The Italo-French Row over Schengen, Critical Junctures, and the Future of Europe's Border Regime

Zaiotti, Ruben

doi:10.1080/08865655.2013.862912

Cited by 14 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is not the first time the French have unilaterally reintroduced border controls at the Italian border with the aim of containing undesired inflows (Casella Colombeau, 2015). The first reintroduction of border controls at the French/Italian border dates back to 2011, in the aftermath of the so-called “Arab Spring” (Carrera et al., 2011; Garelli and Tazzioli, 2013; Zaiotti, 2013).…”

Section: Managing Asylum Seekers’ Mobility At the French/italian Border: Trespassing The Border Isolating Border Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Desired freight and undesired migrants: Security and market forces at internal EU borders

Vergnano

2021

Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on a comparison between two intra-EU border securitization processes in the aftermath of the so-called EU “refugee crisis” of 2015, this article aims to contribute to literature on migration control by stressing the role that market-security dynamics play in state borderwork. The comparison between the French/Italian and the Austrian/Italian borders suggests that the containment of undesired mobility may be better understood in light of economic processes (shared commercial interests between states and the interests of the security industry) whose dimensions are easily quantifiable and comparable but rarely taken into account in research on borders and migration. The analysis highlights that these economic processes, together with other historical, political, social and geomorphological factors, are crucial to explain the emergence of different “local border control regimes” in terms of police cooperation, states’ sovereignty practices and the reconfiguration of migratory routes. As an additional argument, the article brings out the nuances of the EU’s uneven core-periphery dynamics with respect to migration management. Indeed, it shows the active role of peripheral countries, such as Italy, in negotiating, contesting, or actively assuming their role of migration “gatekeepers”.

show abstract

Section: Managing Asylum Seekers’ Mobility At the French/italian Border: Trespassing The Border Isolating Border Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Desired freight and undesired migrants: Security and market forces at internal EU borders

Vergnano

2021

Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Attention to internal borders has so far been more sparse, with some notable exceptions. For example, Zaiotti's (2013) earlier discussion of the row between Italy and France over migrant mobility touched upon some key issues of the forthcoming events. There is also research on the nexus between security, border management and the Schengen treaty in which "critical perceptions of the Schengen cooperation prevail as many scholars compare Schengen to an ideal project ensuring freedom of movement, flawless protection of human rights and perfect external border controls" (Votoupalová 2018, 4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resistance or Acceptance? The Voice of Local Cross-Border Organizations in Times of Re-Bordering

Svensson

2020

Journal of Borderlands Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

National borders in Europe are increasingly subject to re-bordering processes, including the external and internal borders of the European Union. This article asks if and how local cross-border organizations (Euroregions) have reacted to to the recent hardening of these borders. The Austrian-German border is one where border controls have been reintroduced in the wake of the 2015 refugee crisis, and which also has significant local crossborder institutional activity. Based on an analysis of 350 written items, published by six Euroregions during the five-year period 2015-2019, the article finds that the Euroregions have generally not voiced resistance to this development and have not been active in relation to the policy field of refugee or migrant inclusion. When they reacted, the resistance has mainly been embedded in an argumentation linked to instrumental concerns, such as the traffic situation, even though the research also demonstrated the existence of normative arguments related to human rights discourses and rights of migrants.

show abstract

“…There were then two subsequent peaks in the quantity of research (Novotná 2018, p.4). First, between 2011, when the trigger was the so-called "Franco-Italian Affair" 21 and the subsequent Schengen Governance Package (Carrera et al 2011;Pascouau 2012;Peers 2013;Zaiotti 2013). Second, from 2015 onwards, scholarship was triggered by the re-introduction and maintenance of temporary border controls at internal borders by several member states.…”

Section: Internal Border(-struggles)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…"Refugee/Migration/Schengen 'crisis'" Several authors have shifted away from 'crisis' as moment and primarily normative aspects and have placed developments of 2011 or 2015 into broader historical and political contexts, thereby critically interrogating 'crisis' (e.g. Siegel and Nagy 2018;Cobarrubias et al 2015;Zaiotti 2013;Hess and Kasparek 2017a;Campesi 2018). Zaiotti (2013) drew attention towards similarities of actors and dynamics of what he called "critical junctures" characterising the Schengen regime since its very creation.…”

Section: Internal Border(-struggles)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Siegel and Nagy 2018;Cobarrubias et al 2015;Zaiotti 2013;Hess and Kasparek 2017a;Campesi 2018). Zaiotti (2013) drew attention towards similarities of actors and dynamics of what he called "critical junctures" characterising the Schengen regime since its very creation. Accordingly, the essence of the disputes regarded the the allocation of responsibilities and burden-sharing (p.337).…”

Section: Internal Border(-struggles)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Policing-Mobilities in the Border-Stripe

Weissensteiner¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The establishment of an area of "freedom of movement" without border control within the Schengen-area is deemed one of the major achievements of European integration. However, developments since 2015 have shown a renewed salience of internal borders. This is due, on the one hand, to the introduction and maintenance of temporary border control by several member states, which was justified as a response to unauthorised mobilities problematised as "secondary movements". On the other hand, also border-regions adjacent to internal borders have acquired an increased strategic importance. Particularly the European Commission advanced the recommendation to shift towards enhanced (national) border-area police-checks and police cooperation as an alternative to border control. Both the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and explicitly the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement (CISA) encourage bilateral police cooperation between member states, foreseeing particular measures for countries that share a common border. Various studies conducted in the 1990s engaged with initially informal, and increasingly formalised, forms of cooperation across borderregions. In current times, practices of cross-border police cooperation as well as of migration policing at internal borders constitute a substantial knowledge gap.In this dissertation I examine the intersection of cross-border police cooperation (CBPC) with the control of differential mobility rights within today's EU Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. I conceptualise and analyse CBPC as policing-mobilities in the border-strip. Grounded in empirical fieldwork with police officers, this study fills important research-gaps that persist with regards to a twofold inquiry: a) police cooperation at the scale of border-regions and b) the policing of mobilities at internal Schengen borders. Specifically, this study concentrates on three CBPC instruments: joint police centres or PCCCs, (joint) border-area patrols and bilateral simplified fasttrack readmissions. Some of these were also amongst the "best practices" and alternatives which since 2017 the Commission has recommended to enhance. Beyond findings of analytical relevance, this study allows one to critically engage with the envisaged border-area 'solutions'.In PART I, I place this dissertation at the crossroad of social-science and law within a multidisciplinary field of scholarly engagement. I outline the theoretical framework and methodological approach of a multisited research design. Rather than conducting a research that favours a focus on discourses and laws or on situated practices, I studied both elements and the interdependence between law-as-text and as-practice, aiming to get a grasp of large-scale processes not reducible to one empirical field-locale. In PART II, I draw attention towards the spatial-legal regimes that regulate CBPC and trace their emergence as institutionalised regimes of practices. I argue that they constitute the border-strip as spatial-legal condition of possibility xv...

show abstract

The Italo-French Row over Schengen, Critical Junctures, and the Future of Europe's Border Regime

Cited by 14 publications

References 13 publications

Desired freight and undesired migrants: Security and market forces at internal EU borders

Desired freight and undesired migrants: Security and market forces at internal EU borders

Resistance or Acceptance? The Voice of Local Cross-Border Organizations in Times of Re-Bordering

Policing-Mobilities in the Border-Stripe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About