This critique of the securitization and criminalization of asylum seeking challenges the claim that asylum seekers 'threaten' receiving states. It analyzes recent policy developments in relation to their wider historical, political and European contexts and argues that the UK response effectively renders asylum seekers as scapegoats.

This critique of the securitization and criminalization of asylum seeking challenges the claim that asylum seekers ''threaten'' receiving states. It analyzes recent policy developments in relation to their wider historical, political and European contexts and argues that the UK response effectively renders asylum seekers as scapegoats.

The author assesses the politics of different humanitarian interventions in the Mexico-US border region developing a unique perspective on the significance of people, places and things to contemporary border struggles.

This critique of the securitization and criminalization of asylum seeking challenges the claim that asylum seekers 'threaten' receiving states. It analyzes recent policy developments in relation to their wider historical, political and European contexts and argues that the UK response effectively renders asylum seekers as scapegoats.

This critique of the securitization and criminalization of asylum seeking challenges the claim that asylum seekers ''threaten'' receiving states. It analyzes recent policy developments in relation to their wider historical, political and European contexts and argues that the UK response effectively renders asylum seekers as scapegoats.

The author assesses the politics of different humanitarian interventions in the Mexico-US border region developing a unique perspective on the significance of people, places and things to contemporary border struggles.