Farklılaştırılmış Entegrasyon ve Avrupa Birliği Göç Yönetişiminde Üye Devletlerin Farklılaşan Tercihleri

Öz

Bu çalışma, AB göç politikasındaki farklılaşma dinamiklerini Visegrad grubu, Akdeniz ülkeleri ve entegrasyon yanlısı çekirdek devletler olmak üzere üç aktör grubu üzerinden karşılaştırmalı biçimde analiz etmektedir. Farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon kuramı çerçevesinde geliştirilen temel argüman, AB göç politikasındaki ayrışmanın tek bir grubun siyasi direncine indirgenemeyeceği ve birbirini besleyen çok katmanlı bir yapısal döngü oluşturduğudur. Visegrad grubunun egemenlik odaklı ideolojik reddi, Akdeniz ülkelerinin Dublin mimarisinin yarattığı orantısız yükten beslenen reform talepleri ve çekirdek devletlerin dayanışmacı söylemine eşlik eden fiili direktif uyumsuzlukları, bütünüyle farklı gerekçelerle aynı sonuca, yani kapsamlı bir ortak politikanın imkânsızlığına katkıda bulunmaktadır. Bu döngüsel yapı, 2024 yılında kabul edilen Göç ve İltica Paktı’nda da kendini yeniden üretmiştir. Esnek dayanışma mekanizması, Visegrad ülkeleri tarafından mali katkı yoluyla yeniden yerleştirmenin fiili bir ikamesi olarak değerlendirilirken, Akdeniz ülkeleri düzenlemenin yük paylaşımı sorununu temelden çözmediğini vurgulamıştır. Avrupa Komisyonu’nun ihlal verileri de bu tablonun belgesel kanıtını sunmaktadır. Göç alanındaki direktiflere yönelik kronik uyumsuzlukların yalnızca çevre bloklarla sınırlı olmadığı, bizzat entegrasyonun tarihsel savunucusu konumundaki devletleri de kapsadığı görülmektedir. Bulgular, “à la carte” yönetişim normunun AB göç politikasında tüm üye devlet grupları için geçerli yapısal bir norm haline geldiğine ve mevcut reform girişimlerinin bu normu dönüştürmekten ziyade kurumsallaştırma eğiliminde olduğuna işaret etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon
• Avrupa Birliği
• Göç Yönetişimi
• Avrupa Entegrasyonu
• merkez-çevre yaklaşımı

Differentiated Integration and the Diverging Preferences of Member States in European Union Migration Governance

Abstract

This study comparatively analyzes the dynamics of differentiation in EU migration policy through three actor groups: the Visegrad bloc, the Mediterranean countries, and the pro-integration core states. The central argument, developed within the framework of differentiated integration theory, is that divergence in EU migration policy cannot be reduced to the political resistance of a single bloc but rather constitutes a multi-layered structural cycle in which each layer reinforces the others. The sovereignty-oriented ideological rejection of the Visegrad bloc, the reform demands of the Mediterranean countries fueled by the disproportionate burden created by the Dublin architecture, and the de facto directive non-compliance accompanying the solidarist discourse of the core states all contribute, through entirely different rationales, to the same outcome: the impossibility of a comprehensive common policy. This cyclical structure has reproduced itself in the Migration and Asylum Pact adopted in 2024. The flexible solidarity mechanism has been regarded by the Visegrad countries as a de facto substitute for relocation through financial contributions, while the Mediterranean countries have emphasized that the arrangement does not fundamentally resolve the burden-sharing problem. The European Commission’s infringement data also provide documentary evidence of this picture. Chronic non-compliance with directives in the field of migration is not confined to peripheral blocs alone but extends to the very states that have historically championed integration. The findings indicate that the “à la carte” governance norm has become a structural norm applicable to all member state groups in EU migration policy and that current reform initiatives tend to institutionalize rather than transform this norm.

Keywords

• Differentiated Integration
• European Union
• Migration Governance
• European Integration
• Core-Periphery Aproach

Kaynakça

1. AIDA. (2021). Country Report: Hungary. ECRE: Hungarian Helsinki Comittee.
2. Bickerton, C. J., Hodson, D., & Puetter, U. (2015). The New Intergovernmentalism: States and Supranational Actors in the Post-Maastricht Era. Oxford University Press.
3. Bíró-Nagy, A. (2022). Orbán’s political jackpot: Migration and the Hungarian electorate. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 48(2), 405–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2020.1853905
4. Caiani, M., & Graziano, P. (2019). Understanding varieties of populism in times of crises. West European Politics, 42(6), 1141–1158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2019.1598062
5. Chikhachev, A. Y. (2023). France’s Migration Policy under President E. Macron: A European Dimension. Journal of International Analytics, 14(3), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.46272/2587-8476-2023-14-3-23-40
6. Comte, E., & Lavenex, S. (2022). Differentiation and De-Differentiation in EU Border Controls, Asylum and Police Cooperation. The International Spectator, 57(1), 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2022.2021011
7. Deutsche Welle. (2015, August 25). Germany suspends “Dublin rules” for Syrians. Retrieved March 18, 2026, from https://www.dw.com/en/germany-suspends-dublin-rules-for-syrians/a-18671698
8. Drulák, P., N. Hlaváčková, H., Zákravský, J., & Ponížilová, M. (2024). Roles and ideologies in foreign policy: The Czech positions on the EU migration crisis. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 32(4), 1259–1272. https://doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2024.2348160

9. Duszczyk, M., Podgórska, K., & Pszczółkowska, D. (2020). From mandatory to voluntary. Impact of V4 on the EU relocation scheme. European Politics and Society, 21(4), 470–487. https://doi.org/10.1080/23745118.2019.1672367
10. Dutta, A. (2023). A divided “Visegrad Four” navigates relations with the European Union. New Delhi, India: Observer Research Foundation (ORF).
11. Dyson, K., & Sepos, A. (Eds.). (2010). Which Europe? London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230289529
12. ECJ. Joined Cases C-715/17, C-718/17 and C-719/17, (2017).
13. ECJ. European Commission v Republic of Poland and Others. , Joined Cases C-715/17, C-718/17, C-719/17 (ECJ April 2, 2020).
14. Euroepan Council. Council Decision (EU) 2015/1523 of 14 September 2015 establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and of Greece. , 239 OJ L § (2015).
15. European Commission. Directive 2014/36/EU European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the conditions of entry and stay of third-country nationals for the purpose of employment as seasonal workers. , Pub. L. No. Document 32014L0036, 094 OJ L (2014).
16. European Commission. European Agenda on Migration. , Pub. L. No. COM(2015) 240 final, § Document 52015DC0240 (2015).
17. European Commission. New Pact on Migration and Asylum. , COM(2020) 609 finali § (2020).
18. European Commission. (2021a). June infringements package: Key decisions (Infringement Decisions No. INF/21/2743). Brussels. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_21_2743
19. European Commission. (2021b). Monitoring the application of European Union law 2021 Annual Report (No. SWD(2022) 194 final). Retrieved from https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/793edb79-7b3f-471d-aa9b-679fbcd2e98a_en?filename=com_2022_344_2_en.pdf
20. European Commission. (2025). Infringement Decisions. Retrieved July 8, 2025, from Migration and Home Affairs website: https://ec.europa.eu/implementing-eu-law/search-infringement-decisions/?lang_code=da&r_dossier=INFR(2022)0418&langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byDecision&dg=HOME&page=1&size=10&order=desc&sortColumns=decisionDate
21. European Court of Auditors. (2019). Asylum, relocation and return of migrants: Time to step up action to address disparities between objectives and results (Special Report No. 24). Retrieved from https://www.eca.europa.eu/lists/ecadocuments/sr19_24/sr_migration_management_en.pdf
22. European Parliament. (2022, July 11). The EU response to the Ukraine refugee crisis. Retrieved March 19, 2026, from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20220324STO26151/the-eu-response-to-the-ukraine-refugee-crisis
23. Eurostat. (2025). Population on 1 January [Data set]. Eurostat. https://doi.org/10.2908/TPS00001 Geddes, A., Hadj-Abdou, L., & Brumat, L. (2020). Migration and Mobility in the European Union (2nd edition). Bloomsbury Academic.
24. Holzinger, K., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2012). Differentiated Integration in the European Union: Many Concepts, Sparse Theory, Few Data. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(2), 292–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2012.641747
25. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2016). Community, Scale, and Regional Governance: A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance, Volume II (Vols. 1–2). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198766971.001.0001
26. Hungarian Helsinki Commitee. (2023). Country Report: Hungary. The Asylum Information Database (AIDA): European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE). Retrieved from European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) website: https://asylumineurope.org/reports/country/hungary/annex-i-transposition-ceas-national-legislation/
27. Kanat, S., & Uyğun, E. D. (2026). Assessment of the EU Migration and Asylum Policy with a New Intergovernmental Approach. Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi, (Advanced Online Publication), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.32450/aacd.1695918
28. Kolliker, A. (2006). Flexibility and European Unification: The Logic of Differentiated Integration. Lanham, Md.
29. Laffan, B. (2021). Core–Periphery Relations and European Integration. In H. Wallace, N. Koutsiaras, & G. Pagoulatos (Eds.), Europe’s Transformations (1st ed., pp. 132–146). Oxford University PressOxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192895820.003.0009
30. Landini, I. (2022, April 4). Visegrad countries U-turn on migration: Fresh impetus for EU asylum policy? Retrieved March 18, 2026, from EURAC website: https://www.eurac.edu/en/blogs/mobile-people-and-diverse-societies/visegrad-countries-u-turn-on-migration-fresh-impetus-for-eu-asylum-policy
31. Leruth, B., Gänzle, S., & Trondal, J. (Eds.). (2022). The Routledge handbook of differentiation in the European Union (First Edition). New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
32. Leuffen, D., Rittberger, B., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2013). Differentiated Integration: Explaining Variation in the European Union (2012th edition). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
33. Leuffen, D., Rittberger, B., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2022). Integration and Differentiation in the European Union: Theory and Policies. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76677-1
34. Magone, J., Laffan, B., & Schweiger, C. (Eds.). (2016). Core-periphery Relations in the European Union: Power and Conflict in a Dualist Political Economy. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315712994
35. Menguaslan, H., & Arman, M. N. (2022). Turkish and Libyan Refugee Deals: A Critical Analysis of the European Union’s Securitarian Irregular Migration Policy. Journal of Liberty and International Affairs, 8(1), 340–359. https://doi.org/10.47305/JLIA2281340m
36. Nesti, G., & Graziano, P. (2022). United in diversity?: The preferences of populist parties in the European Parliament. In J. Sondel-Cedarmas & F. Berti (Eds.), The Right-Wing Critique of Europe. London: Routledge.
37. Niemann, A., & Zaun, N. (2023). Introduction: EU external migration policy and EU migration governance: introduction. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 49(12), 2965–2985. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2023.2193710
38. Official Journal of the European Union. Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011. , L 337/9 § Document 32011L0095 (2011).
39. Official Journal of the European Union. Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast). , 180 OJ L § (2013).
40. Official Journal of the European Union. Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection (recast). , 180 OJ L § (2013).
41. Official Journal of the European Union. Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast). , Pub. L. No. L 180/31, § Document 32013R0604, 180 OJ L (2013).
42. Ripoll Servent, A., & Zaun, N. (2020). Asylum Policy and European Union Politics. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1057
43. Schimmelfennig, F. (2018). Brexit: Differentiated disintegration in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 25(8), 1154–1173. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2018.1467954
44. Schimmelfennig, F. (2022). Differentiated integration has been of limited use in the EU’s polycrisis. European University Institute. https://doi.org/10.2870/02001
45. Schimmelfennig, F., & Winzen, T. (2014). Instrumental and Constitutional Differentiation in the European Union. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(2), 354–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12103
46. Schimmelfennig, F., & Winzen, T. (2020). Differentiated EU integration: Maps and modes [Working Paper]. European University Institute. Retrieved from European University Institute website: https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/66880
47. Schimmelfennig, F., & Winzen, T. (2023). Cascading opt-outs? The effect of the Euro and migration crises on differentiated integration in the European Union. European Union Politics, 24(1), 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221121720
48. Scipioni, M., & Urso, G. (2018). Migration Policy Indexes (JCR Technical Report No. EUR 29090 EN). Joint Research Center: European Commission.
49. Scipioni, Marco. (2018). Failing forward in EU migration policy? EU integration after the 2015 asylum and migration crisis. Journal of European Public Policy, 25(9), 1357–1375. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2017.1325920
50. Silga, J. (2022). Differentiation in the EU Migration Policy: The “Fractured” Values of the EU. European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2022 7(2), 909–928. https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/586
51. Smeets, S., & Beach, D. (2023). ‘It is like déjà vu all over again’ an inside analysis of the management of EU migration reform. Journal of European Integration, 45(6), 889–909. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2023.2209273
52. Stubb, A. (1996). A Categorization of Differentiated Integration. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(2), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.1996.tb00573.x
53. Szalai, M., Csornai, Z., & Garai, N. (2017). V4 Migration Policy: Conflicting Narratives and Interpretative Frameworks. Institute for Foreign Affairs and Trade, 19–30.
54. Tanács-Mandák, F. (2025). The Hungarian governments in the decade of crises (2015–2024). Frontiers in Political Science, 7, 1541887. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2025.1541887
55. Thielemann, E. (2018). Why Refugee Burden‐Sharing Initiatives Fail: Public Goods, Free‐Riding and Symbolic Solidarity in the EU. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12662
56. Trauner, F., & Servent, A. R. (2016). The Communitarization of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice: Why Institutional Change does not Translate into Policy Change. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 54(6), 1417–1432. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12397
57. Turhan, E., & Yıldız, A. (2022). Turkey’s external differentiated integration with the EU in the field of migration governance: The case of border management. In The Routledge Handbook of Differentiation in the European Union. Routledge.
58. Uyğun, E. D., & Kanat, S. (2025). Avrupa Birliği Nereye? Farklılaştırılmış Entegrasyon Tartışmaları Gölgesinde Birlik Göç Politikasının İstatistiksel Anatomisi. Yetkin Yayınları.
59. Vaagland, K., & Zaun, N. (2025). Strategising solidarity: An examination of the Visegrád group’s role and motivations in EU migration policies. Journal of European Integration, 47(4), 559–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2024.2383954
60. Végh, Z. (2018). From Pro-European Alliance to Eurosceptic Protest Group? The case of the Visegrad Group. Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies, European Policy Analysis(7).
61. Zaun, N. (2017). EU Asylum Policies. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39829-7
62. Zaun, N., & Ripoll Servent, A. (2021). One step forward, two steps back: The ambiguous role of Germany in EU Asylum policies. Journal of European Integration, 43(2), 157–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2021.1877692