The Need for a Spiral Like Mindset: Policy Round Table Discussions of the Challenges of Accessing Citizenship

Elizabeth Challinor[1] and Gizem Alioglu Cakmak[2]

The wide range of issues discussed during the Work Group Three Policy Round Table that took place in Brussels on 04 June 2024 on the topic of Accessing Citizenship, elucidated the underlying policy tensions between safeguarding the human rights of people on the move and protecting territorial sovereign interests imbued with conflicts over time, territory and belonging in which some objectives are spoken, and others remain hidden. The discussions revealed how critical thinking about policy making requires a spiral like mindset in which identifying and addressing policy failings with the proposal of alternative measures, also involves recognizing the new setbacks that these proposals may also create.

Evgeny Shtorn challenged us to think beyond the traditional distinction between migrants and asylum seekers, with the figure of the human rights defender whose international protection should not be territorially and temporally bound, to aid activists in their pursuit of human rights. Shtorn also stated that in recent developments, Russia and Belarus have imposed restrictive measures that effectively create a de facto stateless population. Nationals of these countries face notable challenges in renewing their passports—a process that now typically requires them to travel back to their home countries. This requirement not only complicates the logistics of maintaining legal status abroad but also exposes these individuals to potential risks upon their return, as authorities may target them for their decision to leave.

Annalisa Meloni suggested that human rights obligations could apply extra territory, given that the externalisation of state borders is used to protect territorial interests. Moreover, in a discussion of the technological implications of the new asylum procedures regulation, Romit Bhandari drew attention to the fiction of non-entry for people living in dire conditions who are denied legal status, even though they are physically on the territory. This in turn raised the issue of how accelerated procedures constitute, in principle, a good practice. But whether they turn out to be good in practice should not be automatically assumed. Whilst combating the inequalities created by the subjective discretion of border guards, automated recognitions will not eliminate individual and collective discriminations. Moreover, we need the subjective dimension to remind us of our humanity.

Suad Aldarra, author of “I Don’t Want to Talk About Home, A migrant’s search for belonging” gave us a humanising account of her visa experiences from Saudia Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Ireland and the United States. The life of Suad Aldarra reveals the harsh realities of “traveling for survival” and the sudden descent into irregularity. Born in Saudi Arabia to Syrian parents and labelled a foreigner, Suad was faced with significant barriers due to her identity. After moving to Syria for her studies and later marrying a Palestinian refugee, their journey took them from Egypt—where a regime change overnight turned them into irregular migrants. In stark contrast to dominant narratives about migrants and refugees as abusers of the system, or as burdens to the hosting nation, Suad graced us with an inspiring account of how she managed to realize her capabilities through a maze of restrictive visa and migration regimes.

The need for a more humane Schengen visa process and the difficulty of obtaining such a visa also constituted significant issues of concern during the session. The process has become so complex that people now view obtaining a Schengen visa as a kind of “reward.” This aspect was particularly emphasized by academics from Türkiye attending the workshop, who stressed that Turkish citizens often wait months just for a Schengen visa appointment. Such delays complicate the participation of academics in meetings and scientific studies, restricting their ability to engage and contribute effectively to the international academic community.

Ayşen Üstübici’s research under the HORIZON project shed light on the complexities of migration governance in Türkiye, a major refugee host nation. This research, which illustrates Türkiye as a laboratory for migration studies, delves into the reception and integration of refugees, particularly under the ESSN program—Europe’s largest humanitarian cash aid initiative. She shared the findings concerning the linkage between aid and migration decisions and emphasized that achieving independence from aid is a significant achievement for refugees, often giving them a sense of accomplishment. Interestingly, whether they receive aid does not usually determine if they decide to stay or move to another country.

Ayselin Yıldız shared with us the findings from her research, revealing that Afghans are the leading nationality seeking asylum in Türkiye, driven by intense restrictions back home, where the Taliban rarely issue passports and IDs are becoming obsolete. Many Afghanis choose France over Germany as their destination, considering the lower risk of being sent back and the chance for better opportunities. Integration for these refugees means more than just receiving aid; it’s about gaining fundamental rights like the ability to work and divorce, which were rejected in Afghanistan.

Selin Siviş shed light on the complex dynamics of ‘othering’ refugees in Türkiye, mainly Syrians. Her findings indicate that Turkish citizens often view Syrians through a lens of insider vs. outsider, influencing their perception based on societal roles. In the workplace, Syrians are seen as less important colleagues, and more broadly, they are often considered untrustworthy or traitorous for not fighting for their country. Economic factors compound this mistrust; Syrians generally work longer hours for less pay and lack the leverage to negotiate salaries or secure insurance. This scenario emphasizes a unique view of citizenship among Turkish citizens, emphasizing political unity over institutional affiliation, and highlights the challenges Syrians face in integrating into Turkish society.

Dolf te Lintelo discussed the evolving refugee policies in Lebanon – a country that hosts a large number of refugees and is struggling with continuous political and financial crises. Initially, Lebanon adopted open-border policies and showed generosity towards refugees. However, especially since 2022, there has been a significant increase in the pressure on refugees to return to their home countries. The legal residency rates for displaced Syrians in Lebanon have declined for five consecutive years due, in part, to policies that make obtaining and renewing legal residency too expensive. This lack of legal status then prevents many from working in regular jobs which also makes it difficult to obtain or renew legal residency. Amidst these challenges, a “voluntary” return plan has been proposed, aiming for the return of 15,000 Syrians. This situation underscores the complex dynamics between host nations and refugee populations, particularly in times of political and financial crisis.

Talking about ID as a global public good (UN sustainable Goal 16.9 – everyone granted the right to legal identity by 2030), Juan Franciso Gamal informed us that people without legal proof of identity in 2021 is estimated to total 850 million people. Juan Gamal also took us beyond territorial sovereignty towards the issue of digital sovereignty to think about the tensions emerging between a Europe that regulates and a Europe that protects.

Mikko Hakkarainen from the European Commission provided insights into the EU’s approach to documents and identity management. Highlighting the shift towards digitalization, Hakkarainen outlined the European integrated border control initiatives, including the full digitalization of visas and the reliance on e-Gates for document inspection. By giving us a taste of what the digital future will look like, Mikko Hakkarainen’s presentation confirmed, what we describe in this text as the need for a spiral like mindset, to constantly adapt and evolve. The danger of an increasing digital divide was raised by Jennifer Redmond as a fundamental concern for HIDDEN with its emphasis on its research ethics “nothing about us without us.”

Whilst speaking the local language constitutes an important aspect of integration, the presentations of the IMPECT project – Linguistic Integration and Adult Migrants with Poor Education and Consequences of Migration Tests – (by Kamran Khan, Ricky van Oers and Edit Bugge) reminded us that language is also part of a national, ideological project and demonstrated how these tests can be used as a tool to create an invisible border between desired and undesired, worthy and unworthy citizens in which illiterate and less educated migrants are made to feel unwelcome. The clear distinction between tests and education was also made: does the political will exist to provide a more supporting environment, currently lacking, to learn the language and pass the test, or are these tests instruments of governmentality? This brings us back to the fundamental issue of safeguarding the human rights of people on the move and protecting territorial sovereign interests. The discussions will continue, in a spiral manner…

[1] Researcher at Centre for Research in Anthropology, CRIA, New University of Lisbon, CRIA-NOVA FCSH / IN2PAST. Research financed by FCT within the CRIA strategic plan, (UIDB/04038/2020; 2021.02343.CEECIND, https://doi.org/10.54499/2021.02343.CEECIND/CP1701/CT0002).

[2] Associate Professor, Department of Political Sciences and International Relations, Yeditepe University – Istanbul.