Figure - available via license: CC BY-NC-ND
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Analyzing Poland’s current activity regarding the influx of refugees and the formulated attitude towards action in the field of restriction and control of the influx undertaken by European and international institutions, one should notice increasing reluctance to accept immigrants. What is more, there is a growing trend in the public debate in Pola...
Citations
... 87 In this context, it also should be noted that securitisation increased society's interest in this problem, which under the influence of the nature of the political debate was becoming more and more critical and unwilling to accept refugees, particularly if they come from countries with different traditions, cultures and religions. 88 Immigration was an attractive topic for the right-wing populist parties as it allowed them to construct more easily the opposition between the "people" and the "elites". In this narrative, the elites were represented by the domestic governments (only when right-wing parties were in the opposition) and the EU that attempted to reengineer the Christian and national fabric of Europe in order to construct a new type of multicultural polity. ...
One of the major conflicts between populist and non-populist forces (movements, parties, governments) as well as the European Union (EU) institutions has manifested in the area of immigration policy. This article investigates how the influx of migrants in 2015-2016 was subsequently used by populists as a policy conflict ground within the EU. In this context, it particularly looks at how the problem of migration was framed and map the policy responses in the selected EU Member States. The article covers the 2015-2018 period and includes the following countries: France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Hungary, and Poland.
The article observes that the 2015-2016 migration crisis and the response to it led to (or reinvigorated existing) politicisation of the topic across the EU, forcing the parties
from all sides of the political spectrum to take a position on it. Simultaneously, one may also observe a process of securitisation of migration in the political debate in all analysed countries. Irregular migration was construed as a security threat by many political parties and leaders, requiring emergency measures and justifying actions outside the normal bounds of political and legal procedures. While the securitisation strategy was most visible in the discourse of the right-wing populist parties, its elements were progressively taken by the mainstream parties, arguably in response to increased salience of the issue.
The article also finds a correlation between the ideological profile of the parties and their approach to the migration crisis and the proposed EU response. All the parties
located close to the right extreme tended to take a strong anti-immigration and anti-EU stance. All of them also ranked high in the populist index. On the other hand, the populist parties located on the left side or in the centre of the political spectrum took a moderate stance on this issue.
... Many scholars (Gruszczak, 2022;Grześkowiak, 2022;Podgórzańska, 2019) and journalists (Higgins, 2022;Morris & Dixon, 2021;Reuters Staff, 2020) contend that the reasons behind Poland's reticence to cooperate with the European Commission on a more evenly distributed migration policy centers on the commonly held perception that migrants pose significant risks to the preservation of Polish identity and culture. Another possible reason for the nation's hesitation is the simple fact that the country does not have extensive experience in absorbing large numbers of immigrants from different cultures. ...
This article explores the paradox of a globalized cooperative world that appears conducive to openness, yet simultaneously witnesses the proliferation of closed borders, physical barriers, and increased border militarization. The objective is to research, analyze, and categorize the various types of border militarization, offering both theoretical and practical perspectives. We propose new definitions for border militarization to encompass its diverse expressions, ranging from overt to subtle forms. This study focuses on border militarization within Europe, specifically in peripheral countries on the outer fringes of the European Union’s Schengen regime, employing a comparative case study methodology. It provides in-depth insights into two similar cases and practical militarization following the 2015-2016 European migration crisis in Croatia and Poland. While the research has limitations, including its eurocentric focus and limited generalizability, the conclusions shed light on post-migration crisis long-term effects in Europe and the growing phenomenon of subtle and covert border militarization.
... The government's actions and constant emphasis on citizens' security as an essential value (Podgórzańska 2019) were symbolically supported by the Sejm of the Republic of Poland. On April 1 2016, the Sejm adopted a resolution on Poland's immigration policy opposing "any attempts of establishing permanent mechanisms of allocating refugees or immigrants in the EU". ...
The migration policies of the V4 countries present many similarities that seem to be the effect of congruent historical and economic determinants. During the migration crisis in 2015-2016, the Visegrad states partially coordinated their political communication using the same communication panels, which strongly impacted domestic political relations. The V4's approach was a refusal of the open-door policy promoted by Germany and Sweden, and the European Union. Our main findings are that the migration crisis strengthened the cohesion among V4 countries, although the source of this cohesion was clearly a populistic stance toward the possible implications of uncontrolled migration (migrants and refugees). This communication style and the resulting political tensions were reflected in the V4 states' resentment based on a sense of shared historical experiences rooted in Central European location and shared experience of the repercussions of communism. In this sense, a strong commitment to the idea of a sovereign nation-state, and a reluctance towards postmodern values are also important factors. This study charts the changes in V4 migration policy since 2015, highlighting the crucial developments in V4 countries' negotiations with the European Union. It also deals with the foreign and domestic effects of the migration crisis and the V4 states' discourse of migration, which was complemented by a debate on the future of the EU that became especially important in Hungary and Poland.
Sandro Tabatadze, Salome Dundua: Social Science Knowledge Commercialization: The Case Study of Social Sciences at Tbilisi State University
Hannes Nagel: Factors Influencing Local Governments’ COVID-19 Crisis Decision
Making: Case Study of the First Wave in the Two Estonian Municipalities
Oleksii A. Chugaiev: The European Union’s Soft Economic Power Assessment: A Comparative Analysis
István Miklós Balázs: The Hungarian October Party against the Round Table Talks:
Comparison with the Contemporary Critics of the Polish Transition
Marta Bainka: The Catalan Artists’ Involvement in the Pro-independence Movement
Piotr Zalewski: Działania administracji państwowej w Polsce wobec uchodźców
z Ukrainy w pierwszych tygodniach wojny w Ukrainie 2022 roku. Aspekty prawne
i securitologiczne
The attack of the Russian Federation’s troops
on Ukraine, which took place on February
24, 2022, led to the outbreak of a war, which
caused civilians to flee their homes and leave
their country in search of safety, protection
and humanitarian aid. In the first week of the
war, over a million refugees from Ukraine,
mainly women with children and the elderly,
crossed Ukraine’s border with its neighbor
countries; a large group of the refugees ar‑
rived in Poland. Piotr Zalewski’s aim in this
article is to review the main legislative and
organizational activities undertaken by the
Polish government and the local government administration in terms of providing insti�tutional assistance and protection for the
refugees. Zalewski also discusses the activi‑
ties of the uniformed services, which has
consisted in identifying risks and threats and
ensuring the personal safety of Ukrainian
refugees.
Wprowadzenie stanu wyjątkowego na części terytorium Polski było związane z kryzysem na granicy Polski z Białorusią. Kryzys był związany z licznymi grupami migrantów, które chciałby przedostać się do strefy Schengen z Białorusi. Reakcja władz RP była związana z koniecznością obrony granicy Polski, która była zarazem granicą Unii Europejskiej. W celu skutecznej ochrony granicy podjęto decyzję o budowie zapory oddzielającej Polskę i Białoruś.
One of the major conflicts between populist and non-populist forces (movements, parties, governments) as well as the European Union (EU) institutions is manifested in the area of EU immigration policy. This working paper discusses how the influx of migrants (mostly from the Middle East and North Africa region) into the EU has been used as a policy conflict ground within the EU. In this context, the paper assesses the policy responses in the selected EU Member States and analyses the challenges in implementation of the common EU policies. The paper covers the period from 2015 to 2018 and includes the following countries: France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland and Slovakia.
The paper concludes that the 2015 migration crisis and the response to it led to (or reinvigorated existing) the politicisation of the topic across the EU, forcing the parties from all sides of the political spectrum to take a position on it. Simultaneously, one may also observe a process of securitisation of migration in the political debate in all analysed countries. Irregular migration was construed as a security threat by many political parties and leaders, ‘requiring emergency measures and justifying actions outside the normal bounds of political procedure’. While the securitisation strategy was most visible in the discourse of the right-wing populist parties, its elements were progressively taken by the mainstream parties, arguably in response to increased salience of the issue.
The paper also finds a correlation between the ideological profile of the parties and their approach to the migration crisis and the proposed EU response. All the parties located close to the right extreme tended to take a strong anti-immigration and anti-EU stance. All of them also ranked high in the populist index. On the other hand, the populist parties located on the left side or in the centre of the political spectrum took a moderate stance on this issue.
This paper examines developments in Poland following the 2015 elections and in Hungary since 2010, which included the gradual destruction of democratic institutions, challenges to the rule of law, as well as to the system of checks and balances. The authors consider the Ziblatt–Levitsky model (2018) as a meaningful framework for the analysis of the way in which the power structure was reshaped and have based their research on the classification set out in this model. Our objective is to present the political changes that took place in the two Central-Eastern-European countries during the last decade that resulted in the process under Article 7 being used for the first time in the history of the EU. The paper conclusion is that the path of de-democratization of Hungary and Poland is seen from the perspective of the EU and Council of Europe, as similar one. In actions taken toward both countries, the EU concerns mostly the principle of the rule of law.
