Search

The article is devoted to the study of the legal regulation of the asylum granting and ensuring of the refugees’ rights in the European Union. Within the framework of the article, the legal basis of the Common European Asylum System functioning, the creation of which is laid down in the constituent treaties of the European Union, is investigated. In particular, it is determined that the purpose of such a common system is to establish unified standards for determining the criteria for admissibility of applications for asylum or international protection, a similar procedure for considering such applications and the grounds for refusing or suspending the status of a refugee or a person seeking temporary protection, as well as determining the state, responsible for providing asylum, uniform standards for ensuring the rights of refugees, as well as common principles of cooperation between the Member States and partner states that are not members of the Union. The key provisions of the Directive on qualification criteria, on the procedure for granting asylum and international protection, on the conditions of reception and rights of refugees, as well as the Dublin Regulation and the Eurodac Regulation were analyzed. The authors put an emphasis on the fact that because of the full-scale invasion and emergence of the war on the territory of Ukraine, significant changes were made to the process and procedures for granting refugee status and providing asylum within the framework of the legislation of the European Union. The latest Pact on Migration and Asylum was analyzed, especially regarding changes in ensuring border security, quick and effective procedures for considering and obtaining the status of a refugee or a person seeking international protection, solidarity and responsibility among countries that are obliged to provide asylum, as well as strengthening international cooperation in the field of migration. The authors express their support for those concerns regarding alleged violations that may occur after the entry into force of the Pact, in connection with the threat of violations of fundamental human rights. It was concluded that ensuring dignity and respect for human rights is a priority, considering that refugees are recognized as persons who have already suffered violations and were forced to leave their homes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since it establishes differentiated socio-legal eligibility categories among different migrant groups, family reunification constitutes a prime example of the internal border. In my article, I investigate how the border is produced and negotiated in the context of family reunification of refugee children and parents by focusing on discretionary practices of German immigration bureaucracy through the lens of counselling actors in the city. Taking the city of Frankfurt am Main as my research site, I identify ignorance, verification, and temporalization as three administrative control mechanisms over descent-based refugee families. I argue that family reunification constitutes a highly selective and culturalized field of border control, in which refugee families are filtered according to their conformity to a certain family norm and European bureaucratic standards. By examining how counselling actors understand administrative practice, I also discuss how they respond to it, including their own participation in de- and (re-)bordering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the advancement of fantasy policy solutions to irregular migration, drawing on the case study of the UK/French border. In 2018 people began to cross the English Channel in significant numbers to seek asylum. This led to much commentary and a raft of new legislation seeking to criminalise people crossing the Channel and end rights to seek asylum in the UK. In this article, we explore the interaction between two sets of fantasies that are advanced by politicians and mainstream political parties in the UK. That is: the liberal technocratic fantasy – that this phenomenon can be efficiently 'fixed' through interventions in policing and multilateral cooperation with neighbouring EU states; and the illiberal fantasy that extreme and performative punishments can solve it. These fantasies intersect and break at different points in time, and involve many of the same policy solutions which are represented in different terms. Importantly, both of these fantasies reproduce racialised and colonial logics and ultimately serve border imperialism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research article addresses the challenges between the phenomenon of irregular migration in Pakistan and its border management as well as the related complex issues for both the state of Pakistan and the irregular migrants. To control inbound irregular migration, the border management of Pakistan coupled with administrative and legal measures taken by Pakistan have also been discussed along with border management systems of some developed countries. The data has been collected from various research articles, books, official websites, and newspapers. The long and porous borders between Pakistan and Afghan make the border management task difficult for Pakistan which has been facing substantial security challenges posed by the non-state armed groups operating from Afghanistan. With the unprecedented growth in irregular migration to the Western countries and the strong international legal regime for the protection of these migrants, xenophobia and hatred towards the migrants have also been growing in the last two decades. In the end, it suggests some concrete policy measures for effectively addressing this issue in collaboration with the relevant international actors to ensure a balance between the protection and dignified living of the irregular migrants and the sovereignty of the state of Pakistan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The externalisation of migration and border controls refers to a series of practices whereby States attempt to manage migration flows and enforce immigration policies beyond their borders, often by collaborating with other countries or non-state actors. Externalisation can involve various measures such as outsourcing border control functions, implementing agreements with neighbouring or transit countries to intercept migrants before they reach the State's territory, and providing aid or incentives for other countries to prevent or reduce migration flows. Externalisation practices are employed to shift the burden of migration management away from the receiving state and onto other actors or territories, often to limit responsibilities and on the assumption that human rights obligations only apply territorially. In an attempt to challenge such an assumption and to frame the nature of human rights obligations in the context of externalisation practices, this article develops a taxonomy of externalisation measures and provides an overview of the jurisdictional approaches to the extraterritorial scope of human rights obligations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the effect Australia's 'Medevac' legislation had on the way refugees were depicted by the Liberal-National Coalition and Australian Labor Party in their debate about immigration detention and border security. I argue that by enabling medical evacuations for people detained offshore, Medevac shifted debate about refugees and border security into the realm of the biomedical. I maintain this resulted in the biopolitical production of the figure of the malingering refugee, who falsifies illness to cross the border. While both parties produced this pejorative category, what distinguished them was the degree to which they believed malingering applicants could be rendered ' known ' via the medical border. For the ALP, Medevac could recruit the purported 'objectivity' of biomedicine, such that malingering applicants could be identified, and border security thereby supposedly maintained. Conversely, for the LNP, no such guarantee could be established, meaning for them, Medevac rendered the border and therefore the nation vulnerable to malingering applicants. Despite their differences, I argue both parties articulated the figure of the malingering refugee for similar nationalistic purposes. Namely, to justify the violence of the Australian border protection regime, while nevertheless simultaneously depicting themselves and the nation as fundamentally 'good': not in spite of, but because of their harsh border policing practices. In concluding, this article considers the applicability of its analysis both to the contemporary Australian context and abroad, such as the United States and UK, where similar border protection policies and discourses have emerged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Rohingya refugee crisis is a complex and pressing humanitarian issue in the Southeast Asia region. Conflict in Myanmar has forced thousands of Rohingya to flee seeking protection in neighboring countries. This research aims to evaluate the Indonesian government's policy in handling the Rohingya refugee crisis and provide recommendations for future policy improvements. The research method used is a qualitative approach with descriptive and comparative analysis. The analysis results indicate that Indonesia's policy towards Rohingya refugee flows reflects a commitment to humanitarian principles and national security. However, evaluating the implemented policies is necessary to understand their effectiveness. The implications of the Rohingya refugee flow for Indonesia's national security include risks of regional and global instability as well as threats to the security of individuals and groups. Indonesia's strategies for preventing and mitigating the impact of Rohingya refugees involve strengthening border surveillance, regional cooperation, refugee status organization, and social integration. Recommendations from this research include improving coordination between agencies, enhancing government capacity in managing refugee crises, and increasing protection and assistance to Rohingya refugees. This research is expected to contribute to understanding Indonesia's government policies towards the Rohingya refugee crisis and provide recommendations to enhance policy effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Instead of acting consistently with international law and its own refugee law, the EU has adopted an ambivalent stance over refugee arrivals to Europe. Member states' increasing anxiety led the EU to tighten border controls and outsource its humanitarian responsibilities by agreeing on a statement with Turkey to prevent refugees from entering the EU irregularly. This paper focuses on the human rights breaches and contradictions of the EU-Turkey Statement by specifically investigating the one-in-one-out mechanism and the argument that Turkey is safe country. It is argued that the Statement has turned the refugee issue into the subject of the European market because the political architecture of EU human rights norms has historically been part of the neoliberal hegemony. Hence, the refugee case reveals how inadequately produced norms inside Europe's borders reproduce inequalities and cause mismatches between the EU's claimed role as rights promoter and its practical inadequacies and market-based pragmatism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Przeglad Sejmowy is the property of Kancelaria Sejmu and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The paper examines conflict and migration in different countries couple with the new crisis facing global governance in battling refugee's problem. The major causes of conflict are irreconcilable differences between political elites and rebels, bad governance and economic crunch leading to war and refugees movement. Refugees movement have overpopulated border in some states causing socio-economic disputes in host state sparking up confrontation between the local people and the migrants. The method used in this research is secondary and interview of returned migrants to ascertain the patterns of treatment and problems of migration. The study reveals that the pressure of escaping from their homeland either through war or seeking for jobs in another country have made migrants to be confrontational whenever they get to border that security guards are mindless of their long distance suffering. The study recommends that there should be development centres in both developed and developing countries to accommodate migrants running away from war-like state to stay for four years before repatriation to a place that demand their services, in doing so, they would have save for the purpose of investment and at the same time discourage request for permanent status in host state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In February 2020, Turkey announced that the country would no longer prevent refugees and migrants from crossing into the European Union. The announcement resulted in mass human mobility heading to the Turkish border city of Edirne. Relying on freshly collected data through interviews and field visits, this article argues that the 2020 events were part of a state-led execution of 'engineered migration' through a constellation of actors, technologies and practices. Turkey's performative act of engineered migration created a spectacle in ways that differ from the spectacle's usual materialization at the EU's external borders. By breaking from its earlier role as a partner, the Turkish state engaged in a countermove fundamentally altering the dyadic process through which the spectacle routinely materializes at EU external borders around the hypervisibilization of migrant illegality. Reconceptualizing the spectacle through engineered migration, the article identifies two complementary acts by Turkish actors: the spectacularization of European (Greek) violence and the creation of a humanitarian space to showcase Turkey as the 'benevolent' actor. The article also discusses how the sort of hypervisibility achieved through the spectacle has displaced violence from its points of emergence and creation and becomes the routinized form of border security in Turkey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study focuses on the spatial imaginations of the European Commission's response to the Turkish-Greek border crisis in March 2020. The goal is to unpack the discursive dynamics of space using a critical geopolitical perspective that treats space as a constructed social category. To that end, the Commission's official statements and policies on the crisis are deconstructed in terms of territoriality, securitization, and identity. The article advances the argument that increased political pressure and the influx of refugees from Turkey triggered a reflex reserved for nation-states, resulting in the European Union flexing its geopolitical muscles. In these practices, Turkey has served as the constitutive other of European space by representing the outside, insecure, and distant. Keywords: Migration, Critical Geopolitics, Pazarkule, Space, Identity, This study focuses on the spatal imaginatons of the European Commission's response to the Turkish-Greek border crisis in March 2020. The goal is to unpack the discursive dynamics of space [...]

With the influence of advancing technology, transportation capabilities, and the process of globalization, significant changes have occurred in the structures and practices of border security for nation-states in the face of new asymmetric threats. Particularly, following the events of September 11 and the Arab Spring, border security has undergone a profound transformation, significantly impacting and altering the international understanding of border security. Prior to the globalization process and the events of September 11, the conventional understanding of border security was largely focused on customs and immigration control. However, with these developments, policymakers began to view borders as potential points of entry for terrorists. Fleeing the tension triggered by the Arab Spring in North Africa and the Middle East, refugees have compelled countries, notably Turkey, and the entire Europe to reconsider their border security approaches. The European Union (EU) perceived the refugee crisis not solely as a security issue but also as a humanitarian concern, leading to the implementation of various measures. Conversely, Turkey pursued a more humanitarian approach to the crisis through its "open-door policy." Starting from 2015, Turkey adopted a new security system and strategy along its borders. These new physical border security policies have had significant implications at the local, regional, and global levels. This study examines the local, regional, and global effects of Turkey's new border security understanding and the management of the refugee influx. Analytical methods such as literature review, document analysis, comparative analysis, and fieldwork have been employed in these examinations. This methodological approach has been used to support the main findings of the article and to analyse border security change in detail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A market for mental health apps, designed to help millions of refugees manage symptoms of Post Traumatic Syndrome Disorder and other mental health issues, has proliferated since the outbreak of the so-called refugee crisis in 2015. These bite-size, on-the-go, mindfulness-based apps have emerged at the intersection of new investment models, state-of-the-art AI and surveillance and border control regimes. Conceived of as a more cost-effective approach to refugee mental health care, mental health apps are part of a larger endeavour to create the 'smart' refugee. Self-monitoring, agile, entrepreneurial and resilient in the face of adversity, the smart refugee is expected to emerge as a node in a network of information flow, constantly connected to digital technology, at once receiving and providing real-time data. Biometric and data markets, some of the fastest growing in the world, have already been eagerly collecting refugee fingerprints, iris scans, facial images and other genomic information. To add to this arsenal of data, the new apps are harvesting, storing and selling what I call the mental prints of refugee trauma, turning the human experience of loss, grief and suffering into quantifiable and marketable commodities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 2015 refugee 'crisis' posed a dilemma for European radical-right parties (RRPs). On the one hand, it provided a rallying point against immigration, an issue for which these parties have traditionally claimed ownership. On the other hand, it forced them to propose European solutions, in particular by toughening EU border control and asylum policy. This paper argues that following the 2015 events RRPs distanced themselves from hard Euroscepticism on border control and asylum policy and participated in the political production of exclusionary Europeanness. I perform a theory-testing analysis of campaign pledges, between-election rhetoric and—when in government—policy positions of the French Rassemblement National, the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ) and the Italian Lega. I demonstrate that these three RRPs are engaged in the political production of exclusionary Europeanness along three dimensions: political representation, institutionalisation, and collective identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This report provides an overview of contemporary scholarship on the geopolitics and political geographies of migration. There has also been an extensive amount of scholarship, including several special issues focused on migration, borders, and displacement from state and non-state institutional management to the everyday experiences of individual migrants. The political geographies and geopolitics of human displacement in this report are organized into the following thematic categories: state and institutional management, institutionalized suspicion of migrant populations, border management techniques and technologies, and re-centering migrant experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the country hosting the most significant number of refugees in Europe, Germany's Merkel government's refugee policy has been repeatedly adjusted and plagued by inconsistencies and management failures. What factors have influenced the formation of the Merkel government's refugee policy and its two shifts? The traditional rational decision-making model does not effectively explain government decisions' motivation in complex challenges. This article develops a framework for analyzing "bounded rational decision-making". It identifies the three factors that influenced the Merkel government's refugee policy: (a) strict border controls, (b) welcome culture, and (c) welcome culture under restrained policies. It explains the process and logic of their development. Based on the theory of "bounded rational decision making", the article examines the "key events and problem identification", "goal selection", "national interests", and "political psychology". We found that in the early stages of the refugee crisis, (a) public opinions and pressure, (b) the pursuit of a positive national image, and (c) a shift in the leader's psychology led Merkel to shift away from a pragmatic and rational course. These factors led to the first shift in German refugee policy from "hesitation" to a "welcoming culture". At the end of 2015, however, the shortcomings of the irrational policy were quickly revealed, and the frequency of refugee-related social problems reversed German public opinion, forcing Merkel's government to seek a balance between humanitarianism and national interests. As a result, refugee policy was adjusted for the second time, returning to a strict refugee examination system. The development of the Merkel government's refugee policy exposed the shortcomings of the traditional crisis decision-making model. Moreover, it provided a new perspective for rethinking the governance of the refugee crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on interviews with young refugees, 20–30 years old, mainly from Syria and Afghanistan, we discuss the effects that temporary residence permits have on their ability to build a life in Sweden. The article includes both unaccompanied and accompanied youth that at some point had been given temporary residence permits. These permits could later be renewed or turned into permanent permits if the youth fulfilled certain tough requirements. Through rich empirical data, we show how these temporal techniques of border control keep young refugees in a state where they fear deportation, which have detrimental effects for their ability to build a life in Sweden. They are not able to plan ahead and they feel forced to work although they would have preferred to study, which puts them out of sync with other young people around them, challenges their sense of agency and increases their vulnerability. Temporary residence permits severely limit the life opportunities of young refugees in Sweden, and thus hamper their ability to achieve the "migrant integration" that is expected of them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Migration has been one of the most divisive issues in global politics and media has played a significant role in how people perceive and respond to it. This study employs peace journalism and framing theory to examine how Greek media portrayed migration to Greece during a dual crisis in early 2020: a Greek-Turkish border crisis and the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. It contributes to previous literature in two important ways. First, by offering insights of news coverage of migration in the aftermath of the 2015 refugee crisis in Europe. Second, by examining the less-researched topic of media representations of migration during the pandemic. Results indicate that refugees and migrants are dehumanized in media discourse, portrayed as "enemies at the gate" of Europe and as carriers of the virus. The content analysis finds variations between different media outlets including language, approach, problem/threat definition and stereotypes. The article also identifies important similarities in news coverage; most notably, the dominance of political elites as sources across all media content, the absence of refugee/migrant voice and the focus on policies of border control and enforcement. We suggest that these patterns ultimately function to obscure the complexity of the refugee and migration issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contemporary research on migration and border regimes highlights that migration produces effects beyond border control, as migrants act autonomously (at least partially) as individual or collective agents. On the discursive level, many representations tend to foster imaginaries of refugees as autonomous political fighters which overlooks their frequently peaceful aims and thereby ignores non-violent (micro)politics. Providing an example from Laura Otto’s fieldwork with young migrants on Malta, we claim first, 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 to be regarded as a highly ambivalent concept and not as an aim in itself. Second, we propose to clearly distinguish between belligerent and peaceful forms of political agency. Beyond an understanding of autonomy as combative by principle, a post-autonomous viewpoint takes interdependencies into consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This commentary demonstrates how the risk analysis reports of Frontex (the European Border and Coast Guard Agency) invert deviance and blame by lumping together smugglers, refugees and migrants and portraying the latter as responsible for their own suffering at Europe’s borders while obscuring the role of restrictive migration policies and border controls in producing irregularised migration in the first place. Showing how this discursive framing furthers the securitisation of migration and displaces accountability for border deaths, the author argues that it is important to question the objectivity of Frontex’s risk analyses since they contribute to normalising securitised border controls in response to irregularised migration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses immigration issues in the U.S., particularly how the legal and policy responses by the federal government to address the refugee crises are worsening the problem rather than resolving it. Also cited are the policies of the administration of former President Donald Trump like the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), and the invocation of Title 42 health emergency powers during the coronavirus pandemic to stop the asylum processing for migrants.

This article discusses the new asylum laws implemented in Germany from 2015 to 2020 and places them in the wider context of the bordering process developed in Europe to control migrants' mobility since the year 2011. 'Asylum packages' and the Integration Act combine a restriction of asylum rights with measures to quickly channel refugees into the German labor market. Focusing on a specific regulation that aims at integrated rejected asylum-seekers through vocational training programs—the Ausbildungsduldung —this article highlights the contradictions from the attempts to meet the German economic needs and the efforts to enforce migration control. Moreover, this work highlights how the moral economy of deservingness, which underpins the practices of confinement and selection of the migrant population, influences the new laws. Ultimately, the asylum realm is deprived of being the source of the right to stay, whose conditionality became anchored to the needs of the German economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Welfare provision as a border control strategy is often discussed in relation to irregular migrants and refugees. However, this article focuses on EU migrants. Using discourse theory, it explores interviews with policy experts from four migrant-receiving EU countries. The aim is to identify policy discourses on deservingness articulated in relation to intra-EU migrants from four member states in Eastern Europe, to detect mechanisms that generate these discourses and to reveal how they relate to welfare chauvinism. The article uncovers contesting logics that move policy experts toward welfare-chauvinist assumptions, which might contribute to the discursive welfare exclusion of EU migrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Migration has become highly contentious. Turkey is no exception. Turkey faces even further challenges as the host to the world's largest refugee population, with Syrians as the majority. Fear about loss of control over borders, and its subsequent political, economic, social and cultural repercussions lies at the heart of migration debates. Parliamentary deliberations provide a public venue for airing these concerns. The paper focuses on Turkish Parliamentary deliberations on the Syrians to assess its issue salience. To do so, an extensive coding of the Parliamentary debates from 2015 to 2019 is conducted. The paper's rigorous analysis of the Turkish Parliamentary debates on the Syrians reveals multiple findings, uncovering a divide among the five political parties in the Parliament—the AKP, CHP, MHP, Iyi Party and the HDP emphasizing different dimensions. The paper captures the commonalities and differences among these political parties with a systematic empirical study of Turkish Parliamentary debates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ayer: Revista de Historia Contemporánea is the property of Asociacion de Historia Contemporanea and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Mexico and Central America are the main source of foreign labor, both permanent and temporary, for the United States and Canada, and, with very similar characteristics, together they conform the Mesoamerican migration system. However, their historical processes are very different. In Mexico, the vicinity, recruitment and articulation of labor supply and demand were the main drivers of the migration that originated at the end of the 19th century. In Central America, the detonator was the violence unleashed in the last three decades of the 20th century, in its different modalities: political, armed, social and systemic, which gave rise to different types of migrants: exiles, refugees, economic migrants, forced and uprooted migrants. This article analyzes the main contemporary causes of migration in the Mesoamerican migration system, which are currently the so-called structural causes, but renamed as systemic violence, neoliberal poverty, and institutional impunity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Soziologische Revue is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In The Shifting Border, Ayelet Shachar offers us two concrete proposals for combatting the danger posed by the shifting border, especially to those crossing borders in search of safety. One proposal suggests that human rights travel with migrants, so that agents who control the border must take responsibility for protecting their human rights at the border. A second proposal, which forms the basis of my commentary below, asks that states consider alternative ways for migrants to seek protection safely. In responding to this second proposal, I make two proposals of my own that stem from Shachar's analysis: (1) her analysis offers us the resources we need in order to expand, not only the channels available to migrants for seeking protection, but also our sense of who should be involved in controlling admission, and (2) expanding the "who" that is involved in admission gives meaning to the concept of "moral proximity" which can help to overcome the territorial imperative that dominates the rules governing international migration, i.e., the imperative that protection travels with physical access to territory, only. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many refugee-receiving countries have restricted their asylum policies and stepped up their border control policies to prevent asylum seekers from reaching their territories. At the same time, the resettlement of refugees has gained popularity. Many states have introduced resettlement schemes or have increased the number of refugees they resettle. Why do states voluntarily admit refugees by expanding resettlement? This article develops a comprehensive theoretical account of countries' resettlement choices and identifies the determinants of their openness to refugee resettlement through an empirical analysis of 33 OECD countries between 1980 and 2019. We find that the supply-side factor of wealth best predicts whether a country engages in refugee resettlement. The number of effective resettlement admissions tends to fluctuate with the demand-side factor of humanitarian need. Nevertheless, the expansion of resettlement policies has not resulted in a subsequent expansion of humanitarian protection. Instead, states combine resettlement policies with restrictive border control policies which allows them to preserve their humanitarian credentials while curtailing refugees' overall access to asylum. These findings provide important insights into the policy-making of refugee resettlement and the strategic considerations in the asylum governance of liberal democracies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]