594 Revista del Instituto Español de Estudios Estratégicos Núm. 2 / 2013 To sum up this conceptual analysis, all these related meanings share the view that there is a strong link between the externalisation of policies and an orientation towards managing migratory flows. In the end, what the externalisation policy seeks is to reduce flows and/or control them. From this basis, some basic inter-related premises can be established: a) Inside/outside territory is no longer a frame of reference for policy-making, since there is a growing trend to go beyond these traditional limits in drawing up new policies related to immigration (a fact pointed out by D. Bigo18). There is a link, then, between external and internal policies. In other words, an external practice has the aim of provoking internal effects.19 b) It thus follows that there is a shared understanding of the state’s obligations engaged by a territorial nexus.20 c) Perhaps the best expression to capture the meaning of “externalisation of policy” is “policy at a distance”, or “remote policy”.21 That is, policies implemented in the sending country, yet which seek to impact on the receiving country’s internal dynamics. It follows, then, that the search for policy solutions with the domestic territory is less motivated by the search for innovative solutions than by the internal need for security and stability. d) The notion of inter-dependence explains why a state/the EU chooses to engage in external action, and hence bind third countries to the fulfilment of its internal policy goals.22 This externalisation is primarily conditioned by the construction of a “security community” in a geopolitical context. If we take the European Member States and the European Union as a territorial framework of reference, this would mean having the main aim of ensuring the area of 18 BIGO, Didier, “The Möbius ribbon of internal and external security (ies)”, in M. Albert, M., Jacobson, D., and Y. Lapid (eds.) Identities, Borders, Orders: Rethinking International Relations Theory, London, University of Minneapolis Press, 2001. 19 It is not so much seen as the “external effect” of internal policy (LAVENEX, Sandra and UÇARER, Emek, “The External Dimension of Europeanization: The Case of Immigration Policies”, Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 39, no. 4, 2004, pp. 417-443.), but rather, as the “internal effect” of external action in relation to migration policy. 20 GIL-BAZO, María-Teresa, “The Practice of Mediterranean States in the Context of the European Union’s Justice and Home Affairs External Dimension. The Safe Third Country Concept Revisited”, International Journal of Refugee Law, vol. 18, no. 3-4, 2006, p.593. 21 This term was taken from BIGO, Didier and GUILD, Elpeth, “Policing at distance: Schengen visa policies”, in (eds.) Controlling Frontiers. Free Movement into and within Europe. Hants (England), Burlington (USA), Ashgate, 2005, pp. 233-263. 22 LAVENEX, Sandra, “EU External Governance in Wider Europe”, Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 11, no. 4, 2004, pp. 681.
REVISTA IEEE 2
To see the actual publication please follow the link above