THE MIGRANTS ARE COMING!!! aka The ‘Border Spectacle’

An extract from my research - 'Small Boats & Tall Tales: The Great British Border Spectacle and the illegalisation of irregular migrants':

Tools of governance and differentiation, borders are symbolic and rudimentary, contributing to the management of migration (Casas-Cortes et al., 2015). Despite migration controls becoming more spatially flexible, physical borders retain crucial significance in the ‘self-representation of territorial power’ (Cuttitta, 2014). A consciously sensational emphasis on irregular migration across geographic borders by powerful elites creates a ‘Border Spectacle’. De Genova (2002) defines this as ‘a spectacle of enforcement at “the” border, whereby migrant “illegality” is rendered spectacularly visible’. This dramatically presents immigration as perpetually out of control, generating a moral panic for political gain (De Genova, 2013; Mazzara, 2019). Powerful elites use the Border Spectacle strategy to scapegoat migrants, appealing to base fears to consolidate their control whilst distracting from government failings (De Genova, 2013; Goodfellow, 2019). The problems and solutions are all focused upon migrants and the physical border rather than probing the more complex drivers of the phenomena (Sowards & Pineda, 2013). States utilise the spectacle of the border crisis to consolidate their power, expanding immigration enforcement and state surveillance throughout everyday society (De Genova, 2013). ‘The border’ is encountered in the systemically violent restriction of irregular migrants’ access to public services even as its location dislodges from geographic frontiers (De Genova, 2013). Borders are made less visible through ‘everyday bordering’ practices which also makes them inescapable (Cuttitta, 2014; Yuval-Davis et al., 2018).

The evocative language and images used to represent border crossings in public discourse reinforce the ‘overwhelming threat’ posed by a dehumanised mass of ‘invading’ irregular migrants (Casas-Cortes et al., 2015; Mazzara, 2016; Van Reekum, 2016). Scorzin (2010) asserts that migrants are made highly visible through stereotyping and categorisation, as a ‘flood’ of different, needy and dangerous foreigners; and contrastingly invisibilised as individual human beings (Bischoff et al., 2010; Mazzara, 2016). Even sympathetic portrayals of migrants reinforce the Border Spectacle by over-emphasising border-crossing, essentialising this as the immigrant experience and reifying the border spectacle whilst obfuscating underlying causes (Sowards & Pineda, 2013). This overemphasis leads to the naturalisation and essentialisation of migration as movement through physical terrain (Van Reekum, 2016). Distressing and iconic images of crowded boats, deaths at the border, and military terminology conjure the spectacle of the border, reinforcing the border regime’s structure and practices (Casas-Cortes et al., 2015; Mazzara, 2016). Such polyvalent images evoke many contrasting feelings including sympathy but often leave an overriding sense of threat (Mazzara, 2016). Mazzara (2016) describes the work of documentary-maker Yimer (Soltanto il mare) who highlights the Border Spectacle by turning his camera on the many reporters and cameras fixated upon small boatfuls of migrants landing on Lampedusa, reporting live to ‘foster anxiety, fear, and frustration’. The Border Spectacle lays bare the performative nature of border enforcement whilst states profit from ‘large-scale recruitment’ of easily exploitable migrant labour (De Genova, 2013). The ‘borderisation’ of geographic locations establishes them as the setting for a ‘border play’ created by political and media representations (Cuttitta, 2014; Mazzara, 2016). A key concept in the Border Spectacle is the never-ending ‘state of emergency’ that supports a securitised immigration agenda. Irregular migrants then play a dual role within the ‘border play’ of both victim and transgressor (Mazzara, 2016). The ‘landscapes of death’ geographic borders provide, become a perfect stage for the fetishised ‘spectacle of violations’ manufactured by border enforcement to reinforce illegality as objective fact (Nevins, 2007; De Genova, 2013). The excessive focus on the UK’s South East coastal border maximises its degree of ‘borderness’, making it the embodiment of ‘the UK border’ (Cuttitta, 2014). Furthermore, representations of migrants arriving by sea (including casualties) are much more impactful on public attitudes than visa overstayers and those entering by other means. As such, the sea provides a perfect setting for political actors to stage the ‘border play’ (Cuttitta, 2014).

One reason the Border Spectacle is described as performative is that states’ highly visible responses to irregular migration at geographic borders are rarely proportionate to the most significant sources of irregular migrants (Cuttitta, 2014). In the EU and the UK, the vast majority of irregular migrants enter with a valid visa, subsequently overstaying or otherwise breaching the terms of their stay (Cuttitta, 2014; Triandafyllidou, 2016; Vollmer, 2016). Another important source of UK irregular migrants is people who have exercised their right to claim asylum and subsequently been refused by the government. Despite this, their presence has been ‘tolerated’ by the government instead of logical deportation to their country of origin (Triandafyllidou, 2016). Through this analytical lens, the Border Spectacle is a curated performance because ‘status flow’ contributes far more to irregular migration than ‘geographic flow’. A focus on border-crossing and ‘illegal entrants’ misleadingly focuses public attention and efforts to tackle irregular migration upon geographic borders rather than effective management of key points of ‘status flow’ (Triandafyllidou, 2016; Vollmer, 2016).

Image credit: Refugee Action

One of the most well-documented purposes of the Border Spectacle is the scapegoating of migrants by powerful elites in order to consolidate their control (Goodfellow, 2019; De Genova, 2013). Political actors’ obsessive focus on border crossing for electoral gain naturally designates voters as the audience of the ‘border play’ (Cuttitta, 2014). As well as powerfully distracting from government failings by appealing to base fears, the Border Spectacle helps to drive societal compliance by signalling ‘this could happen to you if you step out of line’ (Robinson, 2010; De Genova, 2013). The ubiquitous racialisation of migrant ‘illegality’ connects the Border Spectacle’s exclusion to myriad social inequalities deeply interwoven within concepts of citizenship (De Genova, 2013). In the EU, border enforcement has been subcontracted to a spectacularly well-funded security industry, who themselves are co-actors, profiting from the reinforcement of the Border Spectacle illusion (Hayes 2012; Andersson 2014; Van Reekum, 2016). The spectacle of the border crisis also allows the consolidation of power through the expansion of state surveillance throughout everyday society (in the UK this takes the form of Hostile Environment policies) (De Genova, 2013). Such an effect is self-perpetuating as immigration enforcement is increasingly enacted within the geographic boundaries of a state, further reinforcing and intensifying the Border Spectacle (De Genova, 2013). This also raises the question of where ‘the border’ is situated as it ceases to be simply a matter of geographic frontiers but is encountered in the systemic violence of increasingly restricted access to public services (De Genova, 2013). Such ‘everyday bordering’ renders borders less visible whilst making them inescapable (Cuttitta, 2014; Yuval-Davis et al., 2018). Amidst borders becoming less fixed in the space they inhabit, they persist as important symbols of state sovereignty even though their walls and fences are often ‘nothing more than spectacularly expensive political gestures’ (Brown 2010; Cuttitta, 2014). As borders become less tangible they also become less visible, simultaneously pervasive and yet ethereal (Cuttitta, 2014).

Schindel’s (2022) research examines how states often strengthen border enforcement by utilising naturally occurring, environmental features (i.e. geography and weather) which expose migrants to greater harm and perpetuate border violence. As with more visible spectacles of border enforcement, states’ weaponisation of natural forces acts as a further obstacle and deterrent, restricting migration and the ability to seek protection. Instrumentalising nature in border enforcement masks moral responsibility and displaces agency. Shifting responsibility to random natural forces diverts focus from the intentional actions and decisions of authorities and policymakers (Schindel, 2022). In this way, an obsessive focus on the transgressing of physical, geographic borders serves as a powerful distraction from systemic failings whilst shifting blame for harm and loss of life to ‘natural events’. This obfuscates accountability allowing the proliferation of systemic violence. An example of these processes includes the 'bare life' zones created at European borders, where illegalised migrants are dehumanised as they’re stripped of their legal protections and abandoned to struggle for survival (Schindel, 2022). Furthermore, Moroccan security forces’ practice of abandoning migrants in the desert turns this landscape into a ‘space of violence’. The denial of protection and violation of rights can occur through both direct acts and indirectly, through exposure to hostile environmental conditions (Schindel, 2022). The overwhelming focus of narrative and discourse on the spectacle of border violence conceals the everyday banality of ‘slow violence’ endured by migrants (Cockburn, 2010). Exploring the restrictions and suffering caused by indirect, ‘natural’ and ‘slow’ forms of violence helps us understand how borders function as sites of exclusion and violence (Schindel, 2022). Furthermore, it highlights that the suffering experienced by migrants extends far beyond the widely publicised, highly visible moments.

The motivations for states’ fetishisation of physical borders are exposed by the concept of the Border Spectacle (as well as giving insight into the lack of constructive engagement with their domestic performance). Despite being a useful analytical frame, little work elaborates upon the particular dynamics in the UK context that my research interrogates. Given the continually escalating anti-immigrant political rhetoric and accompanying legislation, this is especially relevant. My work critically analyses current UK political rhetoric on irregular migration to examine what enables UK immigration policy’s zealous focus on channel crossings.