Externalization Policies and their Impacts on Migrant and Refugee Flows to Europe during the “Crisis.” A preliminary study

Résumé 0

In the past two decades European states have increasingly sought to stem irregularmigration to Europe by cooperating with non-European countries to “externalize” migrationand asylum management beyond European borders and territories. The externalization ofmigration policy amounts to delegating border control in third countries, enablingdeportations of irregular migrants through readmission agreements (RA), while also includingaid and development packages that address the drivers of migration in origin and transitcountries. It is unclear, however, whether or under what conditions such policies have hadtheir intended effects. In this paper, we aim to measure how migrant and refugee flowsrespond to such European externalization of migration and asylum management. Ouranalyses cover the period of the so-called “migrant” or “refugee crisis” of 2015, which offersa unique context in which to study the relationship between migration policies and flows.After introducing a new database on external migration policy instruments, we useFrontex data to describe the patterns in irregular migration flows, focusing on the spatial andcategorical distribution of migrants and refugees from 2009 to 2018. We first introduce auseful distinction between “likely irregular migrants” and “likely refugees”, who both crossborders illegally into Europe. We then explore the extent to which the closure of migrationroutes led to the rerouting of migration flows. We show that such a phenomenon is actuallylimited to few nationalities. We eventually argue that externalization policies, althoughpartially effective at reducing the overall number of irregular border crossings into Europe,directly affect “likely refugees” who remain stranded in transit countries or who renouncefleeing their country of origin.Then, we present key policy trends across European states and third countries inregard with externalization. We first argue that the 2015 crisis reinforced existing dynamicsof diplomatic engagement and cooperation with third countries in matters of migration andasylum and extended their geographical scope. We then examine the impact of policies onirregular flows. Focusing on the impact of readmission agreements, we contend that bilateralagreements are not effective in limiting irregular migration from the signing countries oforigin. However, we also observe that bilateral implemented protocols of EU readmissionagreements (EU RA) are associated with fewer irregular border crossings from the relevantthird countries. We suggest that this effect can be explained by pre-existing political relationsbetween the parties to the EU readmission agreements and the limited number of irregularborder crossers from these nationalities. Overall, our findings call into question theappropriateness of externalization policies as tools for addressing migration issues, inparticular large refugee flows in times of crisis.