Suchergebnisse

At a time when many states are increasing restrictions on immigration, others are using formal agreements on international economic migration to open their borders. The use of international agreements on migration presents a puzzle, as most states can open their borders to migrants unilaterally. I argue that, when states cannot generate large enough flows of migrants or the right type of migrants to fill open positions in the labor market, they turn to the sending state to help them. States that need migrants can negotiate a bilateral labor agreement with a sending state, which then acts as a recruiter, helping to channel labor to the receiving state. This article details the conditions under which immigrant-receiving countries use these treaties and tests the implications of the argument on a new dataset on migration treaties.

This research excavates the case of Jewish refugees in Cyprus between 1946 and 1948. I argue that this case is formative of the development not just of the refugee, but—perhaps more interestingly—of the concept of "illegal immigration," which relies on the constructed impossibility of group-based refugee protection. I contend that there is a paradox residing at the heart of the 1951 Refugee Convention definition of a refugee that produces the refugee as a singular victim while supporting the very conditions that create that victimhood—that is, persecution targeted at an identity group where the persecution is motivated by the shared identity (defined in the Refugee Convention by race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion). As the architecture of international human rights was built, the refugee definition was drafted in a way that embedded group-based exclusion in the design of the definition. I exemplify this through the case of Jewish refugees attempting to reach British Mandate Palestine in the 1940s, who were intercepted and detained in Cyprus. The case is worthy of attention because it exposes the absence of group protection in the refugee definition and the effect of that absence: a group is constituted as a threat and cannot be defined collectively as refugees. Instead, they become "illegal immigrants." This case study of Jewish detention in Cyprus provides a key empirical example of oppression residing inside a historically liberal movement and in the resulting conditions of refugee protection.

"This book analyses the multifaceted ways law operates in the context of human mobility, as well as the ways in which human mobility affects law. Migration law is conventionally understood as a tool to regulate human movement across borders, and to define the rights and limits related to this movement. But drawing upon the emergence and development of the discipline of mobility studies, this book pushes the idea of migration law towards a more general concepts of mobility that encompass the various processes, effects, and consequences of movement in a globalized world. In this respect, the book pursues a shift in perspective on how law is understood. Drawing on the concepts of 'kinology' and 'kinopolitics' developed by Thomas Nail as well as 'mobility justice' developed by Mimi Sheller, the book considers movement and motion as a constructive force behind political and social systems; and hence stability that needs to be explained and justified. Tracing the processes through which static forms, such as state, citizenship, or border, are constructed and how they partake in production of differential mobility the book challenges the conventional understanding of migration law. More specifically, and in revealing its contingent and unstable nature, the book reveals how human mobility is itself constitutive of law. This interdisciplinary book will appeal to those working in the areas of migration and refugee law, citizenship studies, mobility studies, legal theory, and sociolegal studies"--

Bu çalışma, Avrupalı seçkinlerin, yani Avrupa Parlamentosu'ndaki (AP) sağ siyasi grup üyelerinin kamusal söylemi, dolayısıyla kamusal aklı kontrol altına almanın bir aracı olarak söylemleri nasıl kullandığını anlamayı ve ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlamaktadır. Söylemler, söz konusu siyasi grupların ideoloji, değer ve normlarının toplumda meşrulaştırılması amacıyla kullanılmaktadır. Bu durum, toplumsal gücün kötüye kullanılması, egemenlik veya eşitsizlik ile sonuçlanabilmektedir. Çalışma, esas olarak, bu siyasi grupların AP görüşmeleri sırasında üç ana söylem konusu çerçevesinde söylemsel olarak göç karşıtı Avrupa inşa ettiğini savunmaktadır: güvenlik tehdidi, ekonomik tehdit ve kültürel tehdit olarak göç. Bu çalışma, savlarını temellendirmek amacıyla, göçün güvenlikleştirilmesi bağlamında Kopenhag Okulu'nun yanı sıra Norman Fairclough ve Ruth Wodak'a yapılan bazı atıflar ile birlikte, çoğunlukla Teun A. van Dijk'ın eleştirel söylem çözümlemesi toplum-bilişsel yaklaşımı sayıltılarına ve stratejilerine dayanmaktadır. Sağ siyasi grup üyelerinin Öteki'ne, yani sığınmacı, mülteci ya da göçmenlere olumsuz imalar, önvarsayımlar, adlandırma veya yüklemleme ile atıfta bulunurken Öz'ü, yani Avrupa'yı ve bazen kendi ülkelerini çeşitli olumlu atıflarla yücelttiği görülmektedir. Bu durum, göç karşıtı siyasetçilerin yaygın bir tutumudur ve göç karşıtı Avrupa inşasına zemin hazırlamaktadır. Son ama oldukça önemli olarak, 'mülteci krizi' varsa, o halde, diyalektik olarak zıttı da mümkündür: 'mülteci farkındalığı'. Bu çalışma, aynı zamanda, 'mülteci farkındalığı' oluşumuna katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. --- This study is aimed at understanding and exposing how the European elites, i.e. the members of the right-wing political groups in the European Parliament (EP), use discourses as a means of controlling public discourse, and hence, the public mind. Discourses are used to legitimate the ideology, values and norms of the relevant political groups in the society, which may result in social power abuse, dominance or inequality. The study mainly argues that these political groups discursively construct an anti-immigration Europe during the EP debates within three main discourse topics: immigration as a security threat, as an economic threat and as a cultural threat. Along with some references to Norman Fairclough and Ruth Wodak as well as the Copenhagen School in terms of the securitisation of migration, this study mostly draws on the premises and strategies of Teun A. van Dijk's socio-cognitive approach of critical discourse analysis to base its arguments. It is seen that the members of the right-wing political groups tend to glorify the Self, i.e. Europe and sometimes their own country, with various positive attributions to them whereas they mostly refer to the Other, i.e. asylum seekers, refugees or migrants, through negative implications, presuppositions, denomination or predication, which is a common attitude of anti-immigration politicians and paves the way for the construction of an anti-immigration Europe. Last but not least, if there is a 'refugee crisis', then, dialectically, the opposite is also possible: 'refugee awareness'. This study also aspires to contribute to the formation of 'refugee awareness'.

Immigration has become one of the most discussed and controversial topics in recent public and political debates. This is true not just in the United Kingdom (UK), but also elsewhere in Europe, as well as in many other advanced economies, most notably the United States (US). For example, immigration became a major discussion point during the recent general election campaign in the UK, in spite of what appeared to have been an initial reluctance of some participants to engage in such debates. The importance of immigration is demonstrated by the strong attitudes that are displayed by the public. For instance, race and immigration has consistently been viewed as one of the most important issues facing Britain in recent years according to IPSOS/Mori's monthly Issues Index. Typically, more than 30 per cent of those questioned since 2002 have considered race and immigration to be the most important issue. This peaked at over 40 per cent in late 2007 and early 2008, which corresponds with the time when migration from Central and Eastern Europe to the UK was at its highest. This made it the top ranked issue for the British public, since when it has been replaced by concerns over the economy. Attitudes have also been found to vary by skill group, with Scheve and Slaughter (2001) reporting a significantly greater preference for limiting immigrant flows to the US amongst less skilled workers.

"In this overarching portrait of three decades of U.S. immigration reform, the author focuses on the roles, on the one hand, of presidents from Reagan to Obama, and on the other, of Catholic immigration advocates, shedding light on the relationship between debates over immigration policy and broader domestic politics"--Provided by publisher