In order to understand the sharp turns in Sweden's migration policy during the 2015 migration crisis, it is important to examine how parliamentary parties have treated asylum and immigration policy as a security issue. The essay answers the following research question: How did the investigated parliamentary parties securitized the migration question? The purpose is to clarify to what extent these parties have securitized the migration issue, and whether there are differences or similarities in the parties' securitization of the migration issue. Based on the purpose of the study, I chose a qualitative argumentation analysis as the methodological tool for the essay. I delimited the paper to study three of eight parliamentary parties, the Social Democrats, the Moderates and the Sweden Democrats based on their positions on the migration issue, and that they were the three largest parties in the Swedish parliament 2015. In terms of time, I demarcated the study from September 2015 to June 2016. Based on the time limit, I chose nine official debates in the Swedish parliament, two official texts from the Social Democratically controlled government and two motions from the Sweden Democrats that are close in time and relevant during the refugee crisis. The essay concludes that the Moderates' securitization was to some extent in line with the Social Democrats'; both parties noted that the refugee crisis caused by the EU's non-responsibility allocation put pressure on important social functions. The Social Democrats' immigration policy underwent a total reversal from the historically generous to a more restrictive asylum policy during the migration crisis in 2015. Social Democrats' securitization of migration in autumn 2015 testifies to the fact that the party has started to move towards the Sweden Democrats' policy regarding a more restrictive immigration to Sweden. The Sweden Democrats' securitization of immigration is different from that of the Social Democrats and Moderates. The Sweden Democrats' arguments refer to the pressure on important social functions such as the Social Democrats and the Moderates. Then it connects and argues that such a situation affects Swedish society and Swedes.  Results show how the securitization of the migration crisis in 2015 led to the Social Democrats' changed asylum policy from the historically generous to a restrictive asylum policy that is in line with the Sweden Democrats, despite differences of opinions and arguments.

This paper studied if the year 2015 in France, which was characterized by a strongly politicized immigration debate as a result of the terrorist attacks and migration crises, had any consequences on attitudes towards immigrants. With this in mind this paper examined whether people on the right/conservatives, who traditionally have been less tolerant towards immigrants, have had an increase in negative attitudes towards immigrants. To examine this a logistic regression analysis was used with a focus on the main study variable being the left-right scale in addition with control variables to analyze the effect they had on attitudes towards immigrants. The results showed no statistically significant difference between people on the right/conservatives who were negative towards immigrants before the terrorist attacks/migration crises and afterwards. This also meant that symbolic politics theory that was used to test the hypothesis this paper was arguing for didn’t show evidence for people on the right/conservatives feeling that immigrants are a bigger threat towards their culture, traditions and values. To conclude, the results showed no empirical evidence that people on the right/conservatives had showed an increase in negative attitudes towards immigrants in 2016.

The thesis subject is based on a report published by Amnesty International with the title ”Dangerously Disproportionate: The ever expanding security state in Europe”. The report accuses EU states of an ongoing securitization due to terrorism and the migration crises that has led to the discrimination of especially Muslims and foreign nationals. With the report as starting point this paper aims to investigate how inclusion and exclusion is made in the security discourse of the Swedish government and parliament between 2015 and 2017. The time frame is chosen based on Amnesty’s assessment of a shift in paradigm with starting point after the terror attacks in Paris 2015. As theory and method this paper makes use of Laclau & Mouffe´s discourse theory to perform a discourse analyses. Previous research of scientists and theorists is used to operationalize both inclusion and exclusion. The results of the study show that inclusion and exclusion in the discourse is made by talking about the migration crises, unaccompanied refugee children, antisemitism, terrorists, and those who need protection; us. One of the most prominent conclusions related to the analysis is that the figure of the migrant is excluded by means of framing it as a security problem leading to the possible system collapse of prominent welfare and social functions in society. / Uppsatsens ämnesval bygger på Amnesty Internationals rapport med titeln ” Dangerously Disproportionate: The ever expanding security state in Europe” som anklagar de europeiska länderna för en säkerhetiseringsprocess på grund av terrorism och migrationskrisen, vilket huvudsakligen drabbar migranter och människor av muslimsk tro. Med rapporten som utgångspunkt valdes en undersökning av inkludering och exkludering i den svenska regeringens och riksdagens säkerhetsdiskurs med målet att söka efter hur inkludering och exkludering ”görs” i relation till migrations- och terrorkrisen mellan åren 2015 och 2017. Tidsramen valdes på grund av att Amnesty Internationals rapport pekade ut ett paradigmskifte efter terrordådet i Paris 2015. Som teori och analysmetod används Laclau & Mouffes diskursteori som bygger på premissen att verkligheten är socialt konstruerad. Som operationaliseringar av begreppen inkludering och exkludering användes tidigare forskning. Resultatet av undersökningen visade att inkludering och exkludering görs i diskursen när det talas om migrationskrisen, ensamkommande, antisemitism, terrorister och den gruppen som ska skyddas. En av de mest tydliga slutsatser som dras från analysen är att migranten framställs som ett säkerhetsproblem som är ansvarigt för den hotande systemkollapsen av välfärden och viktiga samhällsfunktioner i Sverige, samt att det är en tydlig förändring i förhållande till en tidigare mer generös och inkluderande hållning mot migranten.

Abstract: This thesis consists of a case study on textual analysis derived from the European Union database regarding Migration Policy implemented in the year 2015 with new external policies in conjunction to tackle the Migration Crisis (EU15).  The framework of this thesis focuses on the EU:s Migration Agenda’s efficiency with an exemplification of its Member States like Sweden. To identify the obstacles, i.e. the strengths and weaknesses the policy area faces, and the opportunities that can be of benefit from this agendas, if the EU was to encounter another crisis again.      Furthermore, I present previous scholars' research and depict the theories used in this case study which are; securitization, the concepts of Institutionalism: solidarity, and harmonization. Afterwards, I present the current migration policy derived from the European Agenda issued in the year 2015 and also present the document regarding the progress under the European Agenda On Migration (an illustration between the years 2015 → 2018) issued in the year 2018 and illustrate a comparison towards a Member State; Sweden's result on migratory flow derived from the Swedish Migration Agency.       Then, I analyze my observations on these documented agendas by identifying what I observe to be the strengths and the weaknesses, and also justify what I observe can be used as a strategic tool towards the subduing of a future migration crisis if we were to face a migration crisis again in Europe after the 2015 crisis.        Lastly, I conclude my case study with further insight on what I acknowledged from my framework regarding the EU efficacy and characterize some concepts I find essential towards strengthening within the institution. Thus, give commentary on what I would have touched more on, but possibly can be of a benefit for further studies for any scholar interested in the EU Migration Policy.  Keywords:   EU Agenda on Migration Policy, Migration Policy, Security, Mobility,                              EU Migration Crisis 2015,  EU External Policies,                          Integration with non-EU countries.