La politique du dehors avec les raisons du - European University ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

leaders can focus on the aspects of foreign policy that are important to the nation as a whole and stop playing to the ethnicities that make up our population.” 21 Migrants and security Identities, not ideologies, are the criterion by which most migrants are judged. The notion of the other has expanded as threats to security have become more palpable. Identities perceived as threatening are held suspect. Understanding how to protect a country’s security has shifted from “the absence of threats to acquired values” to “a low probability of damage to acquired values.” 22 Identities threatening not just the internal cohesion of a state but its national security and national interests are identified as especially treacherous. Security has come to be redefined: “There has been a clear shift in emphasis in the perception of security away from what many would now see as the re<strong>du</strong>ndant nation-state to indivi<strong>du</strong>als and groups. Herein lies the paradox. How to reconcile the human right to move freely with the need to protect local cultures, economies, environments, health, and, in some cases, peace.” 23 The traditional meaning of security has been weakened: “The term [security] as it has been traditionally used in international relations literature is based on two major assumptions: one, that threat to a state’s security principally arises from outside its borders, and two, that these threats are primarily, if not exclusively, military in nature.” 24 Today, in an era of 6
unprecedented human migration, phobias—the natural and sometimes constructed fear of “foreigners”—have become more profoundly intertwined with security and foreign policy. The securitization of migration represents a synthesis of phobias and foreign policies. Fear of the loss of national sovereignty enjoins the two. As one academic noted, immigration phobia and threat perceptions have become fused in a “fear narrative.” 25 On the one hand, that is a surprising conflation: “alarmism about national security arising from marginal migration is the principal paradox.” 26 On the other, viewed through the lens of the security dilemma, migration—as cross-border movement of ethnically heterogeneous populations—is a process that makes different groups potentially insecure not because government authority suddenly declines, but because these groups become suddenly proximate: [B]ecause any influx of migrants may be ascribed to government failure, host populations are likely to develop a suspicion that their government becomes weaker, even though the opposite may be the case. The governments then face an immigrant policy dilemma in very much the same way they face the arms race dilemma. The appearance of being soft on immigration is likely to undermine domestic support for the government. But pursuing a tough restrictionist policy may result in economic costs, and it may criminalize immigration—exacerbating exactly the problems that need to be resolved. 27 7
Page 1 and 2: «La politique du dehors avec les r
Page 3 and 4: they?’” 7 Culture organizes mea
Page 5: are a number of reasons for this. T
Page 9 and 10: short, shifting social hierarchies
Page 11 and 12: egion had had important political r
Page 13 and 14: Muslim and Mediterranean worlds is
Page 15 and 16: If France’s relations with Arab s
Page 17 and 18: destination for French aid, investm
Page 19 and 20: predecessors. In a speech to French
Page 21 and 22: minorities so well: he thinks of hi
Page 23 and 24: France than anywhere else. Mutual r
Page 25 and 26: 11 Kal J. Holsti, “National Role
Page 27: 63 From Emmanuel Todd interview in

La politique du dehors avec les raisons du - European University ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?