Immigration Policy Studies

1.1 Welfare States and the Risks Posed to Them via the Migration Movements

The relationship that exists between the welfare state and migration has been widely discussed in recent years (van Oorschot, 2008). The welfare state, as a concept, embodies a structure that forms a border so as to determine who is and who is not a citizen and therefore who does and who does not automatically benefit from state resources that result from the associated welfare system (Freeman, 1986). Since nation-state boundaries and domestic resources often result from hard-fought battles, the primary purpose of the welfare state is to protect these things from potential external threats. A central tenet of the welfare states calls for justice via the redistribution of welfare by taking from the wealthy to ensure that welfare is distributed to the needy and most vulnerable; this may be referred to as the Robin Hood philosophy (Barr, 1998). However, even though welfare states generally strive to protect their national borders, millions of individuals abandon their homelands and, through migration, may erode the borders of nation-states. Migratory movements may serve to disquiet these welfare states and affect their sustainability as they can result in economic, security, and socio-cultural risks, which may prompt the states to close their borders even to claims for asylum.

2 The Assessment of Migration Policies Employed in Turkey and Europe Regarding the Syrian Refugees in terms of Different Variables

2.1 Turkey and Europe’s Approaches to the Migration of Syrian Refugees from a Security Perspective in the Context of the Welfare State

The primary risk associated with migration and asylum movements in terms of the security of a welfare state is the prospect of refugees, for example, encouraging more and more people to migrate into the state and perhaps gradually erode the state’s borders (Gibney, 2004). For instance, beginning in March 2011, when the events that led to war began in Syria, the Turkish government stated that it would implement an open-door policy with regard to the Syrian refugees. However, the psychological limit was determined to be 100,000 refugees, and when number of incoming refugees continued to increase, Turkey wanted to create a security zone in Syria (Ferris and Kirişçi, 2016).

While Turkey, in accordance with both the international agreements to which it is party and the humanitarian viewpoint, generously opened its borders to the Syrian refugees, the migration policy the country implemented prompted new migration and asylum influxes. For instance, the clashes between ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) and opponent factions in 2014, as well as the increase in attacks aimed at civilians, resulted in Iraqi citizens seeking asylum from Turkey; the number of asylum seekers was initially between 40,000 and 50,000, and it later reached between 240,000 and 250,000 (Ferris and Kirişçi, 2016: 36–37). Further, beginning in the first quarter of 2018, a new Afghan migration movement took root, with its participants seeking to make their way into Turkey (Kasapoğlu, 2018). In particular, the increasing clashes in Afghanistan and the insecure environment, the increasing deterioration in the economy, and the country’s high unemployment rates prompted Afghan citizens to seek to Turkey in hopes of ultimately reaching Europe. Although the migration of the Syrians and, later, the Iraqis and Afghanis is largely the result of Turkey’s generous migration policy, it is also a sign of the erosion of Turkey’s borders.

European Union member states approached the Syrian refugees just as they had come to approach refugees from elsewhere; that is, they saw the refugees as a risk and sought to keep them out of Europe (Hristova, 2017). Once the Syrian crisis began, some European countries granted resettlement to the Syrian refugees, but they only allowed relative few refugees to resettle in Europe, and to keep others out, most European countries enhanced border controls, fought harder against migrant smuggling, and built fences along the borders. Most Countries’ were determined to do what they felt necessary to keep the refugees out of Europe rather than to apply right-based approaches. For instance, the European Migration Agenda, which was implemented in May 2015, sought to decrease the illegal migration aimed at Europe as much as possible, strengthen the border controls, decrease migrant and refugee deaths, and implement a unified migration regime among European countries (Carrera, Blockmans, Gros, and Guild, 2015: 3–4). Further, FRONTEX which was founded in 2004 with the aim of generating unity in the migration and asylum regulations of European Union member states, and securitization of the external borders of the European Union against illegal entries (Léonard, 2010), tightened border checks further in response to the increased illegal crossings into European countries (Orchard and Miller, 2014).

Another security problem that the asylum and migration movements bring out in terms of welfare states is the migrant smuggling problem, and along with the emergence of Syrian refugee issue, the migrant smuggling in Mediterranean and Aegean Seas worsened. The migrant smuggling problem has not been a problem only for the lives of the migrants, but it has also caused the individuals who mediate this action to violate the border regulations of nation-states, gain illegal income from this deed, and undermine the relevant welfare states to operate properly.

Along with the Syrian refugee crisis, the number of individuals who committed migrant smuggling in Turkey increased gradually, and while the number of migrant smugglers arrested in 2014 was 1,506, this increased to 4,471 in 2015 (Sirkeci, 2017: 133). Turkey announced that beginning March 2015, the country had suspended the open-door policy except as it pertained to emergency health cases, an this was the result of increased asylum claims (Crawley, Düvell, Jones, McMahon, and Sigona, 2016). Still, some Syrian refugees continue to enter Turkey via illegal routes with the help human smugglers (Crawley et al., 2016). Moreover, it has not been only Syrians who have held out hope of reaching Europe via the Mediterranean and Aegean Seas; Afghan migrants who entered Turkey illegally have also sought to reach Europe via the waters. In particular, since the first quarter of 2018, the number of illegal Afghan immigrants and refugees who seek to enter Turkey with fake documents and trucks gradually increased, as people began to think of Turkey as a corridor by which to reach Europe.

Immigrants and refugees have attempted these perilous journeys in hopes of building new lives in developed countries – primarily Europe. This has resulted in thousands of lost lives, as people have drowned in the Mediterranean and Aegean Seas. Europe’s measures aimed at keeping migrants away from its external borders have played an escalating role in refugees and immigrants choosing to resort to other hazardous routes (Cosgrave et al., 2016).

Finally, another security problem created via the Syrian crisis that served to affect the welfare systems in both Turkey and European countries had to do with the authority gap in Syria that gave rise to terror organizations’ newly formed spheres of influence. For instance, after the civil war in Syria began, the radical terror organization ISIS, which became more problematic in the region beginning in 2013, executed twelve bloody terror acts in Turkey, and as a result, 211 Turkish citizens lost their lives (Çakır, 2016). In addition, with the goal of establishing a Kurdish state, the terrorist groups PKK/PYD gained some of the regions in northern Syria, which prompted the Turkish government to carry out cross-border military operations to the north of Syria (i.e., Fırat Kalkanı in 2016, Zeytindalı in 2018). The main goal of both operations was to weaken the PKK/PYD settlements in the region, prevent the formation of a Kurdish state, provide border security, form security zones, and provide voluntary repatriation of some Syrian refugees.

2.2 Turkey and Europe’s Approaches to the Migration of Syrian Refugees from an Economic Perspective in the Context of the Welfare State

Today, international rivalry is strong and shapes economic stability and growth, which is itself an important factor that helps to determine whether a country can offer its citizens acceptable living standards that are fundamental to the goals of welfare states. In particular, when conducting an evaluation via an economic perspective, it is necessary to consider that natural resources are finite, and the objectives of a welfare state may be to protect state resources from potential external threats (Freeman, 1986).

If migration begins in a country where quality of life is low, then it is not unreasonable to expect that migrants from that country will economically burden any target countries. The just redistribution of public revenues among a society’s citizens is among the aims of the welfare state, but these revenues and the public services that are linked to them may become overburdened with the arrival of foreigners to the state. This may then result in citizens taking a dim view of their government and its ability to govern effectively. For instance, if the host country citizens are discontent with the idea that public revenues, which are collected via the taxation of the citizens in question, will also be used to meet the needs of foreigners, the citizens might resort to tax evasion that will effectively undermine the country’s welfare system (Crepaz, 2008).

In examining the economic impact of migratory movements to states, one might find that migrants have caused the price of labor to fall (Kreibaum, 2014) in some business sectors and have led to an increase in unemployment among the country’s citizens who work in the shadow labor market.