THE INTERACTION BETWEEN SECURITIZATION OF MIGRATION AND ASYLUM: THE POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS ON THE RIGHTS OF ASYLUM-SEEKERS IN THE CASE OF THE EU - TURKISH JOINT STATEMENT IN 2016 (original) (raw)
Related papers
Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi dergisi, 2021
Nowadays, hundreds of thousands of people have been trying to migrate to another country including the EU member states, and live a stable life without security concerns. However, the EU has increasingly reduced their opportunity and ability to seek international protection via strict policies. Securitization of migration results in a decrease in the number of asylum applications. The EU has been politically realistic considering its own interests in implementing measures to combat irregular migration with regard to the reduction of asylum applications. In this context, the EU Commission suggested that Turkey and the Western Balkan countries should be adopted as a "safe country of origin" in September 2015. In fact, this move aimed at reducing the number of applications, many of which had already been rejected. Although the persons who were subject to the EU-Turkey Joint Statement dated March 18, 2016, used to flee from the conflict zones in the different corners of the World, the EU treated them like irregular migrants and sent them back to Turkey. The Statement, which is the basis for the return of these persons, presents itself with various difficulties in terms of procedure and implementation.
Geopolitics
This article contributes to the debates on de-centring the analysis of migration governance in Europe by focusing on the potential role of external actors in the securitisation of asylum and migration in the European Union (EU). Although there has been a growing amount of literature on the securitisation of asylum and migration in the EU, the role possibly played by external actors in this securitisation process has not been considered to date. This article addresses this gap using the case of Turkey. Theoretically, it contributes to the development of the securitisation framework by de-centring the study of securitisation processes. It argues that, from the vantage point of an external actor, a securitisation process highlights the existence of a vulnerability to a specific phenomenon that is perceived to be threatening. An external actor can then decide to exploit this vulnerability for its own gain, notably by making threats that play on the fears of the other political actor. Empirically, the article demonstrates how the Turkish government has been able to exploit the vulnerability of European countries to migration flows, which had been highlighted by the social construction of asylum and migration as security issues. By repeatedly threatening to send more asylum-seekers and migrants Europe's way, the Turkish authorities have managed to secure some significant financial and political benefits for themselves in the last few years.
Securitization of Migration: The Case of Turkey-Eu Relations
Marmara Üniversitesi Avrupa Topluluğu Enstitüsü Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi
This study aims at analyzing "securitization of migration" in Turkey-European Union (EU) relations. Analysis is made in order to see how the EU securitizes migration in its relations with Turkey and whether it is a political choice or not. The Copenhagen School's theory of securitization, multisectoral security approach and speech act are given special emphasis in this regard. The major argument of this study is that the EU has securitized migration from Turkey mainly for political reasons; thus, securitization of migration in Turkey-EU relations is a political choice. The first chapter aims to set the theoretical foundation of the study. Therefore, the concept of security is examined historically and conceptually. While different approaches on security are analysed briefly, the special reference is given to the Copenhagen School's securitization theory. Additionally, multisectoral security approach of the Copenhagen School is applied due to its analysis of different sectors. In this context, the societal sector which contains migration and migration related issues is emphasized. The second chapter aims to analyse the concept of migration historically and conceptually and to show the reasons of securitization of migration depending on anti-immigration discourses in Europe. In the last chapter, securitization of migration in Turkey-EU relations is examined by special emphasis on internal security, cultural identity and welfare state. Accordingly, the conclusion of this study is that securitization of migration in Turkey-EU relations does not depend on real existential threats and the EU has politically securitized migration from Turkey.
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.
Movements, Journal for Critical Migration and Border Regime Studies, 2017
This article discusses the first case law issued on the EU-Turkey deal from April to June 2016, which authoritatively answers the question whether Turkey constitutes a safe third country for refugees. In 390 out of 393 decisions, the Greek Asylum Appeals Committees ruled that Safe Third Country (STC) requirements were not fulfilled with respect to Turkey, essentially impeding the application of the EU-Turkey deal. Through empirical research, this article sheds light on the reasoning of the decisions of the Appeals Committees and investigates the impact of the EU-Turkey deal on them. This analysis is highly relevant to society today as it aspires to inform further law, policy, and jurisprudence in the field, especially since it provides access to sources that, due to language and other practical barriers, would remain far from the reach of legal and policy experts.
Transnational Press London, 2020
Since 2015, the European Union has shown all its internal inadequacy, in dealing with the so-called "refugee crisis". The EU-Turkey Statement has raised a number of questions about its content, including the return of all irregular migrants and the “1:1 scheme” actions. The implementation of these actions would be based on the possibility of recognizing Turkey as a “safe third country” and a “country of first asylum” under Asylum Procedures Directive. This article examines the potential application of the current notion of "safe third country" to Turkey through the formal and substantive analysis of its Asylum System. This is without neglecting the European Commission's proposal to amend the criteria for the “safe third country” concept and the possible spill-over effects, if it is approved. The article shows that the EU externalization of the migration policy, due to Member States divergences, is leading to a significant lowering of refugee protection standards.
EURINT, 2018
European Union's policies on migration and asylum raise double-ditched problems. In the EU, the latter's Court stated that in these areas solidarity is a binding principle: consequently, EU Member States must comply with EU decisions assigning quotas of international protection seekers to each EU State. The paper inspects also agreements between, on one hand, EU Member States (or the EU as such) and, on the other, non-EU countries as origin or transit States of international protection seekers with the view of relocating such individuals to those latter countries. This practice raises doubts if latter countries were deemed non-safe states, e.g. in case they weren't part to 1951 Geneva Convention. These issues are relevant for the development of relations between EU and its member states as well as in the perspective that EU performs its international legal personality in full compliance to international law rules on migration and human rights protection.
V. Stoyanova and E. Karageorgiou eds. The New Asylum and Transit Countries in Europe During and in the Aftermath of the 2015/2016 Crisis (Brill 2019) p. 115-139., 2019
The present chapter examines the interplay between the Turkish asylum laws and the European asylum acquis as well as the EU-Turkey Cooperation in the field of migration. By exploring these issues, the chapter aims to establish how the EU and the EU asylum law and policies have affected Turkish asylum laws and policies, and the protection of forced migrants in Turkey.The chapter consists of three parts. The first provides an overview of the Turkish asylum system by examining the entry of migrants and asylum seekers to Turkey, their access to international protection procedures and the main protection categories provided under the Turkish Law on Foreigners and International Protection. The second part explores the role of the EU and the EU asylum acquis in shaping Turkey’s asylum laws. The third examines the EU-Turkey cooperation in the field of migration by focusing on the EU-Turkey Statement of March 2016, its progress and the legal issues raised by the Statement. Building on these parts, the chapter concludes by addressing the question as to how the EU and the European asylum law and policies have affected protection of forced migrants in Turkey.