Do asylum recognition rates in Europe respond to transnational terrorism? The migration-security nexus revisited

Abstract

Scholars assume that transnational terrorism has culminated in policy securitization with expansive restrictions on migration. I evaluate the impact of transnational terrorism on asylum recognition among European Union and Schengen member-states from 1980 until 2007. I unpack the impact of terrorism according to the location of incidents. The article illustrates that policy tightening is more pronounced when recipient states experience terrorism on their own soil or against their citizens. In contrast, measuring transnational terrorism as attacks worldwide mutes the impact of security concerns. The findings show that policy stringency is not directed against particular sources of terrorism and demonstrates that the humanitarian principles underpinning asylum recognition have not been eroded by terrorism. The article thus represents an important step in differentiating between channels of impact whereby transnational terror shapes policy outcomes.

Keywords

Asylum policies human rights migration security transnational terrorism

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adamson

(2006) Crossing borders: International migration and national security. International Security 31: 165–199.

Avdan N (2013) Controlling access to territory: Economic interdependence, transnational terrorism, and visa policies. Journal of Conflict Resolution. doi: 10.1177/0022002713478795.

Beck

(2001) Time series cross-section data: What have we learned in the past years? Annual Review of Political Science 4: 271–293.

Beck

Katz

(1995) What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-section data. American Political Science Review 89: 634–647.

Bigo D (2000) Border Regimes and Security in an Enlarged European Community Police Cooperation with CEECs: Between Trust and Obligation. EUI Working Papers, vol. 65, London, UK: San Domenico European University Institute.

Bigo D (2002) To reassure and protect after September 11th. Social Science Research Council essays. Available at: http://essays.ssrc.org/sept11/essays/bigo.htm (accessed 17 April 2014).

Boswell

(2007) Migration control after 9/11: Explaining the absence of securitization. Journal of Common Market Studies 45: 589–610.

Boswell

(2009) Migration, security, and legitimacy. In: Givens

Freeman

Leal

(eds) Immigration Policy and Security: US, European, and Commonwealth Perspectives, New York: Routledge, pp. 93–109.

Buzan

Waever

de Wilde

(1998) Security: A New Framework for Analysis, Colorado: Rienner Publishers Inc.

10.

Den Boer

Monar

(2002) Keynote article: September 11 and the challenge of global terrorism to the EU as a security actor. Journal of Common Market Studies 40: 11–28.

11.

Enders

Sandler

(2002) Patterns of transnational terrorism, 1970–1999: Alternative time-series estimates. International Studies Quarterly 46: 145–165.

12.

Freeman

(1992) Migration policy and politics in the receiving states. International Migration Review 26: 1114–1167.

13.

Ghosh

(2000) Managing Migration: Time for a New International Regime?, New York: Oxford University Press.

14.

Gibney

(2002) Political Terror Scales Dataset, Asheville, NC: University of North Carolina at Asheville.

15.

Gibney

(2004) A thousand little Guantanamos: Western states and measures to prevent the arrival of refugees. In: Tunstall

(eds) Displacement, Asylum, Migration, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 169–181.

16.

Gibney

Dalton

Vockell

(1992) USA Refugee policy: A human rights analysis update. Journal of Refugee Studies 5: 33–46.

17.

Gibney

Stohl

(1988) Human rights and US refugee policy. In: Gibney

(eds) Open Borders? Closed Societies? The Ethical and Political Issues, New York: Greenwood Press, pp. 151–183.

18.

Gleditsch

Salehyan

(2007) Civil wars and interstate disputes. In: Strom

Oberg

(eds) Resources Governance and Civil Conflict, New York: Routledge, pp. 58–76.

19.

Greene

(1997) Econometric Analysis, New York: Pearson Education Press.

20.

Hamlin

(2012) Illegal refugees: Competing policy ideas and the rise of the regime of deterrence in American asylum politics. Refugee Studies Quarterly 31: 33–53.

21.

Hatton

(2009) The rise and fall of asylum: What happened and why? The Economic Journal 119: 183–213.

22.

Hollifield

(1992) Immigrants, Markets, and States: The Political Economy of Postwar Europe, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

23.

Holmes

Keith

(2010) Does the fear of terrorists trump the fear of persecution in asylum outcomes in the post–September 11 era? PS: Political Science (Symposium on Terrorism and Human Rights) 43: 431–436.

24.

Holzer

Schneider

(1999) Convergence towards exclusion: The Schengen agreement and the asylum regime in the OECD area. In: Schulte

Thranhardt

(eds) International Migration and Liberal Democracies, Munster, Germany: LIT, pp. 237–268.

25.

Huysmans

(1995) Migrants as a security problem: Dangers of ‘securitizing’ societal issues. In: Miles

Thranhardt

(eds) Migration and European Security: The Dynamics of Inclusion and Exclusion, London: Pinter, pp. 53–72.

26.

Huysmans

(2000) The European Union and the securitization of migration. Journal of Common Market Studies 38: 751–777.

27.

Huysmans

(2006) The Politics of Insecurity: Fear, Migration, and Asylum in the EU, New York: Routledge.

28.

Jacobson

(1996) Rights Across Borders: Immigration and the Decline of Citizenship, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

29.

Joppke

(2006) Why liberal states accept unwanted immigration. In: Messina

Lahav

(eds) The Migration Reader: Exploring Politics and Policies, Boulder, CO: Lynne Publishers, pp. 266–293.

30.

Keith

Holmes

(2009) A rare examination of typically unobservable factors in US asylum decisions. Journal of Refugee Studies 22: 224–241.

31.

Koslowski R (2004) Possibles steps towards an international regime for mobility or security. Global Migration Perspectives 8. Available at: http//www.gcim.org (accessed 10 October 2013).

32.

LaFree

(2010) The Global terrorism database: Accomplishments and challenges. Perspectives on Terrorism 4: 24–47.

33.

Leblang DA, Fitzgerald J and Teets J (2009) Defying the law of gravity: The political economy of international migration. Working Paper Series. Boulder, Colorado: Social Science Research Network.

34.

Leiken

(2002) Bearers of Global Jihad? Immigration and National Security after 9/11, Washington, DC: Nixon Center.

35.

Levy

(2005) The European Union after 9/11: The demise of a liberal democratic asylum regime? Government and Opposition 40: 26–59.

36.

Loescher G (1993) Beyond charity: International cooperation and the global refugee crisis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

37.

Loescher

Steiner

Gibney

(2003) Problems of Protection: The UNHCR, Refugees and Human Rights in the 21st Century, New York: Routledge.

38.

Marshall M, Gurr TR and Harff B (2011) State failure problem set: Internal wars and failures of governance, 1955–2011. College Park: University of Maryland. Available at: http://archive.today/hnCyM (accessed February 2014).

39.

Marshall MG and Jaggers K (2000) Polity IV Project. Available at: http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm (accessed 17 April 2014).

40.

Mickolus

Sandler

Murdock

(2007) International Terrorism: Attributes of Terrorist Events (ITERATE), Dunn Loring, VA: Vinyard Software.

41.

Neumayer

(2004) Asylum destination choice: What makes some European countries more attractive than others? European Union Politics 5: 155–180.

42.

Neumayer

(2005a) Asylum recognition rates in Western Europe: Their determinants, variation, and lack of convergence. Journal of Conflict Resolution 49: 43–66.

43.

Neumayer

(2005b) Bogus refugees? The determinants of asylum migration to Western Europe. International Studies Quarterly 49: 389–409.

44.

Neumayer

(2006) Unequal access to foreign spaces: How states use visa restrictions to regulate mobility in a globalized world. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 31: 72–84.

45.

Noll

(2000) Negotiating Asylum: The EU Acquis, Extraterritorial Protection, and the Common Martek of Deflection, The Hague, The Netherlands: Nijhoff Publishers.

46.

Poe

Carey

Vazquez

(2001) How are these pictures different? A quantitative comparison of the US state department and amnesty international human rights reports. Human Rights Quarterly 23: 650–677.

47.

Price

(2009) Rethinking Asylum: History, Purpose, and Limits, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

48.

Rosenblum

Salehyan

(2004) Norms and interests in US asylum enforcement. Journal of Peace Research 41: 677–697.

49.

Rottman

Fariss

Poe

(2009) The path to asylum in the US and the determinants for who gets in and why. International Migration Review 43: 3–34.

50.

Salehyan I (2008) US refugee and asylum policy: Has anything changed after 9/11? Presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, San Francisco, CA, 26–29 March.

51.

Salehyan I and Rosenblum MR (2008) International relations, domestic politics, and asylum admissions in the United States. Political Research Quarterly 61: 104–121.

52.

Schuster

(2000) A comparative analysis of the asylum policy of seven European governments. Journal of Refugee Studies 13: 118–132.

53.

Soysal

(1994) Limits of Citizenship: Migrants and Postnational Membership in Europe, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

54.

Teitelbaum

Weiner

(1995) Threatened Peoples, Threatened Borders: World Migration and U.S. Policy, New York: Norton.

55.

Thielemann

(2006) The effectiveness of governments’ attempts to control unwanted migration. In: Parsons

Smeeding

(eds) Immigration and the Transformation of Europe, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 442–473.

56.

Thielemann

(2009) Towards a common European asylum policy: Forced migration, collective security, and burden sharing. In: Givens

Freeman

Leal

(eds) Immigration Policy and Security: US, European, and Commonwealth Perspectives, New York: Routledge, pp. 167–187.

57.

Toshkov D (2013) The dynamic relationship between asylum applications and recognition rates. European Union Politics, December 23, 2013. doi: 10.1177/1465116513511710.

58.

UNHCR (2001) Asylum Applications in Industrialized Countries, 1980–1999, Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

59.

UNHCR (2007) Convention relating to the status of refugees. Available at: http://www.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa10.pdf (accessed 10 April 2014).

60.

UNHCR (2008) Statistical Yearbook, Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

61.

Weiner

(1995) The Global Migration Crisis, New York: Harper Collins.

62.

Young

Findley

(2011) Promise and pitfalls of terrorism research. International Studies Review 13: 411–431.

63.

Zolberg

(1995) From invitation to intradiction: US foreign policy and immigration since 1945. In: Teitelbaum

Weiner

(eds) Threatened Peoples, Threatened Borders: World Migration and US Policy, New York: Norton, pp. 117–159.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

2.37 MB

0.00 MB

0.27 MB