Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bordercracies and Bordercrats

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Borders and Mobility in Turkey

Part of the book series: Mobility & Politics ((MPP))

  • 292 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter we investigate Turkey’s 2013 migration and asylum legislation, the Law on Foreigners and International Protection (LFIP), and the concurrent formation of the Directorate General for Migration Management (DGMM), a body created to ensure the law’s effective implementation. Our focus here is on the role of intergovernmental organisations (IGOs) in shaping legislation and the formation of a civilian, transnational community of bordercrats. The existence of this legislation supported the labelling of Turkey as a ‘safe country’ in a joint Turkey–EU declaration reached in March 2016. It is ironic that in 2016 Turkey was designated a ‘safe country’ for refugees in a context in which Turkey can be said to have become increasingly unsafe for refugees and its citizens alike.

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 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 59.99
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.

    Until the 2013 LFIP law, international protection was managed through secondary legislation, notably the 1994 Regulation on Asylum and administrative circulars, which were revised in March 2010. A circular was also issued in March 2010 on combatting irregular migration, and in September 2010 a circular on admission into centres and informing foreigners who will stay in the country.

  2. 2.

    EU–Turkey statement, 18 March 2016, Press Release, 114/16, Foreign Affairs and International Relations http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/18-eu-turkey-statement/

  3. 3.

    For a critical discussion of the EU’s classification of Turkey as a safe third country, you may refer to Ulusoy, O. 29 March 2016, Turkey as a safe third country? https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/research-subject-groups/centre-criminology/centreborder-criminologies/blog/2016/03/turkey-safe-third (accessed 29 March 2016).

  4. 4.

    European Commission, Peer Review Mission Report Turkey, Chapter 24 Migration and Asylum, 6–10 December 2010.

  5. 5.

    http://avrupa.infor.tr/fileadmin/Content/Downloads/PDF/2010 Peer Review report by Gert Jan Von Holk.pdf (accessed 10 June 2016).

  6. 6.

    Council of Europe. 2000. Transit Migration in Central and Eastern Europe. Report by Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, Document 8904, 13 December 2000; Council of Europe. 2001. Transit Migration in Central and Eastern Europe. Opinion by Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, Document 8937, 22 January 2001.

  7. 7.

    European Commission, 2001 Regular Report on Turkey’s Progress towards Accession, 2001 p. 85.

  8. 8.

    For further details you may refer to Frontex Annual Risk Analyses 2010–2016 and BBC News, Migrants turn to Greece–Turkey route to Europe, 5 June 2015 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33020600 (accessed 19 June 2016).

  9. 9.

    See, for example, ICMPD country profile of Turkey.

  10. 10.

    Interview—High Ranking Migration Official, Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, November §2014 (via Skype).

  11. 11.

    Interview—Programme Manager, Bureau for Integrated Border Management, January 2013, Ankara (Turkey).

  12. 12.

    Açiköz and Ariner (2014, 24).

  13. 13.

    Interview—High Ranking Migration Official, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Turkey), Ankara, December 2014.

  14. 14.

    Interview—First migration officer, FCO Turkey, January 2013, Ankara (Turkey).

  15. 15.

    For example, the UNHCR were not consulted regarding the drafting of the 2010 circular on asylum.

  16. 16.

    Jadalyyia, Refugees in Turkey: Implications of Increasing Politicization, 6 June 2015 http://profiles.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/21815/refugees-in-turkey_implications-of-increasing-poli (accessed 12 June 2016).

  17. 17.

    Interview—FCO First migration officer, January 2013, Ankara (Turkey).

  18. 18.

    See Annex 3 for precise figures from 2001 to 2013.

  19. 19.

    Turkey became a member state to the IOM in 2004 and henceforward also contributed voluntary donations to the IOM on a yearly basis.

  20. 20.

    Interview—Project Officer, IOM January 2013, Ankara (Turkey).

  21. 21.

    ICMPD ‘About Us’ webpage http://www.icmpd.org/ABOUT-US.1513.0.html (accessed 20 May 2016).

  22. 22.

    The FCO has a migration officer in countries considered ‘high risk’ for irregular migration towards the UK, including countries considered as key ‘transit’ and ‘sending’ countries.

  23. 23.

    ICMPD, Vacancy Announcement 13PO18VO1, National Management Consultant, June 2013.

References

  • Açiköz, Merel, and Onur Ariner. 2014. Turkey’s New Law on Foreigners and International Protection: An Introduction. Turkmis Briefing Paper, University of Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Düvell, Frank. 2012. Transit Migration: A Blurred and Politicized. Population, Space and Place 18 (4): 415–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FRONTEX. 2010–2016. Annual Risk Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guiraudon, Virginie, and Christian Joppke, eds. 2001. Controlling a New Migration World, 31–64. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • IOM. 1995. IOM Transit Migration in Turkey. Geneva: IOM.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012, September. Irregular Migration in Turkey. Ankara: IOM. http://www.turkey.iom.int/documents/IrregularMigration/IOM_Report_11022013.pdf

  • IOM Irregular Migration in Turkey. 2003, February. 12, IOM Migration Research Series. Geneva: IOM. https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/mrs_12_2003.pdf

  • Kirisci, Kemal. 2005. To Lift or Not to Lift’ the Geographical Limitation to the 1951 Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees: Turkey’s Pre-accession to the EU and Asylum. 4th METU International Relations, Ankara, 30 June–2 July. http://www.edam.org.tr/document/Kirisci2.pdf

  • Martin-Mazé, Médéric. 2015. L’extension transnationale du domaine de la lutte symbolique : comment les savoirs d’État sur les frontières passent-ils les frontières de l’État? Cultures & Conflits 2 (98): 53–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, Etienne. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zolberg, Aristide. 2003. The Archeology of “Remote Control”. In Migration Control in the North Atlantic World, ed. Andreas Farmeir, Olivier Faron, and Patrick Weil, 195–222. New York: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CERI Sciences Po, Paris, France

    Shoshana Fine

Authors
  1. Shoshana Fine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fine, S. (2018). Bordercracies and Bordercrats. In: Borders and Mobility in Turkey. Mobility & Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70120-2_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation