Frontex’s Disseminated Ideology: Constructing a Racialized, Gendered and Illegitimate Other

Through its Annual Risk Analysis Reports, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, also known as Frontex, disseminates a particular ideological view of migration and border control. This view seems to be based on a need to create a racialized, gendered, and illegitimate “other” to justify the border control services, as well as their financial and material development. Moreover, upon further study of the reports, it appears that the implicit narrative processes it uses are not neutral but fundamentally racist.

In May 2022, the Swiss voted on a bill supporting the financial and logistical increase in means of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, known as Frontex. The Federal Council and the Parliament encouraged the people to vote in favor of the bill and it was accepted by a majority “Yes” (71.48%).

Even though most voters probably accepted the bill to strengthen the country’s relationship with the European Union, it feels important to highlight the kind of organization and the ideology it conveys that the Swiss ended up voting for.

Figure 1. Wordcloud of Frontex Annual Risk Analysis (2012 – 2021)

Frontex is a border defense agency that gained its central position and power after the so-called “refugee crisis,” – in reality, a crisis of migration policies. Its growing importance shows Europe’s willingness to militarize its borders and to criminalize one type of migrant in particular: the racialized migrant from the global south.

Moreover, the agency itself is the subject of several ongoing investigations on border blockades, illegal deportation, and the endangerment of migrants, as well as a lack of respect for fundamental human rights (Arguments – Frontex Referendum, 2022).

As various academics have pointed out, the agency enjoys significant influence because of its role of an expert on border control and is thus able to secure more funding for the militarization of its personnel, the use of advanced surveillance technology, and the provision of vehicles for the return of migrants (Kalkman, 2021; Sachseder et al., 2022).

The Agency’s strength in communication is due in large part to its Risk Analysis Reports, which it publishes annually. Through these reports, it legitimizes its position by using a specific argumentative structure highlighting problems that suit its narrative. Frontex also proposes solutions that imply its role as the main actor in their implementation and concludes by requesting more means for its activities. Upon study, it becomes clear that these reports are not neutral and convey rather problematic ideas.

Racialized and Gendered Other

When looking at the Annual Risk Analyses (ARAs) produced by Frontex, we discover that terms related to security and threats are recurrently used. Another latent theme also appears in the reports: the gendered and racialized migrant. This theme is further illustrated by Sachseder et al. (2022), who, inspired by postcolonial feminist literature (Moffette & Vadasaria, 2016), show how the gendered and racialized stereotypes of migrants in Frontex’s reports allow for its discourse of expansion.

The gendered and racialized stereotypes reify a classical dichotomy in the collective imagination of migration: on the one hand, the masculinized economic migrants, who are racialized, undeserving, and generally a danger to culture, economy, and security; and on the other hand, the feminized migrants, victims without agency, and ultimately deserving of protection.

These stereotypes also serve as the basis of Frontex’s narrative and allow it to legitimize its position by preventing these dangerous and unworthy migrants from reaching Europe (provision of security) and by saving the deserving refugees at the border (humanitarian assistance).

Such a gendered and racialized image also plays an important role in labeling what can be considered a crisis. Even though the migration from Ukraine is much more significant than the 2015 “migration crisis,” it was not labeled as a crisis, nor did they receive similar treatment at the borders than the refugees of 2015.

In the collective imagination, migration from the global south is seen as mainly economic male migration. Whereas in the case of Ukrainians, as the vast majority are women and children from Europe, these migrants are therefore seen as “non-racialized” and “deserving” of protection.

Cultural Matter

Having no biological basis to justify itself, racism has mutated into cultural racism, where it is the culture of the other that is considered inferior or incompatible (Salem & Thompson, 2016).

The issue of cultural origin appears in the 2016 ARA (Frontex, 2016) followed by the 2015 terrorist attack in Paris, which made terrorism inseparable from migration in public opinion (Nail, 2016).

In the scenarios section, which is an important tool of Frontex’s argumentation, the difference in cultural backgrounds is considered the source of non-integration, conflict, and nationalism, as seen in the excerpt of scenario 1:

“Extensive migration and failed integration lead to conflicts and nationalism (…) The high numbers of economic migrants – mostly with low educational qualifications and with a different cultural background – are not truly integrated into European societies. This causes social conflicts and critical perception of migration – but without important security issues.” (Frontex, 2016, p. 56)

Besides reactivating the stereotype of the undeserving economic and racialized migrant, it is an oversimplification of the causes of nationalism and conflict, and it places the blame for non-integration entirely on migrants (Kaushal, 2019; Larin, 2020).

Moreover, according to Frontex, the only way to move from this situation to a scenario of harmony between migrants and the Western society is through a “managed diversity” (meaning controlled migration), which can only be done by ceding more power to Frontex.

Figure 2. Map of the future (Frontex, 2016, p. 56) edited

In this scenario, cultural diversity is described as follows:

“Most societies have a positive perception of migration and welcome new citizens even with different cultural backgrounds.” (Frontex, 2016, p. 56)

This section clearly again underlines that for Frontex, and its supporting nations, the cultural background is seen as the main problem. Such an approach to representing migration is highly problematic since it is based on a bias of cultural racism.

Need for More Awareness

In conclusion, Frontex’s Annual Risk Analyses have a lot of influence on the narrative of migration flows throughout Europe. This narrative is, moreover, based on a gendered, racialized, and racist view of migration that has implications on the way it is considered and how migrants are being treated.

Frontex is not only problematic in its actions but also in the ideology conveyed in its reports. It is, therefore, crucial to raise awareness of such discriminatory, as well as racially biased, lens and narrative employed in its reporting, as it impacts how people are being treated at the borders, solely based on their origins and gender.

Vestin Hategekimana is a Doctoral researcher at the nccr – on the move and the University of Geneva. He is part of the project “The Longitudinal Impact of Crises on Economic, Social, and Mobility-Related Outcomes: The Role of Gender, Skills, and Migration Status” with a focus on the mobility outcomes.

References:

-Arguments – Frontex Referendum. (2022). Viewed on 30 January 2023.
-Explications du Conseil fédéral. (2022).
-Frontex. (2016). Frontex Risk Analysis Report.
-Kalkman, J. P. (2021). Frontex : A Literature Review. International Migration, 59(1), 165‑181.
-Kaushal, N. (2019). Blaming Immigrants : Nationalism and the Economics of Global Movement. Columbia University Press.
-Larin, S. J. (2020). Is it really about values? Civic nationalism and migrant integration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46(1), 127‑141.
-Moffette, D., & Vadasaria, S. (2016). Uninhibited violence : Race and the securitization of immigration. Critical Studies on Security, 4(3), 291‑305.
-Nail, T. (2016). A Tale of Two Crises : Migration and Terrorism after the Paris Attacks. Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, 16(1), 158‑167.
-Sachseder, J., Stachowitsch, S., & Binder, C. (2022). Gender, race, and crisis-driven institutional growth : Discourses of ‘migration crisis’ and the expansion of Frontex. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 48(19), 4670‑4693.
-Salem, S., & Thompson, V. (2016). Old racisms, New masks : On the Continuing Discontinuities of Racism and the Erasure of Race in European Contexts. Nineteen Sixty Nine: An Ethnic Studies Journal, 3(1).