| Summary/Abstract |
Border walls are often seen as preferable options to improve security by providing strong barriers against the movement of people. Although these barriers are never absolute and remain porous, they are still appealing, which raises the question about who benefits when border walls are introduced. This article questions whether and for whom border walls work by focusing on the new Turkish-Syrian border wall in Hatay. Through an ethnographic investigation of border politics and the effects of increasing surveillance on residents of the border, it examines the socio-economic and political impact of the wall on local life. Second, it shows how the wall has led to a significant increase in migrant smuggling, which indicates improvements in security in one policy area may lead to a worsening situation in others. It concludes that the wall reinforces the state’s claim of sovereignty but fails to be an effective security measure for border residents or refugees.
|