Introduction

This introductory chapter lays out the key questions of the book. It explains the background assumptions at play and the key philosophical commitments supporting the different arguments in the book. This chapter also explains the key arguments of the following chapters and how they come together to support a partial theory of immigrations that avoids both open borders and complete control of immigration on the part of states. It also explains how the theoretical framework defended in the first part of the book affects the applied questions pursued in the second part of the book, such as the ethics of asylum, family migration schemes, the brain drain, and immigration enforcement.

A globális, az európai uniós vírusválság határpolitikai hatásai.

Összefoglaló. Az elmúlt mintegy másfél év alatt a COVID–19 vírus valójában több struktúrában megrengette a világot, az Európai Uniót és egyes országokat is. A világ államai rövid idő alatt bezárkóztak, az Európai Unió 30 napra lezárta külső határait, az egyes tagállamok pedig az uniós belső határokat is lezárták. Veszélybe került a schengeni rendszer. A Kárpát-medence államai az elsők között reagáltak a határok lezárásával. Az egyéni döntések kritikája erőteljesen megjelent az Európai Bizottság részéről. A globális, az európai és a szomszédállami folyamatok összefüggtek. A határok lezárása feltehetően hozzájárult a vírus terjedésének a korlátozásához. (Ausztrália példája ezt erősíti.) A határzárak a nemzetközi tranzitforgalomban, a határ menti területeken élők és az ingázók között okozták a legnagyobb bizonytalanságot, több esetben zűrzavart. Summary. According to the first ‘official announcement’ in December of 2019 the Covid-19 virus is reported to have emerged in China. The global spread of the virus was extremely fast. On 11 March 2020, the WHO declared Covid-19 to be a global pandemic. As of 31 March 2020 about 91% of the world population lived in countries with border and travel restrictions (border-closed world). The brief analysis reviews the main processes affecting EU and Member States borders, with a special regard to Hungary and its neighbours in the Carpathian Basin. On 17 March 2020, the EU closed its external borders for 30 days.to non-EU citizens. In parallel, a number of Member States decided to close their borders to both Schengen Zone members and third countries. As a response to border closures, the EU Commission and some states organized the repatriation of about 600,000 EU citizens. On 4 March, virus was officially reported to have been detected in Hungary. On 11 March the Hungarian Government declared a national state of emergency. On 15 March the first coronavirus-related death was announced. On 16 March the Government ordered the complete closure of Hungarian borders. After a border ‘traffic chaos’ along the Austrian-Hungarian border, the Hungarian Government – with collaborations with Romania – opened humanitarian corridors for foreign citizens. The possibilities of border crossings of citizens of seven neighbours of Hungary were formed not just by Hungary. In 2020 because of different changes (modifications, opening and closing) we could form at least three categories: open borders, partly open borders, closed borders. In the neighbouring countries (Austria, Slovakia, Ukraine, Romania, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) the progression of the epidemic followed the same pattern. Over the past year and a half the virus crisis has actually shaken many structures of the globalized world, the European Union and many countries in the Carpathian Basin. The virus crises has disrupted intensive connections between Hungary and neighbouring countries. Neither Hungary nor its neighbours were able to insulate themselves from the epidemic waves. The border restrictions primarily affected the movements of persons. Because of ‘permanent uncertainty’ commuters were the losers of the crisis.

Mapping and countermapping shifting borders

Ayelet Shachar's The Shifting Border deploys a powerful map metaphor to support rethinking of borders and their functions. I interrogate this metaphor, developing some of the representational, constructive, and normative functions of maps, along with their connections to legal mechanisms for decoupling migration from territory. I survey three responses to the extra-territorialization of migration: a cynical response that rejects the possibility of migration justice, an abolitionist response connected to open borders, and a revisionist response that advocates for widescale institutional reform. The revisionist response illuminates how Shachar's essay challenges us to reflect on what sorts of maps and accompanying social and political organizations would best support migrant justice.

Whatever Happened to the Canaanites? Principles of a Christian Ethic of Mass Immigration

This article aims to articulate a set of general principles of a Christian ethic of mass immigration. Toward this end, it considers: biblical and theological grounds for cosmopolitanism (and ‘open borders’); biblical and theological caveats against cosmopolitanism; elements of a Christian ethic of the treatment of near and distant neighbours; what Francisco de Vitoria’s ‘On the American Indians’ has to contribute; what lessons should be learned from the history of European colonialism; and the nature of mass immigration into twenty-first-century Europe and the problems it entails. The article concludes with six principles: relevant empirical data should be mastered before developing a judgement; concerns about mass immigration should not be dismissed out of hand as ‘racist’; care of the alien may take a variety of forms, not only that of granting asylum; illegal economic immigrants should normally be returned home; compassion should look in several directions—not only at the migrant, but also at the working-class competitor for jobs and services, and at members of government burdened with the responsibility of making hard decisions; and the Christian is obliged to exercise, not only compassion, but justice and prudence.

Einwanderung in Zeiten von Corona

After the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, most states enacted new measures to constrain international mobility. By May 8th, 2020, more than 93% of the world’s population lived in states with special entry bans and more than three billion lived in countries whose borders were almost completely closed to non-citizens. Can such measures be justified? If so, would this undermine the open borders view? This paper examines these questions. It argues, first, that, although short-term entry bans and other similar measures designed to protect public health can be justified, these bans need to be designed with a number of exemptions, in particular, for asylum seekers and refugees. Even in times of pandemic, completely closed borders are indefensible. It argues, second, that although extreme versions of the open borders position may have difficulty accepting this conclusion, other versions of the position can consistently justify special entry restrictions.

Reworking Race, Nation, and Diaspora on the Margins

At the turn of the twentieth century, terms like globalization, transnationalism, and diaspora heralded the increasing interconnectedness of cultures, nations, and politics. While such global networks continue to grow at a rapid rate, nationalist rhetoric and politics have also become more salient as some decry diversity, the threat of “open” borders, and the impacts of capitalist expansion under globalization. At a time when globalization has become a buzzword for the twenty-first century, how can there be both the proliferation of global cultures and increasing rhetoric of protectionist nationalism? I explore how and why diaspora has become salient particularly in an age where nations have been challenged and transformed under globalized capitalism. First, I trace the rise of hegemonic nationalism, its use in legitimizing racial and gendered differences under colonialism, and how its consequent displacements and marginalization led, for some, to claims of diaspora. I then suggest that the racialized Black migrant diaspora may serve as an example of how race and nationalism inform the creation of diaspora and how resistance can emerge across shared experiences of exclusion on this basis. I argue that diaspora has reemerged as one response to the politics of hypernationalism which has again sought to consolidate capital and wealth in an era of global capitalism. I conclude that Black diaspora may become a means for challenging nationalism through the dismantlement of its racial origins.

The Dutch–German Border: Open in Times of Coronavirus Lockdowns

This essay portrays policies, practices and perceptions at the Dutch– German border during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Before that this border was considered one of the most open borders in the world. The first part of the essay deals with the waves of policies and other initiatives aimed at limiting cross-border traffic that have been introduced since March 2020 trying to curb the pandemic. The second part illustrates to what extent these policies might have had an effect on citizens’ cross-border practices and perception of the border