Discusstheprocess and implications of securitisingimmigration in thecasestudy of Italy.
Introduction
An immigrant is a person who leaves his or her home country to go and settle in a foreign country. An immigrant can either be legal when the foreign country is aware of their presence in the country or illegal when the foreign country does not recognise the presence of these immigrants (Ceyhan and Tsoukala, 2002). Immigration is the process of leaving the mother country to go and stay in another foreign country(repeating what has already been stated). Several factors make someone leave their mother country, for instance, political instability or for employment opportunities. Immigrants may either contribute positively or negatively to the economic development of a foreign country.Fihel, A., and Kaczmarczyk (2016) suggest thatmost of the European countries have an aged population, which implies that young and productive immigrants can take part in the production processactively in most firms in these countries. They can also provide cheap labour hence reducing the cost of production. However, some of these immigrants engage in criminal and violent activities, which normally creates insecurity among the native people in their mother country (Farny, 2016). They can also cause an imbalance and loss of culture in foreign countries(Reference?).(Italy is the case study and the main topic of this essay and is not even mentioned in the introduction)
The negative impact of the immigrants in foreign countries usually brands them a bad image, which usually makes the natives victimise them. Over the past decade, the idea of immigrants has been politicised in most European countries (again reference). Immigration has also been all over the media in the European countries, which normally portrays them negatively(again reference).Farny (2016) argues that this has led to the securitisation of immigration by most European countries. Securitisation immigration is the process in which the migration shifts towards an emphasis on securityThis statement lacks a reference and is not correct. Securitization is a process where an entity of phenomena(in this case immigration, regardless of refugee or immigrant) is portrayed (by acts of speech according to the Copenhagen school) as a treath by actors (in this case these actors were the left wing political parties in Italy). If this process is successful emergency measures are implemented, that are “above politics”. Just for writer reference: For example right now because of the Corona Virus, which is presented as a national treath, securitization was accepted by the audience (public) and the UK went into a National emergency, which allows for extraordinary measures to be implemented. These measures would normally not be accepted by the public. Now in the case of the pandemic this is a legitimate claim , but it doesn’t have to be. The point of securitization is that the actors take an issue and present it to the audience as an existential threat. Emergency measures are implemented, in Italy for example the more sever border controls and other things that are mentioned in the readings that I have provided. And once the these extraordinary measures are implemented, over time they become policies (again if securitization is successful).
The Implication of Securitising Immigration
Immigration(what immigration?)in Italy has led to the development of new citizenship in the country, i.e., the (jus sanguinis), which is believed to have a negative impact on the local city or residential citizens (jus soli)((again reference and what time period are we talking about??). The refugees usually flee their homecountry into other European countries, for instance, Italy, due to political instability and warfare in theirmothercountry(massive generalisation and no reference, who are these immigrants, are we talking about refugees?).Immigrants pose a more significant threat to Italy since and they are usually regarded as ‘illegal,’ undocumented, or irregular people (This is massively incorrect, is mostly irrelevant for the topic, has a grammatical mistake and has no reference).The rampant invasion of the immigrants in the country has led to their images dominating the media in Italy, since immigrants are now the most significant political agenda in the country since 1990. The media and some political groups (who are these groups?)usuallyrefer to the immigration process into the country as a massive invasion since they cause more harm than good to the country- according to these political groups? (this whole paragraph contains significant imprecision, lacks any reference).
The immigrants have led to the emergence of questions on human rights( no, the immigration crisis has and the way it was dealt with, aka the measures that were introduced thanks to securitization).It is believed that these immigrants usually face unfair and inhuman treatment in the countrieswhere they typically flee to.As a result, most social and political groups have developed condemn about the failure to protect human rights by the EU groups such as the Human RightsWatch and the AmnestyInternational. No reference at all
Immigration led to increased fear amongItalian people (what immigration? when? and why?).The Italians feared to go into certain places because they feared being attacked by individual members of a given community who were believed to be from the immigrant’s group(Caviedes, 2015). A good number of immigrants are usually associated with crime and terrorists(in Italy I assume?) .Italian people felt like they are foreigners in their land. Colombo, M. (2018) suggests thatsome immigrants are usually associated with violent behaviour, which in turn, affected the general behaviour of the people in a given area.
In Europe, immigration led to the emergence of ‘Euro-racism,’ which was a new form of racism.This emergence in the Euro-racism led to the citizens going against the national policies in most countries about racism and xenophobia. Immigrants were mistreated and experienced inhuman practices from the foreign countries in which they ran. Colombo (2018) argues that most European countries did not actively participate in ending xenophobia(when?).Instead, they encouraged xenophobiaindirectly in various countries through the policies and amendment bill they formulated. According to Colombo, M. (2018), these countries contributed a lot in tinting negatively the images of the immigrants, hence coming up with policies that control and restrict the immigration of people into their countries( this is the description of securitization).Such policies played a vital role in stereotyping against the immigrants leading to racial behaviours against these immigrants(This is the side product of securitization of immigration).
The emergence of New Racism was also due to Italian people wanting to preserve their culture and ways of doing their things (things? this is not academic writing).According to Colombo (2018), the influx of immigrants to Italy was perceived or projected to affect the traditional ways of carrying out things in the country negatively(yes!).The influx of immigrants into the country meant that they would bring new ways of living, which would automatically destabilise and damage the traditional culture in the country.This implies that new racism was not much different from the older form of older practices since the new racism only adds a cultural dimension to the already existing old racist practices( time periods of old and new racism?).
Another implication of securitising is the increased trust of the local people towards the policymakers.The policymakers come up with ways to manageand protect Italian people from any form of threat. Securitising immigration implies that the influx of immigrants into the country would be controlled.The immigrants who manage to get into thecountry would be closely monitored in order not to pose any potential threat to the locals.This is basically to create harmony between the two groups of people, i.e., the local people and the immigrants( no reference)
According to Ceyhan and Tsoukala (2002),securitising immigration led to the emergence of the social-economic crisis (logical gap! are we talking about immigrants of refugees? did they not find jobs because of the policies that were introduced due to successful securitization? if so what were these policies in the CASE STUDY OF ITALY).The immigrants were associated with unemployment. It is challenging for an immigrant to get legit formal employment in the European countries, which leads to the ultimate chaos in the country(?). This led to the rise of the informal sectors of the economy in the country.Another social and economic impact of the immigrants into the country was urban deterioration. Most immigrants usually end up settling in the urban centres or near urban centres where they can be easily monitored and managed by the national government(Caviedes, 2015). The influx of immigrants in any urban centre leads to the degradation of these metropolitan areas due to the rapid increase in population than the number of persons given urban centres can accommodate.
On the contrary, Ceyhan and Tsoukala (2002) also argue that immigrants can play a vital role in the economic development of any given country(this is not relevant to the essay question).They can actively participate in various projects within the country. Due to their inclusion in the economic activities in any given country, the immigrants may pose some negative impacts to the locals; for instance, they canlead to the ultimate reduction the wages to the nationals. This can lead to unemployment towards the locals. However, the cheap labour and the exploitation of the immigrants allow the achievement of short-term goals in the country, for instance, the reduction in productionincreased exports and the economic survival of firms in the country.Immigrants are believed to play an important role in the development of most Europeancountries since most of these states have an already aged population.
Securitising Immigration has also contributed tremendously to the loss ofcontrol of the national borders and nationalsovereignty(Farny, 2016) (the absence of securitization or policy making, this is an incorrect statement, especially in the case of Italy).The rapid influx of immigrants into a given country may send a bad image of how a given country manages and controls its borders.As a result, it can lead to the internal in the country, i.e., the conflict between the locals and the immigrants.It can also lead to external conflict since several states can be antagonising due to the issue of immigration.
The immigrants have also been subjected to unfair treatment in most judicial systems across European countries.Fihel and Kaczmarczyk (2016) suggest that the immigrants rarely meet the legal requirements for certainsentences in the judicial court; hence they are usually detained instead.The lack of legal requirements by the immigrants makes them not be granted parole like the native citizens in each country. According to Ceyhan and Tsoukala (2002), immigrants are usually placed in custody more often than the native of a given country who are charged with equivalent crimes.They are also likely to stay much longer in custody than the natives of that given country.This implies that immigrants are customarily placed under detention but not imprisonment in order to be taken back to their mother country. The “politics of fear” have steadily dominated Italian public debate on migration( logical gap: how does public debate come into topic?).
Ceyhan and Tsoukala (2002) also suggest that the lawyers in Italy do not usually represent immigrants appropriately in court. This has contributed a lot to the increase in the number of immigrants in Italian prisons.The immigrants are not usually granted interpreters in court, something which also contributes immensely to their high number in the Italian prisons.(this is just structural but this info should have been mentioned earlier and is not coherent here:)As expected, negative views on immigrants and refugees are expressed by far right and conservative nationalist political parties, such as the Northern League, Forza Italia, and the Brothers of Italy.
Process of Securitising Immigration
There are several reasons that can cause someone to flee their mother country to a foreign country. Crisis, whether political or social, is usually the main reason why people flee their mother countries. Citizens from countries like Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan have been profoundly affected by the political crisis; hence, they usually end up fleeing to other neighbouring countries as refugees or immigrants.
The UNHCR is a UN organisation whose primary purpose is to fight for the rights of the immigrants. Usually, the immigrants are subjected to unfair practices as soon as they enter any given foreign country(says who? and why is it relevant for the topic?).( this is a paragraph with 35 words? massive structural error)
Caviedes (2015) suggests that as soon as the immigrant crossesany European border, they are held by the European Union.This action has been heavily criticised by Human Rights Groups such as Amnesty International.The Human Rights Group usually suggests that the EU violates rights and has a negative impact on the welfare and dignity of the immigrants.
According to Caviedes (2015), there are several rules and regulations that the Dublin Regulations have set aside that govern how the immigrants enter any given country.The Dublin Regulation’s primary purpose is to regulate and come up with a concrete procedure in which the immigrant follows in order to be legally allowed to enter a given country.
The Dublin Regulationsusually work hand in hand with the MS (what is the MS? can’t abbreviate just like this).The MS normally processes the applications of the immigrant in the country in which they seek to enter. However, this process is usually hectic and creates much burden at the border,since most of the immigrants enter a given countrygenerally by foot or by sea (Farny, 2016). An increase in the number of immigrants at the bordertypically leads to the storages in resources by the MS to handle these immigrants.
The EU helped the MS in ensuring that the smooth operation of allowing the immigrants into a given country was done; for instance, the EU came up with the idea of ‘Hotspots.’ Through the Hotspot, the immigrants were supposed to be identified, registered, and figure prints are taken when entering any EU country (Caviedes, 2015).These hotspots operations are usually done at the reception centres based in Italy and Greece.These hotspots also provide initial camping of the refugee immigrants. Colombo, M. (2018) suggests that thehotspots usually face several challenges, for instance, the overcrowding of the refugees/immigrants in their camps, which leads to inadequate supply of essential needs like water, shelter, and sanitising pieces of equipment to the immigrants ( Vermeulen, G., 2018).The EU, however(not however, this is what you are talking about), has been receiving much criticism from the Human Rights Group about the failure to provide these essential services to the immigrants appropriately.
After completing the registration process, the immigrants then usually go to the Frontex (Fihel and Kaczmarczyk 2016).This is an organisation that carries out the budgeting and allocation of funds to the immigrants.According toFihel and Kaczmarczyk (2016), these funds are usually meant for the upkeep of these immigrants in foreign countries and sustain them to buy essential needs (again, irrelevant to the topic of the essay)
The refugees are then grouped into variouscategories for quota resettlement.These groups usually compromise around 20,000 individuals.The main aim of the resettlement is often to reduce pressure on the countries of the UE, like Iraq,Lebanon, and Jordan.((again, irrelevant to the topic of the essay, no reference and short paragraph)
Conclusion
In summary, immigration can either be beneficial or harmful to foreign countries. The immigrant may provide cheap and readily available labour to the industry-leading rapid economic development and the growth of the various firms in foreign countries. On the contrary, immigrants may engage in violent and criminal activities that are likely to compromise the safety of the natives. Most European countries, for instance, Italy usually mistreats immigrants a condition which has led to the various Human Rights Organisation bodies to get involved. The immigrants are not usually well represented in courts, hence leading to long jail term sentences as compared to the natives who have committed similar crimes. Xenophobia has also been another challenge that the immigrant faces while in foreign countries since the native citizen usually have the feeling that the immigrants are taking most opportunities they are supposed to occupy. Besides, the issue of immigration has always been politicised and portrayed negatively through the various media channels in these European countries.
This does not answer the question posed by the essay question, and the conclusion is proof of this. Nothing about securitization theory and the application of it in the Italian case study. It concentrates more on the EU than on Italy)The essay mostly talks about procedures that have been implemented regarding “immigration”. But not why and how these have been implemented nor about the politics of it (again this is a political science essay). And it makes a poor attempt at discussing whether immigration is good or bad for a country. This was not the task.
References
Colombo, M., 2018. The representation of the “European refugee crisis” in Italy: Domopolitics, securitization, and humanitarian communication in political and media discourses. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 16(1-2), pp.161-178.
Vermeulen, G., 2018. The securitization of migration during the refugee crisis: The role of the EU institutes (Master’s thesis).
Ceyhan, A., and Tsoukala, A., 2002. The securitization of migration in western societies: Ambivalent discourses and policies. Alternatives, 27(1_suppl), pp.21-39.
Farny, E., 2016. Implications of the Securitization of Migration. E-International Relations, January29.
Fishel, A., and Kaczmarczyk, P., 2016. Migration: a threat or a chance? Recent migration of Poles and its impact on the Polish labour market. In Polish migration to the UK in the new European Union (pp. 23-48). Routledge.
LORDS, H.O., 2007. The Economic Impact of Immigration.
Caviedes, A., 2015. An emerging ‘European’news portrayal of immigration?. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(6), pp.897-917.
