The European migrant crisis showed how fragile the external borders of Europe were. In December 2015 the European Commission put forward a proposal to reinforce the current border agency, Frontex, to become the European Border and Coast Guard Agency to manage EUs external borders. The proposal included a stronger mandate for the agency toward member states and showed more integration toward an issue that has been historically sensitive, since border management is close to state sovereignty. This theory consuming study aim to give further explanation through liberal intergovernmentalism in how the member states were a big part in shaping the outcome of this chosen policy. The study is focusing on state actors as France, Germany, Italy, Greece, Hungary and Poland in how their preferences shaped the intergovernmental negotiations and give explanations if the border agency became more independent in its functions and toward member states.

This thesis explores in which ways the EUs border management agency Frontex was represented as a ‘humanitarian’ actor in the Swedish news media during Operation Triton 2014-2017 in the Central Mediterranean. It conducts a critical discourse analysis of Sweden’s largest newspaper Aftonbladet, using traditional and contemporary understandings of humanitarianism paired with saviour, villain, and victim narratives as a theoretical framework. The thesis concludes that such narratives were reproduced in the Swedish news media’s representation of the agency and when combined with the notion of ‘Swedish exceptionalism’, Frontex was especially portrayed as a humanitarian actor. Furthermore, the thesis argues that Frontex was considered a ‘discourse technologist’ within certain areas of the EUs border regime, and that Sweden’s humanitarian position in the EU was compromised during the 2015 refugee ‘crisis’. The research contributes to the field by concentrating explicitly on Frontex in the Swedish news media, which existing research is lacking.

This thesis investigates the European Union’s response to the refugee crisis in the Mediterranean Sea, focusing on the strategy of externalizing border controls through agreements with Turkey and Libya. Employing a combination of qualitative textual analysis and interviews, the study examines the humanitarian and legal implications of these agreements, particularly in relation to the criminalization of NGOs’ activities on the Central Mediterranean Route. The findings reveal a dual process of criminalization, both at the European level through operational shifts and the implementation of Codes of Conduct, and at the national level through policies targeting NGOs, such as Italy’s “Codice di Condotta per le ONG” and “decreto Salvini-bis”. The examples of the SeaWatch-3 and IUVENTA boats demonstrate how these processes hinder NGOs’ operations and shape public discourse on migration. The thesis concludes by highlighting the ongoing challenges in the Mediterranean Sea and the need for further research to understand their implications fully.

Sienų apsauga yra aktuali tema bet kurioje pasaulio valstybėje. Tenka pastebėti, kad kuomet valstybė turi išorines sienas su kitomis valstybėmis, ji turi sukūrusi politiką, teisinę bei institucinę bazę sienos apsaugai, užtikrinančiai tos valstybės gyventojų socialinius, politinius, teisinius, ekonominius, kultūrinius, mokslinius interesus. Europos Sąjungos sienos apsaugos srityje, išskiriamos dvi sienų sąvokos – vidaus bei išorės sienos. Valstybių narių bendradarbiavimas, pagrįstas integruotos išorinės sienos apsaugos koncepcija, orientuotas į valstybių narių bendras pastangas, siekiant užtikrinti ES vidaus saugumą, vykdant sienos kontrolę, ją saugant bei bendradarbiaujant vykdant įvairias operatyvines operacijas bei bendrus projektus. Darbo tikslas – išanalizuoti ES valstybių narių bendradarbiavimo sienos apsaugos srityje gaires bei įvertinti bendradarbiavimo efektyvumą. Darbą sudaro įvadas, kuriame pateikiamas temos aktualumas, analizuojama problema, keliamas tikslas bei uždaviniai, pateikiami tyrimo metodai, trys dėstomosios dalys bei išvados ir pasiūlymai. Darbe remiantis jau atliktai tyrimais, taip pat Šengeno teisynu, Amsterdamo sutartimi, Europos Ekonominės Bendrijos steigimo sutartimi, Lisabonos sutartimi analizuojamos ES valstybių narių bendradarbiavimo sienos apsaugos srityje gairės, išskiriamos problemos, vertinamas bendradarbiavimo efektyvumą. / Border guard, control and surveillance are a relevant topic in every country. It should be mentioned, that when the country has borders with other countries, it has created the policy, legal and institutional basis for the control and surveillance of its border that secures social, political, legal, economical, cultural and scientific interests of the citizens of that country. There are two border concepts in the European Union – internal and external borders. The co-operation of the member states, based on the integrated border management concept, is oriented to the common attempt to control and secure the external border carrying out various joint operations and projects. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the guidelines of the cooperation of the EU member states in the field of external border guard and to evaluate the effectiveness of this cooperation. This paper consists of preface, where the relevance, problem, purpose, objectives are presented, three main parts, conclusions and appendixes. The analysis of the guidelines of cooperation of the EU member states in the field of external border surveillance and evaluation of the effectiveness of this cooperation is being carried out using the researches, Shengen acquis, the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Treaty of Rome, the Treaty of Lisbon, etc.

Visa-liberalisation agreements are commonly used as an incentive by the EU to encourage cooperation within the realm of border and migration management with its neighbouring countries. The ultimate aim of these agreements is to reduce irregular migration to Schengen territory, something that has been percieved as an increasingly urgent issue for European policy makers in the wake of the 2015 'migration crisis'. However, the use of visa liberalisation agreements in such a fashion appears contradictory considering that most irregular migrants in the EU most likely are visa-overstayers. This essay takes of in this apparent puzzle and argues that securitisation theory might help us better understand this discrepancy. While the construction of the migrant as a security threat in Europe has been thoroughly examined, differences in securitisation between grups of irregular migrants are often left out of the discussion or only implicitly mentioned. By examining the discourse and practices of a central EU agency in regard to border and migration management, FRONTEX, this thesis shows that visa-overstayers are routinely left out of the securitised discussion on irregular migration, thus rendering EU policies asymmetrically occupied with irregular migration by means of 'illegal entry'. However, the thesis also uncovers a more conplex set of ideas that show that although visa-overstayers are not conceptulised as threats to security in discourse on par with other categories of irregular migrants, visa-goers and other travellers are, too, incresingly subjected to a rationale of survaillance and risk.

Over the past years, a body of literature have emerged exploring FRONTEX’s work along the EU’s borders. It suggests that FRONTEX not only frame migration as a security issue, but also as a humanitarianist issue. The literature argues the framing of migration as both an issue of security and humanitarianism legitimizes FRONTEX’s operations in the Mediterranean. However, there is a lack of understanding in how FRONTEX frames migration at the Western Balkans border, one of the EU’s busiest borders and indeed the busiest during the summer of 2015, registering over a million migrants. Therefore, by investigating how FRONTEX framed migration at the Western Balkans border between the years 2014-2017, this thesis sets out to make a unique contribution to the research field, furthering the understanding of how FRONTEX as an organization frames migration. To examine FRONTEX’s framing of migration, a theoretical framework consisting of theories of framing, risk and threat construction, and humanitarianism is deployed. The concepts of framing devices and reasoning devices are used in a qualitative content analysis to identify the presence of frames in the material consisting of FRONTEX published reports and press releases. The empirical results indicate that FRONTEX frames migration in the Western Balkans as primarily a security issue through language connecting migration to risk and threat. The humanitarianist frame, mainly evoked by references to migrants’ vulnerability, appears relatively few times in contrast to the security frame.

The European Union’s border control agency, Frontex, was established in 2004. Since its founding it has received ongoing critique from international human rights organizations stating that it prevents people from claiming their right to seek asylum. Therefore, the aim of this study is to understand how Frontex legitimizes its approach to the management of the union’s external borders in relation to the right to seek asylum. The theoretical framework of the thesis consist of Michel Foucault’s theories of power and knowledge structures in institutional discourse, which helps understand how the discourse is determined by power relations and consequently how Frontex legitimizes its work. A critical discourse analysis was conducted following Norman Fairclough’s three-dimensional model. The model consist of a text analysis, an interpretation and a contextualization of the text. The material analyzed is a report produced by Frontex to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.The results show that Frontex describes its relation to human rights with words that have a positive connotation such as ‘protect’ and ‘respect’, and at the same time aim to legitimize its work in technical terms of ‘development’ and ‘effectiveness’. The results indicate that the knowledge produced in the report dehumanizes migrants and asylum seekers in order for Frontex to treat migration as a legal and technical issue. Furthermore, Frontex partially legitimizes its work by regularly referring to the UN and other NGO’s while emphasizing their previous support of the institution’s work. These power relations influence how Frontex chooses to discursively legitimize its work in respect to human rights. The results of this study only reflect Frontex’s legitimization in the aforementioned report and cannot be generalized to the whole institution. However, it contributes to the knowledge which may improve the situation for those in need to exercise their right to seek asylum.

Portant sur le contrôle des frontières et la gestion des flux migratoires au sein de l’Union européenne, le présent travail a pour objectif de déterminer si le pouvoir discrétionnaire des États membres survient comme une prérogative de souveraineté pour des raisons de sécurité intérieure à l’Union, ou bien si cette prérogative souveraine se consolide à travers la sécurité intérieure. Ce travail permet ainsi d’illustrer l’importance du rôle joué par la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne dans l’harmonisation de l’Union sur ces questions. Concrètement, cette étude décrit en détail la façon dont « l’imprécision » du cadre juridique de l’Union autorise une marge d’appréciation aux autorités nationales dans l’interprétation des faits, conformément aux dispositions générales du cadre juridique. Ainsi, le pouvoir discrétionnaire avec lequel les autorités consulaires et frontalières des États membres appliquent cette législation, laisse un doute raisonnable sur la mise en œuvre adéquate du cadre juridique. En d’autres termes, les autorités des États membres disposent de facultés discrétionnaires, qui leur permettent d’adopter des solutions ad hoc afin de combler les vides laissés par la législation européenne. Par conséquent, l’intervention de la Cour de justice s’avère indispensable afin de garantir une mise en application uniforme du droit dérivé de l’Union. / In the field of the borders control and migration flows management, the aim of this analyse is determine whether Member States discretion arises as a prerogative of sovereignty for reasons of internal security of the Union, or whether this sovereign prerogative is consolidated through internal security. This analyse also serves to illustrate the importance of the work of the Court of Justice of the European Union to harmonize the EU legislation in this area. Specifically, this study details how the "imprecision" of the EU legal framework permits discretion to national authorities in the interpretation of facts, in accordance with the general provisions of the legal framework. So, discretionary power with which consular and border authorities of the Member States apply this legislation, leaves a reasonable doubt on the proper implementation of the legal framework. In other terms, authorities of the Member States have discretionary power, which allow them to adopt ad hoc solutions to fill the gaps left by European legislation. Consequently, intervention of the Court of Justice is essential in order to ensure a uniform application of the Union's secondary legislation. / El presente trabajo tiene por objeto de estudio determinar, en el ámbito del control de fronteras y la gestión de los flujos migratorios, por una parte, si la discrecionalidad de los Estados miembros surge por cuestiones que atañen a la seguridad interior de la Unión o por una prerrogativa soberana, o bien si la discrecionalidad se consolida a través de la seguridad interior. Y, por otra parte, destacar la importancia de la labor del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea para armonizar la normativa de la Unión en este ámbito. En concreto, este estudio describe con detalle como la “imprecisión” del ordenamiento de la Unión otorga un libre margen de apreciación a la autoridad nacional para interpretar los hechos conforme al precepto general del ordenamiento. De modo que, la discrecionalidad con la que esta legislación es aplicada por las autoridades consulares y fronterizas de los Estados miembros deja dudas razonables acerca de la correcta aplicación del ordenamiento. En otros términos, las autoridades de los Estados miembros disponen de facultades discrecionales que les permiten adoptar soluciones ad hoc para llenar los vacíos dejados por la legislación europea. Por lo tanto, la intervención del Tribunal de Justicia es indispensable para garantizar la aplicación uniforme del Derecho derivado de la Unión.

La thèse est une étude du processus de sécurisation de l’immigration clandestine à l’œuvre dans l’Union européenne. Elle s’attache à expliquer la tension, voire la contradiction, existant entre l’ambition et la fermeté du discours européen sur le contrôle de l’immigration illégale, d’une part, et le risque politique intrinsèquement lié à ce choix, d’autre part. La prétention au contrôle des flux migratoires clandestins apparaît en effet largement illusoire tant en raison de l’ampleur et de la nature des flux concernés que de la faiblesse des moyens effectivement mis en œuvre par l’Union européenne. Au départ d’une grille d’analyse s’appuyant sur une lecture critique des approches constructivistes de la sécurité, la politique européenne de lutte contre l’immigration clandestine est interprétée comme étant l’expression d’un « discours de sécurité » forgeant des représentations sociales insécurisantes des migrants clandestins. Cette production sociale du « péril migratoire » est examinée sous l’angle des enjeux de légitimité entourant la création de l’espace européen de liberté, de sécurité et de justice. Dans ce cadre, nous soulignons que la lutte contre l’immigration l’illégale ne peut se réduire à son objectif explicite – la maîtrise des flux – mais qu’elle participe également d’un mécanisme classique de légitimation du corps politique supposant la définition d’une figure menaçante de l’altérité. Le « clandestin » représente dans cette optique un « objet insécurisant » consensuel qui émerge dans le champ européen au terme d’un processus de formation d’une volonté politique fonctionnant sur le mode du plus petit dénominateur commun. Agrégeant les inquiétudes exprimées à l’égard du terrorisme et de la criminalité transnationales mais aussi les préoccupations pour la stabilité économique, sociale et culturelle des sociétés européennes, cette figure permet de rassembler les États membres autour d’un projet sécuritaire commun. Elle contribue de ce fait à l’émergence d’une dynamique de type ami-ennemi reposant sur une opposition croissante entre un « Autre » incarné par le clandestin et un « Nous » qui, à défaut d’être culturellement homogène, se trouve unifié par un sentiment d’insécurité collectivement partagé.

[pt] A dissertação analisa de forma crítica parte da literatura de segurança internacional que advoga pela ampliação da agenda do campo, evidenciando as consequências éticas e políticas de se adotar a lógica da securitização em análises sobre questões sociais. Para tanto, são abordadas as contribuições da Escola de Copenhague às análises sobre a política de controle de fronteiras da União Europeia (UE). Este estudo tem como linha condutora as diferentes visões sobre a criação da Frontex, agência que, apesar das acusações de desrespeito aos direitos dos imigrantes, tornou-se a principal produtora de conhecimento acerca dos riscos às fronteiras europeias. Por fim, é abordada a contribuição do campo da Sociologia Política Internacional para os estudos de segurança, especialmente os trabalhos de Didier Bigo e Jef Huysmans. Esta perspectiva realça os principais problemas da ampliação da agenda de segurança e seu impacto no Estado liberal, demonstrando que há uma modificação drástica nas formas de governança, com restrições à liberdade individual em prol de um suposto aumento de proteção. Deste modo, o objeto desta dissertação é tanto a literatura da Escola de Copenhague, compreendendo suas limitações práticas e silêncios políticos, quanto a própria Frontex, cujas operações são evidências empíricas dos argumentos de Bigo e Huysmans. / [en] This dissertation criticizes part of the literature on international security that advocates for the expansion of the agenda of the field, evidencing the ethical and political consequences of adopting the securitisation perspective while analysing social issues. In this sense, the theoretical contributions of the Copenhagen School to the interpretations of the European Union (EU) policy of boarder control are addressed. This work has as its conductive line the different visions on the creation of the Frontex, an agency that, depite being accused of disrespecting the rights of immigrants, became the main producer of knowledge on the risks to European boarders. Finally, the contribution of the International Political Sociology field to security studies is addressed, mainly through the work of Didier Bigo and Jef Huysmans. This perspective highlights the main problems of widening the security agenda and its impact in the Liberal State, demonstrating that there is a drastic change in the forms of governance, with restrictions to individual freedoms on behalf of an alleged increase in protection. Thereby, the object of this dissertation is both the Copenhagen School literature, understanding its practical limitations and political silences, and Frontex itself, whose operations are empirical evidences of Bigos and Hyusmans s arguments.