Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T07:48:44.344Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Migration and Hybrid Political Regimes: Navigating the Legal Landscape in Russia

Review products

Migration and Hybrid Political Regimes: Navigating the Legal Landscape in Russia. By Rustamjon Urinboyev. Oakland: University of California Press, 2020. xii, 169 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. Photographs. $34.95, paper.
The Language of Political Incorporation: Chinese Migrants in Europe. By Amy H. Liu. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2021. x, 216 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. Plates. Tables. Maps. $34.95, paper.
The History and Politics of Free Movement within the European Union: European Borders of Justice. By Saila Heinikoski. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2021. xii, 224 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Chronology. Index. Figures. Tables. $115.00, hard bound.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 February 2023

Olga R. Gulina
Olga R. Gulina*
Affiliation:
+Benefit Research und Consulting GmbH (vormals RUSMPI UG), CEO/Migration & FSU – Consultant
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In recent years, migration, foreign, and domestic policies to regulate movement and international relations have become embedded fields of study. Myron Weiner examined state-to-state relations depending on actions or inactions vis-a-vis international migration and concluded that the internationalization of migration highlighted “new and conflicting interests into considerations of policies affecting migration in both sending and receiving countries.” Stephen Castles, Mark J. Miller, and Ammendola Giuseppe wrote about “globalization of migration,” which is “the tendency” of getting the countries’ foreign and national politics “crucially affected by migratory movements.” Some scholars tried to theorize the relationship between migration, foreign, and domestic policies. Kelly Greenhill investigated widely deployed but largely unrecognized instruments of state influence on “cross-border population movements that are deliberately created or manipulated in order to induce political, military and/or economic concessions from a target state or states.” Andrew Geddes determined that migration is shaped not only by states’ foreign policy interests but also by changes in states’ domestic politics.

Type
Critical Review
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 81 , Issue 3 , Fall 2022 , pp. 745 - 752
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Weiner, Myron, “On International Migration and International Relations,” Population and Development Review 11, no. 3 (September 1985): 441–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at: https://doi.org/10.2307/1973247.

2. Castles, Stephen, Miller, Mark J., and Giuseppe, Ammendola, The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World (New York, 2003)Google Scholar.

3. Andrew Geddes, Migration as Foreign Policy? The External Dimension of EU Action on Migration and Asylum, Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies, no. 2 (Stockholm, 2009), at: http://cpdoc.fgv.br/sites/default/files/AndrewGeddes.pdf; Christopher Mitchell, “International Migration, International Relations and Foreign Policy,” International Migration Review 23, no. 3, Special Silver Anniversary Issue: International Migration an Assessment for the 90s (Autumn 1989): 681–708.

4. Greenhill, Kelly M., Weapons of Mass Migration: Forced Displacement, Coercion, and Foreign Policy (Ithaca, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5. Geddes, Migration as Foreign Policy?; Teitelbaum, Michael S., “Immigration, Refugees and Foreign Policy,” International Organization 38, no. 3 (Summer 1984): 429–50CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

6. Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. Statistics. Press-release. January 2022.

7. Levada Center, “Monitoring of Xenophobic Sentences” (Monitoring ksenofobnukh nastroenii), 2019, at https://www.levada.ru/2019/09/18/monitoring-ksenofobskih-nastroenij-2/ (accessed November 2, 2022).

8. Zakharov, Nikolay, Race and Racism in Russia: Mapping Global Racisms (Houndsmills, Eng.: 2015), 119CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9. César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández, “Crimigration Law,” AMER BAR ASSN (2017); Desiree Lim, “Low-Skilled Migrants and the Historical Reproduction of Immigration Injustice,” Ethical Theory Moral Practice 24, no 5 (October 2021): 1229–44. doi: 10.1007/s10677–021–10240–1.

10. Schenk, Caress, Why Control Immigration? Strategic Uses of Migration Management in Russia (Toronto, 2018), 56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11. Round, John and Kuznetsova, Irina, “Necropolitics and the Migrant as a Political Subject of Disgust: The Precarious Everyday of Russia’s Labour Migrants,” Critical Sociology 42, no. 7–8 (November 2016): 1017–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12. Light, Mathew, Fragile Migration Rights: Freedom of Movement in Post-Soviet Russia (Abingdon, Oxon, Eng.; 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gulina, Olga and Utyasheva, Leah, “People Last: Lessons from Regulation of Migration in Russia and Tajikistan,” Public Administration Issue No. 5 (2016): 92–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kubal, Agnieszka, Immigration and Refugee Law in Russia: Socio-Legal Perspectives (Cambridge, Eng., 2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ekaterina Demintseva, Frederik Dag Arfst Paulsen, Alain Blum, Cecile Lefèvre, Françoise Daucé, and Michel Guillot, “Migrations et devenir démographique en Sibérie: Une approche à partir de cas régionaux” (Unpublished paper, 2018).

13. David Hollinger, quoted in Marco Martiniello, “Beyond Immigrant Integration Debates and Policies An EU Multicultural Citizenship?” in Marco Martiniello and Jan Rath, eds., An Introduction to Immigrant Incorporation Studies: European Perspectives (Amsterdam, 2014), 391–413.

14. Vertovec, Steven. “Super-diversity and its Implications,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 30, no. 6 (September 2007): 1024–54, online at doi:10.1080/01419870701599465 (accessed November 2, 2022).

15. Attila Juhász, Bulcsú Hunyadi, and Edit Zgut, Focus on Hungary: Refugees, Asylum and Migration (Prague, 2015), 46. Online at https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/2015-focus-on-hungary_refugees_asylum_migration.pdf (accessed November 2, 2022).

16. Umut Korkut, “Resentment and Reorganization: Anti-western Discourse and the Making of Eurasianism in Hungary,” Acta Slavica Iaponica 38 (2017): 71–90. Online at https://eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/84098/1/38_04_Korkut.pdf (accessed November 2, 2022).

17. Floris De Witte, “Kick off Contribution. Freedom of Movement under Attack: Is it worth Defending as the core of EU citizenship?” in Floris de Witte, Rainer Bauboeck, and Jo Shaw, eds., Freedom of Movement under Attack: Is it Worth Defending as the Core of EU citizenship? RSCAS 2016/69, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies EUDO Citizenship Observatory: 1–5, online at https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/44567/RSCAS_2016_69.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed November 2, 2022); Sarah Fine, “Whose Freedom of Movement is Worth Defending?” in de Witte, Bauboeck, and Shaw, Freedom of Movement under Attack, 21–23.

18. Castles, Miller, and Giuseppe, The Age of Migration; Joseph H. Carens, “Aliens and Citizens: The Case for Open Borders,” The Review of Politics 49, no. 2 (1987): 251–73, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1407506; David Miller, “Immigration: The Case for Limits,” in Andrew Cohen and Christopher Heath Wellman, eds., Contemporary Debates in Applied Ethics (Oxford: 2005), 191–206.

19. Catherine E. de Vries and Isabell Hoffmann, Border Protection and Freedom of Movement: What People Expect of European Asylum and Migration Policies. Bertelsmann Foundation, 2016/1, online at: https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/publications/publication/did/border-protection-and-freedom-of-movement.

20. Moritz Jesse, ed., “The Operation of Legal ‘Othering’ and the National-Foreigner Dichotomy in the EU,” European Societies, Migration, and the Law: The ‘Others’ amongst ‘Us’ (Cambridge, Eng., 2020), 105–210; Mehmet Ugur, “Freedom of Movement vs. Exclusion: A Reinterpretation of the ‘Insider’- ‘Outsider’ Divide in the European Union,” The International Migration Review 29, no. 4 (Winter 1995): 964–99, at https://doi.org/10.2307/2547734 (accessed November 2, 2022).

21. Michael D. Cooper, “European Migration and Asylum Law in Context,” in Migration and Disaster-Induced Displacement: European Policy, Practice, and Perspective (Center for Global Development, 2012), 7, online at http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep29716 (accessed November 2, 2022.

22. Iris Goldner Lang, “The European Union and Migration: an Interplay of National, regional, and international law.” AJIL Unbound 111 (2017): 509–13, at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27003793.Mitchell, Christopher. “International Migration, International Relations and Foreign Policy,” The International Migration Review 23, no. 3 (1989): 681–708, at https://doi.org/10.2307/2546435.

23. Cecilia Bruzelius, “Freedom of Movement, Social Rights and Residence-Based Conditionality in the European Union,” Journal of European Social Policy 29, no. 1 (February 2019): 70–83, at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928718756262.

24. Katri Gadd, Viljam Engström, Barbara Grabowska-Moroz, “Democratic Legitimacy in EU Migration Policies,” in Reconnect: Reconciling Europe with its Citizens through Democracy and Rule of Law. European Commission Working Package. 2020, online at https://reconnect-europe.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/D13.1.pdf (accessed November 2, 2022).

25. Christopher Hare, James E. Monogan, “The Democratic Deficit on Salient Issues: Immigration and Healthcare in the States,” Journal of Public Policy 40, no. 1 (March 2020): 116–43, doi:10.1017/S0143814X18000296 (accessed November 2, 2022).