This paper focuses on migration in the context of European integration which
implies, on the one hand, internal integration, integration within the EU
and, on the other hand, the enlargement process related to the countries that
have applied to join the EU. The aim is to determine in which way the
migration, especially refugee crisis in 2015, had influence on the EU, as a
supranational political community, and what was the impact on Serbia which is
in the process of integration into the European Union. Migrant crisis has
shown that the EU has to confront many different issues including several
issues of great importance for its survival and strengthening: how to
influence on global processes to a greater extent instead of dealing with the
consequences of the global politics of others; how to preserve and keep the
values that the EU itself is founded and the values on which should be built
upon further construction of the political community and, finally, weather
the EU can be transformed in the direction of the United European States, in
both the functional and in terms of values, or the EU will move towards
deepening of Europe of concentric circles. Faced with extremely complex
migration situation, Serbia does not have the appropriate institutional and
regulatory framework, nor a political response to a series of complex issues
in the area of migration and migration-related issues, such as asylum system,
irregular migration, sustainable return of our citizens asylum seekers in EU
member states, implementation of the agreement on readmission, the departure
of highly educated - brain drain, migration and development, the fight
against human trafficking (protection of victims, prevention, criminal
prosecution of traffickers), and smuggling of migrants, issues of border
management, demarcation and boundary determination (as well as the agreement
that should be concluded). Some of these problems migrant crisis has made
visible by encouraging coping with the need of systemic response to the flaws
in the regulatory framework, in the policy concerning asylum seekers,
irregular migration through the territory of Serbia, as well as in the
sustainable return of our citizens, applicants for asylum in member states.
If we put all this in the context of untimely planning, ineffective
management of economic trends, the lack of financial support from Brussels to
deal with the refugee crisis, but also in the context of the fact that the
enlargement policy is aimed at meeting the Copenhagen criteria, but not on
economic growth - then the fears of uncontrolled influx of migrants pose
potential capital of radical and populist political options. In the
relationship with Brussels, Serbia would have to fight for more
under-standing regarding the state of the economy and, in general, regarding
help with the costs of joining the EU, especially in case of further
escalation of the migrant crisis. Serbia's image in the international arena
has been changing for better because of the human attitude towards refugees
and migrants who were in transit, but for the citizens of Serbia is much more
important that the attitude towards them is a part of the essential changes
in the society, and not juste an agile response to the crisis - i. e. what
metters most is to make appropriate administrative and legal measures, to
effectively manage the problems that migrant crisis put in the foreground,
but primarily to change the essence of political community and to have this
change of image as a result of state and society transformation towards
strengthening democratic institutions, the rule of law, media freedom and
developed human rights and freedoms.
Recycling European Narratives in South Korea’s ‘Refugee Crisis’: Islamophobia, #MeToo, and Yemeni Refugees on Jeju Island
