The eu’s miGrATion relATions wiTh menA counTries 145
a key driver of cooperation well before the terror attacks of the 2000s. The
EU strategy has also used enlargement to align objectives. Indeed, one of
the key features of the EU has been its rapid growth from f ifteen members
in 2003 to 28 members in 2013. New member states were required to adapt
to the EU acquis or, more precisely, Chapter 24 of this acquis, which is highly
specif ic about the migration and border-security dimension.
It would seem that the counterpoint to migration as a danger exemplif ied
by the ‘securitisation’ approach would be migration as a risk to be man-
aged. Migration as risk has been the basis for the development of dialogue.
Migration dialogues look to build relations with non-EU member states
that seek to facilitate some forms of migration while requiring partner
countries to control their borders and to curtail irregular f lows towards the
EU. The most-developed statement of the principles underlying migration
partnership can be found in the Cotonou Agreement between 77 African,
Caribbean and Pacif ic states and the EU in June 2000. Article 13 specif ies
that the migration partnership involves in-depth dialogue consonant with
commitments in international law to respect human rights and eliminate
all forms of discrimination based particularly on origin, sex, race, language
and religion. The EU approach to building migration dialogue has three
main elements. First, residence and employment, including the fair treat-
ment of third-country nationals (TCNs), an integration policy that grants
rights and obligations comparable to those of citizens, the enhancement of
non-discrimination in economic, social and cultural life and the develop-
ment of measures against racism and xenophobia. In employment, the
treatment by each member state of legally employed workers shall be free
from discrimination based on nationality as regards working conditions,
remuneration and dismissal, relative to its own nationals. The June and
November 2000 directives on anti-discrimination and the November 2003
directive on the rights of long-term residents who are TCNs covered most of
these areas, but labour migration rules remain a national competence and
EU action to shape migration opportunities for nationals of non-member
states remains very limited. Second, addressing what are called ‘root causes’,
which include efforts to ‘normalise’ migration f lows through strategies
aimed at poverty reduction, improved living and working conditions, the
creation of employment and the development of training. Partnership
should also include provision for training and education, such as schemes
to facilitate access to higher education. Third, the ‘f ight against illegal immi-
gration’ through return and readmission policies, with bilateral agreements
governing specif ic obligations for readmission and return, with countries
such as Hong Kong, Sri Lanka, Macao and Albania.