Forced migration as a weapon: the evolution of securitization discourse and narratives in the European Union

Abstract

Given the prevalence of the use of forced migration as a weapon/tool in the hands of non-democratic states against liberal democracies, and the consequent humanitarian and political implications this phenomenon has. This thesis aims to dissect and critically examine the evolution of threat framing within the European Union (EU), to shed light on how the use of threat frames in political discourse comes in hand with the securitization process, and to highlight the explanations for the divergence of the EU from its role as a democratic normative power and how it responds discursively in the face of such threats. Through comparative case studies of Poland (2021–2022) and Finland (2022–2024), I analyze how forced migration was framed by Political actors. Using diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational frames, this thesis demonstrates how each state constructed narratives to justify pushbacks at the borders and changes in legislation, even when such actions conflicted with EU and international legal norms. The findings reveal that securitization and threat framing transformed forced migration from a humanitarian issue into a security imperative. That in turn leads to the mainstreaming of militarized border governance. Moreover, the framing of the threat explains the EU’s divergent response to similar tactics, reflecting differences in threat framing, geopolitical interdependence, and normative flexibility.