Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Schengen Area as a fair-weather project? A discursive analysis of solidarity

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of International Relations and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, critical voices have raised concerns that EU member states are unwilling to express solidarity and proclaimed that EU solidarity was dead. Surprisingly, the Schengen Area, as opposed to asylum policies, has been examined only sporadically in this context. Although there is overall agreement that solidarity is a necessary precondition for the functioning of Schengen cooperation, it has multiple meanings. Hence, theoretically drawing on the concept of solidarity and methodologically employing the Discourse Historical Approach (DHA), this study attempts to find out how solidarity is conceptualised in legislative and political discourse on Schengen cooperation. It does so by identifying the argumentation strategies of the main actors. The main findings are that whereas scholars tend to link solidarity to free movement and incoming refugees, legislative and political discourse emphasise external border controls. Indeed, this suggests that Schengen will remain resilient as long as its security is ensured, no matter the reimpositions of internal borders. These are perceived as a remedy to Schengen deficiencies rather than a problem per se. Also, in line with EU legislation, the interstate dimension of solidarity clearly prevails within Schengen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. It, however, started outside the EU framework.

  2. For more details on other EU institutions see below.

  3. I use the term ‘refugee crisis’, despite its negative connotation, for two reasons. Firstly, it is commonly used to denote the events following the peak in the numbers of incoming refugees to the EU in 2015. Secondly, drawing on Koselleck (Koselleck and Richter 2006) and the special issue of the Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies (2011), the term ‘crisis’ is suitable since it highlights the extraordinary nature of the processes. Despite this, I fully acknowledge the fact that the numbers of incoming refugees to the EU were much smaller than e.g. in the Middle East and the crisis was more of a policy or solidarity crisis than a ‘refugee crisis’ (cf. Den Heijer, Rijpma and Spijkerboer 2016) and that is why I use the term in quotation marks throughout the text. For more details on how the term crisis is used in the context of Schengen, see my previous article (Votoupalová 2018b).

  4. If not specified otherwise, the MS are Schengen, not EU member states.

  5. For example, during the ‘refugee crisis’, the agreement on external actions (border controls) was much easier than on the internal aspects of cooperation (relocations) (Lahusen and Grasso 2017).

  6. Additionally, many news articles and short policy papers examining the issue of solidarity in Schengen have been published, albeit these cannot investigate the topic in much detail either (cf. Bertoncini 2018).

  7. However, trade creation due to Schengen may be significantly lower than in the case of EU or eurozone membership (Felbermayr et al. 2018).

  8. In line with the DHA, genres are understood as specific realisations of fields of action, e.g. genres of the political fields could be reports, legislative proposals, speeches, etc.

  9. The study concludes by summarising the situation in 2020, i.e. the restrictions on movements during the covid pandemic and the presentation of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum and the Strategy towards a fully functioning and resilient Schengen area.

  10. E.g. DR.dk, SVT.se, Kurier.at.

  11. Altogether, over 600 documents on the discourse of political communication were identified and out of these 102 were found relevant and coded. Regarding policy discourse, 42 relevant documents issued by the EC and EP and 35 legislative documents were selected and coded.

  12. Translations from German, Scandinavian languages, Czech and Slovak are the author’s own.

  13. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/solidarity; https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/solidarity; https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/solidarity (4 August, 2021).

  14. E.g. the original sub-categories of ‘cooperation between MS’ and ‘external borders as shared responsibility’ merged into the ‘topos of collective responsibility’; ‘rules to be observed’, ‘changes to Schengen needed’ and ‘restoring normality’ merged into the ‘topos of rules’; ‘Schengen not to be blamed’ became the ‘topos of blame’.

  15. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:11992M/TXT (17 November, 2020).

  16. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:11997D/TXT (17 November, 2020).

  17. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:TOC (17 November, 2020).

  18. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A42000A0922%2801%29 (23 November, 2020).

  19. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A42000A0922%2802%29 (23 November, 2020).

  20. SBC, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32006R0562 (17 November, 2020).

  21. For more details, see Votoupalová (2015).

  22. Regulation (EU) No 610/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 amending Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code), the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement, Council Regulations (EC) No 1683/95 and (EC) No 539/2001 and Regulations (EC) No 767/2008 and (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council; Regulation (EU) No 1051/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 in order to provide for common rules on the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in exceptional circumstances.

  23. https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-30-2013-INIT/en/pdf; https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10597-2013-INIT/en/pdf (17 November, 2020).

  24. This is by no means to say that these terrorists were refugees despite them being often presented so in the political discourse (cf. Votoupalová 2018a).

  25. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/LSU/?uri=CELEX:02016R0399-20190611 (17 November, 2020).

  26. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/calendar/?frDt=01%2F03%2F2016&frDt_submit=01%2F03%2F2016&toDt=30%2F11%2F2016&toDt_submit=30%2F11%2F2016&cc%5B%5D=610&p=1&stDt=20161130; http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/calendar/?frDt=&frDt_submit=&toDt=&toDt_submit=&ent%5B%5D=600&p=1&stDt=20170112 (17 November, 2020).

  27. Strengthening capacities of FRONTEX and establishing a new European Border and Coast Guard (EBCG), preparing passenger name record (PNR) and EU Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS), enhancing the Schengen Information System (SIS), etc. http://shorturl.at/twHT0; http://shorturl.at/osCHS (17 November, 2020).

  28. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_17_3407 (17 November, 2020).

  29. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_16_3281 (17 November, 2020).

  30. http://europa.rs/european-border-and-coast-guard-agreed/?lang=en (17 November, 2020).

  31. http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11986-2015-INIT/en/pdf (10 July, 2017); http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12111-2015-INIT/en/pdf (10 July, 2017); https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/hum_forum/id2464184/ (10 July, 2017); https://www.cssd.cz/media/cssd-v-mediich/m-chovanec-kvuli-odmitnuti-kvot-hrozi-zruseni-schengenu/ (23 July, 2016).

  32. https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/border-crossing_en (4 August, 2021).

  33. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_16_590 (17 November, 2020).

  34. http://europa.rs/back-to-schengen-commission-proposes-roadmap-for-restoring-fully-functioning-schengen-system/?lang=en (17 November, 2020).

  35. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_16_3501 (17 November, 2020).

  36. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52017DC0570 (17 November, 2020).

  37. In September 2016, the LIBE committee set up a Working Group on Schengen Scrutiny with the aim of reviewing and scrutinising the Schengen evaluations.

  38. However, the issue of fences is more complex, depending especially on whether they are internal or external (cf. Buckley and Spiegel 2015).

  39. http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12111-2015-INIT/en/pdf (10 July, 2017).

  40. http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12110-2015-INIT/en/pdf (10 July, 2017); https://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/Mitschrift/Pressekonferenzen/2015/09/2015-09-15-merkel-faymann.html (10 July, 2017); Zeit.de 2017. As Trauner (2016) points out, these states managed to prove statistically that they bear the burden of asylum claims equally if not more than the ‘southern’ states which often failed to fingerprint the incoming refugees properly.

  41. https://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Content/DE/Reiseberichte/2016-05-04-reise-merkel-rom.html (10 July, 2017).

  42. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/hum_forum/id2464184/ (10 July, 2017); https://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Content/DE/Mitschrift/Pressekonferenzen/2016/04/2016-04-07-dt-franz-ministerrat.html (10 July, 2017).

  43. https://www.regeringen.se/4adaca/contentassets/3295338958214275b72db1002b42be27/svensk-migrations--och-asylpolitik (10 July, 2017).

  44. DR.dk 2016; http://www.bmi.gv.at/cms/bmi/_news/bmi.aspx?id=5662435A69722B4553484D3D&page=43&view=1 (10 July, 2017).

  45. This being said, the support offered to these countries by the EU has been often subject to criticism for not being sufficient and effective, even before 2015 (see e.g. Ceccorulli 2019; Carrera and Guild 2010).

  46. https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen/reintroduction-border-control_en (17 November, 2020).

  47. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/hr/IP_16_211 (17 November, 2020).

  48. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/hr/IP_16_211 (17 November, 2020).

  49. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_16_1723 (17 November, 2020).

  50. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/cs/STATEMENT_15_5638 (17 November, 2020).

  51. https://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Content/DE/Artikel/2016/01/2016-01-07-besuch-rumaenischer-ministerpraesident.html (10 July, 2017).

  52. http://www.visegradgroup.eu/calendar/2015/joint-statement-of-the-151204 (23 July, 2016); http://www.visegradgroup.eu/calendar/2016 (23 July, 2016).

  53. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/seance_pleniere/compte_rendu/provisoire/2016/05-11/P8_CRE-PROV(2016)05-11_XL.pdf, pp. 277‒95 (17 November, 2020).

  54. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/fr/SPEECH_16_1064 (17 November, 2020).

  55. https://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Content/DE/Regierungserklaerung/2016/2016-03-17-regierungserklaerung.html (10 July, 2017).

  56. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_16_1628 (17 November, 2020).

  57. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_15_6327 (17 November, 2020).

  58. https://www.statewatch.org/media/documents/news/2016/jan/eu-com-dg-home-com-speech-jha-informal.pdf (17 November, 2020).

  59. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/20151015STO97855/schulz-on-refugees-%E2%80%9Ceuropean-solidarity-is-about-sharing-responsibilities%E2%80%9D (17 November, 2020).

  60. However, it supports the claims about the ongoing securitisation processes in the EU, including migration and refugee management (cf. Huysmans 2000; Kostakopoulou 2000; Lazaridis and Khursheed 2015; Moreno-Lax 2017; Siegel and Nagy 2018; Bello 2020).

  61. Cf. Etiasvisa.com (2021).

  62. After Turkey had opened its borders for refugees going to Europe in February 2020, Greece was accused of returning many of these refugees back to Turkey which was criticised by e.g. Amnesty International and UNHCR as a violation of humanitarian and refugee legislation (Amnesty International 2021). Despite this, Greece was appreciated by the EU representatives as a shield protecting the EU from incoming refugees. Only later, the EC added that securing external borders is not incompatible with protecting human rights (Amnesty International 2020; DW.com 2020).

References

  • Adler, Katya (2015) ‘EU solidarity damaged by splits on migrants and Greece’, BBC, 6 June, available at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33152890 (1 December, 2020).

  • Alkopher, Tal Dingott and Emmanuelle Blanc (2016) ‘Schengen Area Shaken: The Impact of Immigration-Related Threat Perceptions on the European Security Community’, Journal of International Relations and Development 20(3): 511–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amnesty International (2020) ‘Explained: The situation at Greece’s borders’, Amnesty, 5 March, available at https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/03/greece-turkey-refugees-explainer/ (4 August, 2021).

  • Amnesty International (2021) ‘Greece: Violence, Lies, and Pushbacks’, available at https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/EUR2543072021ENGLISH.PDF (4 August, 2021).

  • Apap, Joanna and Sergio Carrera (2003) ‘Maintaining Security within Borders: Towards a Permanent State of Emergency in the EU?’, CEPS Policy Briefs 41, available at http://aei.pitt.edu/1947/ (1 December, 2020).

  • Atger, Anaïs F. (2008) ‘The Abolition of Internal Border Checks in an Enlarged Schengen Area: Freedom of Movement or a Scattered Web of Security Checks?’, Centre for European Policy Studies Research Paper No. 8, available at https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/1629.pdf (6 April 2022).

  • Bast, Jürgen (2016) ‘Deepening Supranational Integration: Interstate Solidarity in EU Migration Law’, European Public Law 22(2): 289–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayertz, Kurt (1998) ‘Solidarity and the Welfare State: Some Introductory Considerations’, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 1(3): 293–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bello, Valeria (2020) ‘The spiralling of the securitisation of migration in the EU: from the management of a “crisis” to a governance of human mobility?’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2020.1851464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertoncini, Yves (2018) ‘Schengen: from resistance to resilience?’ European issues n° 471, available at https://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/european-issues/0471-schengen-from-resistance-to-resilience (1 December, 2020).

  • Binyon, Michael (2015) ‘The end of Schengen. How a human tsunami has shattered a European dream’, Politico, September 14, available at http://www.politico.eu/article/the-end-of-schengen-germany-border-controls-austria-check-points-temporary/ (1 December, 2020).

  • Börzel, Tanja A. and Thomas Risse (2017) ‘From the Euro to the Schengen Crises: European Integration Theories, Politicization, and Identity Politics’, Journal of European Public Policy 25(1): 83–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer, Evelien (2008) Digital Borders and Real Rights: Effective Remedies for Third-Country Nationals in the Schengen Information System, Leiden: Brill.

  • Brunkhorst, Hauke (2007) ‘Globalizing Solidarity: The Destiny of Democratic Solidarity in the Times of Global Capitalism, Global Religion, and the Global Public’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 93–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, Neil and Peter Spiegel (2015) ‘Brussels warns Hungary against erecting Slovenia migrant fence’, Financial Times, 25 September, available at https://www.ft.com/content/5e6d2b66-63ad-11e5-9846-de406ccb37f2 (1 December, 2020).

  • Campesi, Giuseppe (2011) ‘The Arab Spring and the Crisis of the European Border Regime: Manufacturing Emergency in the Lampedusa Crisis’, EUI RSCAS Working Papers 2011/59, Mediterranean Programme Series, available at https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/19375/RSCAS_2011_59.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (1 December, 2020).

  • Carrera, Sergio and Elspeth Guild (2010) ‘Joint Operation RABIT 2010’ – FRONTEX Assistance to Greece’s Border with Turkey: Revealing the Deficiencies of Europe’s Dublin Asylum System’, CEPS, available at http://aei.pitt.edu/15186/1/No_34_Carrera_&_Guild_on_RABIT_2010.pdf (4 August, 2021).

  • Carrera, Sergio and Leonhard den Hertog (2016) ‘A European Border and Coast Guard: What’s in a Name?’, CEPS Paper in Liberty and Security in Europe, 88, available at https://www.ceps.eu/ceps-publications/european-border-and-coast-guard-whats-name/ (1 December, 2020).

  • Carrera, Sergio et al. (2011) ‘A Race against Solidarity. The Schengen Regime and the Franco-Italian Affair’, CEPS, available at http://aei.pitt.edu/31639/ (1 December, 2020).

  • Ceccorulli, Michela (2019) ‘Back to Schengen: the collective securitisation of the EU free-border area’, West European Politics 42(2): 302–22, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2018.1510196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cendrowicz, Leo (2016) ‘The end of Schengen? Restrictions by Denmark and Sweden are ‘threatening Europe’s passport-free zone’, Independent, April 3, available at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-end-ofschengen-restrictions-by-denmark-and-sweden-are-threatening-europes-passport-free-zone-a6796696.html (6 April 2022).

  • Chong, Dennis and Reuel Rogers (2005) ‘Racial Solidarity and Political Participation’, Political Behavior 27(4): 347–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coicaud, Jean-Marc and Nicholas J. Wheeler (2008) National Interest and International Solidarity: Particular and Universal Ethics in International Life, Tokyo: United Nations University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelisse, Galina (2014) ‘What’s Wrong with Schengen? Border Disputes and the Nature of Integration in the Area Without Internal Borders’, Common Market Law Review 51: 741–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crow, Graham (2002) Social solidarities. Theories, identities, and social change, Buckingham: Open University Press.

  • Cunha, Alice et al. (2015) The Borders of Schengen, Brussels, P.I.E. Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Angelis, Gabriele (2016) ‘Political Legitimacy and the European Crisis: Analysis of a Faltering Project’, European Politics and Society 18(3): 291–300, doi: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/23745118.2016.1229383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Capitani, Emilio (2014) ‘The Schengen system after Lisbon: From cooperation to integration’, ERA Forum, 15(1): 101–118 (6 April 2022).

  • De Beer, Paul and Ferry Koster (2009) Sticking Together or Falling Apart? Solidarity in an Era of Individualization and Globalization, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

  • De Bruycker, Phillipe (2016) ‘The European Border and Coast Guard: A New Model Built on an Old Logic’, European Papers 1(2): 559–69, doi: https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Den Heijer, Maarten, Jorrit Rijpma and Thomas Spijkerboer (2016) ‘Coercion, Prohibition, and Great Expectations. The continuing failure of the Common European Asylum System’, Common Market Law Review 53: 607–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delanty, Gerard et al., eds. (2008) Studies in Social & Political Thought, Identity, Belonging and Migration. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

  • di Napoli, Ester and Deborah Russo (2018) ‘Solidarity in the European Union in Times of Crisis: Towards “EuropeanSolidarity”?’, in Veronica Federico and Christian Lahusen, eds, Solidarity as a Public Virtue?, 193–248, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • DR.dk (2016) ‘Støjberg: Grænsekontrol indtil det ikke er nødvendigt længere’, DR, 13 January, available at goo.gl/HJnZY2 (10 July, 2017).

  • Durkheim, Émile (1964) The division of labor in society, New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dussel, Enrique (2007) ‘From Fraternity to Solidarity: Toward a Politics of Liberation’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 73–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DW.com (2020) ‘EU tells Turkey to take back migrants from Greece’, DW, 29 March, available at https://www.dw.com/en/eu-tells-turkey-to-take-back-migrants-from-greece/a-57043879 (4 August, 2021).

  • Erjavec, Karmen and Melita Poler Kovačič (2009) ‘New configuration of borders new division of Europe? Media representation of Slovenia’s accession to the Schengen regime’, Drustvena istraživanja 18(6): 957–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etiasvisa.com (2021) ‘EU plans to overhaul the Schengen Area’, ETIAS, 4 June, available at https://www.etiasvisa.com/etias-news/eu-overhaul-schengen-area (4 August, 2021).

  • European Commission (2015a) ‘Commission opinion of 23.10.2015a on the necessity and proportionality of the controls at internal borders reintroduced by Germany and Austria pursuant to Article 24(4) of Regulation No 562/2006 (Schengen Borders Code)’, available at https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/e-library/documents/policies/borders-and-visas/general/docs/commission_opinion_necessity_proportionality_controls_internal_borders_germany_austria_en.pdf (1 December, 2020).

  • European Commission (2015b) ‘Eighth biannual report on the functioning of the Schengen area’ available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2015b/0675/COM_COM(2015b)0675_EN.pdf (1 December, 2020).

  • European Commission (2016) ‘Back to Schengen – A Roadmap’, available at https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen/docs/communication-back-to-schengen-roadmap_en.pdf (1 December, 2020).

  • European Commission (2017) ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards the rules applicable to the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders’, available at https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/20170927_proposal_for_a_regulation_amending_regulation_eu_2016_399_en.pdf (1 December, 2020).

  • European Commission (2020) ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a New Pact on Migration and Asylum’, available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:85ff8b4f-ff13-11ea-b44f-01aa75ed71a1.0002.02/DOC_3&format=PDF (1 December, 2020).

  • European Commission (2020) ‘New Pact on Migration and Asylum’ available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1601287338054&uri=COM%3A2020%3A609%3AFIN (1 December, 2020).

  • European Commission (2021) ‘A strategy towards a fully functioning and resilient Schengen area’, available at https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/default/files/pdf/02062021_strategy_towards_fully_functioning_and_resilient_schengen_area_com-2021-277_en.pdf (4 August, 2021).

  • European Parliament (2018) ‘Report on the annual report on the functioning of the Schengen area’, available at https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0160_EN.html (1 December, 2020).

  • European Parliament (2021) ‘The state of play of Schengen governance’, available at https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/658699/IPOL_STU(2020)658699_EN.pdf (4 August, 2021).

  • Felbermayr, Gabriel et al. (2018) ‘The Trade Effects of Border Controls: Evidence from the European Schengen Agreement’, JCMS 56(2): 335–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fijnaut, Cyrille (2015) ‘The Refugee Crisis: The End of Schengen?’, European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 23(4): 313–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gasmi, Gordana et al. (2016) ‘Essay on Efficiency of Legal Norms – Schengen Agreement’, Fiat Iustitia 1/2016: 74–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giannakopoulos, Angelos (2017) Solidarity in the European Union: Challenges and Perspectives, Tel Aviv: SDAC.

  • Gibbs, Graham (2018) Analyzing Qualitative Data, Los Angeles: SAGE.

  • Gould, Carol C. (2007) ‘Transnational Solidarities’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 148–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grammaticas, Damian (2016) ‘Is EU’s Schengen border-free dream at an end?’, BBC, January 27, available at http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-eu-35424637 (6 April 2022).

  • Guild, Elspeth et al. (2015) ‘What is happening to the Schengen borders?’, CEPS Paper in Liberty and Security 86, available at https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/No%2086%20Schengenland_0.pdf (1 December, 2020).

  • Harvey, Jean (2007) ‘Moral Solidarity and Empathetic Understanding: The Moral Value and Scope of the Relationship’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 22–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heyd, David (2007) ‘Justice and Solidarity: The Contractarian Case against Global Justice’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 112–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilpold, Peter (2015) ‘Understanding Solidarity within EU Law: An Analysis of the ‘Islands of Solidarity’ with Particular Regard to Monetary Union’, Yearbook of European Law 34(1): 257–85, doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/yel/yev020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbing, Peter (2010) ‘The Management of the EU’s External Borders. From the Customs Union to Frontexand E-Borders’ in Elspeth Guild et al., eds, The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice Ten Years on. Successes and Future Challenges under the Stockholm Programme, 63–72, Brussels: CEPS.

  • Hooker, Juliet (2009) Race and the politics of solidarity, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Huysmans, Jef (2000) ‘The European Union and the Securitization of Migration’, JCMS 38(5): 751–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaminski, Matthew (2015) ‘All the terrorists are migrants’, Politico, November 23, available at http://www.politico.eu/article/viktor-orban-interview-terrorists-migrants-eu-russia-putin-borders-schengen/ (1 December, 2020).

  • Karanja, Kabera Stephen (2008) Transparency and Proportionality in the Schengen Information System and Border Control Co-Operation, Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kolejka, Jaromír et al., eds (2008) Studies in Social & Political Thought, Identity, Belonging and Migration, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koselleck, Reinhart (2010) Begriffsgeschichten: Studien zur Semantik und Pragmatik der politischen und sozialen Sprache [Conceptual histories: Studies on Semantics and Pragmatics of Political and Social Language], Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koselleck, Reinhart and Michaela W. Richter (2006) ‘Crisis’, Journal of the History of Ideas 67(2): 357–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostakopoulou, Dora (2000) ‘The “Protective Union”: Change and Continuity in Migration Law and Policy in Post-Amsterdam Europe’, JCMS 38(3): 497–518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krieg, Andreas (2013) Motivations for Humanitarian Intervention: Theoretical and Empirical Considerations, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krzyżanowski, Michał (2015) ‘International leadership re-/constructed? Ambivalence and heterogeneity of identity discourses in European Union’s policy on climate change’, Journal of Language and Politics, 14(1): 110–133.

  • Krzyżanowski, Michał (2019) ‘Brexit and the imaginary of “crisis”: a discourseconceptual analysis of European news media’, Critical Discourse Studies 16(4): 465–90, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2019.1592001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurier.at (2015) ‘Grenzschutz: EU zeigt Griechenland Gelbe Karte’ [Border control: EU shows Greece a yellow card], Kurier, 4 December, available at goo.gl/R1L84g (10 July, 2017).

  • Lahusen, Christian (2018) ‘European solidarity: an introduction to a multifaceted phenomenon’, in TransSOL: European paths to transnational solidarity at times of crisis: Conditions, forms, role models and policy responses, available at https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/649435/results (1 December, 2020).

  • Lahusen, Christian and Maria Grasso (2017) ‘Solidarity in Europe – European Solidarity: A Comparative Introduction’, in TransSOL: European paths to transnational solidarity at times of crisis: Conditions, forms, role models and policy responses, available at https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/649435/results (1 December, 2020).

  • Lazaridis, Gabriella and Khursheed Wadia, eds (2015) The Securitization of Migration in the EU, Debates since 9/11, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, Alastair (2016) ‘European economy would suffer if free-travel zone collapses: EU’s Juncker’, Reuters, January 15, available at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-juncker-economy-idUSKCN0UT14J (1 December, 2020).

  • Majerský, Ivan (2016) ‘Grécko už fakticky nie je v schengenskom priestore, vyhlásil Kaliňák’ [Greece de facto not in Schengen any more, Kaliňák says], Pravda, January 25, available at http://spravy.pravda.sk/domace/clanok/381144-grecko-uz-fakticky-nie-je-v-schengenskom-priestore-vyhlasil-kalinak/ (1 December, 2020).

  • May, Larry (2007) ‘The International Community, Solidarity and the Duty to Aid’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-Lax, Violeta (2017) ‘The EU Humanitarian Border and the Securitization of Human Rights: The “Rescue-Through-Interdiction/Rescue-Without-Protection” Paradigm’, JCMS, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Andreas Th. and Andreas Oberprantacher (2017) ‘Austria Bordering Europe: Blocking and Brokering Routes Amid a Manifold Crisis’, in Günter Bischof and Dirk Rupnow, eds, Migration in Austria, 217–41, University of New Orleans Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nascimbene, Bruno and Alessia Di Pascale (2011) ‘The “Arab Spring” and the Extraordinary Influx of People Who Arrived in Italy from North Africa’, European Journal of Migration and Law 13: 341–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemann, Arne and Johanna Speyer (2018) ‘A Neofunctionalist Perspective on the “European Refugee Crisis”: The Case of the European Border and Coast Guard’, JCMS 56(1): 23–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pensky, Max (2007) ‘Two Cheers for Cosmopolitanism: Cosmopolitan Solidarity as Second-Order Inclusion’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 165–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pensky, Max (2008) The ends of solidarity: discourse theory in ethics and politics, Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phull, Kiran K. and John B. Sutcliffe (2013) ‘Crossroads of integration? The future of Schengen in the wake of the Arab spring’, in Finn Laursen, ed., The EU and the Eurozone Crisis: Policy Challenges and Strategic Choices, London: Ashgate Publishing.

  • Rehg, William (2007) ‘Solidarity and the Common Good: An Analytic Framework’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 7–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reisigl, Martin (2014) ‘Argumentation Analysis and the Discourse-Historical Approach. A Methodological Framework’, in Christopher Hart and Piotr Cap, eds, Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies, 67–96, London: Bloomsbury.

  • Reisigl, Martin and Ruth Wodak (2009) ‘The discourse-historical approach (DHA)’, in Ruth Wodak, Methods for Critical Discourse Analysis, 87–121, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, Melvin and Michaela W. Richter (2006) ‘Introduction: Translation of Reinhart Koselleck’s “Krise”, in Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe’, Journal of the History of Ideas 67(2): 343–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rippe, Klaus P. (1998) ‘Diminishing Solidarity’, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 1(3): 355–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sangiovanni, Andrea (2013) ‘Solidarity in the European Union’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 33(2): 213–41, doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqs033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaffer, Frederic Ch. (2016) Elucidating Social Science Concepts: An Interpretivist Guide, New York: Routledge.

  • Scholz, Sally J. (2007) ‘Political Solidarity and Violent Resistance’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 38–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuyt, Kees (1998) ‘The Sharing of Risks and the Risks of Sharing: Solidarity and Social Justice in the Welfare State’, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 1(3): 297–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, Joseph M. (2007) ‘From Domestic to Global Solidarity: The Dialectic of the Particular and Universal in the Building of Social Solidarity’, Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 131–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwell, Alexandra (2009) ‘De/Securitising the 2007 Schengen Enlargement: Austria and “the East”’, Journal of Contemporary European Research 5(2): 243–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scuzzarello, Sarah and Catarina Kinnvall (2013) ‘Rebordering France and Denmark Narratives and Practices of Border Construction in Two European Countries’, Mobilities 8(1): 90–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shelby, Tommie (2012) We who are dark: the philosophical foundations of Black solidarity, Cambridge: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siebold, Angela (2017) ‘Open borders as an act of solidarity among peoples, between states or with migrants: changing applications of solidarity within the Schengen process’, European Review of History: Revue européenne d'histoire 24(6): 991–1006, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13507486.2017.1345862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, Dina and Veronika Nagy, eds (2018) The Migration Crisis?: Criminalization, Security and Survival, The Hague: Eleven International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stites Mor, Jessica (2003) Human rights and transnational solidarity in Cold War Latin America, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strupczewski, Jan (2015) ‘EU calls for global response to migration crisis at G20’, Reuters, 4 November, available at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-g-idUSKCN0ST1TM20151104 (1 December, 2020).

  • Svt.se (2015) ‘Tusk: Sverige leder Frontex-motstånd’ [Tusk: Sweden leading the resistance against Frontex], SVT Nyheter, 14 December, available at goo.gl/tF93fY (1 December, 2020).

  • Taylor, Ashley E. (2013) ‘Solidarity: Obligations and Expressions’, JWI Working Paper 1, available at http://www.sps.ed.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/141330/JWI_Solidarity_Obligations_and_Expressions.pdf (1 December, 2020).

  • Thym, Daniel and Evangelia (Lilian) Tsourdi (2017) ‘Searching for solidarity in the EU asylum and border policies: Constitutional and operational dimensions’, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 24(5): 605–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trauner, Florian (2016) ‘Asylum policy: the EU’s “crises” and the looming policy regime failure’, Journal of European Integration 38(3): 311‒25, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2016.1140756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsourdi, Evangelia (Lilian) (2017) ‘Solidarity at work? The prevalence of emergency driven solidarity in the administrative governance of the Common European Asylum System’, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 24(5): 667–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tulmets, Elsa (2012) Identities and Solidarity in Foreign Policy: East Central Europe and the Eastern Neighbourhood, Prague: Institute of International Relations.

  • Vít, Michal and Judit Tóth (2019) ‘The Changing Dynamics of the Effective Protection of EU External Borders or/and Forced Migrants Intersections’, EEJSP 4(4): 89–106. doi: https://doi.org/10.17356/ieejsp.v4i4.502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Votoupalová, Markéta (2015) ‘The Schengen Governance Package – another missed opportunity?’, Brussel, available at http://www.ies.be/policy-brief/schengen-governance-package-%E2%80%93-another-missed-opportunity (1 December, 2020).

  • Votoupalová, Markéta (2018a) ‘EU a uprchlická krize: Pevnost Evropa 2.0?’ [EU and the refugee crisis: Fortress Europe 2.0?], in Jan Eichler, ed., Evropská bezpečnost 25 let po skončení studené války, 54–69, Prague: Nakladatelství Oeconomica.

  • Votoupalová, Markéta (2018b) ‘Schengen in Crisis: Why Subjective Critique Matters’, Central European Journal of International & Security Studies 12(3): 10–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilde, Lawrence (2007) ‘The Concept of Solidarity: Emerging from the Theoretical Shadows?’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations 9(1): 171–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, Ruth and Michał Krzyżanowski (2008) Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zaun, Natascha (2018) ‘States as Gatekeepers in EU Asylum Politics: Explaining the Non-adoption of a Refugee Quota System’, Journal of Common Market Studies 56(1): 44–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeit.de (2017) ‘Abschiebehaft, Fußfessel und Handydurchsuchungen’ [Custody pending deportation, ankle bracelets, cell phone searches], Zeit Online, 18 May, available at goo.gl/dEcC1V (10 July 2017).

  • Pascouau, Yves (2012) ‘Schengen and solidarity: The fragile balance between mutual trust and mistrust’, European Policy Centre Policy Paper, available at https://www.epc.eu/en/Publications/Schengen-and-solidaritythe-f~246080 (6 April 2022).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank anonymous reviewers, JIRD editors and Štěpánka Zemanová for their most constructive comments and suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of International and Diplomatic Studies, Faculty of International Relations, Prague University of Economics and Business, W. Churchill sq. 4, 130 67, Prague, Czech Republic

    Markéta Votoupalová

Authors
  1. Markéta Votoupalová
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Markéta Votoupalová.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 15 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Votoupalová, M. The Schengen Area as a fair-weather project? A discursive analysis of solidarity. J Int Relat Dev 25, 685–708 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-022-00258-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-022-00258-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation