难以捉摸的 "集体化难民保护":欧盟-埃及移民合作案例

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY European Journal of Migration and Law Pub Date : 2024-06-18 DOI:10.1163/15718166-12340179
El-Sayed
{"title":"难以捉摸的 \"集体化难民保护\":欧盟-埃及移民合作案例","authors":"El-Sayed","doi":"10.1163/15718166-12340179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper departs from a deductive premise seeking to apply the theory of “collectivised system of refugee responsibility” to the EU-Egypt migration arrangements. In its basic form, the theory proffers the funding and oversight of the wealthy North to assert protection, and integration of refugees in southern countries. At face value, the design and structure of the EU-Egypt migration arrangements appear to reflect this formula: EU funding in return for Egyptian principled accommodation of refugees. A profounder analysis of these deals, nevertheless, discerns the emergence of an alternative linguistic and legal discourse that priorities security and control over the humanitarian cause. Practice, as well, demonstrates that neither the EU is willing to undertake any refugees’ oversight roles, nor Egypt is vying for EU funding. To the contrary, Egypt’s generous funding of EU commercial interests and ruthless crackdown on refugees represent Egypt’s basic offerings to appease the EU and garner its political support.</p>","PeriodicalId":51819,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Migration and Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Elusive “Collectivised Refugee Protection”: The Case of the EU-Egypt Migration Cooperation\",\"authors\":\"El-Sayed\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718166-12340179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This paper departs from a deductive premise seeking to apply the theory of “collectivised system of refugee responsibility” to the EU-Egypt migration arrangements. In its basic form, the theory proffers the funding and oversight of the wealthy North to assert protection, and integration of refugees in southern countries. At face value, the design and structure of the EU-Egypt migration arrangements appear to reflect this formula: EU funding in return for Egyptian principled accommodation of refugees. A profounder analysis of these deals, nevertheless, discerns the emergence of an alternative linguistic and legal discourse that priorities security and control over the humanitarian cause. Practice, as well, demonstrates that neither the EU is willing to undertake any refugees’ oversight roles, nor Egypt is vying for EU funding. To the contrary, Egypt’s generous funding of EU commercial interests and ruthless crackdown on refugees represent Egypt’s basic offerings to appease the EU and garner its political support.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Migration and Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Migration and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340179\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Migration and Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340179","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文从一个演绎前提出发,试图将 "集体化难民责任体系 "理论应用于欧盟-埃及移民安排。该理论的基本形式是,由富裕的北方国家提供资金并进行监督,以确保难民在南方国家得到保护并融入当地社会。从表面上看,欧盟-埃及移民安排的设计和结构似乎反映了这一公式:欧盟以资金换取埃及对难民的原则性收容。然而,如果对这些交易进行更深入的分析,就会发现出现了另一种语言和法律话语,即安全和控制优先于人道主义事业。实践也表明,无论是欧盟还是埃及都不愿意承担任何监督难民的角色,也不愿意争夺欧盟的资金。恰恰相反,埃及对欧盟商业利益的慷慨资助和对难民的无情打击,是埃及讨好欧盟、争取其政治支持的基本姿态。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Elusive “Collectivised Refugee Protection”: The Case of the EU-Egypt Migration Cooperation

This paper departs from a deductive premise seeking to apply the theory of “collectivised system of refugee responsibility” to the EU-Egypt migration arrangements. In its basic form, the theory proffers the funding and oversight of the wealthy North to assert protection, and integration of refugees in southern countries. At face value, the design and structure of the EU-Egypt migration arrangements appear to reflect this formula: EU funding in return for Egyptian principled accommodation of refugees. A profounder analysis of these deals, nevertheless, discerns the emergence of an alternative linguistic and legal discourse that priorities security and control over the humanitarian cause. Practice, as well, demonstrates that neither the EU is willing to undertake any refugees’ oversight roles, nor Egypt is vying for EU funding. To the contrary, Egypt’s generous funding of EU commercial interests and ruthless crackdown on refugees represent Egypt’s basic offerings to appease the EU and garner its political support.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Migration and Law is a quarterly journal on migration law and policy with specific emphasis on the European Union, the Council of Europe and migration activities within the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe. This journal differs from other migration journals by focusing on both the law and policy within the field of migration, as opposed to examining immigration and migration policies from a wholly sociological perspective. The Journal is the initiative of the Centre for Migration Law of the University of Nijmegen, in co-operation with the Brussels-based Migration Policy Group.
期刊最新文献
The ‘Border Security’ Concept in EU Law EU Boots on the Ground and Effective Judicial Protection against Frontex’s Operational Powers in Return: Lessons from Case T‑600/21 When Do Union Citizens and Their Families Have the Right to Equal Treatment on Grounds of Nationality in EU Law? The Fiction of Non-entry in European Migration Law: Its Implications on the Rights of Asylum Seekers and Irregular Migrants at European Borders Derogations in Exchange of Increased Responsibility: How Can This Fix the Broken Promise for More Solidarity in the EU?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1