THE USA JOURNALS
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY (ISSN- 2693-0803)
VOLUME 06 ISSUE10
49
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
PUBLISHED DATE: - 20-10-2024
DOI: -
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume06Issue10-07
PAGE NO.: - 49-52
THE MIGRATION FACTOR IN MODERN
POLITICAL SCIENCE: SECURITIZATION OF
MIGRATION
D. Muydinov
Doctor of philosophy (PhD) in political sciences, associate professor,
Uzbekistan
INTRODUCTION
Political theory studies and investigates political
processes in connection with various socio-
economic events and changes in society. Migration,
which has a history as long as the history of
mankind, has been scientifically studied since the
last century. This was caused by the influence of
migration on socio-economic and demographic
changes in society, on political processes. Thus, the
problem of migration entered political science. The
entry of migration into political science was
connected with its politicization. The politicization
of migration was signaled by French politician and
opposition leader Le Pen’s (father of Marine Le
Pen) claim in the 1970s that “two million (African)
immigrants are the cause of two million French
unemployment.” [1] Of course, at that time,
migration was not yet considered a “threat” and,
therefore, was not securitized. However, the
introduction of migration into political processes
has become the center of debate, where its causes
and consequences in not only socio-economic, but
also cultural, political, environmental and security
fields are widely studied.
Concept and essence of migration
It is known that migration is divided into internal
and external. Migration within a country is internal
migration, while inter-state migration is external
migration. External migration is also known as
international migration. There are many
definitions of migration, but scholars define
international migration as a person or a group of
people leaving their country for a period of at least
12 months to study, work, or live in another
country[2].
There are different views and theories about the
causes of migration. The first migration theory
(1885) was Ravenstein’s law, and later migration
theories increased. These include Stouffer’s theory
of intersecting opportunities, Lee’s push
-pull
theory, Petersen’s “Five types of migration” theory,
macro-micro theories of neoclassical economics,
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Open Access
Abstract
THE USA JOURNALS
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED SCIENCES (ISSN
–
2689-0992)
VOLUME 06 ISSUE06
50
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
world
systems
(center-periphery)
theory,
migration systems theory, network theory, the
theory of institutional and cumulative causes of
migration and others.
The above theories show that there is no way to
stop or prevent international migration today. This
means that migration has a great impact on
political processes globally. With globalization, the
rapid spread of goods and services, technology,
labor, and cultures has also ensured an increase in
international migration. This led to a change in the
political culture of states and societies and
increased its influence on political processes. In
particular, with the increase in the number of
immigrants, the formation of heterogeneous ethnic
groups, cultures and societies has become the
center of discussion in Europe and North America,
where there are many immigrants. This seems
right in one respect. Because, according to the data
of 2018, 4.561 billion in Asia. people live, and if only
2 percent of them are considered immigrants,
746.4 million people live in Europe. and 11.5
percent or 1 in 9 people are immigrants. 579
million in North America people live and 10
percent or one in 10 people are immigrants. With
this, we can understand the significant influence of
heterogeneous ethnic groups and cultural societies
in Europe and North America. Therefore, in Europe
and North America, immigration is becoming
politicized and in some cases securitized. As
Kostakopoulou points out, immigration policy is a
matter of high politics, that is, it is closely related to
national sovereignty and nationality[3].
The impact of migration on the political process
and political culture
As political scientists Almond and Verba wrote, in
societies with a “participant” and “civic” political
culture, as long as political activity is high, the issue
of migration will have an open discussion center.
The standard conclusion is that increased
immigration leads to discontent among local
populations, leading to increased support for anti-
immigration populist, far-right, and conservative
parties[4]. The results of scientific research
conducted by researchers A. Alesina and M.
Tabellini show that cultural forces (factors) are
more important than economic forces (factors) in
the causes of discontent of the local population. The
reason, according to the researchers, is that, firstly,
when immigrants differ from the local population
(ethnically, racially, culturally), resentment arises
more. Second, local residents’ opposit
ion to
immigration is largely influenced by stereotypes
and misconceptions. For example, local residents
view the immigrant population as excessive and
believe that immigrants are poor, poorly educated,
and culturally distant[5].
The influence of migration on the political process
and political culture during and within the
framework of globalization is studied through the
theory of polarization. The concept of polarization
is the main point of conflict between cultures
characterized by global mistrust. This theory
argues that cultural identity is a global distrust of
the clash of civilizations rather than tolerance in
political
cooperation.
Furthermore,
while
technological changes and the globalization of
information
increase
opportunities
for
intercultural communication and sharing of
experiences, it suggests that it can also be easily
used for conflicts such as hatred, ethno-
nationalism and racism[6].
The most famous and controversial example of this
theory is Samuel Huntington’s “The Clash of
Civilization
s”. According to Huntington, with the
end of the Cold War, the current situation in the
world may lead to cultural wars and even a “global
war of civilizations” due to cultural differences, not
political or economic[7].
From this point of view, Huntington divided the
world into nine civilizations. These civilizations
are: China, Japan, India, Buddhism, Islam,
Orthodoxy, Western Europe, North America, Latin
America. As noted, these civilizations differ sharply
from each other in many aspects, such as their
values, traditions and customs, social relations,
philosophical assumptions, and views on life.
According to Huntington, the history of mankind is
the history of civilizations. Based on this,
immigration is also described as a “fear” or “threat”
of a cultur
e that carries foreign cultures. Such “fear”
and “calls” that are sent to people’s subconscious
make them an object of securitization of migration.
Securitization of migration
THE USA JOURNALS
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED SCIENCES (ISSN
–
2689-0992)
VOLUME 06 ISSUE06
51
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The increase in migration with globalization
ensured that it became a factor of securitization.
The concept of securitization, which was
introduced to science for the first time (1995) by
the researcher Ole Waever, in contrast to
traditional concepts of security, proposes that
security problems and issues appear as a speech
act (speech act)[8]. More precisely, the theory of
securitization explains how and why a certain
problem of society becomes a security problem.
Any public issue can go from non-political (non-
politicized) to political (politicized) to security
(securitized)[9].
Securitization of any issue is not a positive trend,
rather it curtails democratic norms. For example, a
political leader’s statement that immigrants are a
threat to peaceful social life cannot be seen as a
mere assessment of the situation. According to the
theory of securitization, this expression means that
the presence of immigrants was transferred from
the non-politicized sphere to the political sphere
(politicized) and then to the security sphere
(securitized). As a result, radical measures such as
the police arrest of securitized immigrants as a
threat to social peace, their forced detention in
camps, or relocation (deportation) are legalized.
Because “safety is about survival” and anything
goes to ensure survival[10].
Securitization is more related to the concept of
social security in the context of migration. Social
security does not refer to the state, but to the
protection of social identity, individuals or
community units. These communities can be
nations, religious or ethnic communities[11].
Social s
ecurity is defined as “the preservation of
language, culture, religion, national identity,
customs and traditions” and “the ability of a society
to maintain its essence in the face of changing
conditions and despite existing or potential
threats” is descri
bed[12].
CONCLUSION
We can see that the impact of migration on political
processes is studied and researched within the
framework of political culture and political
socialization, within the framework of political
activity and political participation, within the
framework of changes such as polarization,
homogenization and hybridization of cultures
together with globalization. These studies prove
that in countries with a “participant” –
“civic”
political
culture,
immigrants
have
more
opportunities to be politically active and, at the
same time, have higher opportunities to influence
the political culture. This, in turn, leads to the
emergence of negative and positive perceptions
and scientific approaches about immigrants.
The Copenhagen school, which studied the theory
of migration securitization, proved that migration
has become one of the problems perceived as a
potential threat to social (community) identity and
caused migration to be expressed as a speech act by
politicians and mass media. At the same time, the
events of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent
terrorist attacks in Europe led to the actualization
of the securitization of migration in the 21st
century and the expansion of cases of viewing it as
a threat to peace.
REFERENCES
1.
Boyle P., Halfacree K., & Robinson V. Exploring
contemporary migration. Essex: Pearson
Education Limited, 1998, p. 27.
2.
Boswell C. and Geddes A. Migration and
Mobility in the European Union. Hampshire:
Palgrave MacMillan, 2011, p. 2.
3.
Kostakopoulou T., Security Interests. Police
and Judicial Cooperation. In Peterson &
Shackleton (eds.). The Institutions of the
European Union. 2 nd ed. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2006, p. 232.
4.
Abramitzky Ran and Leah P. Boustan,
“Immigration in American Economic History,”
Journal of Economic Literature, 55 (4), 2017,
pp. 1311
–
1345.
5.
Alesina A. and Tabellini M. “The Political Effects
of Immigration: Culture or Economics?”, May
2022,
https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20File
s/Alesina%20and%20Tabellini_May2022_6e3
74744-f5f7-4ed0-9387-d0ac7cf087ff.pdf
6.
Holton
R.
“Globalization's
Cultural
Consequences”. The Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 570,
THE USA JOURNALS
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED SCIENCES (ISSN
–
2689-0992)
VOLUME 06 ISSUE06
52
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
2000, p. 145.
7.
Huntington, Samuel P., The Clash of
Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.
New York, Simon & Schuster, 1996.
8.
Waever
Ole,
“Securitization
and
Desecuritization”, in Ronnie D. Lipschutz (ed.),
On Security, Chapter 5, New York, Columbia
University Press, 1995.
9.
Buzan B., Waever O. and Wilde J. De, Security: A
New Framework for Analysis, Boulder, Lynne
Rienner Pub, 1998, pp. 23-29.
10.
Waever O. “Aberystwyth, Paris, Copenhagen,
New ‘Schools’ in Security Theory and their
Origins between Core and Periphery”, Paper
Presented at the Annual Meeting of the
International Studies Association, Montreal.
17-20 Mart, 2004, p. 8.
11.
Waever O. “Societal Security: the concept” in
Waever O., Buzan B., Kelstrup M. and Lemaitre,
P. (ed.) Identity, Migration and the New
Security Agenda in Europe, Pinter, London,
1993, pp. 25-26.
12.
Waever, 1993, pp. 19-23.
13.
Khabiullo Ya. Azimov. (2023). THE PROBLEM
OF MIGRATION IN TURKEY AFTER THE "ARAB
SPRING". Oriental Journal of History, Politics
and
Law,
3(03),
19
–
26.
https://doi.org/10.37547/supsci-ojhpl-03-03-
03
14.
Yakubovich, A. H. (2019). The emergence of the
Syrian crisis and the impact of the external
forces on it. Bulletin Social-Economic and
Humanitarian Research, (4 (6)), 92-97.
15.
Azimov, H. Y. (2022). Main directions of
modern international security approaches.
International journal of social science research
and review, 5(2), 151-157.
16.
Azimov, K. Y. (2024). THE INFLUENCE OF
RELIGIOUS AND ETHNIC GROUPS IN SYRIA ON
SOCIAL AND POLITICAL PROCESSES IN THE
COUNTRY. Journal of Social Research in
Uzbekistan, 4(02), 12-18.
17.
Pieterse J. N. Globalization and Culture Global
Mélange. United States of America: Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers, 2009. p. 44-49.
18.
Azimov, H. Y. (2022, June). THE ROLE OF THE
SYRIAN CRISIS IN ENSURING SECURITY IN
THE MIDDLE EAST. In International Scientific
and Current Research Conferences (pp. 90-92).
19.
Bo‘ronov, S., & Azimov
, H. (2023). Sharq
mamlakatlarida xavfsizlik muammolari va
mojarolari. Toshkent: EFFECT_D.
