Since the war erupted in Syria in 2011, Turkey has followed an “open door” policy toward Syrian refugees. The Turkish government has been promoting this liberal policy through a humanitarian discourse that leads one to expect that Syrian refugees have not been securitized in Turkey. This article, however, argues that a security framework that emphasizes control and containment has been essential to the governance of Syrian refugees in Turkey, despite the presence of such non-securitarian discourses. To develop this argument, the article first builds an analytical framework based on a critical engagement with the theory of securitization, which was originally developed by the Copenhagen School. Unlike the Copenhagen School’s theory emphasizing “speech acts” as the vector of securitization, this article applies a sociological approach to the analysis of the securitization process by focusing on both discursive and non-discursive practices. In carrying out this analysis, securitizing practices, both discursive and non-discursive, are defined as those that: (1) emphasize “control and containment,” especially in relation to societal/public security concerns (here, specifically, the labor market and employment); and (2) establish a security continuum about various other issues—including criminality, terrorism, socioeconomic problems, and cultural deprivation—and thereby treat migrants as “risky” outsiders. Subsequently, in line with this analytical framework, the article seeks to trace the securitization of non-camp Syrian refugees, especially in the labor market. Finally, the article demonstrates that this securitization process is likely to conceal structural and political problems, and to close off alternative public and political debate about the refugees.

中文翻译：

---

土耳其的叙利亚难民：从“客人”到“敌人”？

自2011年叙利亚爆发战争以来，土耳其一直对叙利亚难民采取“门户开放”政策。土耳其政府一直在通过一种人道主义话语来推动这一自由政策，这导致人们期望叙利亚难民在土耳其没有被安全化。然而，本文认为，尽管存在此类非安全主义言论，但强调控制和遏制的安全框架对于土耳其境内的叙利亚难民的治理至关重要。为了发展这一论点，本文首先建立了一个分析框架，该框架基于对最初由哥本哈根学派开发的证券化理论的批判性参与。与哥本哈根学派强调“言语行为”作为证券化载体的理论不同，本文通过关注话语和非话语实践，运用社会学方法分析证券化过程。在进行这种分析时，话语和非话语的证券化实践被定义为：（1）强调“控制和遏制”，特别是与社会/公共安全问题（这里特别是劳动力市场和就业）；(2) 建立一个关于其他各种问题的安全连续体——包括犯罪、恐怖主义、社会经济问题和文化剥夺——从而将移民视为“有风险的”外来者。随后，根据这一分析框架，本文试图追踪非难民营叙利亚难民的安全化，特别是在劳动力市场。最后，