Normative Power FRONTEX? Assessing Agency Cooperation with Third Countries

Abstract

Human rights groups frequently criticise FRONTEX and the legality of the agency's operations has been questioned in scholarly literature. At the same time, recent studies have shown that humanitarian concerns are increasingly emphasised in FRONTEX's rhetoric. Drawing on Manners' concept of 'Normative Power Europe', and Niemann and de Wekker's framework for empirical analysis of normative power Europe, this paper assesses FRONTEX's cooperation with third countries with a focus on one norm: respect for fundamental rights. It examines to what extent the agency shows a genuine commitment to the implementation of fundamental rights and to what extent the agency is acting in a normative way, i.e. applying universal norms and showing willingness to listen to and learn from the experiences of third countries. The analysis suggests that that the agency has moved towards a more genuine commitment towards fundamental rights implementation and that there is a fair degree of inclusivity and reflexivity to third country cooperation. However, the possibility of internal conflicts of interest as well as discrepancies between what is stated on paper and what is happening on the ground may stand in the way of the agency's exercising normative power.

Opening Pandora’s Box? Joint Sovereignty and the Rise of EU Agencies with Operational Tasks

“…Its formal purpose was to ensure effective management of the EU’s external borders by coordinating operational tasks implementing relevant EU measures. This included monitoring migratory flows, carrying out risk analyses and vulnerability assessments, as well as coordinating joint operations and rapid border interventions at the external borders (Ekelund, 2017). Since 2004, the agency was reformed four times in order to respond to increasing migratory pressures at the EU’s external borders.…”

“…This was done by means of a more robust mandate (Ripoll Servent, 2018) and an immensely increased budget. However, since the beginnings of its operations, Frontex has been criticised by several scholars and practitioners for its alleged non-compliance with international human rights law (Ekelund, 2017). Following our main argument, we trace these deficiencies back to the high ambiguity of Frontex’s mandate and the absence of (open) conflict over human rights violations between the agency and national authorities.…”