Securitization over Solutions: European Migration Policy in Tunisia

Immigration underwent a conceptual shift following the collapse of the soviet union, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the rise of neoliberalism. Privilege-based immigration emerged, where visas became a requirement to access most countries. This underlying model shaped immigration policies, designed to fulfill states' labour market needs while maintaining national sovereignty regarding immigration. Even though the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes the right to freedom of movement, many societies are concerned about migrants because of language, religion, and historical colonial relations, which has transformed migration from an economic phenomenon into a security issue. 

Securitization, a concept introduced by the Copenhagen school, involves framing a phenomenon as a security threat, thereby rallying public support. It frames the issue as an imminent threat that jeopardizes the physical and moral survival of a society, an identity, or an individual. In Europe, political discourses frame immigration as the source or as a major contributing factor to contemporary social problems, such as unemployment, organized crime, drug trafficking, and terrorist threats. This narrative suggests that it compromises stability while eroding national identity. European media fosters anti-immigration public sentiments by demonizing immigration and associating it with violence. Newspapers focus their articles on crimes committed by migrants, even if they are insignificant, without reporting equivalent offences committed by citizens. 

The media writes sensational headlines, such as "The Storming of the Italian Coasts" (L’Unita, 1993), "The Invasion of the Desperate" (La  Repubblica, 1997), “Ultimate Emergency Against the Threat of  Criminal Invasion” ( Il Corriere della Sera, 1997) in Italian media, and “Illegal Immigration: France Under Pressure” (Le Figaro, 2013), “Against Illegal Immigration, Conditions for Aid to the Maghreb Must Be Imposed” (Le Monde,  2013) in French media. The right-wing press goes beyond the contemporary situation and imagines future scenarios where national identity is threatened. In Le Figaro, an article titled "Will We Be French By 2025?" with an image of a woman wearing a headscarf was published.

In this ideological context, the EU has attempted to curb illegal immigration by outsourcing border control to neighbouring countries and making immigration management deals with source countries in exchange for financial support. A central point of departure for migrants toward Europe has been Libya: around 32,000 left in 2021, triple the number compared to 2019. This has led the EU to deal with the Libyan Coast Guard which is, in reality, run by militias. Human-rights groups and journalists have reported brutal conditions such as rape, torture, and slavery in prisons. Although a notorious camp named Al Mabani closed, new camps have probably opened farther from scrutiny.

To avoid detention and inhumane treatment in Libya, migrants have begun travelling to Tunisia to cross the Mediterranean.  In 2023, 75,000 migrants arrived in  Italy from the Tunisian coast. In reaction to this and after complicated negotiations, European leaders signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to curb migration to Europe. Visibly, no lessons were learned from the previous agreement with Libya, through which the EU encouraged an infrastructure of abuse against migrants and refugees. 

In July 2023, while European representatives were shaking Tunisian President Kais Saied's hand over a new partnership on migration issues, hundreds of refugees were rounded up by Tunisian Security Forces in the desert and abandoned without access to food, water, or shelter. Reports of these events were later called 'some videos from the desert or something' by The European People’s Party President Manfred Weber. 

The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, referred to the deal as a "blueprint" for future agreements. Known as the "migrant deal," the MoU covers five areas of partnership: macro-economic stability, economy and trade, green energy transition, people-to-people contacts, and migration and mobility. The EU provided €105 million to fund Tunisia's border control while facilitating the entry of highly-skilled Tunisians, €150 million to reduce Tunisia's inflation and ease the unprecedented economic crisis, and €900 million in macroeconomic support in exchange for Tunia agreeing to sign an IMF bailout. Tunisia committed to cooperating in the fight against smuggling and migrant trafficking to carry out rescue operations along its coast. Still, it did not accept the return of non-Tunisian migrants who passed through the country to reach the EU, to Italy's disappointment.

The EU's border enforcement operations, which limit the movements of sub-saharan migrants to Tunisia, and the violence that comes with imprisonment operations produce social tensions within Tunisian society expressed through anti-black racism. Moreover, Kais Saied, the current president of Tunisia, used incendiary rhetoric against black people, accusing them of a conspiracy to replace Tunisia's Arab majority and bringing with them "violence, crimes, and unacceptable practices." He offered himself as the solution: an outsider who ran for office to upend the status quo and secure his country's borders. But if this is genuinely a plot to change Tunisia's demography, it is poor. There are just 21,000 illegal migrants from sub-Saharan Africa in a country of 12 million inhabitants. Many do manual labour, with wage theft and abuse being common. However, Kais Saied found a receptive audience. His discourse encouraged mobs to attack sub-saharan migrants with petrol bombs; thousands were evicted from their lodgings, and dozens were assaulted and robbed, further dividing Tunisian society.

Additionally, the EU's agreement with Tunisia risks legitimizing an increasingly authoritarian regime led by a President who suspended much of the constitution, dismantled nearly all checks on executive power, repressed dissent, and imprisoned political opponents, critics, lawyers, journalists and judges. A legal scholar by training, Mr Saied routinely uses the law to thwart challenges to his authority.

Moreover, previous associations between the EU and Tunisia caused the current migration flows in the first place. The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) and Tunisia's 1995 association agreement with the EU liberalized trade but worsened economic inequality and undermined Tunisia’s industrial base. The agreement was framed as promoting free trade, but it led to the displacement of farmers and manufacturing workers, particularly in Tunisia’s interior. This built on prior decades of economic liberalization, debt crises, and structural adjustment programs that reversed post-colonial industrialization efforts. Like many Global South countries, Tunisia became dependent on exporting low-value-added goods for European markets, which reduced wages, worsened underemployment, and increased foreign debt. Promises by the World Bank, IMF, and European officials that liberalization would improve trade balances and job creation proved false. Instead, Tunisia faced worsening trade deficits, loss of tariff revenue, and dependence on foreign loans. These economic conditions have fueled Tunisian migration to the EU, including highly skilled professionals and economic migrants. Workers migrate to follow capital flows, typically into the EU, to seek better opportunities, often at the expense of Tunisia’s development.

As Amnesty International’s Advocacy Director at the organization’s European Institutions Office, Eve Geddie said, “By focusing their policies and funding on containment and outsourcing of border control rather than ensuring safe and legal routes for those trying to cross borders safely, EU leaders are once again embarking on failed policies that are based on callous disregard for basic human rights standards.” Agreements to retain people in non-EU countries do not save lives or reduce reliance on illegal routes. Instead, migrants are forced to take even more perilous routes to avoid interception, and smugglers profit as migrants increasingly rely on them. In addition, this method does not address the root cause of migration. Europe claims to hold human rights in high regard. Still, they have yet to publicly condemn violations committed against migrants who languish in urgent need of humanitarian assistance, with international media reporting numerous deaths and abuses. 

Externalization policies are immoral, dangerous and potentially unlawful. Moving forward, EU leaders should reverse course and offer collaborative deals that provide more participatory migration governance, including civil society actors from Tunisia and the EU block, which may lead to more balanced, effective and mutually beneficial migration policies in the Mediterranean. That is the demand of influential Tunisian civil society actors, who do not take a radical antagonist stand against the EU but rather a vision of equitable partnership. Doing so would restore credibility to the founding values of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.