Abstract
As a repercussion of globalization, Europe has been a center of attraction and employment for the citizens of underdeveloped and developing countries for many years. The European states, which sometimes enacted laws encouraging immigration to meet the needs of the labor market, experienced the first mass migration wave of the modern age in the European continent with the disintegration of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. The migration crisis, which occurred as a result disintegration of Yugoslavia, mainly affected Yugoslavia’s neighbors Germany and the Netherlands, since national borders had not been abolished yet in the “Schengen Area” in those years. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, Europe became the target of a strong mass migration wave for the second time, with the refugees fleeing from regional conflicts reaching its borders. At the beginning, European states approached the refugee influx by adopting a humanitarian rhetoric, however, could not reach a consensus on it, and over time, they presented an attitude that prioritized the protection of borders and preferred to pursue policies based mainly on security measures. While the burden of mass migration, as the “aftershock” of the Arab Spring, was on Turkey in the east, Italy and Malta received the impact in the south. The practices of the EU FRONTEX (“Frontières extérieures”,” European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders”) agency, which was established for the purposes of combating illegal immigration and crime, including pushing back asylum seekers by law enforcement, are issues that have been criticized in many respects. However, it has been experienced in different stages of history that it is not possible to prevent mass migration through security measures and the use of force.
The aim of the study prepared in this context is to draw attention to the importance of developing measures with a social policy perspective instead of security measures with a critical approach. It is a fact that a migrant workforce is needed in industrialized societies. Registration of immigrants within the legal framework and under appropriate conditions is their most natural right in the context of human rights. Qualitative research method was preferred in order to investigate the legal equivalent of this natural right in the EU with a theoretical study. In order to examine the migration figures and the experiences in the historical process, document analysis was focused on with the "secondary source research" method. As a result of the study, it would not be wrong to state that the EU's security approach is sometimes on a fine line that enforces internationally recognized human and refugee rights, while social policy production is left behind according to discourses. Within the scope of security measures, inhuman actions such as pushback are unacceptable, and it should be taken into account that directing the expenditures made under the name of border security to the right social policies will support more accurate and permanent solutions.
References
AB Komisyonu (2019). Türkiye’deki Mülteciler için Mali Yardım Programının Dördüncü Yıllık Raporu. Brüksel.
Ager, A., & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(2), 166-191. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fen016
Alcock P., May M., & Rowlingson K. (2008). Sosyal Politika Kuramlar ve Uygulamalar. Siyasal Kitapevi.
Alptekin M. Yavuz (2004). Avrupa Birliği’nde Kültürel Entegrasyon ve Türkiye’nin Durumu. TASAM Siyasal ve Sosyo-Kültürel Çalışma Grubu.
Arbour Louise, Schama Simon, Farage Nigel, & Steyn Mark (2016). The Global Refugee Crisis: How Should We Respond. House of Anansi Press Inc.
Bauman, Zygmunt (2018). Küreselleşme Toplumsal Sonuçları (Globalization The Human Consequences). Ayrıntı Yayınları.
Göçmen İ (2014). Türkiye ile Avrupa Birliği Arasındaki Geri Kabul Anlaşmasının Hukuki Yönden Analiz. Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi, 13 (2), 21-86.
Güllüpınar Fuat (2014). Almanya’da Göçmen Politikaları ve Türkiyeli Göçmenlerin Trajedisi: Yurttaşlık, Haklar ve Eşitsizlikler Üzerine. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14 (1),1-16, https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd. 37339.
Gülnur Erdoğan (2008). Avrupa Sosyal Şartı ve Gözden Geçirilmiş Avrupa Sosyal Şartı. Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi, 21(78), 123-165.
ILO (2018). ILO Global Estimates on International Migrant Workers, International Training Center of ILO, Turin- Italy.
Morris Ian (2014). Dünyaya Neden Batı Hükmediyor Şimdilik. Alfa Yayınları.
Sennett, Richard (2002). Karakter Aşınması (Yeni Kapitalizmde İşin Kişilik Üzerine Etkileri), (Çev. B. Yıldırım). Ayrıntı Yayınları.
Sennett, Richard (2006). Yeni Kapitalizmin Kültürü, (Çev. A. Onacak). Ayrıntı Yayınları.
Şenkal Abdülkadir (2011). Küreselleşme Sürecinde Sosyal Politika, Alfa Yayınları.
Şenkal Abdülkadir (2015), Sosyal Boyutu ile Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Emek. Umuttepe Yayınları.
Uçarol, Rıfat (2015), Siyası Tarih. DR Yayınları.
Topçu Emel, Özbek Cumali (2021), Uluslararası Göçte Geçici Koruma Politikasının Politika Transferi Çerçevesinde Karşılaştırmalı Analizi: Almanya, Hollanda ve Türkiye Örneği, Sosyal Politika Çalışmaları Dergisi, 21(53), 855-886. DOI:10.21560/spcd.vi.799478
Binley Alex (2022 Kasım 06), İtalya Göçmen Krizi Haberi, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63533769
European Commission. (2010). The Schengen area. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2758/45874
FRONTEX (2022, Ekim 22). Göç Raporları, https://FRONTEX.europa.eu FRONTEX (2022, Kasım 13), BEYOND EU Borders (AB Sınırları Ötesinde),
European Border and Coast Guard Agency. (2021). Frontex: Beyond EU borders. Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2819/355871
European Border and Coast Guard Agency. (2022). Frontex 2021 in brief. Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2819/039733
FRONTEX (2022,13 Kasım). AB Göç Risk Analizleri, https://FRONTEX.europa.eu/assets/Publications/Risk_Analysis/Risk_Analysis/ARA_2022_Public_Web.pdf
ICRC (2022, Kasım 13). Uluslararası İnsanı Hukuk Veri Tabanı, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl
International Organization for Migration (IOM) (2020), World Migration Report 2020, www.iom.int/wmr.
OECD (2022, Kasım 12). Yabancı Ülke Doğumluların İşe Yerleşim Göstergeleri, https://www.oecd- ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/foreign-born-employment/indicator/english_05428726-en, doi: 10.1787/05428726-en
TC Dışişleri BakanlığSı (2023, Mart 12). Türkiye’de Düzensiz Göç, https://www.mfa.gov.tr/turkiye_de-duzensiz- goc.tr.mfa
TC Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı (2023, Ocak 11). Uluslararası Doğrudan Yatırım Rakamları, https://sanayi.gov.tr/istatistikler/yatirim-istatistikleri/mi0803011615
TC Göç İdaresi (2022, Ekim 11). Uyum Strateji Belgesi ve Ulusal Eylem Planı, https://www.goc.gov.tr/kurumlar/goc.gov.tr/Yayinlar/UYUM-STRATEJI/Uyum-Strateji-Belgesi-ve-Ulusal-Eylem- Plani.pdf
UNHCR (2022, Kasım 11). The Three-Year Strategy (2019-2021) on Resettlement and Complementary Pathways, https://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/5d15db254/three-year-strategy-resettlement- complementary-pathways.html
UN IOM (2022, Kasım 11). Uluslararası Göç Rakamları, https://www.iom.int/data-and-research
UK Göç Ajansı (2022, Eylül 17). Göç İstatistikleri, https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration- statistics

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of TAM Academy