Border closures and the externalization of immigration controls in the Mediterranean
A comparative analysis of Morocco and Turkey – Retracted
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6093497 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Aysen Ustubici (0000-0002-1498-0025, Koç University), Ahmet Içduygu (0000-0002-8145-5888, Koç University) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 59 |
| Pages | 7-31 |
| Publication date | 2018-11-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | New Perspectives on Turkey (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0896-6346 • E-ISSN: 1305-3299 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/npt.2018.21 |
| OpenAlex | W2890125509 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 6 |
| References cited | 23 |
This article traces the recent history of border closures in Turkey and Morocco and their impact on human mobility at the two ends of the Mediterranean. Border closures in the Mediterranean have produced new spaces where borders are often fenced, immigration securitized, and border crossings and those facilitating border crossings criminalized. Here, bordering practices are conceptualized as physical bordering practices, border controls, and legal measures. Turkey and Morocco constitute comparable cases for an analysis of border closures insofar as they utilize similar mechanisms of closure, despite having quite different outcomes in terms of numbers. The article’s findings are based on fieldwork conducted at both locations between 2012 and 2014, as well as on analysis of Frontex Risk Assessment Reports from 2010 to 2016. The first part of the article reflects on the concepts of border closure and securitization, together with their implications, and draws for its argument on critical security studies and critical border studies. The second part of the article is an overview of controls over mobility exercised in the Mediterranean from the 1990s onward. Then, in the third and fourth parts, we turn to the particular cases—respectively, Turkey and Morocco—in order to discuss their processes of border closure and the various implications thereof. Through analysis of the two country cases, we show that border closures are neither linear nor irreversible
Argument (complex analysis · Border Security · Closure (psychology · Development economics · Economic geography · Economics · Economy · Externalization · Geography · Immigration · Irregular migration · Mediterranean climate · Political science · Securitization · Global Security and Public Health · Law · Migration, Refugees, and Integration · Peacebuilding and International Security
Informalising Readmission Agreements in the EU Neighbourhood
The Tensions of the Ceuta and Melilla Border Fences
The Governance of International Migration
The Politics of Insecurity
Le HCR au Maroc
The biopolitics and geopolitics of border enforcement in Melilla
Rethinking transit migration in Turkey
Borders in a Changing Europe
Live governance, borders, and the time–space of the situation
Protecting Europe and Protecting Migrants? Strategies for Managing Unauthorised Migration from Africa
The Spanish Governance of EU borders
The Politics of Irregular Migratory Flows in the Mediterranean Basin
In‐Between Places
Shifting up and out
Europe's failed ‘fight’ against irregular migration
Time and the Migrant Other
Experimentalist but not Accountable Governance? The Role of Frontex in Managing the EU's External Borders
Political Activism Between Journey and Settlement
The end of the 'Euro-Mediterranean vision
| Unique citing works | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,86 |
| Citation span | 2019 - 2024 (6) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 6 |