Series:

Daniela Vitiello

The creation of Frontex responded to the quest for enhanced integration of national border services within the framework of Schengen cooperation at the external borders. Its empowerment as the institutional actor in charge of the development of the EU Integrated Border Management (ibm) granted much more than that. There are at least two efficiency spill-overs that are tightly linked to Frontex-coordinated border management: (a) the crafting of the EU’s external borders as a unified “border zone”, administrated by means of enhanced inter-agency and international cooperation; (b) the externalisation of EU’s responsibilities for internal security and fundamental rights protection, by means of atypical cooperative tools, characterised by an elevate degree of legal hybridism. This chapter seeks to advance the understanding of the “foreign affairs-migration policy nexus”, taking as a case study the gradual establishment of an integrated management system for EU’s external borders. It investigates Frontex’ contribution to the development of the EU’s external borders as “smart borders” ruled by a new typology of anticipatory border governance. Then, it explores the balance that Frontex’ last reform strikes between the search for efficiency spill-overs within the “brand-new” European ibm and the adherence to “old-fashioned” legal principles, steering the afsj. In doing so, it explains how and why the agency option has fostered the metamorphosis of a process of integration of Schengen States’ border control services into a process of intersection of policy goals, belonging to different policy universes.

Series:

Midori Okabe

However normative it might be, the inclusive power of European Union (EU) is not effective to Asian countries (including asean as a region) with regard to migration governance. The EU attempts to be a mandatory actor of global institutions yet it seems only successful on condition that the EU and Asian countries reach agreements to cooperate. Although the asean-eu meeting (asem) could have been used for the very opportunity, it serves as a forum on information sharing at best. The bilateral scheme is the possible alternative and the EU would need a negotiation-based power instead of attracting non-EU countries to join in the EU as it does to EU candidate and other neighboring countries. Since the EU Enlargement is not a viable bargaining chip to Asia, the EU needs different items of agenda to make the package-deal useful. As a result, the EU resembles more of a single actor on the arena of negotiation where the inclusive power is least salient

Series:

Edited by Sergio Carrera, Leonhard den Hertog, Marion Panizzon and Dora Kostakopoulou

Series:

Dora Kostakopoulou and Marion Panizzon