| Summary/Abstract |
For the past few decades, the increased perception of migration as an issue in Europe resulted in the development of the externalisation of the EU’s migration governance to third countries. EU-Turkey and EU-Libya cooperation frameworks on migration have in this perspective been established in the wake of the 2015 migration crisis and triggered major controversies. The agreements received fierce contestation from non-governmental and international actors, highlighting the poor protection of human rights through this management. This paper analyses the dynamics of politicisation of EU-Turkey and EU-Libya agreements on migration in domestic political discourse. A qualitative comparison between German, French and Polish parliamentary debates constitutes the main empirical basis of this research. The analysis focuses on the different patterns of politicisation with emphasis on contesting arguments. This paper examines members of parliaments’ stances on EU-Turkey and EU-Libya cooperation focusing on humanitarian and securitisation frames. Results demonstrate an uneven process of politicisation in national parliaments dependent on the robustness of parliamentary majority and political parties’ issue positions. Overall, the analysis of discourse on the two agreements clearly illustrates the prioritisation of security over human rights when it comes to migration management.
|