The Syrian crisis that began expanding in 2012 has sent millions of refugees into neighbouring countries and beyond and proved to be a testing ground for the European Union’s new approach to humanitarian crises. Focused on European Union-funded educational programmes carried out in response to the Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanon, this article argues that the European Union’s approach has nevertheless negatively impacted refugees’ lives because of its embeddedness in the international regime of resilience that has gained ground in the field of refugee protection. Indeed, while the resilience regime appears to be a continuation of the neoliberal system of rule, it in fact represents a paradigmatic shift that implies political and moral retreat from donors’ responsibility. Applied to refugee management, the agenda of “resilience” thus contradicts the rationale for burden-sharing that previously involved a “shared responsibility” between external donors and the hosting State. Based on Kratochwil’s praxis approach, this article therefore aims to empirically expand upon the recent literature centred on “resilience” and “self-reliance” in the field of refugee management. In doing so, it demonstrates how neoliberal features of resilience further hinder refugees’ lives as these features entail a total separation from an adequate rights-based approach.

中文翻译：

---

弹性政治的背后：欧盟对黎巴嫩叙利亚难民反应的局限性

2012 年开始扩大的叙利亚危机已将数百万难民送往邻国及其他地区，并证明是欧盟应对人道主义危机新方法的试验场。本文着眼于欧盟资助的为应对黎巴嫩叙利亚难民危机而开展的教育项目，认为欧盟的方法仍然对难民的生活产生了负面影响，因为它嵌入了在难民保护领域。事实上，虽然复原力制度似乎是新自由主义统治体系的延续，但它实际上代表了一种范式转变，意味着政治和道德上从捐助者的责任中撤退。应用于难民管理，因此，“复原力”议程与以前涉及外部捐助者和东道国之间“共同责任”的分担责任的理由相矛盾。因此，基于 Kratochwil 的实践方法，本文旨在实证扩展最近在难民管理领域以“弹性”和“自力更生”为中心的文献。在此过程中，它展示了复原力的新自由主义特征如何进一步阻碍难民的生活，因为这些特征需要与充分的基于权利的方法完全分离。因此，本文旨在实证扩展最近以难民管理领域的“复原力”和“自力更生”为中心的文献。在此过程中，它展示了复原力的新自由主义特征如何进一步阻碍难民的生活，因为这些特征需要与充分的基于权利的方法完全分离。因此，本文旨在实证扩展最近以难民管理领域的“复原力”和“自力更生”为中心的文献。在此过程中，它展示了复原力的新自由主义特征如何进一步阻碍难民的生活，因为这些特征需要与充分的基于权利的方法完全分离。