TURKEY’S EXTERNAL DIFFERENTIATED INTEGRATION WITH THE EU IN THE CONTEXT OF INTEGRATED BORDER MANAGEMENT AND ITS RELATIONS WITH FRONTEX

Öz

Purpose: This study aims to analyze the limits and drivers of Turkey’s external differentiated integration with the EU in the field of border management by focusing on the implementation of the Integrated Border Management (IBM) system by Turkey and the functional cooperation with the European Border and Coast Guard Agency FRONTEX.
Methodology: The theoretical part of the article conceptualizes external differentiated integration and its drivers based on different policy transfer models and literature mapping. In the empirical part, the scope of differentiated integration concerning the implementation of IBM and cooperation with FRONTEX is examined based on the European Commission’s Turkey reports. The factors affecting the scope and limits of integration are revealed by utilizing the mapping presented in the theoretical part of the article.
Findings: The main finding of the article is that while attractive and reliable incentives facilitate Turkey’s integration with the EU in the field of border management, sectoral politicization and high adaptation costs negatively affect the success of external differentiated integration.
Originality: As a new sub-field of European studies, theoretical/conceptual work on the EU’s external differentiated integration remain limited, particularly pertaining to EU-Turkey relations. Only a limited number of studies exists that analyze Turkey’s external differentiation with the EU in specific policy fields. This article provides a significant and original contribution to the literature by scrutinizing Turkey’s differentiated integration with the EU pertaining to the intriguing policy area of migration and border management from both policy-centered and theory-directed angles. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• External differentiated integration
• EU-Turkey relations
• migration
• border management
• FRONTEX
• Integrated Border Management
• Refugee Crisis

ENTEGRE SINIR YÖNETİMİ VE FRONTEX İLE İLİŞKİLER BAĞLAMINDA TÜRKİYE’NİN AB İLE HARİCİ FARKLILAŞTIRILMIŞ ENTEGRASYONU

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışma, Türkiye’nin sınır yönetimi konusunda AB ile harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonunun sınırlarını ve belirleyici faktörlerini Entegre Sınır Yönetimi (ESY) sisteminin uygulanması ve AB Sınır ve Sahil Güvenlik Ajansı (FRONTEX) ile işlevsel işbirliğinin durumu kapsamında analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır.
Yöntem: Makalenin kuramsal bölümünde, harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon ve belirleyici faktörleri, farklı politika aktarımı modelleri ve literatür haritalandırılması üzerinden kavramsallaştırılmaktadır. Ampirik bölümdeyse, ESY’nin uygulanması ve FRONTEX ile işbirliği konularında gerçekleşen farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonun kapsamı Avrupa Komisyonu Türkiye ilerleme/ülke raporları temel alınarak incelenmektedir. Entegrasyonun kapsamını ve sınırlarını etkileyen faktörler, makalenin kuramsal bölümünde gerçekleştirilen haritalandırmadan yararlanılarak ele alınmaktadır.
Bulgular: Makalenin ana bulgusu, cazip ve güvenilir teşviklerin Türkiye’nin sınır yönetimi konusunda AB ile entegrasyonunu kolaylaştırırken, sektörel siyasallaşmanın ve öngörülen yüksek uyum maliyetlerinin harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonu olumsuz etkilediğidir.
Özgünlük: AB-Türkiye ilişkilerinin ele alındığı yazında, harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon konusundaki kuramsal çalışmalar az sayıda olmakla birlikte, oldukça da yeni bir alandır. Bunun ötesinde, kuramsal tartışmaları farklı politika alanları bağlamında inceleyen sınırlı sayıda ampirik çalışma bulunmaktadır. Bu makale, AB-Türkiye ilişkilerini, göç ve sınır yönetimi gibi oldukça önemli ve güncel bir politika alanında, harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon tartışmaları bağlamında inceleyerek özellikle Türkçe yazına önemli ve özgün bir katkı sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon
• AB-Türkiye ilişkileri
• göç
• sınır yönetimi
• FRONTEX
• Entegre Sınır Yönetimi
• Mülteci Krizi

Kaynakça

1. AB Başkanlığı (2022). Ulusal entegre sınır yönetimi stratejisinin oluşturulması ve türkiye’nin entegre sınır yönetimini uygulaması için ulusal eylem planı’nın güncellenmesi. https://ab.gov.tr/taslak-ulusal-entegre-sinir-yonetimi-stratejisinin-olusturulmasi-ve-turkiyenin-entegre-sinir-yonetimini-uygulamasi-icin-_52372.html (Erişim tarihi: 1 Mart 2022)
2. AB Başkanlığı (2002). Türkiye’nin Avrupa Birliği’ne katılım sürecine ilişkin 2002 yılı ilerleme raporu. https://www.ab.gov.tr/files/AB_Iliskileri/AdaylikSureci/IlerlemeRaporlari/Turkiye_Ilerleme_Rap_2002.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 5 Nisan 2022)
3. AB Başkanlığı (1999). Türkiye’nin katılım yönünde ilerlemesi’ne ilişkin komisyon düzenli raporu. https://www.ab.gov.tr/files/AB_Iliskileri/AdaylikSureci/IlerlemeRaporlari/Turkiye_Ilerleme_Rap_1999.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 1 Mart 2022)
4. Alpan, B. ve Öztürk, A. E. (2022). Turkish foreign policy in the Balkans amidst ‘soft power’and ‘de-Europeanisation’. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 1(19), 45-63.
5. Amnesty International (2021). Greece: Violence, lies and pushbacks. https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/EUR2543072021ENGLISH.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 5 Mart 2022)
6. Baird, T. (2015). Functional actorness? Border security in the EU and Turkey. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(12), 849-859.
7. Bilgin, A. (2017). Göçmenlere yönelik deniz operasyonlarında frontex’in müdahale yetkisinin uluslararası hukuk kapsamında değerlendirilmesi. Hacettepe Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), 55-82.
8. Börzel, T. A. ve Risse, T. (2018). From the euro to the Schengen crises: European integration theories, politicization, and identity politics. Journal of European Public Policy, 25(1), 83-108.

9. Börzel, T. A. ve Risse, T. (2012). When Europeanisation meets diffusion: Exploring new territory. West European Politics, 35(1), 192-207.
10. Bürgin, A. (2014). Strategic learning, limited Europeanization: How the Turkish national police used twinning to prepare itself for the planned new border agency. Turkish Studies, 15(3), 458-475.
11. Cianciara, A. K. ve Szymański, A. (2020). Differentiated integration: towards a new model of European Union–Turkey relations?. Turkish Studies, 21(2), 254-273.
12. Cihangir-Tetik, D. ve Müftüler-Baç, M. (2018). Turkey’s compliance with the European Union’s development policy: a pattern of external differentiated integration?. Journal of European Integration, 40(7), 939-959.
13. Commission of the European Communities (2007). Commission staff working document: Turkey 2007 progress report, SEC (2007) 1436. Brussels, 6 November 2007, https://www.ab.gov.tr/files/AB_Iliskileri/Tur_En_Realitons/Progress/turkey_progress_report_2007.pdf. (Erişim tarihi: 20 Mart 2022)
14. Council of the European Union. (2018). Enlargement and stabilisation and association process—Council conclusions. 10555/18. Brüksel. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35863/st10555-en18.pdf. (Erişim tarihi: 1 Mart 2022)
15. Council of the European Union (2006). Council Conclusions on Integrated Border Management, https://europa.eu/capacity4dev/ibm-eap/documents/2-council-conclusions-integrated-border-management-jha-council-4-5-december-2006. (Erişim tarihi: 21 Mart 2022)
16. de Wilde, P., Leupold, A. ve Schmidtke, H. (2016). Introduction: the differentiated politicisation of European governance. West European Politics, 39(1), 3-22.
17. Dimitriadi, A., Kaya, A., Kale, B. ve Zurabishvili, T. (2018). EU-Turkey relations and irregular migration: Transactional cooperation in the making. FEUTURE Online Paper, 16. https://feuture.uni-koeln.de/sites/feuture/user_upload/FEUTURE_Online_Paper_No_16_D6.3.pdf. (Erişim tarihi: 28 Mart 2022)
18. Elitok, S.P. (2013). Turkish migration policy over the last decade: a gradual shift towards better management and good governance. Turkish Policy Quarterly, 12(1): 161- 172.
19. Erdoğan, M. (2020). Syrian barometer 2019: A framework for achieving social cohesion with Syrians in Turkey. Ankara: Orion Kitabevi.
20. European Free Trade Association (EFTA) (1994). Agreement on the European Economic Area, (OJ No L 1, 3.1.1994, p. 3; and EFTA States’ official gazettes). fta.int/media/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main%20Text%20of%20the%20Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf. (Erişim tarihi: 12 Mart 2022)
21. European Commission (2021a) Commission staff working document: Turkey 2021 Report, SWD(2021) 290.Brussels, 19.10. 2021. https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-10/Turkey%202021%20report.PDF. (Erişim tarihi: 8 Mart 2022) European Commission (2021b). 2021 communication on eu enlargement policy, COM(2021) 644 final. Strasbourg, 19.10.2021. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/2021-communication-eu-enlargement-policy_en (Erişim tarihi: 7 Mart 2022). European Commission (2020a) 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, COM(2020) 609. Brussels, 23.10.2020. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2020%3A609%3AFIN. (Erişim tarihi: 8 Mart 2022).
22. European Commission (2020b). Turkey 2020 Report. Brussels, 6.10.2020, SWD(2020) 355 final. https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-10/turkey_report_2020.pdf. (Erişim tarihi: 3 Mart 2022).
23. European Commission (2018) Commission Staff Working Document: Turkey 2018 Report, SWD(2018) 153.Brussels, 17.04.2018. https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2019-05/20180417-turkey-report.pdf. (Erişim tarihi: 9 Mart 2022)
24. European Commission (2014) Commission Staff Working Document: Turkey 2014 Progress Report, SWD(2014) 307. Brussels, 8.10.2014. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014SC0307&from=BG. (Erişim tarihi: 2 Mart 2022)
25. European Commission (2013) Commission Staff Working Document: Turkey 2013 Progress Report, SWD(2013) 417. Brussels, 16.10.2013. https://www.ab.gov.tr/files/2013%20ilerleme%20raporu/tr_rapport_2013_en.pdf. (Erişim tarihi: 2 Mart 2022)
26. European Commission (2010) Guidelines for integrated border management in European Commission external cooperation. https://www.icmpd.org/file/download/48280/file/Guidelines%2520for%2520Integrated%2520Border%2520Management%2520in%2520European%2520Commission%2520External%2520Cooperation%2520EN.pdf. (Erişim tarihi: 5 Mart 2022)
27. European Commission (2002). Towards integrated management of the external borders of the member states of the European Union. Brussels, 7.5.2002, COM(2002) 233 final. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52002DC0233&from=EN. (Erişim tarihi: 5 Mart 2022)
28. European Council (2016). EU-Turkey statement. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/18/eu-turkey-statement/. (Erişim tarihi: 15 Mart 2022)
29. European Parliament (2021). Report on the fact-finding investigation on Frontex concerning alleged fundamental rights violations. Working Report. 14.07.2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/238156/14072021%20Final%20Report%20FSWG_en.pdf(Erişim tarihi: 5 Mart 2022)
30. FIDH – Migreurop – EMHRN (2014). Frontex – Between Greece and Turkey: At the Border of Denial. http://migreurop.org/IMG/pdf/rapport_en_web-2.pdf. (Erişim tarih: 6 Mart 2022)
31. Gstöhl, S. (2016). ‘Brexit’ lessons from third countries’ differentiated integration with the EU’s internal market. College of Europe Policy Brief, 14. http://aei.pitt.edu/93089/. (Erişim tarihi: 6 Mart 2022).
32. Human Rights Watch (2022). “Their Faces Were Covered” Greece’s Use of Migrants as Police Auxiliaries in Pushbacks. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/greece0422_web.pdf. (Erişim tarih: 3 Mart 2022)
33. İçişleri Bakanlığı İller İdaresi Genel Müdürlüğü (2019). Türkiye, Yunanistan ve Bulgaristan arasında sınır yönetimi alanında bölgesel işbirliği aşama-2 projesi. https://www.icisleri.gov.tr/illeridaresi/turkiye-yunanistan-ve-bulgaristan-arasinda-sinir-yonetimi-alaninda-bolgesel-isbirligi-asama-2-projesi. (Erişim tarih: 3 Mart 2022) Karakas, C. (2013). EU–Turkey: integration without full membership or membership without full integration? A conceptual framework for accession alternatives. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 51(6), 1057-1073.
34. Keohane, R. O. ve Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and Interdependence. (2nd ed.). New York: Harper Collins.
35. Kirişçi, K. (2007). Border management and EU-Turkey relations: Convergence or deadlock. European University Institute CARIM-RR 2007/3. https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/7988/CARIM-RR_2007_03.pdf. (Erişim tarihi: 7 Mart 2022)
36. Lavenex, S. (2015) The External face of differentiated ıntegration: third country participation in eu sectoral bodies. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(6), 836-853.
37. Lavenex, S. (2011). Concentric circles of flexible ‘EUropean’ integration: A typology of EU external governance relations. Comparative European Politics, 9(3), 372-393.
38. Lavenex, S. (2008). A governance perspective on the European neighbourhood policy: integration beyond conditionality?. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(6), 938-955.
39. Lavenex, S. (2004). EU external governance in 'wider Europe'. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(4), 680-700.
40. Lavenex, S. ve Schimmelfennig, F. (2009). EU rules beyond EU borders: theorizing external governance in European politics. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(6), 791-812.
41. Lavenex, S. ve Wichmann, N. (2009). The external governance of EU internal security. Journal of European Integration, 31(1), 83-102.
42. Leonard, S. (2010). EU border security and migration into the European Union: Frontex and securitization through practices. European Security, 19(2), 231-254.
43. Leruth, B. ve Lord, C. (2015). Differentiated integration in the European Union: a concept, a process, a system or a theory? Journal of European Public Policy, 22(6), 754-763.
44. Müftüler-Baç, M. (2017). Turkey’s future with the European Union: an alternative model of differentiated integration. Turkish Studies, 18(3), 416-438. Official Journal of the EU (2016). Regulation (EU) 2016/1624. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32016R1624&from=EN. (Erişim tarihi: 9 Mart 2022) Özer, Y. (2020). External differentiated integration between Turkey and the European Union: the customs union and its revision. Turkish Studies, 21(3), 436-461.
45. Schäuble, W. ve Lamers, K. (1994). Überlegungen zur europäischen Politik. https://www.bundesfinanzministerium.de/Content/DE/Downloads/schaeuble-lamers-papier-1994.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1. (Erişim tarihi: 9 Mart 2022)
46. Schimmelfennig, F., Leuffen, D. ve Rittberger, B. (2015). The European Union as a system of differentiated integration: interdependence, politicization and differentiation. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(6), 764-782. Schimmelfennig, F. ve Sedelmeier, U. (2004). Governance by conditionality: EU rule transfer to the candidate countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(4), 661-679.
47. Scholten, P. ve Penninx, R. (2016). The multilevel governance of migration and integration. İçinde B. Garcés-Mascareñas & R. Penninx (der.), Integration processes and policies in Europe: Contexts, Levels and Actors, (s. 91-108). Springer Cham.
48. Turhan, E. ve Wessels, W. (2021). The European Council as a key driver of EU–Turkey Relations: Central functions, ınternal dynamics, and evolving preferences. İçinde W. Reiners & E. Turhan (der.) EU-Turkey Relations: Theories, Institutions, and Policies, (s. 185-217). Palgrave Macmillan Cham.
49. Turhan, E. ve Yıldız, A. (2022). Turkey’s external differentiated integration with the EU in the field of migration governance: the case of border management. İçinde B. Leruth, S. Gänzle and J. Trondal (der.), The Routledge Handbook of Differentiation in the European Union. (s. 502-518) Londra: Routledge.
50. Turhan, E. (2018). Avrupa Birliği’nin üçüncü ülkelerle harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon modelleri ve Türkiye-AB ilişkilerinin geleceği: neoliberal bir yaklaşım. SİYASAL: Journal of Political Sciences, 27(1), 95-120.
51. Turhan, E. (2017). Thinking out of the accession box: The potential and limitations of internal and external differentiated integration between Turkey and the EU. İçinde M. Waechter (der.), Europe–Against the Tide, (s. 43-59). Nomos: Baden-Baden.
52. Türkiye Atom Enerjisi Kurumu (Turkish Atomic Energy Authority - TAEK) (2020). Twinning projects in Turkey. www.taek.gov.tr/en/twinning-project/home/227-what-is-a-twinning-project/1325-twinning-projects-in-turkey.html. (Erişim adresi: 16 Mart 2022).
53. Üstübici, A. (2019). The impact of externalized migration governance on Turkey: technocratic migration governance and the production of differentiated legal status. Comparative Migration Studies, 7(46), 1-18.
54. Wallace, H. ve Ridley, A. (1985). Europe the challenge of diversity, Chatham House Papers. Londra: Routledge.
55. Wessel, R.A., Marin, L. ve Matera, C. (2011). The External dimension of the eu’s area of freedom, security and justice. İçinde C Eckes & T. Konstadinides (der.), Crime within the area of freedom, security and justice: A European Public Order içinde, (s. 272-300). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56. Yanaşmayan, Z., Planck, M., Üstübici, A. ve Kaşlı, Z. (2019). Under the shadow of civilizationist populist discourses: political debates on refugees in Turkey. New Diversities, 21(2), 37-51.
57. Yıldız, A. G. (2016). The European Union’s immigration policy: Managing migration in Turkey and Morocco. Londra: Palgrave Macmillan.
58. Youngs, R. (2009). Democracy promotion as external governance?. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(6), 895-915.
59. Zaiotti, R. (2020). Border management. İçinde A. Ripoll Servent & F. Trauner (der.), The Routledge Handbook of Justice and Home. Londra: Routledge.