Migration-security Nexus Research Articles

Insecurity, deportability and authority

Security is more than ever a central theme in the study of international migration. For the past twenty years, research on the securitization of migration has burgeoned. While these initiatives are to be applauded, we believe they may also have misdiagnosed the problem. For example, it may not be that the concept of ‘security’ needs to be ‘humanized’ in order to be more in tune with migrants’ concerns. Rather, the problem may lie in the use of the ‘migrant’ as an analytical category. The ‘migrant’ remains an inherently statist construct. The starting premise for the collection of articles in this special issue is that it is the tendency of academic research to mistake the statist category of the ‘migrant’ as an analytical category that has prevented the literature on the migration–security nexus from meaningfully reflecting the lived experience and aspirations of its human respondents, particularly as regards their encounters with forms of institutional authority, practices, resistance and resilience. We use the rubric of deportability to open up a variety of ways of thinking and talking about migration and security that do not fall back upon statist tropes. The authors in this collection take up this challenge by framing and employing concepts such as statelessness, sedentariness and expulsion to redefine our understanding of the relationship between movement and order. They take inspiration from multiple brands of social and political theorizing where conditions of violence and forced removal qualitatively differentiate the experiences and encounters of a particular group.

International politics of migration in times of ‘crisis’ and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic

AbstractA much-anticipated end of the COVID-19 pandemic is on the horizon. It is important to reflect on the ways in which the pandemic has impacted the international politics of migration and especially on the migration-security nexus, which is still little understood but affecting policies and population movements with future implications. How the pandemic has shaped tradeoffs between securitization of migration, health, and economic concerns in governing migration? What are the new trends emerging from the pandemic on the migration-security nexus? And how can we study these in the coming years? This Research Note features insights from scholars associated with the British International Studies Association’s working group on the ‘International Politics of Migration, Refugees and Diaspora’. They argue that the pandemic has exacerbated tendencies for migration control beyond reinforcing nation-state borders, namely through foregrounding ‘riskification’ of migration discourses and practices, adding to an earlier existing securitization of migration considered as a ‘threat’. Digital controls at borders and beyond were ramped up, as were racial tropes and discrimination against migrants and mobile persons more generally. These trends deepen the restrictions on liberal freedoms during a period of global democratic backsliding, but also trigger a counter-movement where the visibility of migrants as ‘key workers’ and their deservingness in host societies has been enhanced, and diasporas became more connected to their countries of origin. This Research Note finds that enhanced controls, on the one side, and openings for visibility of migrants and transnational connectivity of diasporas, on the other, are worthy to study in the future as political trends per se. Yet, it would be also interesting to study them as interconnected in a dual movement of simultaneous restriction and inclusion, and in an interdependent world where the power of nation-states has been reasserted due to the pandemic, but migrant transnationalism has remained largely intact.

Migrações irregulares e perceções de (in)segurança

The study of migration in the context of security studies presents various approaches and plural understandings due to the polysemic nature of the concept of security. There are different paradigms that examine in a distinct way the migration-security nexus, reflecting the security agendas developed in the 1990s and after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This article assesses the securitisation of irregular migration using a thematic analysis of national security strategies considering three great powers in the world: China, Russia and the United States of America (USA). The results show dissimilar and ambiguous narratives, sometimes emphasizing border control, surveillance and right of admission, other times placing the focus on the humanitarian intervention and human rights.

Resettling Afghan and Iraqi interpreters employed by Western armies: The Contradictions of the Migration–Security Nexus

This article develops a novel analytical framework for capturing the multiple, competing configurations that the migration-security nexus invokes in discourse and practice, combining insights from critical migration and security scholarship. The framework’s application is illustrated with an empirical case study of the protection and relocation of Afghan and Iraqi former local interpreters and other locally employed civilians working for Western armies. The analysis demonstrates that locally employed civilians (LECs) are simultaneously considered security actors in the East and security risks in the West, the ‘best and brightest’ causing brain drain and potential terrorists when crossing borders, both ‘model migrants’ and threats to western values. By uncovering the nexus’s multiple configurations and its contradictions, the framework supports the project of denaturalizing the migration-security nexus, while also showing that the discourses and practices justified through its various configurations include the legitimation of border violence and the denial of protection to migrants.

Siyasal Liderlerin Söylemleri ve Göçün Güvenlikleştirilmesi: Türkiye ve Amerika Birleşik Devletleri Karşılaştırması

With the growing importance of human mobility in the global agenda since the early 1990s, international migration has increasingly evolved into a securitized phenomenon. This has also made international migrantsa prominent target group of security speech acts. The main objective of this study is to explore migration-security nexus in the context of political discourses. The paper brings a comparative perspective to the role of political leader discourses in the securitization of migration by examining the cases of the United States (USA), hosting the largest number of international migrants, and Turkey, the world’s top refugee hosting country. Through the analytical lens of critical discourse analysis (CDA) and securitization theory, the study unpacks the rhetoric used by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and American President Donald John Trump towards migrants/ asylum seekers. As the key findings demonstrate, the way the two leaders reflect the migration-security relationship to their speech acts significantly varies. President Trump associates migrants with security issues in multiple ways including social, political and economic spheres, while President Erdoğan’s discourse links migrants with security issues inthe economic realm, but his general discourse reflects a desecuritization approach. In both countries, it is observed that the discourses of political leaders concerning migrants and asylum seekers exert influence on public opinion.

Abuse by association: migration from terror-prone countries and human rights abuses

ABSTRACT A burgeoning body of work examines the connection between migration and security. Studies link migration to an increased volume of terrorism in destination states. More recent work examines the humanitarian consequences for political migrants and shows that refugees confront repression by state agents in recipient states. We argue that these consequences can generalize to society writ large and may point to a broader erosion of human rights. We build on and expand this line of work by examining the effects of migration on the abuse of physical integrity rights in destination states. Using a cross-national longitudinal sample from 1980 to 2010, we show that while overall migration has no pernicious effects, migration flows from terror-prone states are associated with reduced physical integrity rights provision in destination states. Contrary to intuition, we find that migration from culturally dissimilar origin states has no negative consequences. These results refine our understanding of the migration-security nexus by showing that fears over terrorism drive the deleterious consequences of migration. Our paper also contributes to the human rights literature by demonstrating that the link between migrants and terrorism affects the rights not just of foreigners but also those of destination citizens.

The spiralling of the securitisation of migration in the EU: from the management of a ‘crisis’ to a governance of human mobility?

ABSTRACT This special issue illustrates that the securitisation of migration is not a linear process but a spiralling phenomenon, which involves different actors, and their policies, practices and narratives, in a spiralling progression that both self-fulfils and reinforces migration-security nexus’ dynamics. By proposing a cognitive ontology to understand the social construction of migration as a security threat, the introduction to this special issue proposes a categorisation of cognitions, mandates, constituencies and interests of state and non-state actors. Through a dichotomisation of these categories, it is possible to clarify how and why they either socially construct or deconstruct migration as a threat. In particular, the special issue identifies in prejudicial cognitions one of the main reasons for which a variety of actors enact practices and produce narratives that contribute to both securitising migration and reinforcing its nexus with crime, and the consequent social construction of ‘migration crises’. The different contributions to this special issue prove the arguments here exposed with a different analysis of how migration has been dealt with at either governmental or non-governmental levels.

Fearful states: the migration-security nexus in Northeast Asia

How does the notion of state security inform national approaches to managing cross-border in-migration in the increasingly interconnected but volatile Northeast Asian region? This paper explores this question by focusing on the intermestic politics of labor importation. Specifically, it theorizes the multidimensionality and multifunctionality of security fears that inform Japan’s and Taiwan’s approaches to the admission of low-skilled foreign workers. The paper proposes a comprehensive conceptual framework that explicates these relationships and argues that Northeast Asian labor importation regimes were formed at the intersection of a threefold logic of state security. Whereas economic security acted as an enabling (inclusionary) factor in both Japan and Taiwan and motivated the acceptance of foreign workers, internal security in Japan and external security in Taiwan acted as constraining (exclusionary) factors, which directly and distinctively conditioned the resulting policies. Moreover, ever since their inception in the immediate aftermath of the Cold War, the divergent policy regimes have been interlocked in these economic-internal and economic-external dynamics of state security.

Migration crisis in the EU: developing a framework for analysis of national security and defence strategies

This article addresses migration-security nexus in the EU by assessing Member States’ national security and defence strategies as well as the 2016 EUGS in a time of migration crisis, a crisis that stands as one of the most important geopolitical challenges today in the EU. After developing and applying a framework for analysis derived from a literature review, the existing differences among Member States are clear in terms of strategic cultures and approaches to migration issues. The idea of ‘EU’rope without internal borders is at stake as Schengen is under serious attack due to increasing Eurocentrism and growing extreme right-wing populism, which are a consequence of increasing economic protectionism and international terrorism. The solution seems to depend on two critical uncertainties: the evolution of political and social instability in the North Africa and the Middle East, and the future of the EU itself. The results enlighten a securitization of migration mostly centred on the nation-state and national security rather than on people and human security.

Introduction.

Irregular migration can be broadly defined as people’s mobility that is unauthorised or forced, and this book expands on the existing migration-security nexus by moving away from the traditional state security lens, and instead, shifting ...

Migration and security: in search of reconciliation

In this paper a case is made for the necessity of an inter-disciplinary treatment of the migration phenomenon. The paper addresses the relation between migration and security from a reconciliatory perspective after a brief analysis of the migration-security nexus and how migration got securitised. Based on the Foucauldian notion of biopolitics, one can argue that what contributes heavily to the securitisation of migration is the emergence of biopower and biopolitics which are primarily concerned with the control over lives of the population within a given territory. This makes states and societies consider migration as a matter that should be under control, since it is related to the hygiene of the population and nationals of a given state. I, therefore, discuss the EU and other European countries’ policies regarding migration and how biopolitics have influenced securitising the EU’s migration policies. The main argument is that migration can, and should, be treated as an advantage rather than a threat, though it does not deny the security concerns that alway accompany such social phenomenon. The impact of culture and history on migration policies, and how identity politics shape a given country’s policies are discussed. Perceiving migration as either a threat or an opportunity, the way in which a country perceives migrants shapes its migration policies, whether restrictive or multiculturally-tolerant.

Securitising Migration: The European Union in the Context of the Post-2011 Arab Upheavals

The migration-security nexus, already at the heart of EU policymaking before the 2011 Arab uprisings, became acute after the forced displacements from Syria and the deterrence measures introduced. The internalisation by broader publics of “security knowledge” regarding migration contributed to the securitisation move. However, the construction of migration into a security-laden notion goes beyond both the adoption of deterrence measures and the straightforward association of migration with state as well as societal (in)security. Through the lens of its cooperative tools with its southern neighbours, the EU has built complex interdependencies between migration, post-2011 regional stabilisation and security. In order to read the EU’s securitised migration politics properly, the migration-security nexus must be embedded in its social, geopolitical and temporal fields. Perceptions of geopolitical threats, concurrent strains and divergences over European integration and immigration constitute an enabling terrain for the politics of securitisation.

Do asylum recognition rates in Europe respond to transnational terrorism? The migration-security nexus revisited

Scholars assume that transnational terrorism has culminated in policy securitization with expansive restrictions on migration. I evaluate the impact of transnational terrorism on asylum recognition among European Union and Schengen member-states from 1980 until 2007. I unpack the impact of terrorism according to the location of incidents. The article illustrates that policy tightening is more pronounced when recipient states experience terrorism on their own soil or against their citizens. In contrast, measuring transnational terrorism as attacks worldwide mutes the impact of security concerns. The findings show that policy stringency is not directed against particular sources of terrorism and demonstrates that the humanitarian principles underpinning asylum recognition have not been eroded by terrorism. The article thus represents an important step in differentiating between channels of impact whereby transnational terror shapes policy outcomes.

Border Controls in Europe: Policies and Practices Outside the Law

The forced migrant 1 to Europe is hostage to a tight “migration-security nexus”, 2 their conversion into a globally ubiquitous “illegal” presence facilitated by the incorporation of the global security industry into the region's system of external border controls. The European Union 3 not only outsources its border control activities to private security concerns (as well as third-party states), but also consults them on the direction of its policies, adopting their discourse and practices. It is using their expertise to meld member states' border technology into an apparatus of detection and deterrence that stretches far beyond the region to intercept forced migrants long before they reach its borders. The agencies that patrol on Europe's behalf outside its geopolitical boundaries also operate outside national legal structures, without regard to international human rights or refugee rights. Under cover of the privatization and securitization 4 of its immigration and asylum regime, the European Union acts with impunity in a parallel world of extra-legal 5 practices.

The Migration-Security Nexus in Short: Instruments and Actions in the European Union

In early 2011, the so-called 'Arab spring' opened a new period of change, expectations and challenges in several North African countries. Despite of the democratic processes started in that countries, to important sectors of European media and public opinion, it seemed that Arab riots had mainly become another push factor for irregular migration to the European Union. Furthermore, the crisis management of Tunisian migrants arriving to Italy, stressed the European system of free movement of people in the Schengen area in an unthinkable way just few weeks before.The aim of this paper is not to analyze the consequences of these events, neither in the Arab world nor in the Schengen performance. The main objective is to analyze the establishment of this migration-security nexus at the European level, and to examine how the EU deals with the security issue in relation with migration.

Revisiting the Migration–Development Nexus: From Social Networks and Remittances to Markets for Migration Control

AbstractIn this paper, I explore the nexus between migration, development and security in South–North migration through an analysis of certain discursive constructions in current migration policy debates; in particular, the migration–development nexus that attempts to make migration work for development in the global South, and the migration–security nexus that legitimizes stricter border controls and migration management in the global North. Shifting geopolitical concerns have changed the balance between the two nexuses over time, but by and large policy debates have been driven by the interests of Northern governments, whereby “development” has been reduced to an instrument of migration policy and “security” to an issue of keeping unwanted and potentially dangerous migratory flows out. The security situation of journeying migrants may make it to the policy debating tables of international organizations and forums, but has thus far not radically changed migration policy. I suggest analysing the nexus constructions through an analytical lens capable of encompassing both migrants and their border‐spanning social networks, on the one hand, and migration policies and state responses aimed at controlling human mobility, on the other. The starting point for this analytical endeavour is the intersection between the migration industry, understood as the broad array of both legal and clandestine actors linked to the facilitation of international migration, and the growing markets for migration management both at the inter‐state level and in the increased use of private and commercial agents for control purposes.

Migrants, refugees and insecurity. Current threats to peace?

Since the early 1980s, international migration has moved beyond humanitarian, economic development, labor market and societal integration concerns, raising complex interactive security implications for governments of migrant sending, receiving and transit countries, as well as for multilateral bodies. This article examines the effects of international migration on varied understandings and perceptions of international security. It discusses why international migration has come to be perceived as a security issue, both in industrialized and developing countries. Questions are raised on the migration-security nexus and the way in which the concepts "security" and "migration" are used. The real and perceived impacts of international migration upon national and regional security, both in industrialized and developing countries, are analyzed. The policies developed by governments and multilateral agencies since the mid-1980s to mitigate the destabilizing effects of certain kinds of international population movement and human displacement are examined. The conclusions stress the need for the establishment of a comprehensive framework of international cooperation among origin and receiving countries and international organizations to address the destabilizing implications of international migration.