Secure Borders, Safe Haven: A contradiction in terms?
Secure Borders, Safe Haven: A contradiction in terms?
复制标题
安全边界、避风港：术语自相矛盾？
DOI：
10.1080/0141987042000337830
复制
发表时间：
2005
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Rosemary A. Sales
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rosemary A. Sales
本文讨论了英国政府的《移民安全边界白皮书》，《安全港》，2002年。这声称是一种“现代移民方式”，但有人认为，与新移民相比，它包含了更多与过去的延续。该条侧重于纳入，认为被纳入是为那些被认为“值得”的人保留的--凭借他们的技能或能力来满足难民身份的严格标准--而建议对“服务不足”的人进行更严格的排斥。排斥问题涉及三个层面：第一，对抵达英国的寻求庇护者实行惩罚性政策对找到“安全避难所”的可能性的影响；第二，“安全边界”和伴随的威胁言论对寻求庇护者和其他被视为“其他人”的人的安全的影响；第三，入境管制制度所固有的更广泛的排斥，这使得一些人能够到达“安全避难所”，而另一些人则被排除在外。
This article discusses the British government's White Paper on immigration Secure Borders, Safe Haven, 2002. This claims to be a “modern approach” to immigration, but it is argued it contains more continuities with the past than new departures. The article focuses on inclusion, arguing that inclusion is reserved for those deemed “deserving” – by virtue of their skills or ability to meet strict criteria for refugee status – while more rigid exclusion is proposed for the “underserving”. Exclusion is addressed at three levels: firstly the impact of punitive policies towards asylum-seekers on arrival in Britain on the possibility of finding a “safe haven”; secondly, the impact of “secure borders” and accompanying discourses of threat on the safety of asylum-seekers and others perceived as “other”; thirdly, the broader exclusions inherent in a system of entry controls, which allow some to reach a “safe haven” while excluding others.