The 2018 Global Compacts on Migration and on Refugees acknowledge mixed
migration – both as flow and as motivation – whilst at the same time trying very hard
to (re)establish clear boundaries between the two ideal types of people mobility. Mixed
Migration is deeply problematic. It is the condition of possibility for ‘illegal migration’
to be intelligible in policy terms, but it is also an expression, empirically, of reality. The
notion of mixed migration had been a solution in the 1970s and 1980s for doctrine
formation in the context of governing international mobility. Today, by insisting on the
dubious distinction, the two Global Compacts are turning mixed migration from a
solution into a problem, even as they draw on the normative framing of Human Rights
and Sustainable Development. Does this move shift perspective rather than
fundamentally achieving transformation of the doctrine towards a more progressive
global approach in governing international mobility? Here, I argue, based on conceptual
analysis of the Global Compacts, that they express a transformation rather than either
returning to the conceptual past or offering something entirely new. What has not
changed, however, is that in the search for solutions to governing international
2
migration there is a reproduction of individuals as gendered and racialised subjects of
global politics.
This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Interventions: International Journal of Postcolonial Studies on 3 Dec 2020, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/1369801X.2020.1845771.