Critiques of “good” and “bad” refugees and immigrants are well established in the literature (Etzel, 2022; Andrews, 2018) and explore phenomena such as (un)documentation, legal compliance, acting white, learning dominant languages and economic contributions. Conditional inclusion and belonging is available to particular immigrant minorities, contingent on certain competences, characteristics and efforts (Hackl, 2022). This issue has brought into sharp relief in recent times following the mass forced migration of people from Ukraine. Governments throughout Europe and beyond have responded to this human tragedy in ways that contrast pointedly with their previous responses to immigration (Esposito, 2022). This paper interrogates the educational consequences of the construction of worthy and unworthy refugees. It starts with an exploration of the enduring double standard that sees some displaced people conceived as tragic victims and others as unworthy of compassion and inclusion. Drawing on an analysis of sixteen oral contributions to series of online workshops held in late 2022 and early 2023, the paper proceeds to elucidate the ways in which displaced Ukrainian citizens have been rendered as worthy of social support and educational provision in ways that are denied to refugees across many European and wider circumstances. This, is evident, for example, in relation to a relaxation of regulations on compulsory attendance at school or the freedom for Ukrainian mothers to excuse their children from mandatory education in Austria, or the accelerated registration of Ukrainian teachers with the Irish Teaching Council. The paper argues that such differentiation is rooted, in the first instance, in racist ideology of successful access to performance of white, European identities. Furthermore, however, it is argued that there is a temporality to some of these exceptions, rooted in a deeper racialized understanding that war in Europe is time bound, while war and instability is inherent in non-European sites of refugee origin. In taking this viewpoint, we argue that the double standard viewed with a geographic lens seems stark but from a temporal perspective, the treatment of Ukrainian refugees, is the same old conditionality but paused, founded on a conditional hospitality, which will be eroded over time. The paper concludes that the current situation demonstrates possibilities towards more appropriate support for all refugees and asylum seekers but promises little by way of sustaining these approaches.

Andrews, A.L. (2018) Moralizing regulation: The implications of policing “good” versus “bad” immigrants, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41(14), 2485-2503, DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2017.137513 Esposito, A. (2022) The limitations of humanity: Differential refugee treatment in the EU, Harvard International Review online at https://hir.harvard.edu/the-limitations-of-humanity-differential-refugee-treatment-in-the-eu/ Etzel, M. (2022) New models of the “good refugee” – bureaucratic expectations of Syrian refugees in Germany, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41(6), 1115-1134, DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2021.1954679 Hackl, A. (2022) Good immigrants, permitted outsiders: conditional inclusion and citizenship in comparison, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 45(6), 989-1010, DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2021.2011938