Racial Profiling on the U-Bahn: Policing the Berlin Gap in the Schönefeld Airport Refugee Crisis

IF 0.4 3区 人文科学 Q1 HISTORY
L. Stokes
{"title":"Racial Profiling on the U-Bahn: Policing the Berlin Gap in the Schönefeld Airport Refugee Crisis","authors":"L. Stokes","doi":"10.1017/S0008938922001054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The German Democratic Republic (GDR) treated the Berlin Wall as an official state border, but the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) did not recognize it as an official state border and thus did not impose entry controls. This asymmetric recognition opened up a gap in the regime of border policing and turned divided Berlin into one of the most significant sources of unauthorized migration into the FRG, creating tensions in Berlin, West Germany, and western Europe more broadly. Countries including France, Denmark, and the Netherlands all pressured the FRG to shut the open border in Berlin. This article examines how West German authorities sought to respond to their demands without recognizing the Berlin Wall as a state border. West German authorities pursued two broad strategies. The first involved internalizing the border through institutionalized racial profiling in West Berlin. The second entailed externalizing the border by asking the GDR to enforce FRG visa and passport requirements. Although both forms of border policing have often been associated with the end of the Cold War, this article shows that they were adopted earlier, and in response to Cold War imperatives.","PeriodicalId":45053,"journal":{"name":"Central European History","volume":"56 1","pages":"236 - 254"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central European History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008938922001054","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"人文科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The German Democratic Republic (GDR) treated the Berlin Wall as an official state border, but the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) did not recognize it as an official state border and thus did not impose entry controls. This asymmetric recognition opened up a gap in the regime of border policing and turned divided Berlin into one of the most significant sources of unauthorized migration into the FRG, creating tensions in Berlin, West Germany, and western Europe more broadly. Countries including France, Denmark, and the Netherlands all pressured the FRG to shut the open border in Berlin. This article examines how West German authorities sought to respond to their demands without recognizing the Berlin Wall as a state border. West German authorities pursued two broad strategies. The first involved internalizing the border through institutionalized racial profiling in West Berlin. The second entailed externalizing the border by asking the GDR to enforce FRG visa and passport requirements. Although both forms of border policing have often been associated with the end of the Cold War, this article shows that they were adopted earlier, and in response to Cold War imperatives.
U-Bahn上的种族定性:Schönefeld机场难民危机中的柏林缺口监管
摘要德意志民主共和国(GDR)将柏林墙视为官方国家边界,但德意志联邦共和国(FRG)不承认其为官方国家边境,因此没有实施入境管制。这种不对称的承认打开了边境治安制度的缺口,并将分裂的柏林变成了未经授权移民到联邦共和国的最重要来源之一,在柏林、西德和更广泛的西欧造成了紧张局势。包括法国、丹麦和荷兰在内的国家都向FRG施压,要求其关闭柏林的开放边境。本文探讨了西德当局如何在不承认柏林墙为国家边界的情况下寻求回应他们的要求。西德当局采取了两大战略。第一个是通过在西柏林进行制度化的种族定性,将边界内部化。第二个是通过要求GDR执行FRG签证和护照要求,将边境外部化。尽管这两种形式的边境警务都经常与冷战的结束联系在一起,但本文表明,它们是较早采用的,是为了应对冷战的需要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: Central European History offers articles, review essays, and book reviews that range widely through the history of Germany, Austria, and other German-speaking regions of Central Europe from the medieval era to the present. All topics and approaches to history are welcome, whether cultural, social, political, diplomatic, intellectual, economic, and military history, as well as historiography and methodology. Contributions that treat new fields, such as post-1945 and post-1989 history, maturing fields such as gender history, and less-represented fields such as medieval history and the history of the Habsburg lands are especially desired. The journal thus aims to be the primary venue for scholarly exchange and debate among scholars of the history of Central Europe.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信