Understanding EU’s double standards for Ukrainian and Syrian protection seekers: a comparative sociopolitical analysis between the 2015 and the 2022 ‘refugee’ crises

Abstract

In this thesis, I intend to compare the differentiated early policy responses formulated by the European Union vis-à-vis the ‘Syrian refugee crisis’ in 2015 and the ‘Ukrainian refugee crisis’ in 2022. The aim of the analysis is twofold: spotlighting the contrasting EU policy responses and investigating the sociopolitical factors that could have motivated differing policy decisions. The following research questions will thus be addressed in order to fulfill this overarching purpose: 1) What policy responses has the European Union and its Member States introduced in response to the ‘2015 Syrian refugee crisis’ and the ‘2022 Ukrainian refugee crisis’? 2) How do these policy responses differ from each other? 3) What are the possible sociopolitical explanations behind differing policy responses and which factors may have influenced such decisions? The choice of answering the third and core question of the thesis from a sociopolitical standpoint is motivated by the fact that I consider the normative dimension not sufficient to explain EU’s differentiated treatment of third-country nationals seeking protection in the European Union. Such dimension, including its limitations, will be extensively covered in the first background chapter, whereby the theoretical foundations of this study will be laid. The focus will instead be placed on sociopolitical factors, with the question of identity being at the center of my reasoning. Overall, I hope to achieve more clarity with regard to EU’s treatment of third-country nationals displaced by conflict and violence who seek safety and protection in the European Union. Through the emblematic comparison of Syria and Ukraine, my ambition is to provide a picture, albeit partial, of who, among third-country nationals, deserves protection in eyes of the European Union, who does not and why, with a view to shedding the light on EU’s double standards when it comes to granting asylum. Regarding the methodology, I will adopt a comparative approach of EU policy responses with an established timeframe of ten months for each of the crisis. In regard to the Syrian case, the thesis will cover the period from April 2015 to February 2016, as on April 20 the first EU’s immediate response plan to the Mediterranean situation, the Ten-point Action Plan, was designed, paving the way for the first special European Council meeting on the refugee crisis held three days later, on April 23. I believe that this month represents a pivotal moment in that the refugee issue in the Mediterranean Sea started to be perceived as a full-fledged crisis by European Union, with rising numbers of shipwrecks at its doors that could no longer be ignored. The EU thus became determined to take concrete although controversial actions thereafter, which will be discussed in detail in the third chapter. With the Russian Federation invading Ukraine on February 24 last year, I consider the time frame for the Ukrainian case less open to debate and therefore decided to cover the period starting from February 2022 until December 2022. The study will be based on the analysis of relevant EU documents and available secondary literature, with a view to providing a critical snapshot of the policies that the European Union and its Member States agreed on implementing in the given timeframes. Instrumental for identifying, delving into and comparing policy responses is the study of EU policy documents, including communications, press releases and statements. The latter are considered particularly useful to grasp the objectives, desired outcomes and, more importantly, the discourses conveyed by the European Union to confer legitimacy to its policy decisions. Hence, they will allow us to see how through discourses identity is either directly or indirectly operationalized differently in the two contexts.