The animosities of the 1899-1901 Anglo-Boer War, however, brought the limits of this imperative into sharp relief. As Shaw’s paper will demonstrate, both British and Boer supporters levied critiques of the treatment of Boer and Uitlander ‘refugees’ that challenged the category of refugee itself. Each accused the British government of failing to provide adequately for the war’s innocents, but questioned which group was in fact innocent and deserving of relief. Boer supporters decried the methodic barbarism inflicted through supposed ‘refugee’ relief of Boer women and children detained in concentration camps. Uitlanders (British subjects) asserted that they themselves were the only ‘refugees’ and entitled to the attention showered upon the enemy.
By situating the war in a longer history of refugee relief, Shaw will demonstrate how the welfare of displaced individuals hinged on the critiques set out by colonial subjects, by philanthropists and by on-looking international powers. Furthermore, if the sheltering of refugees once brought the British international renown, explicit in the critiques of the war was a devastating challenge to her colonial rule and philanthropic authority. The moral force once a particularity of British policy would increasingly devolve upon international organizations.