The globalization of both migratory flows and radicalism has created a profound problem of governance for national governments seeking to address new terrorist threats and successfully integrate new populations. In response, national governments have pursued a series of policies that collectively amount to the securitization of immigration. These largely consist of a combination of restrictive border controls and efforts to encourage assimilation among landed migrant populations. Security measures are used as a way to curb illegal migration flows and control minorities. They also involve the redefinition of the relations between foreign and homegrown threats, and have expanded into many facets of economic, political, and social life. 

A decade after 9/11 it is therefore crucial to ask how securitization has shaped the collective identities and action of migrants, and what the “feedback” effects are on migrant behavior. Building on the findings of existing research, this panel proposes to study this missing link, examining the relationship between security policies and integration policies and how the response of migrant communities shapes those policies. Policies on citizenship -- defining who is included and excluded from economic and political rights -- are also increasingly formulated in terms of security. Thus discourses and policies on the “integration” of migrants and of ethnic minorities are also implicitly but firmly viewed as a means to counter threats. European debates on Muslim dress or mobilization against Hispanics in the United-States provide prime examples of this trend. These policies implicitly suggest that unless migrants adjust to the values of their host society they pose a threat to the stability of the social order. These policies, thus, constitutes an important dimension of what can be termed the `securitization of integration'.

In addition, the extent to which these policies have successfully induced migrant assimilation or fostered radicalism among settled communities also remains to be explored. Evidence from the US and Europe suggests that while greater assimilation has resulted in some cases, and some have successfully changed these policies, a fraction of the landed migrant population has been radicalized. Participants to the panel share the assumption that migrants or ethnic minorities are not just passive receptors of policy but also potential actors, who must be included in any model of the security governance of migrant integration.

This panel proposes to study these twin questions : (a) the extension of the securitization logic into domestic policies not just of immigration, but also of “integration” in its various guises – notably naturalization and citizenship, community partnerships, social policies, and policing, and (b) the relationship between security policies and integration policies and how the response of migrant communities shapes those policies.