The 2018 Global Compacts on Migration and on Refugees acknowledge mixed migration – both as flow and as motivation – whilst at the same time trying very hard to (re)establish clear boundaries between the two ideal types of people mobility. Mixed migration is deeply problematic. It is the condition of possibility for “illegal migration” to be intelligible in policy terms, but it is also an expression, empirically, of reality. The notion of mixed migration had been a solution in the 1970s and 1980s for doctrine formation in the context of governing international mobility. Today, by insisting on the dubious distinction, the two Global Compacts are turning mixed migration from a solution into a problem, even as they draw on the normative framing of human rights and sustainable development. Does this move shift perspective rather than fundamentally achieving transformation of the doctrine towards a more progressive global approach in governing international mobility? Here, I argue, based on conceptual analysis of the Global Compacts, that they express a transformation rather than either returning to the conceptual past or offering something entirely new. What has not changed, however, is that in the search for solutions to governing international migration there is a reproduction of individuals as gendered and racialized subjects of global politics.

《 2018年全球移民与难民契约》承认混合移民（既是流动又是动机），同时又努力（重新）在两种理想的人员流动类型之间建立清晰的界限。混合移民问题严重。在政策上可以理解“非法移民”的可能性条件，但从经验上讲，它也是现实的一种表达。混合移民的概念在1970年代和1980年代是在管理国际流动性的背景下形成学说的一种解决方案。如今，尽管这两个全球契约都依靠人权和可持续发展的规范框架，但它们坚持坚持可疑的区分，正在将混合移民从解决方案变成问题。此举是否会改变观点，而不是从根本上实现该学说的转变，从而朝着一种更先进的全球性方法来管理国际流动性？在此，我认为，根据对全球契约的概念分析，它们表示一种转变，而不是回到概念的过去或提供全新的东西。然而，没有改变的是，在寻求解决国际移徙的解决方案时，有个人作为全球政治的性别和种族化主体而繁殖。他们表达了一种转变，而不是回到概念的过去或提供全新的东西。然而，没有改变的是，在寻求解决国际移徙的解决方案时，有个人作为全球政治的性别和种族化主体而繁殖。他们表达了一种转变，而不是回到概念的过去或提供全新的东西。然而，没有改变的是，在寻求解决国际移徙的解决方案时，有个人作为全球政治的性别和种族化主体而繁殖。