Navigating Schengen: Looking back into past sources to see beyond our current challenges to Human Mobility Rights
by Cristina Blanco Sío-López
The following Blog has been developed by one of the participant of the recent MCAA ECS Satellite event on Science Communication.
During the workshop, participants were invited to work on a scientific blog and submit their final piece to be published on the MCAA Blog.
The piece has been revised by a task-force of the MCAA Communication Working Group. Members of the team included: Maria Montefinese, Luisa Merz, Ashish Avasthi, Pradeep Eranti, Nicoleta Spînu, and Ruben Riosa.
Enjoy the piece!
My EU H-2020 research project as a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Senior Global Fellow and a Principal Investigator (PI), ‘Navigating Schengen: Historical Challenges and Potentialities of the EU’s Free Movement of Persons’ (NAVSCHEN)’, examines the rights of the EU human mobility from the inception of the Schengen Area in 1985 until the so-called Refugee Crisis in 2015, considered not just a governance crisis, but also a solidarity crisis. I specifically trace the historical roots, developments, and discourses concerning EU governance decisions on human mobility rights from a critical historical perspective.
The core questions in this realm are: Who is allowed to move across borders through time? Who is subsequently excluded from transnational mobility? What dimensions of solidarity and diversity could be improved for migrants and asylum seekers?
Limits and potentialities of human mobility rights in the EU
Human mobility policy-making is closely intertwined with single market priorities, human rights claims, and with an increasing securitisation of migration. In the mid-1980s, many European Community political representatives concluded that for a functioning single market, not only should goods, capitals and services be able to move across borders easily, but also persons. However, the opening of the internal borders of the Community consolidated external borders towards the so-called third countries.
Going back to historical archives on this matter (e.g., at the Historical Archives of the European Parliament in Luxembourg) gives us evidence of how we tend to forget about the dimension of human rights. We focus too much on the priority given to the securitisation of migration. Conversely, it is important to highlight the positive potential of human mobility and the need to conceive it as a fundamental human right.
Indeed, as a historian devoted to sharing and unveiling inspiring proposals and initiatives to uphold human mobility rights as part of the European integration process, I think it is the moment to be vocal and present when we talk about this, especially given the increasing overlap of factors shaping conflict and discrimination in our present. It is also a time to join interdisciplinary forces to explain that the defense of mobility rights can enhance our human societies and not limit ourselves to normalized and inherited mindsets.
Social solidarity
Human mobility rights can be enhanced by the quality of democracy and the rule of law or reduced by an exclusive focus on surveillance. The challenge is that security has increasingly become a business model that prioritizes social control over social solidarity. Without solidarity, distress and polarization find a fertile breeding ground. For instance, when in 2015, many refugees from Syria and other countries arrived in Europe, a frequent response was fear. Instead, examining historical sources on parallel situations in the past shows us the benefits of proposing a constructive engagement. The conclusion of studying this issue from a historical perspective is that the most advisable solution is to just abandon fear because fear paralyzes everything. Indeed, new opportunities come with new ideas and capacities that individuals bring as they cross frontiers. Empathy and inclusiveness can unravel this potential and foster connections that improve mutual support from a community-building perspective.
Conclusions
This study sheds light on how individuals can realize their full potential by moving beyond boundaries. This is associated with the possibility of learning from a new context and contributing to it. Human mobility rights facilitate personal development as well as innovative and open-minded worldviews. That is why it is fundamental to conduct in-depth research on this area, which brings us to a most significant identity-building question:
Who do we want to be?
EU MSCA H-2020 NAVSCHEN project: https://www.unive.it/pag/38081/
EU MSCA H-2020 NAVSCHEN project PI: https://www.unive.it/pag/38078/
Related project outputs:
Blanco Sío-López, Cristina, ‘Schengen as a Political Territory: Sources of Differentiation in the EU’s Free Movement of Persons’ from 1985’, Politique européenne, Special Issue 2020/1 (67–68): ‘Differentiated European integration beyond mainstream approaches’, pp. 26–52, Paris: CNRS –L’Harmattan, ISSN 1623–6297 — DOI: 10.3917/poeu.067.0026
https://www.cairn-int.info/journal-politique-europeenne-2020-1-page-26.htm
Blanco Sío-López, Cristina, ‘Decoupling Fundamental Rights and Security: A History of Human Mobility Rights in European Integration from 1985’, EuropeNow Journal, Council for European Studies (CES) — Columbia University, Issue 35, August 2020
