Article Information

MIGRANTS AS “PERSONS SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE IDEOLOGY OF TERRORISM”. INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE RUSSIAN MIGRATION SECURITIZATION CASE

Kseniya Grigoryeva (kseniagrigoryeva@yandex.ru)

Institute of Sociology FCTAS RAS, Moscow, Russia

Citation: Grigoryeva K. Migranty kak «litsa, podverzhennyye ideologii terrorizma». institutsional'nyy analiz rossiyskogo keysa sek'yuritizatsii migratsii [Migrants as “persons susceptible to the ideology of terrorism”. Institutional analysis of the Russian migration securitization case]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 24(3): 58–85 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2021.24.3.4

Abstract. In the last twenty years, in Russia and abroad, migration has increasingly been presented as a security problem, or more narrowly, as a source of terrorist threat. Securitization theory allows us to understand how this process unfolds at the level of discourses (Copenhagen School) and non-discursive practices (Paris School). However, institutional aspects of migration securitization rarely come to the attention of researchers. This article attempts to analyze the role of institutions using a Russian case study of the transformation of migrants into “individuals exposed to the ideology of terrorism”. The empirical basis for the research was a corpus of federal and regional documents related to implementing the Comprehensive Plan to Counter the Ideology of Terrorism in the Russian Federation for 2013–2018 and the Comprehensive Plan to Counter the Ideology of Terrorism in the Russian Federation for 2019–2021. Analysis of document sources made it possible to trace the institutional mechanisms of migration securitization, establish the main circle of actors involved in this process, and determine the practices through which it is implemented. The research showed that a key role in migration securitization is played by the bureaucratic field and the multitude of agents in it, both security and non-security professionals. Performative and perlocutionary speech acts securitizing migration are contained in federal plans, which, going down the bureaucratic chain to the field, generate a mass of derivative planning documents that involve ever more implementers in ever more activities aimed at preventing the “terrorist threat” posed by migrants.

Key Words: migration securitization, Copenhagen School, Paris School, bylaws, bureaucracy.

References

Balzacq T., Başaran T., Bigo D., Guittet E.-P., Olsson C. (2010) Security Practices. In: The International Studies Encyclopedia Online. Ed. by R.A. Denemark. Blackwell Publishing, March 18, 2010. [https://is.muni.cz/el/fss/podzim2015/ESS419/um/Balzaq_et_al_2010.pdf ] (accessed: 08.06.2021).

Balzacq T., Guzzini S., Williams M.C., Wæver O., Patomäki H. (2014) What kind of theory − if any − is securitization? International Relations International, published online 21 October 2014. [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0047117814526606 ] (accessed: 08.06.2021).

Bigo D. (2002) Security and Immigration: Toward a Critique of the Governmentality of Unease. Alternatives, 27, Special Issue: 63–92.

Bigo D. (2004) Criminalization of «migrants»: The side effect of the will to control the frontiers and the sovereign illusion. In Irregular Migration and Human Rights: Theoretical, European and International Perpsective. Ed. by B. Bogusz, R. Cholewiński, A. Cygan, E. Szyszczak. Leiden and Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: 90–127.

Bigo D., Guild E. (2019) International Law and European Migration Policy: Where Is the Terrorism Risk? Laws, 8(4): 30.

Bigo D., McCluskey E. (2018) What Is a PARIS Approach to (In)securitization? Political Anthropological Research for International Sociology. In: The Oxford Handbook of International Security Online. Ed. by A. Gheciu, W.C. Wohlforth. Oxford University Press. April 2018. [https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198777854.001.... ] (accessed: 08.06.2021).

Buzan B., Wæver O., De Wilde J. (1998) Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, CO: Lynne Reiner.

Chudinovskikh O., Denisenko M. (2017) Russia: A Migration System with Soviet Roots. Migration Information Source, May 18.

Chudinovskikh O., Kharaeva O. (2020). Migration policy towards skilled labor in the Russian Federation. BRICS Journal of Economics, 1(2): 80–102.

Heleniak T. (2002) Migration Dilemmas Haunt Post-Soviet Russia. Migration Information Source, October 1.

Huysmans J. (2000) The European Union and the Securitization of Migration. Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(5): 751–777.

Karyotis G. (2007) European migration policy in the aftermath of September 11. The security-migration nexus. Innovation. The European Journal of Social Science Research, 20(1): 1–17.

Light (2017) Zwischen Liberalisierung und Restriktion: Entwicklungen der russischen Migrationspolitik. Russland-Analysen, 331: 2–8.

Malakhov V., Simon M. (2016) The Political Economy of Russian Migration Politics. Preprints. [https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/201609.0058/v1/download ] (accessed: 08.06.2021).

Mukomel V.I. (2005) Migracionnaya politika Rossii: Postsovetskie konteksty [Migration policy of Russia: Post-Soviet contexts]. Moscow: Dipol-T (in Russian).

Özerim G. (2014) Avrupa’da göç politikalarinin ulusüstüleşmesi ve bir güvenlik konusuna dönüşümü: Avrupa göç tarihinde yeni bir dönem mi? [Supranationalisation of the migration policies in Europe and transformation into a security issue: a new phase in history of European migration?]. Ege Stratejik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(1): 11–48.

Rudolph C. (2003) Security and the Political Economy of International Migration. American Political Science Review, 97(4): 603–620.

Wæver O. (2003) Securitisation: Taking stock of a research programme in Security Studies. Unpublished manuscript. DOCPLAYER. [https://docplayer.net/62037981-Securitisation-taking-stock-of-a-research-programme-in-security-studies.html] (accessed: 08.06.2021).