Suchergebnisse

Contents Acknowledgements Preface-- Martin Schain Immigration and Integration Policies: Assumptions and Explanations-- Umut Korkut, Gregg Bucken-Knapp and Aidan McGarry PART I: CONSTRUCTION OF THE FOREIGNER 1. Whose Interests Do Radical Right Parties Really Represent? The Migration Policy Agenda of the Swiss People's Party between Nativism and Neoliberalism-- Alexandre Afonso 2. Domestic Work, Gender and Migration in Turkey: Legal Framework Enabling Social Reality-- Hande Eslen-Ziya and Umut Korkut 3. Getting the Message Across: Struggling with EU Safe Country Practices in Asylum-- Sarah Craig PART II: HOST NATIONS 4. The Politicization of Roma as an Ethnic 'Other': Security Discourse in France and the Politics of Belonging-- Aidan McGarry and Helen Drake 5. 'Good' and 'Bad' Immigrants: The Economic Nationalism of the True Finns' Immigration Discourse-- Mikko Kuisma 6. 'A Two-way Process of Accommodation' Public Perceptions of Integration Along the Migration-mobility Continuum-- Kesi Mahendran PART III: LAW AND ORDER 7. Asylum Policy Responsiveness in Scandinavia-- Froy Gudbrandsen 8. The Multi-level Governance of Migrant Integration: A Multi-level Governance Perspective on Dutch Migrant Integration Policies-- Peter Scholten 9. Ideology and Entry Policy: Why Center-Right Parties in Sweden Support Open Door Migration Policies-- Andrea Spehar, Gregg Bucken-Knapp and Jonas Hinnfors 10. The Discourses and Politics of Migration: Policy, Methodology, and Theory-- Umut Korkut, Jonas Hinnfors and Helen Drake Notes Bibliography Index

This book engages with politics and political discourse that relate to and qualify immigration in Europe. It brings together empirical analysis of immigration both topically and contextually, and interprets such empirical evidence with the use of policy and discursive analyses as methodological tools. Thematically, this volume focuses on how discourse and politics operate in issue areas as varied as immigrant integration and multilevel governance, Roma immigration and their respective securitization, the uses of language in determination of asylum applications, gendered immigrants in informal economy, perceptions of integration by the migrants, economic interests and economic nationalism stimulating immigration choices, ideology and entry policies, and asylum processes and the institutional evolution of immigration systems. These issues are analyzed with empirical evidence investigating the discursive formulation of immigration systems in political contexts such as the Netherlands, France, United Kingdom, Turkey, Switzerland, Scandinavian states, and Finland.

"An examination of the problem of liberalisation in the Central and East European (CEE) states, this book explores two related research questions: why has the course of political liberalisation in the CEE states failed to construct an organic link between democratic institutions and the public? and how has the economic liberalisation narrative of the liberalising elite excluded the public? Subsequently, the book investigates the conditions under which post-accession liberalisation comes to a halt in countries once praised by the Democratisation and Europeanization literatures for their pace of reform. Particular emphasis is on the comparative aspects of research, placing Hungary in context amongst the new EU member states such as Poland, Slovenia, and Slovakia and examining trends over time. "--

This report reviews the unfolding of the future of Europe and external migration related narratives in Hungary, and the liberal/conservative dilemmas that Hungarian politicians proposed since 2015. Its particular scope is the Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's speeches and how they were quoted by or referred to in the Hungarian media. The abrupt increase in the number of irregular migrant arrivals to Hungary prepared the conditions for Orbán to project the course that he foresaw for the conservative transformation for Hungary to transform Europe. After his victory in 2010 and 2014 at Hungarian general elections, Orbán presented his country as the vanguard for the conservative transformation that Europe also needed. In this respect, external migration from those countries where Islam was the majority religion presented Orbán the context whereby he could project the historical other for Europe as the future danger. The report is empirically focused first and foremost on Viktor Orbán's speeches regarding external migration and Europe; introduce quotations from 25 speeches extracted from mostly Orbán's as well as other Fidesz politicians. The report also looks at the conservative (Magyar Hírlap), centrist (hvg.hu), and liberal (Népszava) media outlets in Hungary in order to see how they have embedded narratives, slogans and tropes from these speeches.

This report reviews the unfolding of the future of Europe and external migration related narratives in Hungary, and the liberal/conservative dilemmas that Hungarian politicians proposed since 2015. Its particular scope is the Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's speeches and how they were quoted by or referred to in the Hungarian media. The abrupt increase in the number of irregular migrant arrivals to Hungary prepared the conditions for Orbán to project the course that he foresaw for the conservative transformation for Hungary to transform Europe. After his victory in 2010 and 2014 at Hungarian general elections, Orbán presented his country as the vanguard for the conservative transformation that Europe also needed. In this respect, external migration from those countries where Islam was the majority religion presented Orbán the context whereby he could project the historical other for Europe as the future danger. The report is empirically focused first and foremost on Viktor Orbán's speeches regarding external migration and Europe; introduce quotations from 25 speeches extracted from mostly Orbán's as well as other Fidesz politicians. The report also looks at the conservative (Magyar Hírlap), centrist (hvg.hu), and liberal (Népszava) media outlets in Hungary in order to see how they have embedded narratives, slogans and tropes from these speeches.

AbstractThis article shows how similar humanitarian narratives of states can travel across different geographies in response to refugee crises. Empirically, it follows Turkey's position vis-à-vis the Syrian and Rohingya refugee crises. Considering Turkey's migration management practices, humanitarian activism narrative, and its political ambition to foster domestic and international audiences for this narrative, this article elaborates on how Turkey has become a humanitarian actor responding both to Syrian and the Rohingya crises. In both cases, the Turkish political discourses have been very resonant of each other, despite Syria and Myanmar being in different geographies and proximities to Turkey. The article also shows how Turkish politicians and the civil servants aspired to enhance visibility and credibility of Turkey as a humanitarian actor. Delineating Turkey's humanitarian narrative shows the role of political agency in forging sympathetic domestic and international audiences. Overall, the Turkish case presents how states operate migration regimes at the cusp of discourses and institutions affecting their forced migration management and humanitarian engagements.

This article shows how similar humanitarian narratives of states can travel across different geographies in response to refugee crises. Empirically, it follows Turkey's position vis-à-vis the Syrian and Rohingya refugee crises. Considering Turkey's migration management practices, humanitarian activism narrative, and its political ambition to foster domestic and international audiences for this narrative, this article elaborates on how Turkey has become a humanitarian actor responding both to Syrian and the Rohingya crises. In both cases, the Turkish political discourses have been very resonant of each other, despite Syria and Myanmar being in different geographies and proximities to Turkey. The article also shows how Turkish politicians and the civil servants aspired to enhance visibility and credibility of Turkey as a humanitarian actor. Delineating Turkey's humanitarian narrative shows the role of political agency in forging sympathetic domestic and international audiences. Overall, the Turkish case presents how states operate migration regimes at the cusp of discourses and institutions affecting their forced migration management and humanitarian engagements.

This article deals with the political responses of the Turkish Republic when faced with incursions of refugees from its neighboring countries forced to migrate due to conflicts. It develops a general argument that the restrictive Turkish asylum regime and averse Turkish public philosophy to immigration have enforced political authorities to continuously resort to discursive rather than institutionalized means to handle impacts of forced migration. Responding to increasing cases of forced migration and the resulting influx of refugees from the bordering countries, therefore, the Turkish political authorities have pursued selective policy responses resting on narratives. Via strategic discourses, these narratives have expressively embedded the Syrian as an "acceptable refugee" in political responses to forced migration. The acceptable refugee in this instance is the one that implies historical and social responsibilities for Turkey, given its history. The outcome is the discursive construction of some as acceptable rather than extending institutionalized refugee rights for all.

This article scrutinizes how the Syrian crisis affects the management of Turkey's refugee regime. It also analyses how the Turkish government has treated the Syrian refugees preferentially in comparison to refugees of other nationalities. The article illustrates that the current Turkish humanitarian assistance to refugees is selective, and it predominantly welcomes those that have religiously, ethnically and politically acceptable backgrounds to the Islamist AKP (Justice and Development Party) ideology in government. This attitude is merely in line with the selective application of what remains as the anomaly of the Turkish asylum regime, that is, it limits itself to accepting asylum applications only from European nationals. This geographical limitation dates from the time when Turkey adopted the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees in 1961, while having published a declaration that it would admit only aliens coming from Europe due to the geographical region in which Turkey is located. Non-European asylum seekers who qualify for the internationally accepted 'refugee' definition are granted the right of temporary asylum (Asylum and Migration Legislation, 2005, pp. 13-14) in Turkey, while the UNHCR deals with their cases to find a country of settlement. This process can take years in many instances, and these refugees can neither leave their places of temporary residence nor be afforded any employment rights while waiting.