Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T07:18:29.454Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The External Dimension of EU Refugee Policy: A New Approach to Asylum?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Abstract

This article first looks at developments in the external dimension of EU migration and refugee policy, as highlighted by a succession of Commission Communications and Council or European Council conclusions that have emphasized the need to integrate migration and asylum more firmly into the Union's external policies. It then looks at one particular recent experiment with externalizing refugee policy, namely the invention of ‘Regional Protection Programmes’. Finally it asks what this concept of regional protection has meant in normative terms, before suggesting ways in which the space afforded protection has been altered.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2008.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Lavenex, Sandra and Uçarer, Emek M., ‘The External Dimension of Europeanization: The Case of Immigration Policies’, Cooperation and Conflict, 39: 4 (2004), p. 427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Presidency Conclusions, European Council, Tampere, 15–16 October 1999, paragraph 11.Google Scholar

3 Presidency Conclusions, European Council, Laeken, 14–15 December 2001, paragraph 11.Google Scholar

4 Presidency Conclusions, European Council, Seville, 21–22 June 2002, paragraph 10.Google Scholar

5 European Commission, ‘Communication on Integrating Migration Issues in the European Union's Relations with third Countries’, COM(2002) 703 final.Google Scholar

6 European Commission, ‘Communication on Towards More Accessible, Equitable and Managed Asylum Systems’, COM(2003) 315 final.Google Scholar

7 European Commission, ‘Communication on the Managed Entry in the EU of Persons in Need of International Protection and Enhancement of the Protection Capacity of the Regions of Origin: Improving Access to Durable Solutions’, COM(2004) 410 final, p. 3.Google Scholar

8 Ibid., p. 13.Google Scholar

9 United Nations, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, The State of the World's Refugees: Human Displacement in the New Millennium, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 10. This figure does not include the 4.3 million displaced Palestinians who fall under the mandate of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) – UNHCR, 2005 Global Refugee Trends: Statistical Overview of Populations of Refugees, Asylum-Seekers, Internally Displaced Persons, Stateless Persons, and Other Persons of Concern to UNHCR, Geneva, UNHCR, 2006, p. 3.Google Scholar

10 European Commission, ‘Communication on the Managed Entry’, pp. 17–18.Google Scholar

11 European Commission, ‘Communication on Regional Protection Programmes’, COM(2005) 388 final, pp. 3–4.Google Scholar

12 Phuong, Catherine, ‘The Concept of “Effective Protection” in the Context of Irregular Secondary Movements and Protection in Regions of Origin’, Global Migration Perspectives, 26 (April 2005), p. 12.Google Scholar

13 European Commission, ‘Communication on Regional Protection Programmes’, p. 4.Google Scholar

14 UNHCR, ‘Observations on the Communication from the European Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Regional Protection Programmes’, [*] p. 3, available at www.refugeelawreader.org.Google Scholar

15 European Commission, ‘Communication on Regional Protection Programmes’, p. 3.Google Scholar

16 Boswell, Christina, ‘The “External Dimension” of EU Immigration and Asylum Policy’, International Affairs, 79: 3 (2003), pp. 622–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Lavenex, Sandra, ‘Shifting Up and Out: The Foreign Policy of European Immigration Control’, West European Politics, 29: 2 (2006), p. 337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Aristide Zolberg, cited in Lavenex, ‘Shifting Up and Out’, p. 334.Google Scholar

19 Diez, Thomas and Whitman, Richard, ‘Analysing European Integration: reflecting on the English School – Scenarios for an Encounter’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 40: 1 (2002), p. 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 Cited in Morgan, Roger, ‘A European “Society of States”– But Only States of Mind?’, International Affairs, 76: 3 (2000), p. 563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 Phuong, ‘The Concept of “Effective Protection” ’, p. 14.Google Scholar

22 Kostakopoulou, Dora, ‘The “Protective Union”: Change and Continuity in Migration Law and Policy in Post-Amsterdam Europe’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 38: 3 (2000), p. 506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23 T. A. Aleinikoff, ‘State-Centred Refugee Law: From Resettlement to Containment’, in E. V. Daniel and J. R. Knudsen (eds), Mistrusting Refugees, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1995, p. 264.Google Scholar

24 Jeff Crisp, ‘Refugee Protection in Regions of Origin: Potential and Challenges’, December 2003, available at http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=182.Google Scholar

25 UNHCR, ‘Observations on the Communication’, p. 1.Google Scholar

26 European Commission, ‘Communication on the Managed Entry’, p. 14.Google Scholar

27 Presidency Conclusions, ‘The Global Approach to Migration: Priority Actions Focusing on Africa and the Mediterranean’, European Council, Brussels, 15–16 December 2005.Google Scholar

28 European Commission, ‘Communication on the Global Approach to Migration One Year On: Towards a Comprehensive European Migration Policy’, COM(2006) 735 final.Google Scholar

29 European Commission, ‘Communication on the Global Approach’, p. 9.Google Scholar