Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Politics of the Schengen/Dublin System: The Case of the European Migrant and Refugee Crisis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Border Politics

Abstract

The Schengen/Dublin system requiring the first EU member state of entry to take full responsibility for migrants and applicants for asylum has placed an asymmetrical burden on EU border states, resulting in an emphasis being placed on the fight against illegal migration and the reduction of protections for refugees. The system has been explained in terms of intergovernmental decision-making and the dominance of security discourse which enabled member states to block the sharing of burdens. This chapter argues against this approach, grounded in mid-range theory, and finds that the regulatory framework is not due to a particular institutional-discursive setting as such but rather due to deeper causes such as the absence of community policies in areas relevant to migrations and asylum. Research into the interaction between issues, positions, decision-making rules and rhetoric applied on the EU level during the European migrant and refugee crisis of 2015 demonstrates that (a) the sharing of burdens as such was in fact not a disputed issue, (b) that there is broad support for the existing policy among member states and (c) that departure from a veto setting triggered nationalist security rhetoric that deepened the crisis suggesting the role of causes at a deeper level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Frontext stands for Frontières extérieures.

  2. 2.

    The central role of the ministries of interior affairs, police and security experts has been both the cause and consequence of the dominance of the security issues.

  3. 3.

    More recently Tichenor (2015) has addressed this issue for the USA.

  4. 4.

    At the time, 22 out of 28 EU member states participated in Schengen; the UK and Ireland had opt-outs while Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus and Romania would join after fulfilling the criteria. In addition, four European Free Trade Agreement (EFTA) countries participated: Iceland, Lichtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. The Dublin regulation applied to all EU member states but Denmark and was applied in EFTA members.

  5. 5.

    The Schengen agreement allows for a temporary re-introduction of border controls for up to 2/6 months.

  6. 6.

    At the Council, the June 2015 agreement on the first relocation package was formally approved.

References

  • BBC. (2015a, April 19). As it happened: Migrant boat disaster. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-32372351

  • BBC. (2015b, September 25). Migrant crisis: Why EU deal on refugees is difficult. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34324096

  • Bigo, D. (1996). Polices en réseaux. L’expérience européenne. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castles, S. (2006). Back to the future? Can Europe meet its labour needs through temporary migration? (Working paper). Oxford: International Migrations Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEC (Commission of European Communities). (2015a, April 20). Joint Foreign and Home Affairs Council: Ten point action plan on migration (IP/15/4813). Luxembourg. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-4813_en

  • CEC. (2015b). European agenda on migration 2015—Four pillars to better manage migration. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/background-information/docs/summary_european_agenda_on_migration_en

  • CEC. (2015c). Proposal for a council decision establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and Greece (COM (2015) 286 final). Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEC. (2015d). Proposal for a council decision establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy, Greece and Hungary (COM (2015) 451 final). Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEC. (2015e). Proposal for a Regulation […] establishing a crisis relocation mechanism (COM (2015) 450 final).

    Google Scholar 

  • Demmelhuber, T. (2011). The European Union and illegal immigration in the southern Mediterranean: The trap of competing policy concepts. The International Journal of Human Rights, 15(6), 818–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Düvell, F. (2011). Irregular migration. In A. Betts (Ed.), Global migration governance (pp. 78–108). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Espinoza, S. A., & Moraes, C. (2012). The law and politics of migration and asylum: The Lisbon Treaty and the EU. In D. Ashiagbor, N. Countouris, & I. Lianos (Eds.), The European Union after the Treaty of Lisbon (pp. 156–184). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Euractiv. (2015, May 8). Hungary’s PM Orban calls refugee quota plan ‘mad’. Euractiv. Retrieved from http://www.euractiv.com/sections/migrations/hungarys-pm-orban-calls-eu-refugee-quota-plan-mad-314457

  • European Council. (2015a, April 23). Special meeting of the European Council [Statement]. Brussels. Retrieved from http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/04/23-special-euco-statement/

  • European Council. (2015b). European Council meeting conclusions (22/15 CO EUR 8 CONCL 3). Brussels, 26 June. http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-22-2015-INIT/en/pdf. Accessed December 2015.

  • European Council. (2015c). Action plan and political declaration. Valletta summit on migration, 11–12 November. Retrieved from http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/11/12-valletta-final-docs/. Accessed December 2015.

  • European Parliament. (2015). Resolution on the latest tragedies in the Mediterranean and EU migration and asylum policies. 2015/2660 (RSP).

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabbe, H. (2000). The sharp edges of Europe. International Affairs, 76(3), 519–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham-Harrison, E., Kingsley, P., Waites, R., & McVeigh, T. (2015, September 5). Cheering German crowds greet refugees after long trek from Budapest to Munich. The Observer. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/05/refugee-crisis-warm-welcome-for-people-bussed-from-budapest

  • Guild, E. (2006). The Europeanisation of Europe’s asylum policy. International Journal of Refugee Law, 18(34), 630–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guiraudon, V. (2000). European integration and migration policy: Vertical policy-making as venue shopping. Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(2), 251–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollifield, J. F. (2008). The politics of international migration: How can we bring the state in? In C. B. Brettell & J. F. Hollifield (Eds.), Migration theory. Talking across disciplines (pp. 183–237). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huggler, J., & Marszal, A. (2015, April 24). Angela Merkel calls for new rules for distributing asylum seekers in Europe. Daily Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11561430/Angela-Merkel-calls-for-new-rules-for-distributing-asylum-seekers-in-Europe.html

  • Huysmans, J. (2000). The European Union and the securitization of migration. Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(5), 751–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • JHA Council. (2015a, July 20). Outcome of the council meeting. Provisional version, press. 11097/15 3405th Council meeting, Justice and Home affairs. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • JHA Council. (2015b, September 14). Council decision establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and of Greece, 2015/1523. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • JHA Council. (2015c, September 22). Council decision establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and Greece, 2015/1601. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. O. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and interdependence: World politics in transition. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, R. (2012). Theories and Typologies of migration: An overview and a primer. Willy Brandt Series of Working Papers in International Migration and Ethnic Relations 3/12. Malmö: Malmö Institute for Studies of Migration, Diversity and Welfare.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostakopoulou, T. (2000). The ‘protective union’; change and continuity in migration law and policy in post-Amsterdam Europe. Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(3), 497–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M., & Macdonald, A. (2015, September 14). Germany re-imposes border controls to slow migrant arrivals. Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/europe-migrants-idUSKCN0RD0NU20150914

  • Meyers, E. (2000). Theories of international immigration policy—A comparative analysis. The International Migration Review, 34(4), 1245–1282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International Organization, 51(4), 513–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. (1998). The choice for Europe: Social purpose and state power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. (1999). Is Something Rotten in the State of Denmark? Constructivism and European Integration. Journal of European Public Policy, 6(4), 669–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A., & Checkel, J. T. (2001). A constructivist research program in EU Studies? European Union Politics, 2(2), 219–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2009). Liberal intergovernmentalism. In A. Wiener & T. Diez (Eds.), European integration theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouzourakis, M. (2014). We need to talk about Dublin: Responsibility under the Dublin System as a blockage to asylum burden-sharing in the European Union. Refugees Studies Centre, Oxford Department of International Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poptcheva, E. M. (2015). EU legal framework on asylum and irregular immigration ‘on arrival’ State of play [Briefing]. European Parliament Research Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommer, S. (2013). Opening fortress Europe? Constructing a new approach to EU migration policy. Brussels Journal of International Studies, 10, 42–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thielemann, E., & Armstrong, C. (2013). Understanding European asylum cooperation under the Schengen/Dublin System: A public goods framework. European Security, 22(2), 148–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thielemann, E., Williams, R., & Boswell, C. (2010, January 22). What system of burden-sharing between member states for the reception of asylum seekers? European Parliament, Directorate-General Internal Policies, Policy Department C, Citizens Rights and Constitutional Affairs, Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, PE 419.620. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tichenor, D. (2015). The political dynamics of unauthorized immigration: Conflict, change and agency in time. Polity, 47(3), 283–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, O. (1996). European security identities. Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(1), 103–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, O., Buzan, B., Kelstrup, M., & Lemaitre, P. (1993). Identity, migration and the new security agenda in Europe. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinar, A. (2011). EU cooperation challenges in external migration policy, EU-US immigration systems 2011/02. Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, A., & Diez, T. (Eds.). (2009). European integration theory (2nd ed.). Oxford: Hampshire.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre of International Relations (CIR), University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Marko Lovec

Authors
  1. Marko Lovec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marko Lovec .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. oiip Austrian Institute of International Affairs, Vienna, Austria

    Cengiz Günay

  2. Munich Center for Technology in Society, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany

    Nina Witjes

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lovec, M. (2017). Politics of the Schengen/Dublin System: The Case of the European Migrant and Refugee Crisis. In: Günay, C., Witjes, N. (eds) Border Politics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46855-6_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation