欧盟对土耳其移民拘留政策的影响

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY European Journal of Migration and Law Pub Date : 2022-09-12 DOI:10.1163/15718166-12340133
P. Canga, S. Behrman
{"title":"欧盟对土耳其移民拘留政策的影响","authors":"P. Canga, S. Behrman","doi":"10.1163/15718166-12340133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In the context of rising populist and nationalist politics amongst some EU states and throughout the world, the EU prides itself on the principle of free movement, and its adherence to a detailed set of human rights norms. However, this dichotomy obscures a more complex reality. The problem is that ‘free movement’ is conceived of, in EU terms, as solely relating to internal movement. When it comes to its external relations, the EU arguably comes to more closely resemble the politics of the critics of ‘free movement’ in the UK and elsewhere. The policy, colloquially known as ‘Fortress Europe’ has been around for some time, and the EU’s response to the refugees attempting to enter via the Mediterranean in recent years has not been defined by a humanitarian approach. Another way in which the EU’s prejudices around non-European migration can be observed is through its external relations with other states. We explore the case of EU-Turkey relations, and by doing so reveal the ways in which the EU has attempted to alter the policies of its partner, and putative member state, in ways that place burdens on migrants rather than relieving them. Turkey as the EU’s ‘candidate’ country has adopted these policies without much debate about alternatives to detention or ethics of detaining people as long as certain standards were met. This candidate-EU relationship, although strained a few years back, has finally led to the readmission agreement in 2015 where immigration detention became the norm.","PeriodicalId":51819,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Migration and Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of the European Union on Turkey’s Policy of Immigration Detention\",\"authors\":\"P. Canga, S. Behrman\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718166-12340133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In the context of rising populist and nationalist politics amongst some EU states and throughout the world, the EU prides itself on the principle of free movement, and its adherence to a detailed set of human rights norms. However, this dichotomy obscures a more complex reality. The problem is that ‘free movement’ is conceived of, in EU terms, as solely relating to internal movement. When it comes to its external relations, the EU arguably comes to more closely resemble the politics of the critics of ‘free movement’ in the UK and elsewhere. The policy, colloquially known as ‘Fortress Europe’ has been around for some time, and the EU’s response to the refugees attempting to enter via the Mediterranean in recent years has not been defined by a humanitarian approach. Another way in which the EU’s prejudices around non-European migration can be observed is through its external relations with other states. We explore the case of EU-Turkey relations, and by doing so reveal the ways in which the EU has attempted to alter the policies of its partner, and putative member state, in ways that place burdens on migrants rather than relieving them. Turkey as the EU’s ‘candidate’ country has adopted these policies without much debate about alternatives to detention or ethics of detaining people as long as certain standards were met. This candidate-EU relationship, although strained a few years back, has finally led to the readmission agreement in 2015 where immigration detention became the norm.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Migration and Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-12\",\"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/10.1163/15718166-12340133\",\"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/10.1163/15718166-12340133","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

在一些欧盟国家和世界各地民粹主义和民族主义政治日益高涨的背景下,欧盟以自由流动原则及其对一套详细人权规范的遵守而自豪。然而,这种二分法掩盖了一个更为复杂的现实。问题是,用欧盟的术语来说,“自由流动”被认为只与内部流动有关。在对外关系方面,欧盟可以说与英国和其他地方“自由流动”批评者的政治更为相似。这项政策,通俗地说是“欧洲堡垒”,已经存在了一段时间,欧盟对近年来试图通过地中海进入的难民的反应并没有用人道主义方法来定义。另一种可以观察到欧盟对非欧洲移民的偏见的方式是通过其与其他国家的对外关系。我们探讨了欧盟与土耳其关系的情况,并通过这样做揭示了欧盟试图改变其合作伙伴和假定成员国政策的方式,给移民带来负担,而不是减轻他们的负担。土耳其作为欧盟的“候选”国,在采取这些政策时,没有就拘留的替代方案或只要符合某些标准就拘留人员的道德问题进行太多辩论。尽管几年前这种候选欧盟关系紧张,但最终在2015年达成了重新接纳协议,移民拘留成为常态。
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 Impact of the European Union on Turkey’s Policy of Immigration Detention
In the context of rising populist and nationalist politics amongst some EU states and throughout the world, the EU prides itself on the principle of free movement, and its adherence to a detailed set of human rights norms. However, this dichotomy obscures a more complex reality. The problem is that ‘free movement’ is conceived of, in EU terms, as solely relating to internal movement. When it comes to its external relations, the EU arguably comes to more closely resemble the politics of the critics of ‘free movement’ in the UK and elsewhere. The policy, colloquially known as ‘Fortress Europe’ has been around for some time, and the EU’s response to the refugees attempting to enter via the Mediterranean in recent years has not been defined by a humanitarian approach. Another way in which the EU’s prejudices around non-European migration can be observed is through its external relations with other states. We explore the case of EU-Turkey relations, and by doing so reveal the ways in which the EU has attempted to alter the policies of its partner, and putative member state, in ways that place burdens on migrants rather than relieving them. Turkey as the EU’s ‘candidate’ country has adopted these policies without much debate about alternatives to detention or ethics of detaining people as long as certain standards were met. This candidate-EU relationship, although strained a few years back, has finally led to the readmission agreement in 2015 where immigration detention became the norm.
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