Changing Sovereignty Games and International Migration

In this article, Professor Zolberg argues that today\u27s immigration issues should be analyzed within their historical bases. He follows the formation of the modern State, with particularfo cus on the legal and political meaning of sovereignty as understood in pre-colonial times down to the World War II period. He next identifies several late twentieth century phenomena in Europe and elsewhere, many of which pose serious challenges to long-standing notions of nationhood and citizenship. The author concludes that despite the recent development of borderless markets and communication infrastructures, much remains to be done to build a truly global community

Changing Sovereignty Games and International Migration

In this article, Professor Zolberg argues that today\u27s immigration issues should be analyzed within their historical bases. He follows the formation of the modern State, with particularfo cus on the legal and political meaning of sovereignty as understood in pre-colonial times down to the World War II period. He next identifies several late twentieth century phenomena in Europe and elsewhere, many of which pose serious challenges to long-standing notions of nationhood and citizenship. The author concludes that despite the recent development of borderless markets and communication infrastructures, much remains to be done to build a truly global community

Die Zukunft der internationalen Migrationsbewegungen

Angesichts der fortbestehenden schroffen Ungleichheit der sozioökonomischen und politischen Bedingungen in einer zunehmend zusammenhängenden Welt und der Verhängung von Zuzugsbeschränkungen durch die entwickelteren Länder, durch die dieser Zustand abgesichert wird, ist ein weiteres Anwachsen des Wanderungsdrucks aus den weniger entwickelten Ländern zu erwarten. Doch ob sich dieser steigende Druck in tatsächliche Wanderungen umsetzt, hängt nicht nur von der Ausreisepolitik der Herkunftsländer, sondern vor allem von der Einwanderungspolitik der potentiellen Aufnahmeländer ab. Dieses Faktum wird auch den Strom der Migranten aus den ehemals realsozialistischen Ländern nach der Liberalisierung des Ausreiserechts definieren. Während die wirtschaftlich motivierte Migration insofern "nachfragebestimmt" ist, sind die Wanderungsströme der Flüchtlinge, die lebensbedrohender Gewalt zu entrinnen suchen, "angebotsgeprägt". Diese vom Umfang her bedeutendere Wanderung richtet sich zumeist auf Nachbarländer, sodaß die zukünftige Süd-Nord-Wanderung auch weiterhin beschränkt bleiben wird. Hinsichtlich der ethischen Frage einer Zuzugsregelung für Migranten und Flüchtlinge lautet die umstrittene Frage, ob sich moralische Berechnungen nur auf die nationale Gemeinschaft gründen oder die gesamte Welt umfassen sollten

‘Street-level’ agents operating beyond ‘remote control’: how overseas liaison officers and foreign state officials shape UK extraterritorial migration management

Extraterritorial migration management perspectives on how states try to enforce immigration controls beyond their juridical borders are strongly influenced by ‘remote control’ metaphors. This is conceptually limited and outdated. Most research fails to sufficiently acknowledge agency by a destination state's officials acting abroad, foreign states and their officials, when evaluating extraterritorial measures and ‘outcomes’. We study UK liaison officers abroad, specifically, how they see their efforts to implement extraterritorial immigration control through interactions with foreign state officials. Our approach links inter-state relations to the social world of on-the-ground ‘street-level’ interactions between officers abroad and their foreign counterparts. The empirical analysis draws from original interviews and official sources. We compare factors accounting for the UK's activities and perceived ‘outcomes’ across USA, France, Thailand, Egypt and Ghana. Findings show the UK's extraterritorial migration management results from a very long chain of decisions and actions, by foreign and UK state actors, operating at different institutional-levels, with uncontrollable local circumstances abroad. Realising extraterritorial goals depends strongly on liaison officers’ agency, ‘soft power’ over foreign officials and foreign officials’ willingness to cooperate. Meanwhile liaison officers’ ‘feedbacks’ importantly influence Home Office decision-making. Against the simplistic one-way causality of ‘remote control’, this is ‘street-level’ agency beyond ‘remote control’

Blame the victims? Refugees, state capacity, and non-state actor violence

Existing research argues that refugee inflows may increase the risk of domestic conflict, particularly civil war that, by definition, involves the state as an actor. However, many of the postulated mechanisms linking refugees to a higher risk of such conflict pertain to tensions with locals, which do not necessarily involve any grievances against government authorities. We contend that it is more likely to identify an association between refugees and non-state actor violence, i.e., armed violence between organized non-state groups, neither of which pertains to the state. We also claim that the extent to which refugees are associated with a higher likelihood of non-state conflict depends on the capacity of governments to manage and mitigate risks. We report evidence that refugee populations can be linked to an increased risk of non-state conflict, as well as for a mitigating effect of state capacity on the risk of non-state conflicts in the presence of refugees. We do not find a clear effect of refugee populations on civil war, suggesting that the link depends on existing conflict cleavages relevant to mobilizing refugees or locals. Our research helps to shed light on the relevant security consequences of managing refugee populations. Despite the common arguments portraying refugees as security risks in developed countries, the risk of non-state conflict applies primarily to weak states that have been forced to shoulder a disproportionate burden in hosting refugees

The global mobility divide: How visa policies have evolved over time.

While visa policies are the major instrument for regulating and controlling the global flow of people, little is known about how they have changed over time. Accordingly, scholars have expressed the need for large-N datasets which cover more than one point in time. This article takes up this challenge and presents a for the first time a global overview of the changes in visa waiver policies based on a newly created database containing the visa waiver policies of over 150 countries for 1969 and 2010. We find that, on average, visa-free mobility has in-creased over the past 40 years. However, not everybody has benefited from these develop-ments. In fact, visa waivers are increasingly unequally divided: While citizens of OECD countries and rich countries have gained mobility rights, mobility rights for other regions have stagnated or even diminished, in particular for citizens from African countries. Overall, we find a clear bifurcation in mobility rights, leading to a ‘global mobility divide’

Survival and integration: Kachin social networks and refugee management regimes in Kuala Lumpur and Los Angeles

How do refugees establish social networks and mobilise social capital in different contexts throughout a multi-stage migration process? Migrant social network literature explains how migrants accumulate social capital and mobilise resources in and between origin and destination but provides limited answers regarding how these processes unfold during refugee migrations involvingprotracted stays in intermediate locations and direct interaction with state agents. Drawing from ethnographic fieldwork with Kachin refugees in Kuala Lumpur and Los Angeles, I address these gaps by comparing refugee social networks in two sites of a migration process. Distinguishingbetween networks of survival and networks of integration, I argue that differences in their form and functions stem from their interactions with local refugee management regimes, which are shaped by broader state regulatory contexts. In both locations, these networks and regimes feed off each other to manage the refugee migration process, with key roles played by hybrid institutions rooted in grassroots adaptation efforts yet linked to formal resettlement mechanisms. Considering the refugee migration process as a whole, I show that Kachin refugees demonstrate their possession of socialcapital gained during the informal social process of migration to advance through institutionalised political processes of resettlement in each context