Çokkültürlülüğün Din ve Milliyetçilik Karşısındaki Çöküşü: Danimarka ve İsveç’in Göçmen Politikalarındaki Dönüşüm (original) (raw)
Related papers
Revista de Ciências Militares, 2016
European Union is experiencing its greatest dilemma since setting out on its project. With human rights, democracy and freedom as its political and constitutional identity, EU has been forced to reconsider its strategies in order to defend itself and protect its citizens. Politicians continue to alter the local, regional and communitarian legal system, placing legal barriers-and much more-before non-EU immigrants. This puts the community's ethos (θɒsː θoʊs) at jeopardy and the fear of the other is changing irreversibly the acquis communautaire, the legal corpus that has taken years to create. The panic and weakness of our political leaders has not reassured the people, nor there has been any evidence of reason or dignity in the search for solutions. The extreme reaction has weakened us all and has also undermined European Union's political aspirations to be a major global player. The difficulty of assimilating a large number of migrants with strong cultural identities of their own, who share a different religion from the majority of the native population, also presents a challenge to unity. They are accustomed to an anthropological political dialectic of dominated/dominant that is different from the European Union reality. Marginalisation and social exclusion will only increase as a result of the lack of assimilation policies as will xenophobia. Radical political changes will follow these social facts.
Assimilation, Security, and Borders in the Member States
in Desmond King & Patrick Le Galès (eds), Reconfiguring European States in Crisis, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 428-450, 2017
The control of migrant flows was not a decisive function for European nation-states until the end of the nineteenth century. Across the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, European states began to document migrants’ individual identities and to implement frontier controls, activities complemented in international coordination of information and policing. Passports and other identification papers became standard tools of movement from the middle of the twentieth century, as did systems of registration by foreigners. The abolition of internal frontiers in the European Union made border control between EU and non-EU countries a sharper demarcation of state boundaries, overlaying serous tensions between Western and Eastern EU states. Historically, European modernity was characterized by outward migration and state border controls developed especially to control exit strategy and to limit the loss of population. In the contempor- ary period, the question of state borders has been made salient by mass migration and more recently by terrorist attacks. The mobilization of European-born citizens as Islamic extremists draws attention to the relative success of the US and Canada in assimilating new immigrants and their offspring. These developments are discussed in this chapter with reference to immigration integration and assimilation, and the migration and security challenge to European state borders. Table of contents: CRISES, STATES, AND ASSIMILATION The European Experience State Models of Assimilation Radicalization or Integration? A Secular State or a Revival of Lipset and Rokkan’s (1967) Church–State Cleavage? STATE AND BORDER CONTROL External Borders Conflict and Rationalization Rationalization and Border Control E-bordering the European State: Schengen Besieged National versus European States Conclusion REFERENCES
H. Emre Ertem, Gizem Bilgin Aytaç- Securitizing the Immigrants as a Way to Build a European Identity
European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) Graduate Conference 2010, Dublin
In the post-cold-war years, migration has become a "high-security" issue and it has been securitized especially by the opening up the internal borders within the EU member states. The non-EU immigration has been regarded as a "threat" to the existence of "European values". The "Europeanness" myth, which was derived from "above", has a strong ideological character and plays the similar role of the cold war discourse. The European idea "has been more connected to the state tradition and elite cultures than with the politics of civil society". This structure has created "democratic deficit" in the EU, and it takes the legitimacy of the EU into the question.
Białystok Legal Studies, 2023
In 2020 the New Pact on Migration and Asylum was presented as a normalization of EU migration, asylum and border management policies in the EU, a much-needed reform which is supposed to strike a balance between security, solidarity and protection of human lives. Th e aim of this article is to investigate to what extent the proposed reform is changing the modes and trajectories of the securitization of migration in the EU. In doing so, it focuses on specifi c security logics promoted in the text, discussing how diff erent iterations of security are strengthened and/or marginalized in the EU securitizing framework. Building on the approach of 'securitization as the work of framing' , the article indicates that the pact has strengthened the risk-management and resilience-centred security logics while at the same time downplaying the role of humanitarianism. It also reveals a strong role for 'exceptionality' as a security logic, which has gained prominence especially in relation to crisis management and a wider application of militarized and robust measures.
The European Dilemma: Consequences of the new migration on European Security and Defence
The European Dilemma: Consequences of the new migration on European Security and Defence, 2016
European Union is experiencing its greatest dilemma since setting out on its project. With human rights, democracy and freedom as its political and constitutional identity, EU has been forced to reconsider its strategies in order to defend itself and protect its citizens. Politicians continue to alter the local, regional and communitarian legal system, placing legal barriers – and much more – before non-EU immigrants. This puts the community’s ethos (θɒsː θoʊs) in jeopardy and the fear of the other is changing irreversibly the acquis communautaire, the legal corpus that has taken years to create. The panic and weakness of our political leaders has not reassured the people, nor there has been any evidence of reason or dignity in the search for solutions. The extreme reaction has weakened us all and has also undermined European Union’s political aspirations to be a major global player. The difficulty of assimilating a large number of migrants with strong cultural identities of their own, who share a different religion from the majority of the native population, also presents a challenge to unity. They are accustomed to an anthropological political dialectic of dominated/dominant that is different from the European Union reality. Marginalisation and social exclusion will only increase as a result of the lack of assimilation policies as will xenophobia. Radical political changes will follow these social facts.
Democracy presupposes the existence of a political body – the demos – which is the legitimate holder of the sovereign rights. The identity of the State, as well as the possibility of the existence of a democratic political regime, is founded upon the cohesion of this political body. In 19th and 20th centuries Europe, this cohesion was expressed through a certain idea of the 'nation', a constructed notion of cohesiveness of a territorial community. But what is becoming of this political body at a time when porousness of State borders allows for the massive intrusion of populations perceived as being fundamentally extraneous, therefore threatening (Girard 1982)? Which is the place of the immigrant in the Western democracies? And which are the means through which the State reacts when confronted to this type of identity threat? Our contribution will try to map the main interrogations that cross the relation between democracy, migrations and sovereignty in the 21st century. We will argue that, while the political body of the nation-State is fragilized by immigration, new ways of re-institute the cohesiveness of its political community are set up by the State in order to enhance its identity through difference with respect to others. These include the consolidation of external borders (a policy trend in the EU), but also enhancing the symbolic internal boundaries between “us” and “the others”. The recent discourse of the European leaders about the failure of the multiculturalism is an example of this attempt to re-institute difference.
Europe Divided - The National VS Human Security Debate and its Implications for Migrant Policy
Europe Divided - The National VS Human Security Debate and its Implications for Migrant Policy, 2017
Introduction “Both irregular migrants in need of protection and members of the receiving communities are accepted as the referents of security analysis… [T]he security of the two groups of individuals cannot be thought of independently as their source of insecurity is the same: the phenomenon of irregular migration.” (Bilgic 2013: 156) Background: Refugee Crisis & EU Response At the end of 2015, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Global Trends Report stated that the number of displaced persons worldwide had reached a record high of 65.3 million people. In 2015 arrivals into Europe were recorded at over 1M with 4000 dead or missing. In 2016, over 360,000 arrived into Europe via the Mediterranean with 5022 dead or missing. In just the first month of 2017, there were been 3,233 sea arrivals with over 230 feared dead or missing. The response to these statistics varies widely at each level within the international system. What is more, the current political, social and economic climate in Europe amidst the ongoing Refugee Crisis has problematized the formulation and implementation of security policies and essentially caused a blockade to all attempts at mitigation. In a 2016 interview the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Fillipo Grandi expressed his concern in this regard. He observed that: “Instead of developing better asylum systems that are hospitable, that recognize the hardship and the difficulties and the reasons for people to flee, barriers are erected. And the barriers need not be physical, sometimes they are 2 MSc Global Studies 2017 | INRL 6000 | 808014454 Europe Divided: The National vs Human Security Debate and its Implications for Migrant Policy legislative barriers. We see this in Europe; we see the lowering of the threshold in the quality of asylum law.” This fragmented climate has stemmed from an enduring debate regarding the importance of National Security over Human Security and vice versa. This has led to a tangible division at systemic, state and individual levels. Former UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon noted that “we are facing the biggest refugee and displacement crisis of our time. Above all, this is not just a crisis of numbers, it is also a crisis of solidarity.” Not only has it disrupted the efforts of the European Union in addressing the crisis, but also spread through the wider international community. Some member states such as Germany and Sweden responded with valiant efforts at resettling refugees but found themselves condemned rather than applauded by some of their neighbours. These contradictory views have led to a significant abuse of human rights in contravention of the 1951 Refugee Convention as well as the standards of the EU Common Asylum System. The European Commission was forced to bring action against 23 member states for failure to adhere to these standards but this resulted in their attempt to shift responsibility to other states outside of the Union. It has also led to populist sentiment with a proliferation of nationalist and far-right groups, and increases in extreme xenophobia and islamophobia resulting in violent hate crimes and other degenerative social issues throughout Europe. The alleged failure of the quota referendum and other shortcoming of EU deals aimed at mitigating the crisis, does not bode well for the most recent EU-Turkey deal. In the first instance, it has been condemned as illogical, as Turkey is already hosting the largest quantity of Syrian refugees; an alarming 2.5 million. This deal has also been identified by critics as unsustainable and it can be argued that it is a means by which 3 MSc Global Studies 2017 | INRL 6000 | 808014454 Europe Divided: The National vs Human Security Debate and its Implications for Migrant Policy each country’s interests are met, masking a hidden agenda to save face with their respective populations, as opposed to an attempt at ameliorating the crisis and providing assistance to refugees as required under international law. In fact Elizabeth Collett, Director of the Migration Policy Institute, Europe (2016) argues that “the EU Turkey deal sends a message to other host countries – providing protection to large populations is a fungible task: should governments face the prospect of domestic unpopularity, the obligation to protect becomes secondary.” She furthers that “in focusing upon the most visible perceived threat, the problem has once again been squeezed elsewhere rather than resolved.”
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014
The complex dynamics between the states and the immigrant influxes led to the ongoing transformation of identity and security structures. The threats of terrorism and trans-national organized crime aggravated fears of immigration, while the prospect of Turkey and other Western Balkans states’ accession to the EU highlighted the importance of identity securitization and led to a permanent employment of identity in the migration-security logic. This paper deals with some of the key issues on how identity innovates the migration-insecurity causality relation, conferring it flexibility and referential value both at a sub- and a supranational level. In this paper, our attention is retained by the actual and potential political, social and security implications arising from the transformation of identity into a referent object of security, while identifying ways to address these consequences at a national or community level.