Suchergebnisse

Despite initial suggestions that the COVID-19 pandemic affected everyone equally, it quickly became clear that some were much worse affected than others. Marginalization—including poverty, substandard accommodation, precarious or no employment, reduced access to healthcare and other key public goods—was clearly correlated with higher rates of both contagion and fatality. For Sweden, COVID-19 inequality could be seen along clear racial and socio-economic lines, with some of the first high death rates seen amongst Somali communities, where individuals had contracted the virus through unsafe employment as taxi drivers transporting wealthier Swedes home from their winter holidays. At the same time, actors on the extra parliamentarian far-right in Sweden were quick to blame the country's relatively high per-capita fatality rate on persons born outside Sweden working in the healthcare and care home sector. Media frames affirming racial stereotypes grounded in cultural racism circulated across the ecosystem of alternative media in the country. In both healthcare and the media, we see growing forms of exclusion disproportionately affecting migrants. Such intertwined exclusions in Sweden, as the article argues, are a sign of a wider disintegration of Swedish society in which individuals lose trust in both the core institutions as well as across different parts of society. Drawing on Davina Cooper's understanding of the relationship between the state and other public institutions with individuals as based on "touch," the article explores how exclusionary practices impact this relationship. Our key argument is that, whilst ostensibly such practices often most materially hurt minority groups (e.g., migrants), they are indicative of—and accelerate—a broader disintegration of society through undermining a logic of "care" necessary to sustain social bonds.

This article analyses sanctuary initiatives intended to change the situation of 'irregularised residents'. Through fieldwork, three main activities are identified: assistance for welfare services, alternatives to inaccessible services, and inventing new ways of organising togetherness in the city. The role of activists in the initiatives links to discussions within Critical Human Rights literature, which emphasise the anti-institutionalist origins of rights. Yet, a complex interplay also plays out through co-current resistance against the state's migration policing and collaboration with city-level state agencies. Understanding this complex process is important to improving knowledge of both the politics of sanctuary and human rights.

The present article elaborates on struggles over the inclusion and exclusion of undocumented children and young people in the Swedish school system. Through conducting an in-depth case study on the issue of access to school in the city of Malmö in Sweden, our analysis demonstrates how the right to education for undocumented migrant children is subject to a process of struggle between divergent discourses on children's human rights. Internal debates at the city level of governance are identified around, for example, whether the police could be denied access to schools or if contradictory messages from various authorities might lead to a legitimacy problem. Other questions are the registration of grades when the children concerned are reluctant to be put into a register due to the risks involved; and if fictitious names could be used on class lists that police officers can request. As the article shows, these local struggles are an expression of tensions between different levels of governance that are also affected by the migration control regime, as regards rights for children who are residing irregularly. In that respect, there is a struggle over the appropriate legalistic discourse – as in, to which level should it make reference. However, actors contesting a restrictive interpretation of the right to education also make substantial use of, what we call here, an 'experiential' discourse – that is, drawing upon the everyday experiences and feelings of those whose rights are in question. Struggles at the local governance level also have relevance for exploring substantial parts of the broader political context in which the human rights of undocumented migrants are (de)contested.

This article analyses sanctuary initiatives intended to change the situation of 'irregularised residents'. Through fieldwork, three main activities are identified: assistance for welfare services, alternatives to inaccessible services, and inventing new ways of organising togetherness in the city. The role of activists in the initiatives links to discussions within Critical Human Rights literature, which emphasise the anti-institutionalist origins of rights. Yet, a complex interplay also plays out through co-current resistance against the state's migration policing and collaboration with city-level state agencies. Understanding this complex process is important to improving knowledge of both the politics of sanctuary and human rights.

This article considers the relationship between education and hospitality, illustrated in a case that sparked a highly politicised debate on the topic. In 2012, several schools in Malmö, Sweden's third largest city, excluded students from the regular process governing access to school as well as special support otherwise normally provided based on the students' unauthorised legal status. The controversy sparked a debate in the local media, academia, and among refugee rights organisations over the right to education as well as the everyday risks faced by persons attending school in Malmö while present in Sweden without legal authorisation.

The article contributes to our understanding of how trade is politicized and how civil society activists manage the tensions between multiple collective action frames in a complex political context. When viewed alongside the Brexit referendum and Trump's US Presidency, it is easy to see the 2013–2016 campaign against a European Union–US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership as a further example of an apparently growing populist 'nationalism.' Yet, in the European context—where campaigning was most visible—there was in fact extensive reliance on, and re-iteration of, a transnational 'European' frame, with antecedents in the 1999–2006 campaign against General Agreement on Trade in Services negotiations. As the article argues, transnational campaigning operates within a nexus of multiple, and sometimes conflicting, geographic frames. In both campaigns discussed here, activists typically engaged with the wider public via the national context and, sometimes, with allusions to 'national autonomy.' However, their activism was dependent upon a frame espousing 'transnational solidarity.' Developed over time, this structured their transnational relations with other groups and more full-time activists.

Abstract The article contributes to our understanding of how trade is politicized and how civil society activists manage the tensions between multiple collective action frames in a complex political context. When viewed alongside the Brexit referendum and Trump's US Presidency, it is easy to see the 2013–2016 campaign against a European Union–US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership as a further example of an apparently growing populist 'nationalism.' Yet, in the European context—where campaigning was most visible—there was in fact extensive reliance on, and re-iteration of, a transnational 'European' frame, with antecedents in the 1999–2006 campaign against General Agreement on Trade in Services negotiations. As the article argues, transnational campaigning operates within a nexus of multiple, and sometimes conflicting, geographic frames. In both campaigns discussed here, activists typically engaged with the wider public via the national context and, sometimes, with allusions to 'national autonomy.' However, their activism was dependent upon a frame espousing 'transnational solidarity.' Developed over time, this structured their transnational relations with other groups and more full-time activists.

The article contributes to our understanding of how trade is politicized and how civil society activists manage the tensions between multiple collective action frames in a complex political context. When viewed alongside the Brexit referendum and Trump's US Presidency, it is easy to see the 2013–2016 campaign against a European Union–US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership as a further example of an apparently growing populist 'nationalism.' Yet, in the European context—where campaigning was most visible—there was in fact extensive reliance on, and re-iteration of, a transnational 'European' frame, with antecedents in the 1999–2006 campaign against General Agreement on Trade in Services negotiations. As the article argues, transnational campaigning operates within a nexus of multiple, and sometimes conflicting, geographic frames. In both campaigns discussed here, activists typically engaged with the wider public via the national context and, sometimes, with allusions to 'national autonomy.' However, their activism was dependent upon a frame espousing 'transnational solidarity.' Developed over time, this structured their transnational relations with other groups and more full-time activists.

The externalization of the EU's migration policies has seen a sharp increase in recent years but many aspects of its historical roots, internal dynamics, and broader implications remain insufficiently explored. This special issue analyses recent developments in the EU's external migration policies including the extra-territorial reach of EU migration policies; the power relationships between the EU and third countries involved in EU migration policies; the overlap with critical development studies and post-colonialism; the replication of many of Australia's external migration policies; the impact of EU external migration policies on third countries, and civil society contestation of those policies. As the contributions show, the series of policies discussed here go beyond the specific empirical area of migration control to have significance for both the future of the European Union and its role in global affairs.

The externalisation of European Union migration governance disproportionately impacts states based on the African continent. Much of the analytical focus amongst existing research has been on the agency of the EU and its Member-states, identifying the asymmetric and postcolonial character of these policies, as well as highlighting that the imposition of European interests on African states risks undermining their own political stability. Yet, there is significant effort spent by actors on both sides of the Mediterranean on making African counterparts visible as an equal partner – an endeavour seen not just rhetorically within speeches, but also in the set-up of key institutional fora and their membership. The article approaches the framing processes involved to trace the legitimating basis of EU-Africa relations and the externalisation of EU migration policy to African states, highlighting how African political actors are positioned as participating in what is an EU-led process.