Retrieved #3 Gender & Migration Policy

0:00:06
“Rescuers are continuing the search of the coast of Greece for victims of a boat that has claimed the lives of at least 79 migrants”. “European Union Interior Ministers have agreed to tighten the bloc's asylum policies. The decision comes after what was seen as a make-or-break meeting for the bloc to solve its migration policy conundrum”.

0:00:32
Christina: In 2022, more people fled to the European Union in the span of a few days than in 2015 and 2016 combined. But what kind of standards do we have in Europe where migration is concerned?

George: And what about the gender impacts of our migration policy? What are the latest developments in the framework of migration handling in Europe, and why are they concerning?

Christina: I'm Christina.

George: And I'm George, and we're journalists and producers at the Greek Podcast Project. 

Christina: And this is ‘Retrieved’, the podcast that shines a light onto the new chapter of foreign policy, taking it out of its dusty past and into a fairer future. George, who are we speaking with today?

0:01:13
George: Today we're speaking with Neda Noraie-Kia, Head of Migration Policy at the Heinrich Böll Foundation. Before that she was a researcher and Head of Office for the Spokesperson of Migration Policy of the Green Group and the German Federal Parliament.

Christina: I think she's more than equipped to answer all of our questions.

George: I think you'd be correct in assuming that, Christina. Should we jump right in?

Christina: Let's do it.

0:01:44
Hi, Neda. Welcome to the show.

Neda: Hi. Hello. Thanks for having me.

Christina: In the introduction, we've spoken a little bit about your background, but can we start by going into why you decided to work in migration policy?

Neda: Sure. I never really decided to work in migration, but I always had this strong interest for human rights. I studied Development Policy and Peace and Conflict and worked in the Middle East for some years. And when I got back to Berlin in 2015, I started working in the parliament and I was lucky to be able to start working on migration, which was quite a decisive time in Europe to do that. So I was working on European migration policies for some years and then I had the chance to come to Greece and continue working on these issues, but from a place which is quite relevant within the EU.

0:02:42
George: And I suppose was that the decision to come to a place that was kind of at the front line I guess or, as you said, “more relevant”.

Neda: Definitely.

George: Okay we just want to jump straight in I guess and ask the big question which is: Do we need a feminist migration policy and if we do why? Isn't a feminist migration policy already covered by a feminist foreign policy?

Neda: I think often we see migration policies more as a domestic policy field, you know, when it comes to integration, asylum, but there is a clear external dimension to it. And I don't think we are seeing this external dimension and the potential maybe feminist foreign policy would have there.

Christina: Can you talk a little bit about, more practically, what a feminist migration policy would look like and why it's necessary under the status quo?

0:03:41
Neda: Sure, if we take one of the main aspects, for instance, a feminist foreign policy doesn't look at state security, but looks at individuals, right? So the idea is to look at every individual in a state, looking at their security needs, including all the different needs that are there in a state. So I think we are currently not seeing this happening in our migration policy at all. 

We very much focus on borders and border security rather than looking at people's security

Like we very much look at states, we very much focus on borders and border security rather than looking at people's security. So this would be an area to really focus on. And we often see a very stereotyping perspective towards genders. So if we really apply a feminist concept, you know, we would have a more holistic, comprehensive understanding of gender, right? Like, we would – I'd wish for an intersectional perspective to a person in need of protection to a migrant. I think there would be a huge potential for better policies.

0:04:53
Christina: But to craft those better policies, we also need information. Is there any gender or sex-disaggregated data available when it comes to migration? And what does this data tell us?

The right to unity of a family is much more likely to be disrespected for an LGBTIQ family

Neda: There's barely sex-aggregated data and almost no gender-aggregated data, right? Like looking at gender identities beyond the women and men kind of framework, right? So LGBTI are usually not seen. And obviously they are more affected by the current policies. For instance, the right to unity of a family is much more likely to be disrespected for an LGBTIQ family, right? Just as an example. I mean, we can think of many different aspects, how this plays out in reality, but no, we don't have the data we would need to answer your question.

0:05:50
Christina: Can you tell us a little bit about, perhaps, the initiatives around data gathering that exist in Europe right now where migration is concerned?

Neda: If we really take this serious, the question of what do we mean by a ‘feminist approach’, right? Then we would have to start with who is actually talking about people on the move? Is it people themselves? Is it others that define who migrants are and their rights, etc? There is a part of academia that is looking into feminist migration policy in particular, but it's not so much yet in the policy field. It's more a niche, I would say.

0:06:41
George: And what would you say right now are the main challenges when it comes to migration policy? And what about the externalizing of handling of migration, for instance? Does that have a gendered impact as well?

Neda: We tend to forget that we had the numbers recently, right? The new, newest, latest numbers by the UNHCR. And I feel like every year we see more people globally being displaced and a very small number of those actually really come to, or even try to come to, to Europe. But still there is this focus on preventing irregular migration especially, right? And there are different ways to do that. Like one could look into root causes, obviously creating safe and legal pathways to protection is one way to go. And there you had a chance to re-identify vulnerabilities. So if you have someone who is particularly vulnerable due to gender violence in her or his home country, this is something that could potentially be seen and acted upon. But the way we see externalization play out now is basically having safe third countries that are, you know, supported, paid money to host people rather than having people come to Europe. And we see this with the EU-Turkey agreement and obviously Turkey is not a safe third country for Syrians for instance or Afghan people and less so from a feminist perspective.

0:08:16
George: And is it happening now with, is it Tunisia now, with the recent developments?

Christina: And just quickly Neda, can you define for those that don't know what qualify as ‘safe countries’?

Neda: Sure, so there is this concept of safe third country. So a country where a person might have traveled through or have left in order to arrive in Europe might be seen as a safe third country. It's not the country of origin for the person. But in the case of Turkey, for instance, Turkey currently, under Greek law, Turkey is seen as a safe third country for people coming from Syria, Afghanistan, and three other countries. So that doesn't mean that people come from Turkey, but they have been in Turkey prior to coming to Greece. This has implications, of course, for the country, of course, the so-called ‘safe country’, but also for people on the move. For instance, in the case of Turkey, Turkey only signed the Geneva Convention with a geographical restriction.

0:09:34
So people from five countries are not eligible to protection under the Geneva Convention, but Syrians have a special status and this status is quite volatile and we've seen a shift in the public discourse on how refugees in the country are to be seen and to be treated and there have been calls for deportations of Syrians. Actually in the electoral campaign, this really was an issue. And if Turkey would really deport Syrians or Afghan nationals, obviously this has huge impact on the people. And obviously, no feminist approach is being respected here with regard to people's vulnerabilities and gender at all.

0:10:24
Christina: Just to clarify, you said that they signed, Turkey signed the Geneva Convention, but exempting the protection of certain nationalities?

0:10:31
Neda: The Geneva Convention in Turkey only is applicable for Europeans. So none of the people at stake actually profit from this ratification indeed.

Christina: Wow. Okay. I didn't know that.

0:11:02
Can we jump into standards where migration policy is concerned and speak specifically about Europe? Are there any effective control mechanisms when it comes to abiding by standards, especially at the EU borders? And why are standards important?

Neda: Yeah, I mean, we do have standards, of course. And since we are in a process of reforming the common European Asylum System for so many years now, I feel like we sometimes tend to forget that we do have a common law already. It's not that we are creating this from scratch. There is the obligation, for instance, to allow people to enter a country in order to seek asylum. There are clear rules for how border protection should be. And this is already existing EU law, I think we tend to forget that because this law is being violated so structurally. But in fact, the EU Commission, for instance, would be the body to start infringement procedures. And in fact, our partners and many civil society organizations are asking for such infringement procedures for a long time now. We don't see this happening unfortunately. So I think it's not a matter of system, it's more a matter of political will, actually.

0:12:34
George: I guess what you're saying is the control mechanisms are in place but if we don't abide by them then they won't be effective. So to what extent do you think sound migration policy is dependent on political will?

Neda: Probably like every other policy field, we have the norms and the rules, and we also need the application of these norms and rules. And to be honest, I think it's quite interesting because we have this tendency to present ourselves in Europe as value-driven, and we have this high standard of norms. And even sometimes countries in the Global South would speak of a normative superiority that we claim to have. Against this backdrop, it's even more hypocritical to have the kind of migration policies as we are seeing them now.

Christina: At this point, we'd like to talk about the recent developments in regards to the justice and home affairs configuration of the Council, which for those that don't know, is a council made up of Justice and Home Affairs Ministers from all the EU member states. How are these developments changing the framework for migration in Europe?

0:13:53
Neda: What was at stake in this meeting was the reform of the common European Asylum System, right? And we have a proposal from the EU Commission, the so-called ‘New Pact on Migration’. And this has been on the table for, I think, two or three years by now. It was in late 2020. We have a very nice study actually. So “Intersectionality, refugee women and the EU Pact”, I think it's the title of the study. And it really shows how the pact is not taking into account vulnerabilities, that there is very little understanding of what ‘vulnerable’ from a feminist perspective means. 

What the member states agreed on is mainly going into the wrong direction, putting more emphasis on border procedures and actually exposing more people on the move to detention

And then we had this meeting where the member states agreed on how the reform should actually look like from their perspective. What the member states agreed on is mainly going into the wrong direction, putting more emphasis on border procedures and actually exposing more people on the move to detention. And we recently supported a conference on immigration detention in the European Union and really there also learned a lot about how people in immigration detention are stripped of their rights on various levels right now in the EU and unfortunately I must say what we see being discussed in this council meeting you're referring to, is actually recreating this reality that we are already seeing being in place in a more structural manner and going really into the wrong direction.

0:15:36
George: Are there any specific like gendered impacts of these like recent developments? Are there ways that we can sort of project what that would mean for more vulnerable people potentially?

Neda: Absolutely. I mean, the latest proposal would put more emphasis on where people come from in terms of countries. So the question would then be: Is someone coming from a country with a high acceptance rate, in terms of asylum. So if a person that is seeking protection because this person's rights as an LGBTIQ+ person is under threat in the home country, but the home country doesn't have a high acceptance rate for asylum seekers by statistic, right? This person would undergo a fast procedure at the EU's borders and chances for this person to really prove his or her vulnerability would be really low. And we already see LGBTI people, for instance, being more vulnerable, also along the migratory routes being more likely to be exposed to violence and obviously such a reform would create much more harm and mistreat people, much more than we are already seeing it happen at the borders.

We already see LGBTI people, for instance, being more vulnerable, also along the migratory routes

0:17:22
George: I think, as you've said, we're not in a very good place and also the recent talks haven't really given us a positive outlook on it. But I know that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Germany, they've recently released a set of practical guidelines for a feminist foreign policy. To what extent are those guidelines helpful when it comes to looking at migration policy?

Neda: I must say I find it quite surprising that migration is not really mentioned in these guidelines. I must also say the Foreign Ministries guidelines were published in parallel to the Development Ministries guidelines. So both were presented together and has to really also be seen together, I must say. So, their migration is mentioned in the Foreign Ministry's guidelines. It's only mentioned once in the framework of the Khartoum Process. It's a process along the migration route between the Horn of Africa and the EU, and it aims to kind of manage migration in that area and there, the Foreign Ministry mentions climate change, women's and girls' needs for protection in particular. I think this is really not enough. I very much like that the German guidelines, for instance, mention decolonialism. Decolonialism is really relevant and really important to look into. And I think we also really have to ask ourselves what led to the development of the international system as we know it. I think there is a lot of potential in the feminist approaches that are there, I just don't see it being presented within the guidelines.

0:19:06
George: I just want to pick you up on the decolonialism that you mentioned just then, what would they recommend in terms of policy?

When we look at forced migration from a European perspective, it's really important to ask about our own role

Neda: I mean, acknowledging colonial paths and trajectories when we look at migration as a whole, right, the phenomenon of migration and also when we look at forced migration from a European perspective, it's really important to ask about our own role, right? How did European countries actually, how do they perpetuate drivers of migration until today? I think this is something that we cannot close our eyes to or cannot ignore.

0:19:49
Christina: And just to speak a little more on feminist foreign policy: do you think that it's part of the solution for a better migration policy overall? What does a feminist foreign policy have to offer migration policy?

Neda: I think a lot. I think we also have to be careful not to overburden the concept, maybe. You know, there's no one size solution. It's not an easy way out of all dilemmas we're facing currently, right? But I think if we take the idea of feminism serious, we really have this comprehensive understanding of gender. We really want to look how different aspects intersect, right? We really want to take age, race, ability, all these aspects. We really want to take them serious and focus on the individual. I think there is a lot of potential for better migration policies here, without a doubt. I'm sure. And at the same time, I'm happy to see more states committing to a feminist foreign policy. I wouldn't say that, you know, just the fact that they don't speak about migration at the same time disqualifies their feminist foreign policies. But I think migration is a policy field that should just be added to the conversation and we should highlight really the particularity of this policy field. And yeah, I think there is huge potential for a feminist approach to really help us create better migration policies for sure.

0:21:30
George: Would you say that feminist migration policy then is about gradual process of change and small victories and sort of attrition, or would you say it's kind of more of a take-it-or-leave-it dilemma, like an all-or-nothing solution?

Neda: I think it's both, maybe. I would wish for the big questions to be asked and to be aimed for the structural change, but at the same time, I think we have to be realistic and bring upon improvements for people on the move wherever we can, because the current state really isn't great. We have to really do both. We have to bring upon improvements no matter how small, we have to seek improvements wherever possible. And at the same time, we still have to ask for bigger changes and for the greater picture to be looked at. Does that make sense?

0:22:32
Christina: Yeah, it does.

George: I think that's a great place to finish it. Christina, is there anything you'd like to add? 

Christina: No, no, no. Thank you for all of your insight, Neda. This was, I wouldn't say a wonderful conversation because I feel like we're talking about a lot of things that are quite upsetting, but thank you for letting us in on all of your knowledge and thoughts.

George: Yeah, thank you so much, Neda. That was a really interesting conversation.

Neda: Thank you.

0:23:04
George: So that was our chat with Neda Noraie-Kia. And although it wasn't necessarily the most positive of conversations, it was very important and also pretty interesting to find out what recent developments mean and how feminist foreign policy might change those developments.

Christina: Yeah, I think it's quite necessary to hear a critical point of view on the changes that Europe is making in relation to its migration policy, because I think we tend to put Europe on a pedestal quite often.

George: In the next episode, we speak with EURACTIV editor-in-chief Lucia Yar about how feminist foreign policy has developed as a concept both in academia and in policy-making. Stay tuned.

0:23:51
Christina: This podcast series is produced by the Greek Podcast Project and supported by the Thessaloniki office of the Heinrich Böll Foundation, distributed under a Creative Commons NonCommercial-ShareAlike license.