Suchergebnisse

In this article, the term "radicalisation" is discussed as a process that appears to be a defensive and reactionary response of various individuals suffering from social, economic, and political forms of exclusion, subordination, alienation, humiliation, and isolation. To that effect, the article challenges the mainstream understanding of radicalisation. In doing so, the work concentrates on the elaboration of reactionary radicalisation processes of self-identified Muslim youth and self-identified native youth residing in Europe. The main reason behind the selection of these two groups is the assumption that both groups are co-radicalizing each other in the contemporary world that is defined by the ascendance of a civilizational political discourse since the war in the Balkans in the 1990s. Based on the findings of in-depth interviews conducted with youngsters from both groups in Belgium, France, Germany, and the Netherlands, the work demonstrates that the main drivers of the radicalisation processes of these two groups cannot be explicated through the reproduction of civilizational, cultural, and religious differences. Instead, the drivers of radicalisation for both groups are very identical as they are both socio-economically, politically, and psychologically deprived of certain elements constrained by the flows of globalization and dominant forms of neo-liberal governance.

This country report includes a detailed analysis of reception policies, practices and humanitarian responses from state actors and non-state agencies in Turkey. Data on policies were retrieved through desk research on policy papers and documents at national and sub-national levels, building on the international and EU framework. The analysis of secondary data includes the elaboration of maps of reception policies, practices and humanitarian responses and new typologies of these policies, practices and responses. Evidence on existing practices and responses at the grassroots level have been gathered through interviews and roundtable discussions with key-informants and gatekeepers such as national/local authorities, and NGO representatives. The report also includes the analysis of migrants' perceptions, actions and reactions to reception policies and practices in Turkey. The main framework of reception regulations in Turkey is drawn by the Law on Foreigners and International Protection and the Temporary Protection Regulation, both of which were put into force in 2014. Both documents include provisions about housing, education, labour market, allowances, health services and information/counselling services. The definition and scope of 'reception' in Turkish legislation includes various material conditions including housing, food and clothing provided in kind, or as financial allowances or in vouchers, or a combination of the three, and a daily allowance. Reception also covers matters of education, basic health care and accommodation which ought to be provided during the period of reception. Similar to the EU legislation, the time frame of 'reception' is not clearly defined in the Turkish legislation. However, there is an implicit definition: reception starts as soon as the border of a given state has been crossed and an application for international protection has been made. It ends either with the "effective expulsion", "repatriation", "forced/assisted return" of unsuccessful applicants or with the acceptance of their request for protection which, in the terminology of RESPOND, makes them subject to 'integration'

This country report includes a detailed analysis of reception policies, practices and humanitarian responses from state actors and non-state agencies in Turkey. Data on policies were retrieved through desk research on policy papers and documents at national and sub-national levels, building on the international and EU framework. The analysis of secondary data includes the elaboration of maps of reception policies, practices and humanitarian responses and new typologies of these policies, practices and responses. Evidence on existing practices and responses at the grassroots level have been gathered through interviews and roundtable discussions with key-informants and gatekeepers such as national/local authorities, and NGO representatives. The report also includes the analysis of migrants' perceptions, actions and reactions to reception policies and practices in Turkey. The main framework of reception regulations in Turkey is drawn by the Law on Foreigners and International Protection and the Temporary Protection Regulation, both of which were put into force in 2014. Both documents include provisions about housing, education, labour market, allowances, health services and information/counselling services. The definition and scope of 'reception' in Turkish legislation includes various material conditions including housing, food and clothing provided in kind, or as financial allowances or in vouchers, or a combination of the three, and a daily allowance. Reception also covers matters of education, basic health care and accommodation which ought to be provided during the period of reception. Similar to the EU legislation, the time frame of 'reception' is not clearly defined in the Turkish legislation. However, there is an implicit definition: reception starts as soon as the border of a given state has been crossed and an application for international protection has been made. It ends either with the "effective expulsion", "repatriation", "forced/assisted return" of unsuccessful applicants or with the acceptance of ...

Received 26 Jul 2016, Accepted 17 Oct 2016, Published online: 28 Nov 2016 ; As a clear depiction of unconventional forms of civic and political participation, the Occupygezi movement has revealed that a more comprehensive approach is needed to understand the deep socio-political drives underpinning the Turkish bid for EU membership. Focusing on three different framings, namely Euroenthusiastic, Euro-sceptic and critical Europeanist frames, developed by civil society organizations in Turkey since the 1999 Helsinki Summit, this article will analyze the transformative effect of the Occupygezi movement on various civil society groups which had previously been Euro-sceptic. Subsequently, the article will claim that the critical Europeanist frame has recently become stronger. Methodologically, the article will be based on a literature survey on the civil society actors, as well as discourse analysis of some particular associations, trade unions and the media organizations in relation to their changing perception of the EU before and after the Occupygezi movement.

Work Package 5: New Knowledge on Tolerance and Cultural Diversity in Europe ; The ACCEPT PLURALISM project (2010-2013) is funded by the European Commission under the Seventh Framework Programme, Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities. (Call FP7-SSH-2009-A, Grant Agreement no: 243837). Coordinator: Prof. Anna Triandafyllidou, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute.

Work Package 4: National Case Studies of Challenges to Tolerance in Political Life ; The ACCEPT PLURALISM project (2010-2013) is funded by the European Commission under the Seventh Framework Programme, Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities. (Call FP7-SSH-2009-A, Grant Agreement no: 243837). Coordinator: Prof. Anna Triandafyllidou, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute.

Work Package 4: National Case Studies of Challenges to Tolerance in Political Life ; The ACCEPT PLURALISM project (2010-2013) is funded by the European Commission under the Seventh Framework Programme, Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities. (Call FP7-SSH-2009-A, Grant Agreement no: 243837). Coordinator: Prof. Anna Triandafyllidou, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute.

This paper aims to shed light upon the dynamics of community construction by migrants of Turkish origin, or what I call Euro-Turks, and their descendants residing in European countries such as Germany, France, Belgium and the Netherlands.1 A retrospective analysis of the dynamics of community construction among the Euro-Turks reveals that they have always been engaged in producing and reproducing communities deriving from various needs. The construction of communities is sometimes a response to social-economic deprivation, sometimes to the form of affiliation with the homeland, and sometimes to the transition of the welfare state into post-social prudentialist state. This paper claims that Euro-Turks have become more occupied with the construction and articulation of ethno-cultural and religious communities in the last two decades due to the ascendancy of culturalist and civilizationist discourse along with neo-liberal forms of governmentality (Foucault, 1979) essentializing ethnic, cultural and religious boundaries, and generating an Islamophobic, migrantphobic and xenophobic climate in the west. As Wendy Brown (2010: 33) rightly stated the civilizationist discourse brought two disparate images together in order to produce a single figure of danger justifying exclusion and closure: "the hungry masses" and "cultural-religious aggression toward Western values." The growing stream of citizenship tests, attitude tests, zero-tolerance policy towards unqualified migrants, and negative public opinion vis-a-vis migrants, in general, results in that the European countries are recently inclined to be more assimilationist vis-a-vis Muslim origin migrant populations, who are perceived to be hostile toward Western values. Social, political and economic changes at global level have brought about the revitalization of an Islamophobic discourse in a way that leads to the redefinition of community boundaries through nationalist and religious lines. "I fear that we are approaching a situation resembling the tragic fate of ...

The aim of this paper is to provide a review of the contemporary literature on Islamophobia in Europe, through the lens of immigration issues, socio-economic status and civic participation of Muslim origin migrants and their descendants as well as international constraints. In addition to critically reviewing the current state of knowledge and debate about Islamophobia through the literature, the paper seeks to address the most recent data, survey findings and public discourses available about the current state of Islamophobia in Europe. In the process, some references will also be made to the current rise of Islamophobia in the United States and its differences with the European context. Describing Islamophobia as a form of governmentality in Foucaultian sense, I shall argue that it operates as a form of cultural racism in Europe, which has become apparent together with the process of securitizing and stigmatizing migration and migrants in the age of neo-liberalism. Furthermore, I shall also claim that the growing Islamophobic form of governmentality has produced unintended consequences on both minorities and majorities in a way that has so far led to the political and social instrumentalization of Islam by Muslim origin minorities, and to the deployment of an antimulticulturalist discourse by the majority societies in the west.

Received 09 Dec 2016, Accepted 09 Dec 2016, Published online: 09 Jan 2017 ; This special issue focuses on the emergence of different forms of civic and political activism in Turkey. In doing so, we have taken into account different components of active citizenship and looked more specifically into the development of civic and political forms of activism that bridge the realms of conventional and non-conventional participation.

There are around 3 million Turkish origin migrants in Germany and 400 thousand in France who have already raised their third generations. Nowadays they are even being named with their hyphenated identities, such as German-Turks and French-Turks. In the meantime, they encounter various obstacles in everyday life due to the stigmatization and securitization of migration and Islam. This is why their integration into the receiving societies is of great importance, as better social cohesion helps nurture the economic, political and social contribution of migrants to their countries of settlement. Using the data derived from a recent micro-level survey on Turkish-origin immigrants residing in Germany and France, the determinants of their social affiliations and employment probability as well as the impact of citizenship acquisition on their socio-economic integration will be analyzed in this article.

There are around 3 million Turkish origin migrants in Germany and 400 thousand in France who have already raised their third generations. Nowadays they are even being named with their hyphenated identities, such as German-Turks and French-Turks. In the meantime, they encounter various obstacles in everyday life due to the stigmatization and securitization of migration and Islam. This is why their integration into the receiving societies is of great importance, as better social cohesion helps nurture the economic, political and social contribution of migrants to their countries of settlement. Using the data derived from a recent micro-level survey on Turkish-origin immigrants residing in Germany and France, the determinants of their social affiliations and employment probability as well as the impact of citizenship acquisition on their socio-economic integration will be analyzed in this article.

In recent years, the so called "refugee crisis" has triggered considerable policy change in many countries along the Eastern Mediterranean route. We understand reception as a hybrid policy field with a strong attachment to social policy. In many countries, welfare production used to be (or has become) a highly collaborative endeavour which spans different levels of political decision making (e.g. national, regional and municipal) and involves a high degree of subcontracting and public-private collaboration. The previously published 11 country reports in Work Package 4 (Reception policies, practices and responses) mostly discussed how the period of reception of refugees has become gradually extended. Most of the country reports demonstrated that there is a growing politics of deterrence of the nation-states while "Welcome Culture" in Europe has deteriorated to a great extent. Neo-liberal forms of governance, the emerging mechanisms of the so-called resilience of refugees, the problems of multi-level governance of migration and reception are also other contested areas to be covered by the country reports. The report content is based on empirical work from 11 country reports that primarily cover interview material conducted with stakeholders active in the field of reception and individual asylum seekers and refugees.

In this comparative report we develop a typology of reception governance, which allows for a country comparative perspective on reception measures for refugees. The term "reception governance" is to comprise both reception policies (i.e. a system of principles to guide decisions), decision-making and actual practices. The main rationale for the construction of the typology is that reception governance does not constitute a policy field or domain on its own, but crosscuts both classical policy domains (such as social policy, immigration policy, economic and labour policy) and various levels of governance (such as inter- and supranational, national, federal and municipal). The report is based on a based on a meta-analysis of 11 national reports on reception policies and practice from countries along the so-called Eastern Mediterranean Route. It comprises established EU member states, such as Austria, Germany, Greece, Italy, Sweden and the United Kingdom (before Brexit), more recent member states, such as Hungary and Poland, and third countries, such as Turkey, Lebanon and the Iraq, which have played an important role as source and transit countries of refugees. Based on country-by-country pair comparisons we identified five major types of reception governance which are presented in the order of declining state intervention: "Wary Hospitality", "Post-Communist Reluctance", "Ordo-liberal Delegation", "Overload and Externalization", and "Residual Patronage".

In this comparative report we develop a typology of reception governance, which allows for a country comparative perspective on reception measures for refugees. The term "reception governance" is to comprise both reception policies (i.e. a system of principles to guide decisions), decision-making and actual practices. The main rationale for the construction of the typology is that reception governance does not constitute a policy field or domain on its own, but crosscuts both classical policy domains (such as social policy, immigration policy, economic and labour policy) and various levels of governance (such as inter- and supranational, national, federal and municipal). The report is based on a based on a meta-analysis of 11 national reports on reception policies and practice from countries along the so-called Eastern Mediterranean Route. It comprises established EU member states, such as Austria, Germany, Greece, Italy, Sweden and the United Kingdom (before Brexit), more recent member states, such as Hungary and Poland, and third countries, such as Turkey, Lebanon and the Iraq, which have played an important role as source and transit countries of refugees. Based on country-by-country pair comparisons we identified five major types of reception governance which are presented in the order of declining state intervention: "Wary Hospitality", "Post-Communist Reluctance", "Ordo-liberal Delegation", "Overload and Externalization", and "Residual Patronage".