Focusing on the readmission agreement between Sweden and Afghanistan, this study aims to enhance our understanding of why and how states use readmission agreements and the discourse underpinning these practices. Based on interviews with key officials working in the Swedish deportation infrastructure, the findings show that the agreement is presented as a successful measure resulting in a more predictable process and increased forced returns. The agreement is a critical technique for minimizing disruptions in the deportation corridor to Afghanistan, however, not without interruptions due to the infrastructure’s reliance on many elements and the complexity of bilateral cooperation. The discursive practices, including “problem” representations and assumptions justifying the agreement, can be questioned considering that most Afghans abscond or travel to another Schengen country instead of returning. The absence of an agreement evaluation further necessitates calling the increased governmental focus on readmission agreements into question. The study contributes to deconstructing governmental rationalities through a novel methodology of studying deportation and readmission.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:mau-40379 |
| Date | January 2021 |
| Creators | Hertzberg, Alice |
| Publisher | Malmö universitet, Malmö högskola, Institutionen för globala politiska studier (GPS) |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0028 seconds