...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Refugee Survey Quarterly >Refugees, Europe, Camps/State of Exception: “Into The Zone”, the European Union and Extraterritorial Processing of Migrants, Refugees, and Asylum-seekers (Theories and Practice)
【24h】

Refugees, Europe, Camps/State of Exception: “Into The Zone”, the European Union and Extraterritorial Processing of Migrants, Refugees, and Asylum-seekers (Theories and Practice)

机译：欧洲的难民，营地/例外状况：“进入该地区”，欧洲联盟以及移民，难民和寻求庇护者的域外处理（理论和实践）

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This article outlines the debate over extraterritorial processing in the European Union (EU) from the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997) to the Treaty of Lisbon (2009). It will briefly outline the historical precedents, the evolution of policy within the EU, and the role of other models (Australian, American, etc.). This article emphasizes the contested understandings of how these zones might be manifested in practice. It uses evidence from the political history and policy-making of the EU to question Giorgio Agamben’s concept of the state of exception. In fact, the promotion of extraterritorial zones was not merely sold as necessary, if unfortunate, choices. Likewise, the more sinister interpretation of these zones as a regression from the Liberal State to the universe of camps failed accurately to capture what was happening in reality. Firstly, supranational extraterritorial processing was beyond the constitutional or political capacity of the EU. Secondly, at times, the unintended consequences might have led to a liberalization of so-called “Fortress Europe” and caused certain politicians to become disenchanted precisely because the proposed form of extraterritorial processing threatened to institute a rigorous form of burden sharing.
机译：本文概述了从《阿姆斯特丹条约》（1997年）到《里斯本条约》（2009年）对欧盟（EU）域外处理的辩论。它将简要概述历史先例，欧盟内部政策的演变以及其他模式（澳大利亚，美国等）的作用。本文强调了关于如何在实践中体现这些区域的有争议的理解。它使用来自欧盟政治历史和政策制定的证据来质疑乔治·阿甘本的例外状态概念。实际上，不仅在必要时出售了域外保护区，如果不幸的话，还有选择权。同样，对这些地区的更险恶的解释是从自由国到营地的倒退，无法准确地捕捉到现实中发生的事情。首先，超国家域外处理超出了欧盟的宪法或政治能力。其次，有时，意想不到的后果可能导致所谓的“欧洲堡垒”的自由化，并导致某些政治家变得迷惑不解，这恰恰是因为拟议的域外处理形式威胁要建立严格的分担形式。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Refugee Survey Quarterly》 |2010年第1期|p.92-119|共28页
  • 作者

    Carl Levy;

  • 作者单位

    * Dr. Carl Levy is a Reader in European Politics in the Department of Politics at Goldsmiths College, University of London.;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号