Migration in the Sahel-Sahara with the Critical Security Studies (CSS) Perspective
[Ümit Kurt]
1. Introduction
The Sahelian region, with its long-standing issues that sit at the intersection of development and security, has been a subject of migration-themed discussions in recent years (Raineri & Rossi, 2017: 13). The significant international migratory flows have acted on top of the existing security issues and made it an even more tangled web of human security problems in the last decade. That is why migration with the security-development nexus in the Sahel-Sahara was designated as the research topic. Critical Security Studies can be an ideal framework to discuss the Sahelian region, as the traditional realist theories offer very little in cases which has significant developmental aspects and a small component of a power struggle.
As “a structural hub, a key center” (Danda, 2017: 36) in migration flow, Niger and as the beneficiary of the “migration industry” (Sagna, 2017: 57), Senegal are two ideal candidates for the migration-related case studies in the region.
1.1. The Research Question
Under the leadership of the EU as an international organization (including some of its members individual efforts) with the support of the US, the security-development nexus is active for all kinds of security issues in the Sahel-Sahara. As Stetter et al. depict, the triple threat of Security issues, Developmental problems, and Migration forces act in tandem in the region and cannot be analyzed independently of each other (Stetter & Tocci, 2017: 7).
With migration as the main focus, this study’s research question becomes: Can the security-development nexus approach solve the migration problem in the Sahel-Sahara or—as CSS hypotheses suggest – become a tool to securitize economic and political issues in the hands of the powerful?
1.2. Method and Sources
In terms of methodology, this study considers migration2 within a security continuum and refers to the Security-Migration-Development Nexus in the Sahel as an illustrative case. This research uses open sources to refer to the ‘migration and Sahel-Sahara,’ such as official speeches, official reports of international organizations, devoted books, journal articles, articles in a periodical, and news articles as its corpus.
The first part of the study is devoted to explaining Critical Theory (CT), CSS, and the Security-Development Nexus approach. The second part contributes to a better understanding of the region’s security-migration and development nexus with two case studies: Senegal and Niger. Before the conclusion part, a one-page evaluation is presented on the same topic from the perspectives of Human Security and the Feminist Approach.
As for the research method being employed in this study, the tools that will be used may be labeled as:
1.2.1. Analysis of existing mainstream CSS approach to determine; scope, applicability, evidence, alternative explanations, and blind spots regarding the Security-migration-development nexus in the designated region,
1.2.2. Multifaceted qualitative analysis: approaching and discussing migration from the security-development nexus and utilizing the analysis above to present an approach that aims to explain and predict security-migration-development from the point of the CSS.
1.3. Aims and Contributions
This study is titled “The Security-Migration-Development Nexus in the Sahel” as it aims to be a monograph on examining the migration–development–security nexus through the analysis of this linkage in the Sahel region with the perspective of CSS, and in particular vis-à-vis two case study countries: Niger and Senegal. The paper also recasts the European Union and the United States’ approaches to these dynamics and explores current and potential partnerships in the region.
This research will aim to
1.3.1. Analyze the existing “CSS” perspective for the security issues in the Sahel-Sahara Region specific to “The Security-Migration-Development Nexus in the Sahel.”
1.3.2. Verify the theory using two case studies.
The study will contribute to knowledge about the security-migration-development nexus in the Sahel with the CSS perspective, particularly analyzing Niger and Senegal.
Keywords: Migration, Critical Theory (CT), Critical Security Studies (CSS), Sahel-Sahara, The security-development nexus
2. Theory
If all theory is a theory for someone, then critical theory, or critical security studies, is for the voiceless, the unrepresented, the powerless, and its purpose is their emancipation. Richard W. Jones
Critical Theory (CT) is a product of movement that has ties to Marxist tradition and served as a theory that criticized the mainstream theories during Cold War and is initially formulated by Frankfurt School thinkers such as Thomas Adorno and Mark Horkheimer. The theory continued in the 1980s, by Robert W. Cox, Jürgen Habermas, Andrew Linklater, Steve Smith, and Max Hoffman, criticized the modernity, and also provided the inspiration for postmodernism and poststructuralism, which emphasized the totalitarian aspect of enlightenment and regarded it as a failed project.
International Relations Security Studies have been dominated by traditional approaches during the Cold War and was heavily influenced by the destruction experienced in the WW2 along with constant threat of Nuclear Apocalypse. It is not a coincidence that main propelling brains of the traditional realism in that era was European emigres such as Hans Morgenthau and was focused on application of power and military power in particular. Although there were significant evolution in the classical thought towards the end of the Cold War where theorists such as Waltz offered a new explanation for the seemingly anarchic state of international affairs, the core focus on power as the main variable, security as the main objective and states as the main actors remained.
It should be noted that as Cox proclaims every theory is a product of the zeitgeist of its era and different perspectives emerge as political and social environment change (Cox, 1981). As such CT emerged mainly from Europe as the political and social landscape changed. Nuclear treaties such as SALT, the non-aligned movement, failed war in Vietnam and growing focus to development lead to alternative thought in IR where traditional focus, actors and objectives were questioned.
CT examines in what context and why it appears and to whom it serves by questioning the seeming nature of each concept or theory. CT’s approach to the concept of security has been influenced by the assumptions of this theory as well as its attitudes from the works of the scholars who have dealt with this issue, as well as the historical conditions and space in which this theory emerged, and as such; fields such as information, institutions, social structure, power, government, environment are historical so changeable (Kolasi, 2014). CT provides a theoretical framework to help us understand why and how the concept of security is transformed. Thus, CT studies on security occurred early in the 1990s as “Critical Security Studies-CSS” (Fierke, 2017: 2).
2.1. Critical Security Studies (CSS)
Adopted by Welsh School, the CSS branched out from CT (Jones, 2000) which has been developed by Frankfurt School. Welsh School has three core elements of the security: Individuals are regarded as the main subject of security, security concept has a broadened and deepened meaning and security is closely coupled with emancipation (Kolasi, 2014).
Bhal explains the focus on the individual with a moral argument and claims that the moral purpose of a state is to protect its citizens in accordance with the social contract theory and therefore the individuals -not the state- should be the main referent in security studies(Fierke, 2017: 1). Although it can be theorized that it is natural to regard states as the main actor and as the states establish security from external threats, the individuals will have their security as a default, Buzan et al. has proposed that state security meaning individual security might not always holds true in real life even though the state should be the guardian of individual in theory (Buzan & Hansen, 2009: 138). With the CSS perspective, the state can only be “a means of ensuring security not ends” (Booth, 1991: 320) to security policy. While the national interest can be a source of insecurity for those who are outside the definition of the nation, the state itself may be the source of mistrust for its citizens in illiberal or autocratic governments. The consideration of actors other than states in IR studies is sometimes labeled as the deepening of the field (Tarry, 2001:2).
The second main theme observed in CSS is a more broadened and deepened understanding of the term security. The field has various terms and differing understandings for the term “broadening” as the Critical Theorists under the roof of CSS can come from a wide spectrum of theoretical background. One explanation of broadening of IR field comes from Paris who describes broadening as “consideration of nonmilitary security threats, such as environmental scarcity and degradation, the spread of disease, overpopulation, mass refugee movements, nationalism, terrorism, and nuclear catastrophe” (Paris, 2001: 97). The broadened view of security by CSS theorist is closely tied to the deepening expressed in the previous paragraph. The natural result of considering other actors is also considering the security threats for these actors. As security theorists started to consider individuals a main actor in the security studies, threats other than external states came into focus and the broadening phenomenon carried stronger as deepening phenomenon became widespread. One alternative view to deepening is offered by Booth who focuses on the innate relation between the security and world politics and deduces that different political views and assumptions result in different concepts of security(Booth, 1994: 14) which means that the root of the deepening phenomenon is in the changing political landscape.
2.2. Emancipation
“Security and emancipation are two sides of the same coin. It is emancipation, not power and order, in both theory and practice, which leads to stable the security’’ Ken Booth
CSS has, as an approach to the study of security, become virtually synonymous with the concept of ‘emancipation’. People’s argue that emancipation is accepted as the key distinguishing feature of CSS, a view shared by both the critics and the supporters of the CSS. (Peoples, 2011: 1116). Furthermore, Booth argues that CSS has intentionally put to place emancipation at the center of its critique of traditional security studies – and claims that: “security and emancipation are two sides of the same coin.” (Booth, 1991: 319). In theory, emancipation is the core idea of CSS in Welsh School discipline which “separates CSS from other critical security studies” (Kolasi, 2014).
It is a process rather than an endpoint, a direction rather than a destination. Emancipation means “freeing people (as individual and group)” (Booth, 1991: 319) socially, physically, economically, politically and from all other restrictions “whether from the assumptions that blind us to alternatives or from the structures of power that constrain human potential” (Fierke, 2017: 19). It should also be emphasized that the Welsh School is stressing emancipation for security while traditional approaches emphasize the state and order.
In this regard, Welsh school sees classical subjects of security studies such as war, conflict, power as just some of the obstacles in front of “emancipation” and has a more holistic view of being free. While traditional approaches view security as being free from threats, emancipation approaches more inclusive view considers other factors that impede human existence and growth such as poverty, low education etc (Sonmez, 2019).
2.3. The Security-Development Nexus
Development is impossible without stability and that security is not sustainable without development.
It is almost a truism to say that the values promoted by a state may not always align with national interests. Therefore, the states might find themselves trying to balance these two counteracting forces (Copeland, 2009: 7). Developmental issues and global inequality are two subjects that often put the developed nations into interests against promoted values dilemmas. Global inequality was a theme of the early Marxist literature of international relations, especially in the 1990s. Furthermore, the old concept of security, focusing on the conflict between states, is not interested in this phenomenon, and one can hardly find inequality in any research agendas of classical theorists. Not surprisingly, despite the often-encountered rhetoric towards eliminating inequality by state leaders and the values they derive from, the classical theorists have fallen silent on the issue of global inequality.
Fierke points out two developments as critical in establishing an alternative viewpoint; the rise of human security and the “redefining of the nexus between security and development” (Fierke, 2017: 12). The human security concept is borne out of the 1994 UN Human Development Program Report (UN Human Development Report, 1994) as a response to an observation that in today’s conflicts civilians are often the victims and even the primary targets of violence.
The security and development nexus also received attention as the post-Cold War conflicts heavily involved states with an intersecting development and security problem which made the relationship between them painfully clear. Researchers such as Barrett shows that transborder problems encountered in that era are worsened by developmental problems (Barrett, 2018). There is a clear relation between underdevelopment and security problems such as cross-border terrorism and transborder migration forced a reemphasis and refocus on security and development nexus.
It would not be farfetched to argue that the rise of human security and reevaluation of security and development nexus is not mutually exclusive as developmental issues are closely coupled with human security. Copeland argues that from a policy perspective security and development should be regarded as inseparable concepts as; both have a human centered focus (Copeland, 2009: 8). Therefore, it would not be wise to regard basic human needs and freedoms (political freedom, free speech, freedom from want and fear) separate from concept of security and try to develop policies that have are disconnected and exclusive of one another.
From a more pragmatic view, developed states need to deal with conflict-ridden areas and states with developmental problems—which at times become fragile or failed states—since these regions become fertile land for terrorism, migration, international crime, etc. Barrett also points out that the relationship between security and development is so coupled that, when taking preventive or reactive measures, the distinction between aid and military agencies can be very much blurred (Barrett, 2018).
It is not to say that the emphasis on security development nexus is without critics. One criticism comes towards the practice rather than theory. Often, the Western brand of liberalism, with a focus on liberalization, free trade, etc., is presented as the recipe for the cure. Such approach is argued to be “Western Biased”. Brohman argues that the western background of the developmental theorists led to a preconditioning to believe that the Western path towards development as the only true way and thus disregarding cultural and contextual differences which results in inability to understand or address root causes of the problems of these societies (Brohman, 1995:121).
3. Case Studies: Niger and Senegal
Critical approaches to the study of migration have sought to trace the production of mobility as a security threat, emphasize the ethical and political implications of the categorization of different forms of migrants, and argue for a shift in the referent object of analysis away from statist perspectives on tides and swarms of migrants to the individual and his/her experiences. A range of writers in CSS have examined the securitization of migration against the backdrop of European integration.
Niger deserves to be the first case study because it sits at a critical junction of international migration. Refugees originating from West and Central Africa, destined to the popular destination of Europe through North Africa, uses Niger as Hub to start their journey, therefore as Danda puts it Niger – and specifically Agadez region- is “de facto becoming a structural hub, a key center” (Danda, 2017: 36). Niger’s situation has been provoked by the collapse of Libya in 2010-2011 and by terrorist incursions on its borders with Mali and Nigeria.
Senegal is the second case study to be analyzed, not due primarily due to geography but due to the role of migration in the national economy of Senegal. Niger’s economy benefits immensely through the migrant diaspora, and even national policies are adopted to take advantage of this fact. Sagna cites the World Bank and brings attention to the large flux of remittances from Senegalese in Europe and the USA, which amounted to 1.6 billion dollars in 2014 – an astounding 10.3% of the country’s GDP (Sagna, 2017: 73). Besides, Senegal carries an important trait of being a country that both attracts incoming migrants and also being a source of migrants destined for Europe. Also, it should be mentioned that Senegal is not landlocked like Niger, and migrants can try out different routes other than the central land route through Niger.
3.1. The Security and Migration
It is important to recognize that the relationship between migration and security is not a newly encountered phenomenon. During WW2, US interned Japanese migrants, while UK interned German migrants due to fear of creating internal unrest, also a wave of attacks in Europe activities in 1970s and 1980s were associated with groups inside Kurdish and Algerian diasporas (Koser, 2011) along with high profile assassinations in USA and Western Europe by Armenian group ASALA.
Beginnings of the 1990s, migration and asylum issues started to have a refocus within a security continuum that connects it with issues such as terrorism, international crime, and border control. The security nexus has become more prevalent across many aspects of policy, and in part in response to rise of the intrastate conflicts in the post-Cold War era which brought about a rapid growth in number of international migrants, more specifically illegal and irregular migrants (Koser, 2011).
It is important to recognize the important role of migration in political discourse in migration receiving countries. Migration is securitized in political discourse with the objective of influencing attitudes, norms and most importantly for justifying the policy response, which often entails unsavory measures such as detention and deportation (Koser, 2011). Even categorization of migration can be seen as a tool of securitization that enables and justifies desired policies and procedures (Farny, 2016).
Once securitization is on the table, the question of “security for who” heavily influences the perceptions. As such one can attest to changing attitudes towards migration across the world. It is clear that European – and more and more American lately- attitudes towards migration hold the threat to security and identity at the center of discourse, from the perspective of Africans migration is more about human security and economic well-being (Raineri & Rossi, 2017: 23). Therefore, recognizing the perception points held by different actors and the type of security -security of whom and what- is critical in debating the security-migration nexus.
In fact, in assessing the security-migration nexus, one should explore the issue as a whole and evaluate what it means at the national level as well as global level. An often-overlooked aspect of migration is that, it can actually bolster – or at least prevent degradation – of the security at undeveloped and challenged regions. These regions are often plagued with human security issues such as famine, droughts, lack of resources etc. The competition for limited resources can lead to conflict. It is recognized that depletion of natural resources and sharp changes in access to resources whether through natural phenomena or administrative policies can lead to conflict (Ross, 2004). This trend would be worsened if other factors such as youth bulge is present (Urdal, 2012). The migration can be an outlet for expanding anger and can be an alternative to taking up arms, which can quickly spiral out of control and lead to humanitarian disasters. Viewed from this lens, migration as a substitute and alternative to civil conflict can be contributing to national stability in undeveloped regions, as well as regional and global stability and security (Raineri & Rossi, 2017: 26).
Policies and practices to counter migration are an important part of the migration and security discussion. It is important to separate the anti-migration rhetoric from effective counter-migration policies and implement productive policies. More importantly, it is critical to understand what works and accept that migration might not be completely stopped unless the conditions in native countries that caused the migration change. As experience shows, even in the face of heavy legal obstructions and physical barriers, migration flow may not experience a significant reduction, but rather, new routes, alternative methods, and new circumventing routes and practices are born (Raineri & Rossi, 2017: 29).
The transborder nature of the migration and legal jurisdictional reality leads to cooperation in countering migration. In 2016, REGARDS (Renforcement de l’Engagement communautaire pour la gestion Alerte des Risques de Destabilisation Sociales et Securitaires – Strengthening Community Engagement for the Management of Social and Security Destabilization Risks Alert) project launched by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and funded through UN Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) focuses on establishing a peaceful coexistence between the Malian refugees and
in neighboring country Niger, by strengthening the local integration and economic productivity and therefore resulting in local acceptance (UNDP, 2017). The end-objective from a European perspective is to decrease the flux to Europe by establishing regional centers where refugees can be situated and accepted by local public. The cooperation between international organizations regional governments and local authorities is a good example of the complex action required in dealing with migration.
An important aspect of the security – migration nexus is recognizing that not all actors international and local benefit from the reduction of migration. Both countries in this case studies Senegal and Niger, encouraged and financed by the EU and US also imposed laws for strengthening border security and blocking illegal migration flows. However, at the local executive level, the local authorities might not be very much willing to enforce such rules as they may be somehow beneficiaries of migration flow at least economically themselves.
3.2. The Development and Migration
Although there is a simple intuitive link between development and migration in the form of -less development equals more migration- the actual evidence from the field is much more complex. For example, it is not the least developed countries with smallest GDP per capita that produces the most migrant flow to Europe. Raineri et al. points out that countries such as Niger, Chad and Burkina Faso rank at the at the very bottom of Human Development Index, are geographically closer to Europe, and are located on the popular migration routes, yet far more distant and more developed countries such as Nigeria, Senegal and Ivory Coast produce much more migrants destined for Europe, which begs the conclusion that simple income gap alone can be a key driver of migration(Raineri & Rossi, 2017: 19).
Another key concept in understanding the link between the development and migration is the migrant remittances. Migrant remittances can be defined as monetary flow from migrants established in their new locations to their originating states. These remittances are extremely important due to their sheer size and more importantly what they mean for the economies of originating states. Yang shows that these remittances have actually exceeded other source of foreign currency income such as foreign direct investment since late 1990s, continue to have and annual real growth that is far above the world average and remained stable despite economic crisis (Yang, 2011), all of which make these remittances extremely attractive to the states that receive them. For the two countries in these case studies, Senegal, received 2.5 billion USD in 2019 which amounts to 10.5% of annual GDP, while Niger received 320 Million USD which amounts to 3.5% of the annual GDP (The World Bank, 2019). Migrants’ remittances play a critical role in funding of development and the creation of basic services, to such level that the term “migration industry” (Danda, 2017: 45) might be an appropriate label.
Along with remittances, international aid is another critical economic factor in migration development nexus. Funds such as EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa, UN coordinated Multi-Partner Trust Fund along with bilateral/multilateral agreements between the migration originating and receiving states make up an important financial motivation. It is important to note that, UNDP supported Senegal with “2.3 billion dollars” (Sagna, 2017: 57) and Niger with “145 million euros” (Danda, 2017: 50) which is a more than welcome source of foreign income for these countries. However, Raineri points out that funding sources like EU Trust Fund for Africa is not used to target the root causes of the migration, but rather to address the more short term and immediately visible effects through security measures such as enhanced border controls and capacity building for law enforcement and therefore questions both the effectiveness of the way these funds are utilized and the validity of the axiom “more development aid, less migration” (Raineri & Rossi, 2017: 23). As such, Newland also challenge the idea that migration is simply a response to developmental failure -and consequently cure is sustainable development- and shows that remittances, diasporas, circular migration and high skilled migrant emigration trends witnessed in the last 20 years show that more complex dynamics are at play (Newland, 2013: 13). All of the above suggest that there is a component of migration-development nexus where migration actually cause more development, at least for the originating state.
3.3. The Roles of the External Actors: The EU and the US
The fact that migration is an important issue in the local political discourse at the receiving nations and is charged with strong emotions in both proponents and opponents, leads to treatment of migration issues with short term reactive measures rather than long-term fact-based measures. Policy frameworks sponsored and designed by foreign actors in the region, basically, the EU and the US, seem to understand the need for a multi-layered approach but are sometimes stretched to meet inconsistent political demands.
Policy discourses and the practices of foreign actors in the Sahel in the security -migration nexus, the EU expresses the idea that the enforcement of local security forces and border controls as a part of an emerging European foreign policy approach that “externalizes the bloc’s security” (Venturi, 2017: 115) can contribute to reducing irregular migration by inhibiting opportunities for smuggling (Raineri & Rossi, 2017: 27).
Grant discusses how US policy in the Sahel has been usually described as “tends to emphasize military and strategic security concerns” (Grant, 2017: 129) and concludes with a positive note that: there still are major opportunities for US engagement in Sahel despite the uncertanities shown regarding general direction to follow by current administration.
It should be noted that when security and development are discussed in developed world in migration issues, there has been a national interests focus which aims to optimize the security of the developed nation rather than an effort to improve security in a global or more comprehensive way. At the bottom line, in compliance with the security-development nexus theory, both the EU and the US are prioritizing their security and targeting more immediate consequences rather than the root cause of migration by focusing the security nexus often at the expense of Niger and Senegal. It is important to question whether these policies improve or worsen global security in the long term.
4. Migration from Human Security and Feminist Perspectives in the Sahel-Sahara
4.1. Human Security Perspective
Human security is the result of post-Cold War efforts to expand the definition of security beyond the classical subjects and actors. Paris described this process as “broadening and deepening” where broadening implies addition of non-military issues such as migration, environment, diseases, and deepening implies to inclusion of actors other than states in IR theory(Paris, 2001: 97). The core concern underpinning the human security concept is the inextricable interrelationship between freedom from want and freedom from fear.
Human security while raising questions about the focus and assumptions of realist security studies builds on the idea that people should receive as much attention as states in terms of security, considering the safety of individuals is key to global security and therefore emphasizes human rights, sustainable development and safety from violence” (Fierke, 2017: 12-13).
The critics of human security claim that these concepts can be used to justify intervention and regime change (Copeland, 2009: 16-Note 10), threatening the norm of state sovereignty with Libya argued to be an exemplary case. Another argument is that human security will lead to a dilation of the IR field, rendering it useless, considering focusing on everything would mean focusing on nothing.
In the case of Sahel, human security has no problem finding application areas. The chronic problems such as economic security, food security, health security and personal security are widespread and in dire need of action ameliorating action. One can argue that initiative such as World Bank programs and the G8-led ‘The New Alliance3′ where international institutions, transnational corporations, local governance and people are theorized to work together to diminish poverty, carry all the elements of the human security approach.
The issues at hand are beyond the classical focus on state security and the main actors involved are not states. Thus, the broadening and deepening described by Paris are quite visible. However, Sahel is hardly a glowing win for human security. Many issues argued by critics are evident. The first issue comes from a motivation perspective. The market-led focus in The New Alliance program and easing of local regulations -so those private companies can act under the legal framework- envisioned in the US Millennium Challenge Account program can be argued to benefit those who are supposed to help, rather than those who need help. This skewed motivation resulted in pro-corporatist policies rather than pro-poor policies in agricultural development and led to an “altered marginalization” of the poor rather than eradicating poverty as argued by Rajaonarison (Rajaonarison, 2014: 381).
Thus, the criticism of human security as a tool to advance own agendas have a substantial ground in the case of Sahel. The dilution criticism does not apply to the Sahel. The various problems of Sahel do not negate each other. The human security issues continue to affect as much -if not more- people compared to traditional state security issues, and there is no evidence to claim that discussing one is diluting the others.
4.2. Feminist Perspective
Feminism in international relations studies can be described as a school of thought that focuses on gender as the primary determinant of an actor’s identity and argues that the IR has been dominated by men and therefore has masculine content and form (Nau, 2015: 67). The Feminist Approaches focus on equal dignity for men and women, and equal access to social, economic and political opportunities. It aims to work against “the 3 symptoms of power – exploitation, inequality and suppression, to build ideas of justice, equality and participation” (Enloe, 1989).
Some factors block the participation of women into Sahara- Sahel’s daily politics. The family, in the Region, form the main unit of society. The role of women in the family is to marry early and devote themselves to children and household affairs. In this family, the man is still the sole and capable breadwinner and there is no need for another one. On the other hand, modesty code shields the reputation of women, on which family honor rests, and restricts the opportunities for women to enter the workplace and other public spaces. Lastly, religious laws dictate a radically unequal balance of power between men and women in the family. These cultural and religious factors, more than legal factors, limit employment possibilities.
Gender inequality is another major deficiency. In Niger specifically, enrollment of girls in primary-level schools is still less than that of boys for example. Girls and women endure inequalities in families, tribes, and villages that stem from centuries-old traditions and superstitions. Conflicts in the region often involve the widespread rape and humiliation of women. Many of these practices contribute directly to the spread of AIDS.
5. Conclusion
It is difficult to claim the security-migration-development nexus has been successful in solving security issue in the Sahel region. The evidence shows that these issues are handled with a focus on short term policies that are based more on conforming to emotional winds towards migration at home rather than evidence based, long term policies.
The root causes of the migration in Niger and Senegal are bad governance and patronage politics, poverty and hunger, unequal opportunities, poor provision of public services, the lack of security in certain localities close to borders and international organized crime and terrorist networks.
But the measures taken against migration are, -for the reasons described above-, targeting more immediate consequences rather than the root causes which prioritizes the security of developed world. As mentioned earlier, the security-development approaches have their deficiencies like prioritizing the securitization of the state’s border and sustain the host nation’s regime rather than the individual. Emancipation, empowering and democratization of the region are not on the agenda when it comes to the migration-security-development nexus
It is not to say that all programs are short-sighted or have a nationalistic focus. Long term focused solutions such as REGARDS program discussed above is a good example of inclusive and comprehensive approach. However, it is also not possible to claim that such programs are more numerous than border security-based approaches or even that they receive significant amount of funding.
The migration is still critical in the security-development nexus for the region, but unfortunately this issue is often “hijacked by voices more concerned with domestic politics rather than the governing truth.” (Stetter & Tocci, 2017: 7). Fake and or misguided information are often broadcasted to bring the emotional forces at play and influence policy. As very well identified by Cohen, COVID-19 “exacerbates tensions” (Cohen, 2020) and how the current pandemic will act as a force on migration and security is yet to be seen, but it has the potential to be a catalyst for both globalist humanitarian trends as well as seclusion and nationalistic trends.
Lastly, there is a significant need to educate the leaders and general public that simplifications such as “under development causes migration” and “migration damages the receiving nation” are not always true and much more complex mechanisms are at play for both the receiving nation and the originating nation, which require region specific, evidence-based approaches.
References
Barrett, R. (2018, July 24). The Development-Security Nexus: An Exploitative Past and Present. Retrieved April 12, 2020, from E-International Relations Students: https://www.e-ir.info/2018/07/24/the-development-security-nexus-an-exploitative-past-and-present/
Bhal, W. b. (2014, August 24). Security: An Essentially Contested Concept? Retrieved April 11, 2020, from E-International Relations: https://www.e-ir.info/2014/08/24/security-an-essentially-contested-concept/
Booth, K. (1991, October). Security and Emancipation. Review of International Studies, 17(4), 313-326. Retrieved April 01, 2020, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20097269.pdf
Booth, K. (1994, October). Security and Self Reflections of A Fallen Realist. YCISS Occasional Paper Number 26 (October 1994). Toronto: York University. Retrieved May 02, 2020, from https://yorkspace.library.yorku.ca/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10315/1414/YCI0073.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Booth, K. (2005). Two Terrors One Problem. In E. Aydinli, & J. N. Rosenau (Eds.), Globalisation, Security, and the Nation-State: Paradigms in Transition (pp. 27-48). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Booth, K. (2007). Deepening, broadening, reconstructing. In In Theory of World Security (Cambridge Studies in International Relations) (pp. 149-181). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511840210.006
Brohman, J. (1995, March). Universalism, Eurocentrism, and Ideological Bias in Development Studies: From Modernisation to Neoliberalism. Third World Quarterly, 121-140.
Brown, W. (2006). Africa and international relations: a comment on IR theory, anarchy and statehood. Review of International Studies, 32, pp. 119–143 . doi:doi:10.1017/S0260210506006954
Buzan, B., & Hansen, L. ( 2009). The Evolution of International Security Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buzan, B., & Wæver, O. (2009). Macrosecuritisation and security constellations: reconsidering scale in securitisation theory. Review of International Studies , 35, pp. 253–276. doi:doi:10.1017/S0260210509008511
Cohen, R. (2020, May 22). Germany’s Lessons for China and America. Retrieved May 25, 2020, from https://www-nytimes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/05/22/opinion/coronavirus-germany-china-america.amp.html
Copeland, D. (2009). Guerrilla Democracy. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Cox, R. W. (1981, June 01). Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory. Millennium, 10(2), 126-155. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298810100020501
Danda, M. (2017). The Security–Migration–Development Nexus In The Sahel: A View From Niger. In B. Venturi (Ed.), The Security–Migration–Development Nexus Revised: A perspective from the Sahel (pp. 35-56). Brussel: FEPS and IAI. Retrieved April 04, 2020, from https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/9788868129729.pdf
Enloe, C. H. (1989). Bananas, Beaches & Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics. London: University of California Press.
Farny, E. (2016, July 29). Implications of the Securitisation of Migration. Retrieved April 07, 2020, from E-International Relations Students: https://www.e-ir.info/2016/01/29/implications-of-the-securitisation-of-migration/
Fierke, K. M. (2017, November ). Critical Theory, Security, and Emancipation. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.138
Grant, A. K. (2017). US Policy in The Sahel: Shifting Strategies Amid Shifting Threats in A Volatile Region. In The Security–Migration– Development Nexus Revised: A Perspective From The Sahel (pp. 129-152). Brussel: FEPS and IAI. Retrieved April 04, 2020, from https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/9788868129729.pdf
Hentz, J. J. (2009). The Southern African security order: regional economic integration and security among developing states. Review of International Studies, 35, pp. 189–213. doi:doi:10.1017/S0260210509008481
Jones, R. W. (2000). Security, Strategy, and Critical Theory. The American Political Science Review, 94(10). doi:10.2307/2586105
Kolasi, K. (2014, November). Eleştirel Teori ve Güvenlik: Kimin Için Güvenlik? Uluslararası İlişkilerde Güvenlik Kavramı: Teorik Değerlendirmeler, pp. 121-154. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/39793649/kolasi-elestirel_teori_ve_guvenlik.pdf?response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DElestirel_Teori_ve_Guvenlik_Kimin_icin_G.pdf&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=ASIATUSBJ6BA
Koser, K. (2011, March 31). When is Migration a Security Issue? Retrieved April 01, 2020, from Brookings: https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/when-is-migration-a-security-issue/
Nau, H. R. (2015). Perpectives on International Relations. California: SAGE Publications.
Newland, K. (2013). What We Know About Migration and Development. Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/what-we-know-about-migration-and-development
Paris, R. (2001, October). Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air? International Security, 87-102. doi:10.1162/016228801753191141
Peoples, C. (2011). Security after emancipation? Critical Theory, violence and resistance. Review of International Studies, 37(3), pp. 1113–1135. doi:doi:10.1017/S0260210510000884
Peoples, C., & Vaughan-Williams, N. (2010). Critical Security Studies -An Introduction. London and New York: Routledge.
Raineri, L., & Rossi, A. (2017). The Security-Migration-Development Nexus in the Sahel: A Reality Check. In B. Venturi (Ed.), The Security–Migration–Development Nexus Revised: A Perspective From The Sahel (pp. 13-34). Brussels: FEPS and IAI. Retrieved April 04, 2020, from https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/9788868129729.pdf
Rajaonarison, H. M. (2014). Food and Human Security in Sub-Saharan Africa. Procedia Environmental Sciences , 20, pp. 377-385. Retrieved April 08, 2020, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878029614000498
Ross, M. L. (2004). How Do Natural Resources Influence Civil War? Evidence from Thirteen Cases. International Organization(Volume 58, Issue 1), 35-67.
Sagna, S. (2017). The Security–Migration–Development Nexus in The Sahel Region: Aview from Senegal. In B. Venturi (Ed.), The Security– Migration– Development Nexus Revised: A Perspective From The Sahel (pp. 57-85). Brussels: FEPS and IAI. Retrieved April 04, 2020, from https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/9788868129729.pdf
Sonmez, S. (2019). Syrian Civil War from Critical Security Studies Perspective ‘A Case of the Security of the Ethnic and Sect Groups’. Researchgate. Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. Retrieved April 01, 2020, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335149897_SYRIAN_CIVIL_WAR_From_Critical_Security_Studies_Perspective_’A_Case_of_the_Security_of_the_Ethnic_and_Sect_Groups’_-Current_Issues_of_International_Security
Stetter, E., & Tocci, N. (2017). Foreword. In B. Venturi (Ed.), The Security–Migration– Development Nexus Revised: A Perspective From The Sahel (pp. 7-8). Brussel: FEPS and IAI. Retrieved April 04, 2020, from https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/9788868129729.pdf
Suliman, S. (2016, February 12). Mobility and the kinetic politics of migration and development. Review of International Studies, 42(4), pp. 702–723. doi:doi:10.1017/S0260210516000048
Tarry, S. (2001). Deepening’ and ‘Widening’: An Analysis of Security Definitions in the 1990s. Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, 1-13.
The World Bank. (2019). The World Bank. Retrieved 08 16, 2020, from Annual Remittances Data – Inflows: https://www.knomad.org/sites/default/files/2020-04/Remittance%20inflows%20April%202020.xlsx
UNDP, U. N. (2017). REGARDS 2017 Annual Reporting. UNDP. Retrieved from http://mptf.undp.org/factsheet/project/00098292
United Nations. (1994). UN Human Development Report. New York: UN. Retrieved March 08, 2020, from https://www.un-ilibrary.org/economic-and-social-development/human-development-report-1994_87e94501-en
Urdal, H. (2012). A CLASH OF GENERATIONS? New York: Harvard University and Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO) .
Venturi, B. (2017). The EU and the Sahel: A Laboratory of Experimentation for the Security– Migration–Development Nexus. In B. Venturi (Ed.), The Security–Migration– Development Nexus Revised: A Perspective From The Sahel (pp. 109-129). Brussels: FEPS and IAI. Retrieved April 04, 2020, from https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/9788868129729.pdf
Venturi, B., & Ntousas, V. (2017). Introduction. In B. Venturi (Ed.), The Security–Migration– Development Nexus Revised: A Perspective From The Sahel (pp. 9-10). Brussel: FEPS and IAI. Retrieved April 04, 2020, from https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/9788868129729.pdf
Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Long Grove: Waveland Press .
Yang, D. (2011). Migrant Remittances. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, VOL. 25, NO. 3, , 129-52. doi:DOI: 10.1257/jep.25.3.129
As a graduate of the U.S. Army War College and a former senior civil servant, Mr. Umit Kurt is dedicated to advancing the field of international relations as a Ph.D. researcher at UCLouvain in international relations in Belgium.
His research delves into the dynamics of International Institutions with their diverse members, the ethics of reconciliation, the complexities of migration, and the overarching governance of digital ecosystems.
With a career that spans over two decades, he has been at the forefront of leading and contributing to task forces in various capacities, including NATO Peace Operations and strategic NATO Headquarters.
Mr Kurt’s professional journey has been enriched by a Master of Business Administration. His expertise in Global Governance for Digital Ecosystems was honed through a consultancy role at PA Europe-Belgium, a prominent multinational public affairs firm.
