Advanced liberal democratic states interdict migrants on the High Seas global commons. Why have liberal states engaged in this practice over the past four decades? Deterrence and humanitarian rescue explain part of this puzzle, but they are insufficient for understanding the patterns and justifications for migrant interdiction on the High Seas. Tension between states promoting international human rights and circumventing those obligations challenges expectations of liberal state behavior. International relations scholars must incorporate the global commons when explaining state behavior; ungoverned areas create exceptional zones for states to partially suspend their standard operating procedures to execute policies furthering their interests. We argue that liberal states use the regulatory gray zones of the High Seas to ‘muddy the waters’ in order to advance their security interests. States with the highest domestic refugee protections have incentives to circumvent their own obligations, which vary over time with changes to domestic asylum laws.

先进的自由民主国家在公海全球公域上拦截移民。为什么自由主义国家在过去的四年中从事这种做法？威慑和人道主义救援部分解释了这个谜团，但它们不足以理解在公海阻截移民的模式和理由。促进国际人权和规避这些义务的国家之间的紧张关系挑战了对自由国家行为的期望。国际关系学者在解释国家行为时必须纳入全球公域；不受管制的地区为各国创造了特殊区域，可以部分暂停其标准作业程序，以执行促进其利益的政策。我们认为，自由主义国家利用公海的监管灰色地带来“搅浑水”，以促进其安全利益。国内难民保护最高的国家有动机规避自己的义务，随着时间的推移，国内庇护法的变化会有所不同。