Migration Statecraft: Managing Migration Flows at a Bilateral Level

Q1 Arts and Humanities
C. Pagani
{"title":"Migration Statecraft: Managing Migration Flows at a Bilateral Level","authors":"C. Pagani","doi":"10.17994/it.2021.19.1.64.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article assesses the theoretical contours and effectiveness of migration governance and diplomacy as an instrument of statecraft in interstate relations. The first part provides an overview of the stakes and challenges of migration within the fields of international relations and political theory. In particular, the category of migration defies the theoretical model of the nation­state, on which traditional IR and political theory are grounded. The second part highlights how the state, through the securitization of migration, uses migration as a tool to reaffirm its defining features: reinforcing its borders, legitimating state sovereignty, and building societal security. The third section demonstrates the usefulness of the category of statecraft within the context of migration governance at a bilateral level owing to the absence of a global normative framework. This relationship can serve different purposes, depending on the context: to harm, to deter, to bargain, to escalate. The last section presents contemporary case studies of the application of migration statecraft by the United States and Russia, as well as by member states along external border of the European Union and within the Schengen space. The elements of \"migration statecraft\" evidenced by these episodes focus on several objectives: trade blackmail, cooperation in an asymmetrical relation, political threat, and diplomatic escalation for electoral purposes. The variety of these cases illustrates the specificity of statecraft in comparison with foreign policy analysis. While the latter refers to a general and long­term strategy, the former is context­dependent and specific to achievement of a precise desired outcome.","PeriodicalId":37798,"journal":{"name":"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17994/it.2021.19.1.64.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article assesses the theoretical contours and effectiveness of migration governance and diplomacy as an instrument of statecraft in interstate relations. The first part provides an overview of the stakes and challenges of migration within the fields of international relations and political theory. In particular, the category of migration defies the theoretical model of the nation­state, on which traditional IR and political theory are grounded. The second part highlights how the state, through the securitization of migration, uses migration as a tool to reaffirm its defining features: reinforcing its borders, legitimating state sovereignty, and building societal security. The third section demonstrates the usefulness of the category of statecraft within the context of migration governance at a bilateral level owing to the absence of a global normative framework. This relationship can serve different purposes, depending on the context: to harm, to deter, to bargain, to escalate. The last section presents contemporary case studies of the application of migration statecraft by the United States and Russia, as well as by member states along external border of the European Union and within the Schengen space. The elements of "migration statecraft" evidenced by these episodes focus on several objectives: trade blackmail, cooperation in an asymmetrical relation, political threat, and diplomatic escalation for electoral purposes. The variety of these cases illustrates the specificity of statecraft in comparison with foreign policy analysis. While the latter refers to a general and long­term strategy, the former is context­dependent and specific to achievement of a precise desired outcome.
移民治国之道:在双边层面上管理移民流动
本文评估了移民治理和外交在国家间关系中作为治国手段的理论轮廓和有效性。第一部分概述了国际关系和政治理论领域内移民的利害关系和挑战。特别是,移民的范畴违背了民族国家的理论模型,而传统的国际关系和政治理论正是建立在这个模型之上的。第二部分强调了国家如何通过移民的证券化,将移民作为重申其定义特征的工具:加强其边界,使国家主权合法化,并建立社会安全。第三部分展示了由于缺乏全球规范框架,治国方略类别在双边层面移民治理背景下的有用性。这种关系可以达到不同的目的,取决于具体情况:伤害、威慑、讨价还价、升级。最后一部分介绍了美国和俄罗斯以及欧盟外部边界和申根区域内的成员国应用移民治国方术的当代案例研究。这些事件证明了“移民治国方略”的要素集中在几个目标上:贸易勒索、不对称关系中的合作、政治威胁和为选举目的的外交升级。与外交政策分析相比,这些案例的多样性说明了治国方略的特殊性。后者指的是一般和长期战略,而前者则依赖于具体情况,具体到实现精确的预期结果。
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
Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy
Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: “International Trends” (“Mezhdunarodnye protsessy”) was established in 2002 as the first Russian TIR journal. As of the early 2010s, it holds a strong position among the top three Russian thematic academic journals (according to the Russian Science Citation Index). The Journal’s key mission is a theoretical comprehension of the world as a whole, of international tendencies and the planetary political environment, and of the world-integrity our country finds herself in and develops with.
×
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