Foreign Terrorist Fighters as a Factor of Securitization of the EU Migration Policy

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (11) ◽  
pp. 106-114
Author(s):  
O. Potyomkina
Keyword(s):  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Difficult Problem ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Security Threat ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The article analyzes the impact of the Foreign Terrorist Fighters’ (FTF) phenomenon on the securitization of the European Union’s migration policy. The author follows the construction of the FTF as a serious security threat to the European Union’s strategies and action plans, and demonstrates the EU’s practical actions to respond the threat: criminalization of “suspicious travel”, strengthening border security, preliminary screening of asylum seekers at the border. The article pays special attention to the EU plans to achieve compatibility of the European Union information systems, while emphasizing new opportunities for the law enforcement bodies to access migration databases for combating terrorism. Exploring the new EU integration plan for migrants, the author notes that this is for the first time that the European Commission focuses its efforts not only on migrants, but also on the EU citizens with “migratory background”, which is undoubtedly dictated by a fear of the extremist ideology influence on young people. The article exposes certain similarities between the Commission’s methods to coordinate integration and inclusion of migrants, reintegration of the FTF and their families, which indicates that the migration policy is becoming a part of the EU security policy. That leads to a conclusion that securitization of migration policy aims not only and not so much at preventing the potential threat of the returnees’ terrorist activities, but at curbing migration flows as a whole and reducing the number of asylum seekers, in particular. Nevertheless, terrorism and migration seem to be closely linked in public discourse, despite the absence of an empirical basis to conclude that these factors directly influence each other. The author considers the most difficult problem of modern migration policy to be the definition of the red line beyond which its securitization can be justified.

scholarly journals The Shoppers; Venue Shopping, Asylum Shopping: A Resolution in EURODAC?

2018 ◽  
Vol 331 ◽  
pp. 229-237
Author(s):  
Catherine Odorige
Keyword(s):  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Venue Shopping ◽  
Judicial Scrutiny ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Third Country Nationals

The term shopping used in reference to two strictly legal/politically somewhat related issues ‘Asylum shopping’ and ‘Venue shopping’, belong to two different spheres of actors. Asylum shopping is descriptive of the action of asylum seekers selectivity, in choice of member state where they perceive better social and welfare conditions. Venue shopping, a concept introduced by Guiraudon in 2000, explain the action of movement by member states in the European Union from venues of national jurisdiction, less amenable to their search for more restrictive migration policy to venues howbeit transnational like transit countries and EU institutions suitable for their policy perspectives. This they did for the primary purpose of avoiding adversary activities of non-state actors and the judicial scrutiny within their national sphere. Common European Asylum System (CEAS) the Dublin Directive and the EURODAC are spill-over in the European integration Project, commonly referred to as the Schengen acquis in the area of migration and integration of third country nationals. The three directives are the results of policy search to administer the entrance and residence of third country nationals especially in the area of irregular migration. This paper seeks to examine the inter-relationship between the two actors to which the commercial term shopping describes, how an electronic regulation in EURODAC became a check to their ‘shopping.’ For the asylum seekers exposing their agency, for the member states reducing anxieties, and influenced the ceding of powers hitherto held by member states through (intergovernmental) negotiations to the EU (Supranational) and the impact of these policy measures in checking security challenges and sanitization of this angle of asylum administration in the EU.

scholarly journals Migration issues in the EU’s common foreign and security policy – selected aspects

2021 ◽  
pp. 43-59
Author(s):  
Tomasz Dubowski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
External Action ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Eu

In the discussion on the EU migration policy, it is impossible to evade the issue of the relation between this policy and the EU foreign policy, including EU common foreign and security policy. The subject of this study are selected links between migration issues and the CFSP of the European Union. The presented considerations aim to determine at what levels and in what ways the EU’s migration policy is taken into account in the space of the CFSP as a diplomatic and political (and subject to specific rules and procedures) substrate of the EU’s external action.

scholarly journals Migrations in Europe: Fears due to the enlargement of the EU to the East

Stanovnistvo ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 41 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 131-145
Author(s):  
Mirjana Morokvasic
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Buffer Zone ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eastern Border ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The European Union is confronted with the biggest enlargement in its history: ten states, among them eight middle European - the so called "buffer zone" in the new European migration landscape - will become members in 2004. Other candidates hope to join in the coming years. For all Eastern and Eastern European countries, including those that are not candidates, the end of the bi-polar world meant a hope of "return to Europe". When shifting its borders to the East, the European Union both includes and excludes. The final objective to achieve Europe as "a space of freedom, security and justice", is conditioned by the capacity and necessity to control the migratory flows. The prospect of free circulation for the citizens of the new Union members entails also fears: the EU countries are afraid of the consequences the enlargement would have on migratory flows from the countries of the Central and Eastern Europe and which transit through that area. The perception of migrants as a threat inspired the conditions that the Union imposed on the candidate countries concerning migration policy issues and which mostly focus on the protection of its Eastern borders. For the future Union members however, protecting of the thousand of kilometers of their Eastern border, implies a number of quite different problems. These countries are afraid of the impact the restrictive measures they are obliged to implement would have both on many economic and family ties which have been maintained since the socialist period and on more recently engaged cooperation with the neighbours which are not candidates. The challenge of enlargement is different therefore for the EU members, for the candidate countries and for those who are for the moment excluded from the process. The fears do not seem to be always grounded. Thus, the impact of enlargement which, it was feared, could have been so destabilizing for the Union because of potentially large migration flows, is more likely to be destabilizing for the new candidate countries, especially concerning their relations with their neighbours excluded from the enlargement process.

scholarly journals Migration Challenges in the EU amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Fostering Solidarity or Threatening the Cohesion?

2020 ◽  
pp. 94-107
Author(s):  
E. Matyukhova
Keyword(s):  
Regional Integration ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Assistance Programs ◽  
States Of Emergency ◽  
Long Term Impact ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The article discusses the formation and adaptation of migration policies in the European Union Member States under the impact of COVID-19. Prior to the pandemic, migration was already a very acute issue for the Member States, because the attitudes of each country towards formulating a common migration policy and its further communitarisation were quite different. Not surprisingly, amid the spread of the infection, a phenomenon such as migration has an even greater impact on the development of the entire European regional integration project. Due to the introduction of strict measures against coronavirus, such as social distance standards and states of emergency, most migrant and refugee assistance programs have been suspended indefinitely, with an immediate negative impact on the lives of these people. However, one thing all countries agree on is that migrants contribute greatly to EU life and development, as they constitute 13% of the key workforce. Therefore, new safe working practices need to be adopted. Another key issue under consideration is developing coherent asylum-seeker and refugee policies. These two categories constitute a large part of the Union's migration flows; however, the EU experience in this area has not been very successful. Thus, in the midst of COVID-19, effective migration management becomes even more important. The pandemic stresses the need for better public administration with migrants and refugees in mind. As a consequence, it is not surprising that COVID-19 will have a long-term impact on migration. Basing on the analysis of current developments, the author concludes that although the EU has taken some initiatives to improve the situation of migrants and refugees, it cannot fully guarantee them health protection, decent and stable living conditions, social security and access to the labor market.

THE EUROPEAN UNION MIGRATION POLICY IN TERMS OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC

2021 ◽  
pp. 80-92
Author(s):  
Maxim V. Fomenko ◽  
◽  
Anfisa E. Kriuchkova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Open Door Policy ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Migration Crisis ◽  
The Impact ◽  
European Migration ◽  
The Eu

The article is devoted to the impact of the epidemiological situation in the countries of the European Union in connection with the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic on the migration policy of the integration association. Based on the analysis of documents and statistical materials, the author identified the key factors that determine the transformation of European migration policy at the present stage. In addition to that the author put forward the idea of the EU maintaining the course for the implementation of a set of measures taken in this area before the beginning of the pandemic. The article analyzes some of the consequences of the migration crisis of 2015-2016. Some documents adopted in the EU during and after the migration crisis are cited. A critical understanding of the "open door policy" is given. After the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the EU countries faced a new challenge. The global lockdown put tens of thousands of migrants in a vulnerable position in EU countries awaiting status. Despite the fact that the primary tasks of accommodating and helping migrants at the beginning of the pandemic were solved, it is worth noting that the European Union did not show proper coordination of actions. For example, a comprehensive approach to the formation of a unified migration policy has not yet been developed.

scholarly journals Impact of Brexit on voting power in Council of the European Union

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 192-197
Author(s):  
Jakub Gábor
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Voting Power ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe United Kingdom has left the European Union on 31 January 2020. Discussions that preceded such a move were conducted in three dimensions: they pertained a post-Brexit relationship between the UK and EU, future conduct within the UK and the one within the EU. Whilst public discourse has been dominated by the first two, this paper approaches the third one – on how Brexit has affected relationships between remaining 27 EU Member States. Stemming from the calculation of Banzhaf indices, it assesses the impact of Brexit on the voting power of remaining Member States in the Council of the EU – arguably the most important body within the EU institutional architecture – and identifies which countries are going to record the most significant gains and losses in this respect.

scholarly journals MIGRATION CRISIS IN THE EU: IS THE PEAK PASSED?

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 31-37
Author(s):  
Olga Potemkina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
External Pressure ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
Migration Crisis ◽  
The Eu

The article analyses the prospects of a new migration crisis in the European Union. Referring the statistics of displaced persons within Afghanistan and the neighboring countries, the author predicts potential threat of an emergency migration influx to Europe. The factors are proposed that can cause a significant outflow of population from the country, but at the same time obstacles preventing a large number of Afghan asylum seekers from reaching the borders of the European Union: external pressure on the Taliban government to maintain control over emigration, remoteness from Europe and the excessive cost of travel, EU measures to strengthen the external border. The author concludes that there is a small probability of new large-scale migration crisis in the short term but does not exclude it in the long term if the plans of the European Union and the international community to assign responsibility for Afghan refugees to neighboring countries are not implemented. In the meantime, the author notes, the plans of the European Union are criticized by both MEPs and human rights.

What Is Best for Europe?

2020 ◽  
pp. 158-195
Author(s):  
Luke Patey
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Formal Group ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Values ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Divide And Rule ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
The Eu

Across European and Western liberal market democracies, China’s rise exposes friction between economic interests and political values and challenge common foreign and security policy in the European Union. From positions of economic weakness, Greece, Hungary, and Portugal have blocked or watered down common security, human rights, and economic positions in the regional body. Beijing’s formation of a formal group with Central and Eastern European countries, the so-called 17+1, is similarly seen in Brussels as a “divide and rule” tactic. Yet while European governments receive ample criticism for neglecting their political values in order to advance economic relations with China, the economic importance of China to the EU is rarely scrutinized. For large member states like Germany and France, and smaller ones such as Denmark and Norway, trade and investment with China does not produce a relationship of economic dependency for the EU as commonly perceived, particularly as China’s state capitalist system produces new competition for European companies. Beijing’s infringements on European democratic values and competitive economic pressures are changing the public discourse on China, but without a collective response, economic relations with China will only become more asymmetric than they are today.

Russia - European Union: The continuation ofthe sanctions standoff

2017 ◽  
pp. 114-127
Author(s):  
M. Klinova ◽  
E. Sidorova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Recession ◽  
Economic Sanctions ◽  
Current Data ◽  
The State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Year 2013

The article deals with economic sanctions and their impact on the state and prospects of the neighboring partner economies - the European Union (EU) and Russia. It provides comparisons of current data with that of the year 2013 (before sanctions) to demonstrate the impact of sanctions on both sides. Despite the fact that Russia remains the EU’s key partner, it came out of the first three partners of the EU. The current economic recession is caused by different reasons, not only by sanctions. Both the EU and Russia have internal problems, which the sanctions confrontation only exacerbates. The article emphasizes the need for a speedy restoration of cooperation.

Austrian Veto against European Union Membership Negotiations with Turkey

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-122
Author(s):  
Ewa Kaczan-Winiarska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Strategic Partner ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
European Standards ◽  
The Eu

The Austrian government is extremely sceptical about the accession negotiations which are conducted by the European Commission on behalf of the European Union with Turkey and calls for the negotiation process to end. Serious reservations of Vienna have been raised by the current political situation in Turkey under the rule of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, as well as by the standards of democracy in Turkey, which differ greatly from European standards. Serious deficiencies in rule of law, freedom of speech and independence of the judiciary, confirmed in the latest European Commission report on Turkey, do not justify, from Vienna’s point of view, the continuation of talks with Ankara on EU membership. In fact, Austria’s scepticism about the European perspective for Turkey has a longer tradition. This was marked previously in 2005 when the accession negotiations began. Until now, Austria’s position has not had enough clout within the European arena. Pragmatic cooperation with Turkey as a strategic partner of the EU, both in the context of the migration crisis and security policy, proved to be a key factor. The question is whether Austria, which took over the EU presidency from 1.7.2018, will be able to more strongly accentuate its reservations about Turkey and even build an alliance of Member States strong enough to block Turkey’s accession process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document