geneva: IOM. Brown, Penny, and Claire Harvey. 2001.“Muslims Say PM to Blame for Tragedy.” Australian, October 26. Butler, Judith. 2004.Precarious Life. London: Verso. Chambers, Peter. 2011.“Society Has Been Defended: Following the Shifting Shape of State Through Australia’s Christmas Island.”International Political Sociology 5 (1): 18–34. Cuttitta, Paolo. 2015.“Mare Nostrum e la retorica umanitaria.”Intrasformazione 4 (1): 128–140. De Léon, Jason. 2015.The Land of Open Graves: Living and Dying on the Migrant Trail. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. De Swert, Knut, Laura Schacht, and Andrea Masini. 2015.“More than Human Tragedy? A Quantitative Comparison of Newspaper Coverage on Irregular Migration and Lampedusa in Five European Countries.”Italian Studies 70 (4): 506–520. Doty, Roxanne Lynn. 2011.“Bare Life: Border-Crossing Deaths and Spaces of Moral Alibi.”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 29 (4): 599–612. Edkins, Jenny. 2011.Missing: Persons and Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 16 K. HORSTI AND K. NEUMANN Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 Friese, Heidrun. 2012.“Border Economies: Lampedusa and the Nascent Migration Industry.”Shima 6 (2): 66–84. Friese, Heidrun. 2015.“Thalassographies of Departure, Disaster and Rescue: Fishermen and Undocumented Migrants.”Etnofoor 27 (1): 13–36. Gatta, Gianluca. 2012.“Corpi di frontiera. Etnografia del trattamento dei migranti al loro arrivo a Lampedusa.”Revista della Società italiana di antropologia medica 33-34 (1): 129–161. Gatta, Gianluca. 2014.“Lampedusa, 3 ottobre 2013. Vita, morte, nazione e politica nella gestione delle migrazioni.”Studi Culturali 11 (2): 323–332. Gibbings, Beth. 2010.“Remembering the SIEV X: Who Cares for the Bodies of the Stateless, Lost at Sea?”The Public Historian 32 (1): 13–30. Global Migration Data Analysis Centre (GMDAC), International Organization for Migration. 2017.“Migrant Deaths and Disappearances Worldwide: 2016 Analysis.” Data Briefing Series no. 8. Hartman, Ben. 2013.“Eritrean Community Mourns Lampedusa Migrant Ship Disaster in South Tel Aviv Memorial Service.”Jerusalem Post, October 12. http://www.jpost.com/ National-News/Eritrean-community-mourns-Lampedusa-migrant-ship-disaster-in- south-Tel-Aviv-memorial-service-328531. Hodge, Paul. 2015.“A Grievable Life? The Criminalisation and Securing of Asylum Seeker Bodies in the ‘Violent Frames’of Australia’s Operation Sovereign Borders.” Geoforum: Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences 58: 122–131. Horsti, Karina. 2016.“Imagining Europe’s Borders: Commemorative Art on Migrant Tragedies.”In Migration by Boat: Discourses of Trauma, Exclusion, and Survival, edited by Lynda Mannik, 83–100. New York: Berghahn. Hutton, Marg. 2013.“Australian Connections to Drowned Asylum Seekers.”Eureka Street 23 (21): 46–48. Kasim, Mohamed. 2017. Phone interview with Karina Horsti, 24 February 2017. Kevin, Tony. 2004.A Certain Maritime Incident: The Sinking of SIEV X. Melbourne: Scribe. Kirby, Emma Jane. 2016.The Optician of Lampedusa. London: Allen Lane. Kleist, J. Olaf. 2013.“Remembering for Refugees in Australia: Political Memories and Concepts of Democracy in Refugee Advocacy Post-Tampa.”Journal of Intercultural Studies 34 (6): 665–683. Kovras, Iosif, and Simon Robins. 2016.“Death as the Border: Managing Missing Migrants and Unidentified Bodies at the EU’s Mediterranean Frontier.”Political Geography 55: 40–49. Kushner, Tony. 2016.“Lampedusa and the Migrant Crisis: Ethics, Representation and History.”Mobile Culture Studies 1: 199–231. Mares, Peter. 2002.Borderline: Australia’s Response to Refugees and Asylum Seekers in the Wake of the Tampa. Sydney: UNSW Press. Marr, David, and Marian Wilkinson. 2003.Dark Victory. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin. Mastrodonato, Claudio. 2013.“A Lampedusa il giardino della memoria”. Ambient & Ambienti, November 7. http://www.ambienteambienti.com/a-lampedusa-il-giardino- della-memoria/. Mazzara, Federica. 2015.“Spaces of Visibility for the Migrants of Lampedusa: The Counter Narrative of the Aesthetic Discourse.”Italian Studies 70 (4): 449–464. Muneroni, Stefano. 2015.“Memorialization and Representation of Immigrants in Contemporary Italy: The Case of Mimmo Paladino’s Monument ‘Gateway to Lampedusa/Gateway to Europe.”Crossings 6 (2): 233–245. Neumann, Klaus. 2000.Shifting Memories: The Nazi Past in the New Germany. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ETHNIC AND RACIAL STUDIES 17 Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017 Orsini, Giacomo. 2015.“Lampedusa: From a Fishing Island in the Middle of the Mediterranean to a Tourist Destination in the Middle of Europe’s External Border.” Italian Studies 70 (4): 521–536. Orsini, Giacomo. 2016.“Securitization as a Source of Insecurity: A Ground-level Look at the Functioning of Europe’s External Border in Lampedusa.”Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism 16 (1): 135–147. Perera, Suvendrini. 2006.“‘They Give Evidence’: Bodies, Borders and the Disappeared.” Social Identities 12 (6): 637–656. Post, Paul. 2015.“The Lampedusa Tragedy: Chronicles of Absent and Emerging Ritual Repertoires.”Jaarboek voor liturgieonderzoek 31: 19–43. Puggioni, Raffaela. 2015.“Border Politics, Right to Life and Acts of Dissensus: Voices from the Lampedusa Borderland.”Third World Quarterly 36 (6): 1145–1159. Reckinger, Gilles. 2013.Lampedusa: Begegnungen am Rande Europas. Wuppertal: Edition Trickster. Rinelli, Lorenzo. 2015.“Translating Erratic Struggles: Reflections on Political Agency and Irregularity in Lampedusa.”Italian Studies 70 (4): 487–505. Ritaine, Évelyne. 2015.“Quand les morts de Lampedusa entrent en politique: damnatio memoriæ.”Cultures & Conflits 99–100: 117–142. Rygiel, Kim. 2016.“Dying to Live: Migrant Deaths and Citizenship Politics Along European Borders: Transgressions, Disruptions, and Mobilizations.”Citizenship Studies 20 (5): 545–560. Senate Select Committee. 2002.A Certain Maritime Incident. Canberra: Parliament of Australia. Spijkerboer, Thomas. 2007.“The Human Costs of Border Control.”European Journal of Migration and Law 9 (1): 127–139. Squire, Vicki. 2017.“Governing Migration Through Death in Europe and the US: Identification, Burial and the Crisis of Modern Humanism.”European Journal of International Relations 23 (3): 513–532. Stephens, Julie. 2008.“Commemorating the SIEV X.”Arena Magazine 93: 43–45. Stierl, Maurice. 2016.“Contestations in Death –The Role of Grief in Migration Struggles.”Citizenship Studies 20 (2): 173–191. Ticktin, Miriam. 2016.“Thinking Beyond Humanitarian Borders.”Social Research 83 (2): 255–271. Tonacci, Fabio. 2016.“Ritorno a Lampedusa.”La Repubblica, October 1. http://www. repubblica.it/cronaca/2016/10/01/news/ritorno_a_lampedusa-148853936/. Vaughan-Williams, Nick. 2015.Europe’s Border Crisis: Biopolitical Security and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ware, SueAnne. 2007.“SIEV X Memorial.”Landscape Architecture Australia 113: 48–51. Ware, SueAnne. 2008.“Anti-memorials and the Art of Forgetting: Critical Reflections on a Memorial Design Practice.”Public History Review 15: 68–72. Weber, Leanne, and Sharon Pickering. 2011.Globalization and Borders: Death at the Global Frontier. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 18 K. HORSTI AND K. NEUMANN Downloaded by [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] at 04:38 15 November 2017