The Multilayered Migration Regime in Turkey: Contested Regionalization, Deceleration and Legal Precarization

Genç, Fırat; Heck, Gerda; Heß, Sabine

doi:10.1080/08865655.2017.1344562

Cited by 20 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…By focusing on diverse non-state actors, and by drawing on ethnographic research in two North African countries, the paper also tries to adopt a less univocal, state-centric, and European perspective, thus addressing recent calls to avoid Euro-centrism in the study of externalisation and EU-neighbourhood policy (Bürkner & Scott, 2018;Casas-Cortés & Cobarrubias, 2019;Celata & Coletti, 2016;Üstübici, Stock, & Schultz, 2019-2020Gaibazzi, Bellagamba, & Dünnwald, 2017b;Genç, Heck, & Hess, 2018;_ Işleyen, 2018b;Tazzioli, 2015). Indeed, EU-externalisation "is not a smooth top-down process" (Bartels, 2018, p. 64) and "cannot be understood entirely in terms of an old style geopolitics of dominance" (Collyer, 2016, p. 610).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Non‐governmental/civil society organisations and the European Union‐externalisation of migration management in Tunisia and Egypt

Cuttitta

2020

Population Space and Place

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper sheds light on the role of non-governmental/civil society organisations, as well as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, in the externalisation of migration management in Tunisia and Egypt. These organisations are involved in migration-related activities, which, from the externalisation perspective, should prevent people from attempting the sea-crossing to Europe, thus immobilising them in North Africa. The paper is an ethnographic border regime analysis drawing on extensive fieldwork. It shows that European Union-externalisation is not a univocal and smooth process. Instead, externalisation is entangled in a complex network of actors and dynamics. Measures meant to support externalisation may produce effects contrary to those envisaged, whereas practices accomplishing externalisation goals may be in fact the result of internalisation. By analysing the various actors in their diverse practices and in their-sometimes conflictual-relationships, the paper also tries to minimise state-centrism and Euro-centrism in the study of externalisation.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Non‐governmental/civil society organisations and the European Union‐externalisation of migration management in Tunisia and Egypt

Cuttitta

2020

Population Space and Place

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…49 Yet, as noted earlier, Turkey's migration policy has been shaped not only in relation to Turkey's EU membership but in Turkey's changing geopolitical and economic position regionally and globally. 50 As part of its goal to intensify economic relations, visa restrictions were lifted for nationals of various African countries in 2005, while a mutual visa exemption agreement was signed with Syria in 2009 with the aim to create "Şamgen," a Schengen-type joint visa policy with Iran and Iraq. 51 Moreover, migration control has again been used as both a citizenship and foreign policy tool despite legal changes toward a relatively more liberal visa regime.…”

Section: Episode Ii: Absolute Exclusion With Impunitymentioning

confidence: 99%

14. Migration control, citizenship regime, and the spectrum of exclusion in turkey

2020

Crimmigrant Nations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

, 123 asylum seekers in Kumkapi Deportation Center in Istanbul set fire to their beds and escaped from the center as their legal insecurity became insurmountable. 1 The maltreatment in the Kumkapi Deportation Center had previously been sanctioned by both the European Court of Human Rights 2 and the Turkish Constitutional Court. 3 Government chose to ignore the issues around legal uncertainty that impeded any kind of effective protection and instead responded to the overcapacity problems in Kumkapi by increasing the number of deportation centers. While the first recorded uprisings and hunger strikes in Kumkapi detention center go back to 2009, 4 terrible living conditions and prevailing legal insecurity are not germane to the deportation center in Kumkapi. Recent NGO reports cover instances from 2017, such as the one concerning the Harmandali Deportation Center in Izmir, where passersby reported hearing screams for help and food and statements such as "this is Guantanamo." There are also serious allegations that asylum seekers in these centers are subjected to maltreatment to coerce them to agree to a voluntary return, with their access to justice further curtailed. 5 Interestingly, Harmandali Deportation Center rebutted some of these claims in an internet statement by not only denying the accusations of maltreatment, but also accusing those who engender such news of being supportive of terrorist groups that aim to defame Turkey. 6 Their statement reveals how the discourse over terrorism and "enemies of the state" prevalent in Turkey, a country hosting the largest number of refugees worldwide for four consecutive years, 7 could so readily be mobilized not only against migrants

show abstract

“…While the literature on Turkey-EU relations and foreign policy focus on the mechanisms of policy transfers and explore the bargaining power exercised by third countries such as Turkey (Aras & Mencütek, 2018;İçduygu & Üstübici, 2014), they have put less emphasis on the socio-legal implications. Since the arrival of Syrian refugees, migration scholars working on the case of Turkey have emphasized the differentiated inclusion in relation to various groups of migrants and refugees (Baban et al, 2017;Genç et al, 2019). Others problematized differential treatment among Syrians either based on ethnicity (Korkut, 2016) or on several criteria of vulnerability (Sözer, 2019).…”

Section: Border Externalization and Its Socio-legal Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The analytical connection between the technocratic approach to migration and the production of differentiated legal status is established through an inter-connected reading of recent literature on the EU impact on Turkey's migration governance from early 1990s until the present challenge of refugee arrivals from Syria and on the conceptual framing of externalization practices from critical security studies. Hence, the discussion in the article draws on emerging literatures on the external dimension of EU migration and border policies (Boswell, 2003;Frelick, Kysel, & Podkul, 2016;Genç, Heck, & Hess, 2019;Lavenex & Uçarer, 2004;Wunderlich, 2013), global migration management (Geiger & Pécoud, 2010), critical border studies (Bigo, 2014;Pallister-Wilkins, 2015;Tsianos & Karakayali, 2010), and the legal production of migrant illegality (De Genova, 2004) as well as the recent scholarship on differentiated inclusion in Turkey (Baban, Ilcan, & Rygiel, 2017;Genç et al, 2019;Sözer, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of externalized migration governance on Turkey: technocratic migration governance and the production of differentiated legal status

Üstübici

2019

CMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article highlights international dimensions of the emergence and transformation of migration policies in Turkey from the early 2000s onwards, including the context of the Syrian displacement, which made Turkey the top refugee hosting country in the world. While the transformation of migration governance in Turkey has widely been discussed, the effects of externalization on Turkey have remained focused on foreign policy and Turkey-EU relations. Only recently has the research explored the socio-legal implications of migration governance in terms of the emergence of categorizations leading to differentiated inclusion of migrant groups. The article establishes the historical and conceptual link between technocratic responses to externalization dynamics and the emergence of differentiated legal status. The article argues that measures of externalization brought a technocratic approach to migration governance. As a result, the complex, controversial aspects of the externalization process, such as the production of differentiated legal statuses amongst migrant communities with protection needs, have so far been overshadowed.

show abstract

The Multilayered Migration Regime in Turkey: Contested Regionalization, Deceleration and Legal Precarization

Cited by 20 publications

References 31 publications

Non‐governmental/civil society organisations and the European Union‐externalisation of migration management in Tunisia and Egypt

Non‐governmental/civil society organisations and the European Union‐externalisation of migration management in Tunisia and Egypt

14. Migration control, citizenship regime, and the spectrum of exclusion in turkey

The impact of externalized migration governance on Turkey: technocratic migration governance and the production of differentiated legal status

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About