De-centring the securitization of asylum and migration in the European Union: Securitization, vulnerability and the role of Turkey

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

Competing structural powers and challenges for the EU's structural foreign policy

This article contends that, in order to understand global affairs, not only crises and conflicts need to be examined, but also long-term processes which result from the competition between structural powers. These structural powers have the potential to set or influence the organizing principles and the rules of the game in other countries and regions as well as the international system in general. The article focuses on the European Union's potential as a structural power. Examining where the EU has succeeded and where it has failed to behave as a structural power, it argues that the EU is losing the structural power game against competing structural powers in its neighbourhood, specifically Russia in the EU's eastern neighbourhood and the multifarious phenomenon of “Islamism” in the EU's southern neighbourhood

China's Peripheral Diplomacy: Repeating Europe's Errors in Dealing with the Neighbourhood

[[abstract]]The European Union (EU) and China are on a quest to establish themselves as global actors. Still, both powers first need to create a stable neighbourhood that will not threaten their interests. Consequently, in 2004 the EU launched the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), while in 2013 China’s Peripheral Diplomacy (CPD) was introduced. Against this background, this article aims to conduct a comparative analysis of both initiatives. Specifically, as there is a wide agreement that the ENP has failed to generate any impact on the EU’s periphery, the research question is: To what extent could the CPD transcend the problems of its European counterpart? The article posits that both policies are rather similar in their inability to strike the right balance between protecting core interests and acknowledging the neighbours’ needs. Thus, it is likely that the CPD, just like the ENP, will remain a policy with big potential but without effective results.[[notice]]補正完