The Racialization of Security: Ethnic Minorities in Europe, International Relations and Comparative Politics

In the academic literature, race is rarely considered an important factor in the study of international relations (IR). The fields of IR as well as comparative politics (CP) have also been reluctant to view immigration as in important factor in understanding relations between nations and domestic politics, despite large flows of people moving from the developing world to the developed world. Immigration is often overlooked as a major component of both economic and national security. Much is made of capital flows, trade agreements, treaties and military action in the broader scheme of international relations, however, the flow of people, particularly people from a variety of ethnic and national backgrounds, has always played a key role in international relations. Immigration and race touch on issues not only of racism and ethnic conflict, but also of labor movements, relations with developing countries, demographics, economic growth, and a variety of factors that impact international relations and domestic politics. In this article, I discuss why the issues of race and immigration need to play a more central role in the analysis of politics, particularly in Europe

Immigration, Race and Populism: Politics and Policy from Colonialism to Brexit

Presented on October 17, 2018 at 3:00 p.m. in the Bill Moore Student Success Center, Clary Theater.Terri Givens has been a visionary leader since early in her career in higher education, from founding and directing the Center for European Studies at the University of Texas at Austin, to leading the university’s efforts in Mexico and Latin America as Vice Provost for Undergraduate Curriculum and International Activities. Terri is a strong advocate for access to higher education and developing the tools for student success that will ensure that a wide range of students continue to find opportunities in higher education.Runtime: 57:56 minutesWith images of children in cages, separated from their parents, and would-be migrants floating on overloaded boats in the Mediterranean becoming fixtures in the news media, politicians are struggling to find solutions to the ongoing issues related to migrant flows. Immigration has become a flashpoint not only in the U.S., but it has also had an impact on the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom, led to instability in Angela Merkel’s government in Germany, and has influenced the rise of populist parties across Europe. Since I began studying the politics of immigration in the 1990s, it is difficult to think of a time that the issue has had more of an impact on politics. This brief overview of immigration policy developments in the U.S. and Europe explains how policy toward migrants has interacted with attitudes toward racial and religious minorities over time. Many studies have shown that recent voting behavior in the U.S. and Europe has been tied to racism and xenophobia. This will continue to be a challenge to democratic values as “white” populations become the minority amidst demographic change

"The freedom party in comparison: Radical right parties in Western Europe"

What is a radical right party? Radical right parties are not new to the political scene. Different parties have come and gone over the last century. What is different about the radical right parties of the 1980s and 1990s is their staying power, and their impact on the mainstream parties. The rise of new parties on the right in the 1980s led to a great deal of controversy over how these parties would be defined. On the other hand, there is little argument regarding their challenge to established party systems in Western Europe. I will argue in this paper that there are many similarities between the radical right parties in France, Germany and Austria. I begin by comparing different authors' definitions of extreme or radical right parties, and develop my own definition of a radical right party. I then describe the radical right parties and their histories in section III. Section IV provides a description of the nationalism that defines radical right parties, and the positions they have taken on immigration, economics, and the mainstream parties. Despite differences in their historical development, the parties I will be describing have taken very similar positions on issues such as immigration and the European Union

"The politics of EU immigration policy"

This paper will demonstrate how the economic and institutional imperatives of European integration have led to two contradictory political developments: 1) a push by EU institutions such as the Commission and the Parliament, as well as some member states, to develop a common, "harmonized" EU immigration policy that includes TCNs; and 2) a resistance on the part of some member states to this development. Because of this resistance, immigration harmonization has lagged behind other policy areas. To explain national resistance m harmonizing immigration policy, our paper's main task is developing a theoretical and conceptual model of how immigration policy is harmonized at the EU level, and how this harmonization comes to be blocked or restricted. Our model of EU immigration policymaking is bottom-up, in that it sees immigration policy institutions as arising from domestic politics and national immigration policies. Thus, we draw on theories of "intergovernmentalism" which see supranational institutions as a means of locking in preferred domestic political arrangements, and see member states as the primary political actors

The Politics of European Union Immigration Policy: Institutions, Salience, and Harmonization

This article examines recent attempts to create a common European Union (EU) immigration policy. This “harmonized ” policy has faced political blockages, despite being seen by most observers as nec-essary if the EU is to meet its goal of free movement of labor. Because of this resistance, immigration harmonization has lagged behind other EU policy areas. To explain national resistance to harmoniz-ing immigration policy, our article develops a theoretical and conceptual model of how immigration policy is potentially harmonized at the EU level, but how this harmonization can be blocked or restricted. We explain these political blockages with a model of intergovernmental bargaining that focuses on political salience, political partisanship, and institutions that protect immigrant rights. We argue that these national-level factors have determined the success and the nature of various harmo-nization proposals, by determining the positions of member states when negotiating in the European Council. Our primary hypothesis is that when the political salience of a given immigration issue is high, any harmonization that results is more likely to be restrictive toward immigrant rights. We also hypothesize that the impact of institutions that protect immigrant rights, and of political partisanship, is variable depending on the issue area and the national context. We use literature on European inte-gration, immigration politics, agenda-setting, venue-shopping, and two-level games to theorize, oper