A Critical View on Human Mobility in Times of Crisis
| Published date | 01 February 2017 |
| Date | 01 February 2017 |
| Author | Christiane Fröhlich |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12417 |
A Critical View on Human Mobility in Times of
Crisis
Christiane Fr€
ohlich
Universit€
at Hamburg
Abstract
The number of forced migrants from the Global South to the Global North has increased in recent years, contributing to an
on-going, multi-level political crisis in an already struggling European Union, as well as to a rise in right-wing populism across
the ‘Northern’/’Western’world. How does the West’s claim to be a norm entrepreneur for rule of law, freedom and prosperity
relate to a growing rejection of an ‘other’who is asking for refuge in this protected space in accordance with the latter’s self-
proclaimed rules? This contribution aims to answer this question by inquiring into the role of colonial borders, both in the lit-
eral and the metaphorical sense, in and for processes of ‘othering’with regard to present-day migrants. Inspired by Homi K.
Bhabha, it uncovers colonial power relations by looking at central characteristics of Western discourses on migration in order
to answer the question of who belongs, which is, in turn, key to peaceful co-existence.
The world is experiencing a phase of intense human mobility
within the context of multiple political and ecological crises.
According to the United Nations, more than 60 million peo-
ple have been forcibly displaced
1
by war, violence, political
persecution. Only around 21 million have been awarded
refugee status, i.e. the right to protection by their hosting
state. In addition to this, 26.4 million people have been dis-
placed from their homes on average each year since 2008 by
disasters brought on by natural hazards (IDMC 2015).
The distances crossed by forcibly displaced people are
usually as long as necessary and as short as possible: for
instance, from Aleppo to Gaziantep or from Juba to Kam-
pala. Most, however, remain within their home states as
internal refugees; they just move to less destroyed or
endangered areas. In fact, only relatively few people embark
on the long, risky journey towards areas which –allegedly –
offer better chances for survival and a good life, for instance
from the Middle East and North Africa across the Mediter-
ranean or the Balkan route towards the European Union
(EU). Nevertheless, their number rose significantly in 2015,
contributing to an on-going, multi-level political crisis in an
already struggling European Union, as well as to a rise in
right-wing populism across the ‘Northern’/’Western’world.
This becomes evident in Western discourses and policies
which differentiate to a varying extent between ‘good’and
‘bad’migrants, between ‘us’and ‘them’. The issue is further
complicated by the fact that the relation between securing
external and national borders on the one hand and the
overarching normative goal to provide humanitarian aid and
protection to refugees on the other remains ambiguous and
full of contradictions. The (im)migrant unsettles this already
indeterminate situation further through his/her ambivalent
positioning within formalised structures and processes: He/
she is hard or impossible to control, because he/she often
does not (want to) fit in with the existing body of
regulations. Attempts to contain this refractory positioning
of the migrant –through agreements with key transfer
states like Libya and Turkey, for instance –have been only
partially successful, as illustrated by the enduring game of
cat and mouse between border protection agencies like
Frontex and migrants trying to reach industrialised states,
by the continuous development of new migration routes, as
well as by the dubitable success and normative conse-
quences of agreements like the so-called ‘EU-Turkey deal’.
This special issue looks at the ruptures, oppositions and
insecurities in Western/Northern perspectives on human
mobility with the overall goal to explain how the West’s
claim to be a norm entrepreneur for rule of law, freedom
and prosperity relates to a growing rejection of an ‘other’
who is asking for refuge in this protected space in accor-
dance with the latter’s self-proclaimed rules, for instance the
EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights.
2
Adding to the perspectives presented by the articles in
this special issue, which range from conceptual and theoreti-
cal to specific case studies, this introductory contribution
enquires into the role of colonial borders, both in the literal
and the metaphorical sense, in and for processes of ‘other-
ing’with regard to present-day migrants: after all, current
migrants are often crossing from formerly (or presently) colo-
nised spaces into (neo-)colonial dominions. What is more,
they are crossing discursive boundaries between in- and out-
group which have evolved in a specific (colonial) context
and are themselves characterised by colonial power relations.
They play a crucial role for answering the question ‘who
belongs?’, which in turn is key for peaceful coexistence.
Inspired by Homi K. Bhabha, I aim in the following to
uncover such colonial power relations by looking at central
characteristics of Western discourses on migration, since
they shed light on and inform political decision-making with
regard to human mobility. One essential aspect of human
Global Policy (2017) 8:Suppl.1 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12417 ©2017 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Global Policy Volume 8 . Supplement 1 . February 2017 5
Introduction
To continue reading
Request your trial