Search

Right-wing politicians who speak out for women’s rights while attacking emancipatory feminist politics appear to be a contradiction. Nevertheless, studies show that this is a widespread Western phenomenon in fact. It represents a discursive construction, one that Suvi Keskinen understands as a “politics of reversal”: namely as “the adoption and rearticulation of central feminist ideas […] to promote racist agendas” (2018, 161). However, racialized and culturalist gender discourses and images cannot only be found in the context of far-right parties and groups that can be easily and readily defined as “femonationalists” (ibid.). Rather, we can observe “dangerous convergences” of gender and race across the political spectrum, especially in the context of feminist and migration politics. These convergences, how they are produced within feminist as well as migration-related social fields, plus how they circulate and hence structure policies and politics are the focus of this article. We argue that culturalist and racializing gender discourses within current migration and feminist politics reinforce each other—whether intended or not. Hereby several incidences of sections of the international feminist movement deliberately opting for (racial) alliances with the state and law and order policies are illustrated., Rechte Politiker, die sich für die Rechte der Frauen einsetzen und gleichzeitig eine emanzipatorische feministische Politik angreifen, scheinen ein Widerspruch zu sein. Studien zeigen jedoch, dass dies tatsächlich ein weit verbreitetes westliches Phänomen ist. Es stellt eine diskursive Konstruktion dar, die Suvi Keskinen als "Politik der Umkehrung" versteht: nämlich als "die Übernahme und Reartikulation zentraler feministischer Ideen [...], um rassistische Agenden zu fördern" (2018, 161). Rassistische und kulturalistische Geschlechterdiskurse und -bilder sind jedoch nicht nur im Kontext rechtsextremer Parteien und Gruppen zu finden, die sich leicht und einfach als "Femonationalisten" (ebd.) definieren lassen. Vielmehr können wir "gefährliche Konvergenzen" von Geschlecht und Rasse im gesamten politischen Spektrum beobachten, insbesondere im Kontext von feministischer und Migrationspolitik. Diese Konvergenzen, wie sie innerhalb feministischer und migrationsbezogener sozialer Felder produziert werden und wie sie zirkulieren und damit Politiken strukturieren, stehen im Mittelpunkt dieses Beitrags. Wir argumentieren, dass sich kulturalistische und rassifizierende Geschlechterdiskurse in der aktuellen Migrations- und feministischen Politik gegenseitig verstärken - ob beabsichtigt oder nicht. In diesem Zusammenhang werden einige Beispiele aus der internationalen feministischen Bewegung skizzieren, die sich mehr oder weniger bewusst für (rassistische) Allianzen mit dem Staat und der Ordnungspolitik entschieden haben., Peer Reviewed

The article processing charge was funded by the Open Access Publication Fund of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin., This paper analyzes the role of border fortifications for migration control and access to asylum based on two case studies: the Hungarian–Serbian and U.S. American–Mexican borders. The research is based on qualitative interviews on both sides of the borders. It shows that despite other options for border control, fortifications still play an important role, especially for asylum seekers. Fences fulfill a material, a symbolic and a filtering function here. The three functions contribute in different ways to preventing asylum seekers from crossing the border, thus depriving refugees of the opportunity to apply for asylum. The paper shoes that fences fulfill functions that other forms of border control (such as shifting or smart borders) cannot accomplish in the same way and it thereby contributes to understanding the ‘puzzle’ of contemporary border fencing., Peer Reviewed

Contemporary research on migration and border regimes emphasizes that migration produces effects beyond border control, as migrants act (partially) autonomously as individual or collective agents. On the discursive level, many representations tend to foster fantasies of refugees as autonomous political fighters, which overlooks their frequently peaceful aims and ignores non-violent (micro-)politics. Based on an example from Laura Otto’s fieldwork with young migrants in Malta, we claim that it is important for critical migration theory not to subsume diverse forms of agency and concrete actions of migrants too easily under the umbrella of the autonomy of migration, as autonomy is a highly ambivalent concept – not an end in itself. We propose to distinguish clearly between belligerent and peaceful forms of political agency. Beyond an understanding of autonomy as combative by principle, a post-autonomous viewpoint takes constructive interdependencies among migrants and non-migrant EU-populations into consideration, too.

Contemporary research on migration and border regimes emphasizes that migration produces effects beyond border control, as migrants act (partially) autonomously as individual or collective agents. On the discursive level, many representations tend to foster fantasies of refugees as autonomous political fighters, which overlooks their frequently peaceful aims and ignores non-violent (micro-)politics. Based on an example from Laura Otto’s fieldwork with young migrants in Malta, we claim that it is important for critical migration theory not to subsume diverse forms of agency and concrete actions of migrants too easily under the umbrella of the autonomy of migration, as autonomy is a highly ambivalent concept – not an end in itself. We propose to distinguish clearly between belligerent and peaceful forms of political agency. Beyond an understanding of autonomy as combative by principle, a post-autonomous viewpoint takes constructive interdependencies among migrants and non-migrant EU-populations into consideration, too.

Many in Germany argue that the minimum wage and other protective provisions for migrant workers will only be effective when workplace inspections by the enforcement body "Finanzkontrolle Schwarzarbeit" (FKS) are stepped up. For this reason, a novel cooperation agreement between the FKS and migrant workers' counseling offices has been signed, in June 2021. This step is informed by the FKS' public image of being a guardian of the minimum wage and of victims of labor exploitation. The hypothesis of this thesis is that the argument of more inspections lead to less exploitation is oversimplified. Therefore, it explores the role that the FKS has for migrant workers in more detail by using regime theory and a methodological approach informed by ethnographic border regime analysis. An analysis of the FKS' formal duties codified in the law reveals its ambivalent character. Especially the concept of unlawful employment serves as an umbrella term that conflates protective as well as punitive provisions for migrant workers. In eleven qualitative interviews, FKS officers and migrant workers' counselors mostly rejected the FKS' image as a "workers' protection squad". Instead, they think that the FKS only served the interests of the state. As a consequence, exploited workers have no immediate benefit from FKS inspections, and sometimes even experience heavy detriments like the loss of their job, housing, or unpaid wages. The most severe consequences, like expulsions or deportations, result from violations of the Residence Act. For these reasons, counselors reacted differently to the new cooperation agreement. While most counselors have strong reservations or even refuse to work with law enforcement bodies, others have found ways to cooperate without putting their clients at risk. For such successful cooperation it is crucial that FKS officers take workers' and counselors' needs seriously and adapt their routines and protocols in order to instill trust. Under the current legal and

Many in Germany argue that the minimum wage and other protective provisions for migrant workers will only be effective when workplace inspections by the enforcement body "Finanzkontrolle Schwarzarbeit" (FKS) are stepped up. For this reason, a novel cooperation agreement between the FKS and migrant workers' counseling offices has been signed, in June 2021. This step is informed by the FKS' public image of being a guardian of the minimum wage and of victims of labor exploitation. The hypothesis of this thesis is that the argument of more inspections lead to less exploitation is oversimplified. Therefore, it explores the role that the FKS has for migrant workers in more detail by using regime theory and a methodological approach informed by ethnographic border regime analysis. An analysis of the FKS' formal duties codified in the law reveals its ambivalent character. Especially the concept of unlawful employment serves as an umbrella term that conflates protective as well as punitive provisions for migrant workers. In eleven qualitative interviews, FKS officers and migrant workers' counselors mostly rejected the FKS' image as a "workers' protection squad". Instead, they think that the FKS only served the interests of the state. As a consequence, exploited workers have no immediate benefit from FKS inspections, and sometimes even experience heavy detriments like the loss of their job, housing, or unpaid wages. The most severe consequences, like expulsions or deportations, result from violations of the Residence Act. For these reasons, counselors reacted differently to the new cooperation agreement. While most counselors have strong reservations or even refuse to work with law enforcement bodies, others have found ways to cooperate without putting their clients at risk. For such successful cooperation it is crucial that FKS officers take workers' and counselors' needs seriously and adapt their routines and protocols in order to instill trust. Under the current legal and

Drawing on the findings of previous research on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cross border movement within the European Union and the separation of cross-border families, the study focuses on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cross-border movement of Polish families within the European Union and, more specifically, on the situation of Polish families separated by the borders that remain withing the Schengen Area. The study explores the ways in which Covidfencing has dramatically restricted the free movement of the UE citizens within the Schengen Area, especially between Poland and Germany. Using research methods such as literature review, participating observation and interview, the researcher identifies key factors that has shaped the migration crisis during the COVID-19 pandemic inside the Schengen area and then focuses on examining in greater detail commuting and migration problems of the Polish cross-border families. The research is organised by the hypothesis that has been assumed at the start of the research. The hypothesis argues that the Polish cross-border families have been significantly affected by the crossborder movement restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic within the Schengen area. The findingsof the research indicate the validity of such assumption and the need for further research in this direction., Opierając się na wynikach wcześniejszych badań dotyczących wpływu pandemii COVID-19 na ruch transgraniczny w Unii Europejskiej i separacji rodzin transgranicznych, w badaniu skupiono się na wpływie pandemii COVID-19 na ruch transgraniczny polskich rodzin w Unii Europejskiej, a konkretnie sytuacji polskich rodzin oddzielonych granicami pozostającymi w strefie Schengen. Badanie analizuje sposoby, dzięki którym Covid radykalnie ograniczył swobodę przemieszczania się obywateli UE w strefie Schengen, zwłaszcza między Polską a Niemcami. Korzystanie z metod badawczych, takich jak przegląd literatury, obserwacja uczestnicząca i wywiad umożliwiło identyfikacje kluczowych czynników, które ukształtowały kryzys migracyjny podczas pandemii COVID-19 w strefie Schengen, a następnie pozwoliło skupić się na bardziej szczegółowym badaniu dojazdów i problemów migracyjnych polskich rodzin transgranicznych. W artykule sformułowano hipotezę, że polskie rodziny przygraniczne zostały znacząco dotknięte ograniczeniami ruchu granicznego podczas pandemii COVID-19 w strefie Schengen. Wyniki badań wskazują na słuszność takiego założenia i potrzebę dalszych badań w tym kierunku.

Durch internationale Fluchtbewegungen über die sogenannte Balkanroute bildete sich in Serbiens Hauptstadt Belgrad in den letzten Jahren ein sogenannter Refugee District heraus. Im Kontext von Migration und Flucht werden dabei zahlreiche Spannungsfelder auf unterschiedlichen räumlichen und politischen Ebenen sichtbar. Für Flüchtende kreieren diese eine Situation, die von Stillstand, Ausweglosigkeit, Kontrolle, Gefahr und Verdrängung geprägt ist. Allerdings führen die Vielschichtigkeit und die Diversität unterschiedlicher Akteur*innen, die bezüglich der Situation von Flüchtenden auf der Balkanroute wirkmächtig sind, auch zu Nischen, Widerständigkeiten und der Möglichkeit (neuer) Allianzen. Auf diese Weise entsteht eine kollektive Praktik der Nicht-Bewegung im Widerstand gegen die Unterdrückung und für globale Bewegungsfreiheit., International refugee movements via the Balkan route have resulted in the emergence of the so-called Refugee District in the Serbian capital Belgrade in recent years. In this process, different fields of tension on different spatial and political levels and within the context of migration and flight become visible. This creates a situation for refugees that is of standstill and hopelessness, control, danger and displacement. Though, the multidimensionality and diversity of the different actors, that are effective in relation to the situation of refugees on the Balkan route, leads to niches, the resistance and the possibility for the (new) alliances. This is how a collective practice of non-movement has developed in resistance to oppression and on behalf of global freedom of movement. For this reason, not only the Balkan route and thus the situation in Belgrade must from now on be more strongly integrated into the local discourse on safe harbours and German and European border and migration policy, but there are also opportunities for solidarity with refugees at the city level - by integrating the refugees into the protests against the neoliberal urban development project Belgrade Waterfront and by supporting and maintaining the infrastructure created in the Refugee District.

Durch internationale Fluchtbewegungen über die sogenannte Balkanroute bildete sich in Serbiens Hauptstadt Belgrad in den letzten Jahren ein sogenannter Refugee District heraus. Im Kontext von Migration und Flucht werden dabei zahlreiche Spannungsfelder auf unterschiedlichen räumlichen und politischen Ebenen sichtbar. Für Flüchtende kreieren diese eine Situation, die von Stillstand, Ausweglosigkeit, Kontrolle, Gefahr und Verdrängung geprägt ist. Allerdings führen die Vielschichtigkeit und die Diversität unterschiedlicher Akteur*innen, die bezüglich der Situation von Flüchtenden auf der Balkanroute wirkmächtig sind, auch zu Nischen, Widerständigkeiten und der Möglichkeit (neuer) Allianzen. Auf diese Weise entsteht eine kollektive Praktik der Nicht-Bewegung im Widerstand gegen die Unterdrückung und für globale Bewegungsfreiheit., International refugee movements via the Balkan route have resulted in the emergence of the so-called Refugee District in the Serbian capital Belgrade in recent years. In this process, different fields of tension on different spatial and political levels and within the context of migration and flight become visible. This creates a situation for refugees that is of standstill and hopelessness, control, danger and displacement. Though, the multidimensionality and diversity of the different actors, that are effective in relation to the situation of refugees on the Balkan route, leads to niches, the resistance and the possibility for the (new) alliances. This is how a collective practice of non-movement has developed in resistance to oppression and on behalf of global freedom of movement. For this reason, not only the Balkan route and thus the situation in Belgrade must from now on be more strongly integrated into the local discourse on safe harbours and German and European border and migration policy, but there are also opportunities for solidarity with refugees at the city level - by integrating the refugees into the protests against the neoliberal urban development project Belgrade Waterfront and by supporting and maintaining the infrastructure created in the Refugee District.

Durch internationale Fluchtbewegungen über die sogenannte Balkanroute bildete sich in Serbiens Hauptstadt Belgrad in den letzten Jahren ein sogenannter Refugee District heraus. Im Kontext von Migration und Flucht werden dabei zahlreiche Spannungsfelder auf unterschiedlichen räumlichen und politischen Ebenen sichtbar. Für Flüchtende kreieren diese eine Situation, die von Stillstand, Ausweglosigkeit, Kontrolle, Gefahr und Verdrängung geprägt ist. Allerdings führen die Vielschichtigkeit und die Diversität unterschiedlicher Akteur*innen, die bezüglich der Situation von Flüchtenden auf der Balkanroute wirkmächtig sind, auch zu Nischen, Widerständigkeiten und der Möglichkeit (neuer) Allianzen. Auf diese Weise entsteht eine kollektive Praktik der Nicht-Bewegung im Widerstand gegen die Unterdrückung und für globale Bewegungsfreiheit., International refugee movements via the Balkan route have resulted in the emergence of the so-called Refugee District in the Serbian capital Belgrade in recent years. In this process, different fields of tension on different spatial and political levels and within the context of migration and flight become visible. This creates a situation for refugees that is of standstill and hopelessness, control, danger and displacement. Though, the multidimensionality and diversity of the different actors, that are effective in relation to the situation of refugees on the Balkan route, leads to niches, the resistance and the possibility for the (new) alliances. This is how a collective practice of non-movement has developed in resistance to oppression and on behalf of global freedom of movement. For this reason, not only the Balkan route and thus the situation in Belgrade must from now on be more strongly integrated into the local discourse on safe harbours and German and European border and migration policy, but there are also opportunities for solidarity with refugees at the city level - by integrating the refugees into the protests against the neoliberal urban development project Belgrade Waterfront and by supporting and maintaining the infrastructure created in the Refugee District.

This articule discusses how Central American migrants in transit through Mexico during the last years of the 21st century have deployed new ways of dealing with the violence of border controls in the US border regime. It analyzes the relationship between violence, immigration controls and their devices, with the processes of capital accumulation in the United States and the exploitation of resources and labor in Mexico and Central America, from where migrants have made a massive flight from mid-eighties. It describes the caravans of Central American migrants that acquired media notoriety in 2018, as political bodyments in motion, which question the different confinement devices that they have experienced in recent years when transiting illegalized and criminalized for several decades. The focus of the chapter is analytical and ethnographic, in order to show in what ways we can observe how the migrant caravans question and challenge the right-humanist discourses and oppose the violence of the migration government of the US border regime., Este artículo analiza cómo los migrantes centroamericanos en tránsito por México durante los últimos años del siglo XXI han desplegado nuevas formas de enfrentarse a la violencia de los controles fronterizos del régimen fronterizo estadounidense. Se analiza la relación entre la violencia, los controles migratorios y sus dispositivos, con los procesos de acumulación de capital en Estados Unidos y la explotación de recursos y mano de obra en México y Centroamérica, de donde los migrantes han realizado una huida masiva desde mediados de los años ochenta. Describe las caravanas de migrantes centroamericanos que adquirieron notoriedad mediática en 2018, como cuerpos políticos en movimiento, que cuestionan los diferentes dispositivos de confinamiento que han experimentado en los últimos años al transitar ilegalizados y criminalizados desde hace varias décadas. El enfoque del capítulo es analítico y etnográfico, para mostrar de qué manera podemos observar cómo las caravanas de migrantes cuestionan y desafían los discursos derechistas y se oponen a la violencia del gobierno migratorio del régimen fronterizo estadounidense.

Durch internationale Fluchtbewegungen über die sogenannte Balkanroute bildete sich in Serbiens Hauptstadt Belgrad in den letzten Jahren ein sogenannter Refugee District heraus. Im Kontext von Migration und Flucht werden dabei zahlreiche Spannungsfelder auf unterschiedlichen räumlichen und politischen Ebenen sichtbar. Für Flüchtende kreieren diese eine Situation, die von Stillstand, Ausweglosigkeit, Kontrolle, Gefahr und Verdrängung geprägt ist. Allerdings führen die Vielschichtigkeit und die Diversität unterschiedlicher Akteur*innen, die bezüglich der Situation von Flüchtenden auf der Balkanroute wirkmächtig sind, auch zu Nischen, Widerständigkeiten und der Möglichkeit (neuer) Allianzen. Auf diese Weise entsteht eine kollektive Praktik der Nicht-Bewegung im Widerstand gegen die Unterdrückung und für globale Bewegungsfreiheit., International refugee movements via the Balkan route have resulted in the emergence of the so-called Refugee District in the Serbian capital Belgrade in recent years. In this process, different fields of tension on different spatial and political levels and within the context of migration and flight become visible. This creates a situation for refugees that is of standstill and hopelessness, control, danger and displacement. Though, the multidimensionality and diversity of the different actors, that are effective in relation to the situation of refugees on the Balkan route, leads to niches, the resistance and the possibility for the (new) alliances. This is how a collective practice of non-movement has developed in resistance to oppression and on behalf of global freedom of movement. For this reason, not only the Balkan route and thus the situation in Belgrade must from now on be more strongly integrated into the local discourse on safe harbours and German and European border and migration policy, but there are also opportunities for solidarity with refugees at the city level - by integrating the refugees into the protests against the neoliberal urban development project Belgrade Waterfront and by supporting and maintaining the infrastructure created in the Refugee District.

For centuries, the Strait of Gibraltar has been a crossroads between Africa and Europe. Since the 1980s, however, it has increasingly become a “zone of illegality” (Hannoum 2020) where racial governmentality produces illicit lives and creates an apartheid-like hierarchy of humanity. By exploring how colonial legacies and EU policies play out in the Strait of Gibraltar, I show how categories of difference are made and remade across time and space. Through a genealogical and ethnographic approach, I study the historically produced particularities that make racialised “Others” emerge and explore how human differences are created in terms of race, gender, and class. Migrants are historical actors that shape and are shaped by the social fabric of a border region. I thus argue that categories of difference are not fixed entities, but instead they are simultaneously reworked, reinforced, contested, and subverted.

published first as (erstmalig folgendermaßen erschienen): Gerhild Perl: “The Production of Illicit Lives: Racial Governmentality and Colonial Legacies Across the Strait of Gibraltar”. In: Zeitschrift für Ethnologie / Journal of Social and Cultural Anthropology 145.2 (2020), Special Issue “Rethinking the Mediterranean”, pages 255–274. Die Zweitveröffentlichung dieses Artikels unter der Lizenz Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) erfolgte mit freundlicher Genehmigung des Reimer Verlags., For centuries, the Strait of Gibraltar has been a crossroads between Africa and Europe. Since the 1980s, however, it has increasingly become a “zone of illegality” (Hannoum 2020) where racial governmentality produces illicit lives and creates an apartheid-like hierarchy of humanity. By exploring how colonial legacies and EU policies play out in the Strait of Gibraltar, I show how categories of difference are made and remade across time and space. Through a genealogical and ethnographic approach, I study the historically produced particularities that make racialised “Others” emerge and explore how human differences are created in terms of race, gender, and class. Migrants are historical actors that shape and are shaped by the social fabric of a border region. I thus argue that categories of difference are not fixed entities, but instead they are simultaneously reworked, reinforced, contested, and subverted.

In this article, I ask how to interpret the border regime of South America. I reflect on the possible relation between international migration, states and borders in the field of migration studies in order to build analytically situated categories. In order to do so, I use a qualitative methodology based on a set of documents such as final declarations and technical reports of the South American Conference on Migration (sacm), and resolutions of the Southern Common Market (Mercosur) and the Andean Community (can). In order to interpret the border regime, I construct three categories: (i) the border externalization, associated with the regionalization process of migration control policies in South America, (ii) the crossing from one national territory to another, linked to the control at the border points, and (iii) the borders of permanence, associated with the state mechanisms that stipulate the ways of residence. South America, through its regional organizations, constitutes a sub-region of the global border regime, which favors and stimulates organized, planned and integrated migration control policies. At “the borders”, such controls identify migrants belonging to a member state of the can, the Mercosur, or an out-of-region migrant. Thereby, the subjects are subordinated under the political stratum of the state to which they belong. The states set a differential mode to enter and stay in a territory according to the national origin of the subjects., No artigo nos perguntamos como interpretar o regime de fronteira desde a América o Sul. Para isto, refletimos sobre a possível relação entre migrações internacionais, Estados e fronteiras no campo dos estudos migratórios, com o fim de construir categorias analiticamente situadas. Desde uma metodologia qualitativa, analisamos um conjunto de documentos vinculados a esta temática: declarações finais e informes técnicos da Conferência Sul-americana sobre Migrações (csm), como também resoluções do MercadoComum do Sul (Mercosur) e da Comunidade Andina de Nações (can). Paraa análise destes documentos, e interpretar o regime de fronteira da região, construímos três pontos de apoio: a externalização, associado ao processo de regionalização das políticas de controle migratório na América do Sul; o cruze de um território nacional a outro, vinculado aos controles em pontos de fronteira; e, por último, as fronteiras de permanência, enlaçados aos mecanismos estatais que estipulam os modos de residir em destino. A América do Sul, através de seus organismos regionais, se constitui comouma sub-região do regime de fronteira global, o qual favorece e estimula políticas de controle ordenadas, integradas e planificadas das migrações. Nas “fronteiras”, estes controles distinguem aos migrantes pertencentes a um Estado membro da can, do Mercosur ou extra regional. Deste modo, os sujeitos ficam supeditados ao estrato político que ocupa o Estado do qual são parte, ao fixar um modo diferencial para ingressar, permanecer ou não a um território segundo a origem nacional., En el artículo nos preguntamos cómo interpretar el régimen de frontera desde América del Sur. Para esto, reflexionamos sobre la posible relación entre migraciones internacionales, Estados y fronteras en el campo de los estudios migratorios, con el fin de construir categorías analíticamente situadas. Desde una metodología cualitativa, analizamos un conjunto de documentos vinculados a esta temática: declaraciones finales e informes técnicos de la Conferencia Suramericana sobre Migraciones (csm), así como resoluciones del Mercado Común del Sur (Mercosur) y de la Comunidad Andina e Naciones (can). Para el análisis de estos documentos, e interpretar el régimen de frontera de la región, construimos tres puntos de apoyo: la externalización asociada al proceso de regionalización de las políticas de control migratorio en Sudamérica; el cruce de un territorio nacional a otro, vinculado a los controles en puntos de frontera; y, por último, las fronteras de permanencia, enlazadas a los mecanismos estatales que estipulan los modos de residir “en destino”. Sudamérica se constituye como unasubregión del régimen de frontera global, que favorece y estimula, no sin conflictos y tensiones, políticas de control ordenado, integrado y planificado de las migraciones. En “las fronteras”, los controles distinguen a los migrantes pertenecientes a un Estado miembro de la can, del Mercosur o uno extraregional. De este modo, los sujetos quedan supeditados al estrato político que ocupa el Estado del cual son parte al fijar un modo diferencial para ingresar y permanecer “en destino” según origen nacional.

In this article, I ask how to interpret the border regime of South America. I reflect on the possible relation between international migration, states and borders in the field of migration studies in order to build analytically situated categories. In order to do so, I use a qualitative methodology based on a set of documents such as final declarations and technical reports of the South American Conference on Migration (sacm), and resolutions of the Southern Common Market (Mercosur) and the Andean Community (can). In order to interpret the border regime, I construct three categories: (i) the border externalization, associated with the regionalization process of migration control policies in South America, (ii) the crossing from one national territory to another, linked to the control at the border points, and (iii) the borders of permanence, associated with the state mechanisms that stipulate the ways of residence. South America, through its regional organizations, constitutes a sub-region of the global border regime, which favors and stimulates organized, planned and integrated migration control policies. At “the borders”, such controls identify migrants belonging to a member state of the can, the Mercosur, or an out-of-region migrant. Thereby, the subjects are subordinated under the political stratum of the state to which they belong. The states set a differential mode to enter and stay in a territory according to the national origin of the subjects., No artigo nos perguntamos como interpretar o regime de fronteira desde a América o Sul. Para isto, refletimos sobre a possível relação entre migrações internacionais, Estados e fronteiras no campo dos estudos migratórios, com o fim de construir categorias analiticamente situadas. Desde uma metodologia qualitativa, analisamos um conjunto de documentos vinculados a esta temática: declarações finais e informes técnicos da Conferência Sul-americana sobre Migrações (csm), como também resoluções do MercadoComum do Sul (Mercosur) e da Comunidade Andina de Nações (can). Paraa análise destes documentos, e interpretar o regime de fronteira da região, construímos três pontos de apoio: a externalização, associado ao processo de regionalização das políticas de controle migratório na América do Sul; o cruze de um território nacional a outro, vinculado aos controles em pontos de fronteira; e, por último, as fronteiras de permanência, enlaçados aos mecanismos estatais que estipulam os modos de residir em destino. A América do Sul, através de seus organismos regionais, se constitui comouma sub-região do regime de fronteira global, o qual favorece e estimula políticas de controle ordenadas, integradas e planificadas das migrações. Nas “fronteiras”, estes controles distinguem aos migrantes pertencentes a um Estado membro da can, do Mercosur ou extra regional. Deste modo, os sujeitos ficam supeditados ao estrato político que ocupa o Estado do qual são parte, ao fixar um modo diferencial para ingressar, permanecer ou não a um território segundo a origem nacional., En el artículo nos preguntamos cómo interpretar el régimen de frontera desde América del Sur. Para esto, reflexionamos sobre la posible relación entre migraciones internacionales, Estados y fronteras en el campo de los estudios migratorios, con el fin de construir categorías analíticamente situadas. Desde una metodología cualitativa, analizamos un conjunto de documentos vinculados a esta temática: declaraciones finales e informes técnicos de la Conferencia Suramericana sobre Migraciones (csm), así como resoluciones del Mercado Común del Sur (Mercosur) y de la Comunidad Andina e Naciones (can). Para el análisis de estos documentos, e interpretar el régimen de frontera de la región, construimos tres puntos de apoyo: la externalización asociada al proceso de regionalización de las políticas de control migratorio en Sudamérica; el cruce de un territorio nacional a otro, vinculado a los controles en puntos de frontera; y, por último, las fronteras de permanencia, enlazadas a los mecanismos estatales que estipulan los modos de residir “en destino”. Sudamérica se constituye como unasubregión del régimen de frontera global, que favorece y estimula, no sin conflictos y tensiones, políticas de control ordenado, integrado y planificado de las migraciones. En “las fronteras”, los controles distinguen a los migrantes pertenecientes a un Estado miembro de la can, del Mercosur o uno extraregional. De este modo, los sujetos quedan supeditados al estrato político que ocupa el Estado del cual son parte al fijar un modo diferencial para ingresar y permanecer “en destino” según origen nacional.

The first reception system for irregular migrants taking the Mediterranean route into the European Union (EU) is dictated almost solely by border control and security concerns. There is no recognition of the role of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) as human rights monitors in first reception, and access is limited, controlled, and dependent on local authorities. Newly arriving migrants are at their most vulnerable during first reception. Traumatization and retraumatization brought by violations of human rights, or alternatively, care and welcome within the first reception system will pave the way for subsequent integration processes, by ensuring migrants' well-being, decreasing hostility, diffidence and subjugation, and peaceful relations with European host communities. By critically assessing the current system, backed by the author's long-term ethnographic fieldwork, this article explores the links between policy, practice, and mental health consequences for migrants. It shows that there are multiple risks of human rights violations of a vulnerable group of people. The article is critical of the absence of an official role for NGOs(1) as human rights monitors arguing that NGOs have a unique role to play. The article suggests that the dignified conduction of first reception could have a positive influence on integration processes, and concludes that first reception should not be designed within a security framework but within a reception one.

The first reception system for irregular migrants taking the Mediterranean route into the European Union (EU) is dictated almost solely by border control and security concerns. There is no recognition of the role of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) as human rights monitors in first reception, and access is limited, controlled, and dependent on local authorities. Newly arriving migrants are at their most vulnerable during first reception. Traumatization and retraumatization brought by violations of human rights, or alternatively, care and welcome within the first reception system will pave the way for subsequent integration processes, by ensuring migrants' well-being, decreasing hostility, diffidence and subjugation, and peaceful relations with European host communities. By critically assessing the current system, backed by the author's long-term ethnographic fieldwork, this article explores the links between policy, practice, and mental health consequences for migrants. It shows that there are multiple risks of human rights violations of a vulnerable group of people. The article is critical of the absence of an official role for NGOs(1) as human rights monitors arguing that NGOs have a unique role to play. The article suggests that the dignified conduction of first reception could have a positive influence on integration processes, and concludes that first reception should not be designed within a security framework but within a reception one.

Nachgenutzt gemäß den CC-Bestimmungen des Lizenzgebers bzw. einer im Dokument selbst enthaltenen CC-Lizenz., In this article, I trace struggles regarding EU internal mobility and migrant labour as they emerge in the mobilization of South European migrants in Berlin. The effects of the 2007–2008 financial crisis and European austerity politics have reoriented migration flows within the EU, increasing South-to-North migration with Germany as a prime destination. German public discourse on the matter reveals a view on (EU) migration that focuses on its economic ‘usefulness’ and tries to regulate it accordingly. EU citizenship turns out to be a key instrument of such EU internal ‘migration management’. The emergence of migrant activist groups, however, hints at another force at play. In their fight for social rights and better working conditions, migrant activists show they will not allow themselves to be easily ‘managed’ into precarious ‘productivity’. Against this background, I argue that EU internal mobility is a field of struggle where attempts to control migrant labour clash with moments of autonomy and resistance. My aim is to explore this field from a migration perspective, analysing rationales of EU ‘migration management’ and their impact on migrants’ lives as well as investigating the strategies that migrants develop in response. Based on an analysis of EU legislation and interviews with Italian activists in Berlin, I trace conflicts around EU internal mobility and migrant labour. Against the background of critical migration studies, I analyse EU internal ‘migration management’, especially regarding the role of EU citizenship. Then, I look at EU migrant struggles in Berlin through the lens of autonomy of migration, drawing on the example of the Italian activist group Berlin Migrant Strikers., Peer Reviewed

Como consecuencia de la “crisis migratoria” que asola Europa, han sido muchas las voces de políticos europeos que se han alzado para declarar que se trata de una amenaza. En España este hecho, ha motivado la aprobación por parte del Gobierno de la disposición adicional décima de la Ley Orgánica 4/2000, de 11 de enero, sobre derechos y libertades de los extranjeros en España y su integración social, introducida por la Ley Orgánica 4/2015, de 30 de marzo, de protección de la seguridad ciudadana. En el presente trabajo se expone que los denominados “rechazos en frontera”, establecen un enunciado que a nuestro entender no tiene cobertura legal dentro del ordenamiento jurídico español, además de transgredir tratados internacionales ratificados por España.