PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen The following full text is a postprint version which may differ from the publisher's version. For additional information about this publication click this link. http://hdl.handle.net/2066/173857 Please be advised that this information was generated on 2021-09-26 and may be subject to change. Chapter 13 Navigating migration policies in Europe: insights from the field Asuncion Fresnoza-Flot 13.1. Introduction In 2015, more than one million migrants arrived in Europe by crossing the Mediterranean Sea.1 Most of them came from Syria, but there were also a considerable number of migrants who originated from Iraq and Afghanistan.2 In the same year, more than 3,000 people lost their life in the sea during their crossing on the way to Europe.3 Despite the dangers present in their paths, the high financial cost of their cross-border movement, and the tightened border controls in their desired country of destination, many people from war-stricken, politically unstable and developing countries continue to embark on a migration journey towards Europe. How do these migrants succeed in overcoming the macro-level hurdles to their spatial mobility, notably the restrictive migration policies of many European countries? What are the impacts of these hurdles on their individual and familial lives? The present chapter addresses these questions by examining the micro dimension of migration in Europe, that is, migrants’ experiences of and interactions with state policies. Focusing on the perspectives of these social actors, this chapter aims to shed light on the governmentality of the state, i.e. the way it manages its population through the ‘ensemble formed by the institutions, procedures, analyses and reflections, the calculations and tactics, that allow the exercise of this specific albeit complex form of power’.4 It also intends to highlight the subjectivities that the governmentality of the state creates as well as the 1 UNHCR (2016), Refugees/Migrants Emergency Response – Mediterranean. Regional overview, <data.unhcr.org/mediterranean/regional.php> [12 August 2016]. 2 UNHCR (2016). 3 IOM (2016), IOM Counts 3,771 Migrant Fatalities in Mediterranean in 2015, <www.iom.int/news/iom-counts-3771-migrant-fatalities-mediterranean-2015 [12 August 2016]. 4 Foucault, 1991, p. 102. 266 CHAPTER THIRTEEN – ASUNCION FRESNOZA-FLOT agency it entails among its subjects. Informed by the phenomenological approach to the study of social phenomena, this chapter argues that to grasp state’s power, logics and limitations, it is important to look at not only the impact of state’s actions on its subjects, but also how they respond to its instruments of governmentality such as policies. The idea behind this argument is that the relationship between the state and the people inhabiting its territory is neither static nor straightforward, but is continuously in the making and is mutually constructed. To attain the objectives of this chapter, I scrutinize three types of movements from South-east Asia to Europe, namely maternal migration, marriage migration, and children migration.5 I specifically examine the experiences of Filipino and Thai migrants residing in France and in Belgium, respectively. Contrary to refugees and asylum seekers from the Middle East and in Africa, who enter Europe by boat or by foot, these Southeast Asian migrants arrived by plane, as is the case of many migrants in the region. As Frontex data of 2016 show, international airports serve as ‘one of the biggest entry routes for migrants into the European Union’. This is notably the case for Filipino and Thai migrants, given the geographical distance between their region of origin and Europe. These migrants are predominantly women, which sets them apart from asylum seekers in the region who are mostly young men.6 The ethnographic data presented in this chapter originated from three different studies that I conducted between 2004 and 2015: a doctoral research on Filipino migrant mothers in France and on their transnational families (2005-2008), a collaborative study on 1.5-generation Filipinos in France (2009-2015), and a postdoctoral project on children of Filipino and Thai migrants growing up in ethnically mixed families in Belgium (2012-2015). These qualitative studies were mainly based on observations and interviews of migrants and their family members. During the first study, 35 migrant mothers and 40 members of their families left in their country of origin were interviewed. For the second study, I interviewed 52 persons including 21 young people of the ‘1.5 generation’ who migrated to their receiving country before reaching majority.7 The third study relied on 142 interviews, including 19 Thai women. Despite their varying focus and objectives, these researches provide complementary insights about the 5 I refer here to the following countries that are members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN): Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singa- pore, Thailand, and Vietnam. 6 Eurostat, 2017. 7 Nagasaka & Fresnoza-Flot, 2015. NAVIGATING MIGRATION POLICIES IN EUROPE 267 power of state policies in structuring individual lives and aspirations as well as about the way individuals respond to its intricacies. Before investigating the migration cases of Filipino and Thai migrants in Europe, I first position the present chapter within the migration studies literature focusing on how migrants respond to the governmentality of the state. After this, I explain the analytical framework of the chapter, and then describe the context within which the spatial movements of Southeast Asians take place. I conclude by reflecting on the emerging views of migrants about Europe, their agency as subjects of the state, and the importance of their perspectives. 13.2. Migrants’ agency in the face of the state Migration studies scholarship has documented through time the different phases, dimensions, and processes of life of migrants from varying viewpoints and perspectives. One of the most widely held approaches is one that values migrants’ points of view and examines their lived experiences of migration.8 The works in this line of thought reveal how migrants interact with the states of their country of origin and/or immigration9 by living with, navigating, or contesting their policies, notably migration-related ones. Living with migration policies means not attempting to counter them, although it does not imply accepting them or agreeing with them. For instance, under the sponsorship (kafala) system in many countries in the Middle East, employers keep the travel documents of migrant domestic workers, thereby restricting their spatial and professional mobilities.10 Despite being tied to their labour contract, many migrants find a way to survive with-in this system. However, when their working and living conditions become intolerable for them, they escape their employers and look for another employment in the domestic service sector.11 Others escape when they are brought abroad during their employer’s travel and become undocumented migrants.12 In both cases, the kafala system remains unaffected. Migrants in these cases may appear as ‘powerless victims’, but their way of living with migration policies is often a strategy in itself to attain their personal objectives, such supporting economically their families in their countries of origin. We can also cite the example of people who ‘settled in 8 E.g., the classic work of Thomas & Znaniecki, 1958. 9 Basch et al., 1994; Sayad, 1999. 10 Bajracharya & Sijapati, 2012. 11 Pande, 2013. 12 Anderson, 2000; Fresnoza-Flot, 2009. 268 CHAPTER THIRTEEN – ASUNCION FRESNOZA-FLOT mobility’13 due to their legal statuses in two or more countries.14 They learn to live with the migration policies of these countries, thereby gaining mobility and economic opportunities. Navigating the law is another response of migrants to state policies, notably restrictive ones. Similar to the first approach, it does not involve contestations. Nevertheless, it is about following and using policies to realize one’s personal aims. One example is the case of irregular migrants in Europe. They are well aware that they do not have the ‘legal right’ to stay in their receiving countries, and they follow this line of thought by staying away as much as possible from the eyes of the authorities while waiting an amnesty or a possibility to regularize their situation. Many work in the domestic service sector15 and do not participate in undocumented migrants’ movement.16 Making themselves socially invisible is how they navigate the law. Another example is marriage migrant Filipinas in Japan, whose legal status depends on their marriage with their Japanese husband, or if they divorce, on their Japanese children. Many of these women are able to continue staying legally in the country by deciding not to divorce their husbands but instead to run away from their problematic conjugal relationships.17 Finally, migrants react to policies by contesting them, mostly through collective mobilizations and protests. A rich literature on this topic shows its transnational character. For instance, migrant domestic workers’ activism has challenged many discriminatory policies concerning their labour and living conditions.18 One of its successes is the signing of the Domestic Workers Convention (no. 189) in 2011 by the International Labour Organisation, which specifies the rights of domestic workers and provides them legal protection. At the national level, domestic workers in Hong Kong remain very active in their associations. The Internet offers possibilities to these migrants to communicate their grievances, reveals their predicament, and call for a change in policies affecting their lives. Contesting the state is the obvious way of responding to state policies, its power and hegemony. While many migrants are living with or navigating policies, at some point of the migratory process some of them become tired and start to be vocal and fight for their rights. We observe this among migrant Filipinas in 13 Morocvasic, 2004.