The rhetoric of externalizing migration policies: The cases of British and Italian sovereignty by proxy

This paper conducts a Critical Discursive Analysis of the institutional rhetoric employed by the British and Italian Prime Ministers to legitimize their respective migration externalization policies – the Rwanda and Albania agreements. While both governments primarily rely on securitization and deterrence arguments that intertextually hark back to electoral promises, the British corpus appeals to an imagined post-Brexit British community, whereas the Italian corpus appeals to the imagination of Fortress Europe. These legitimation strategies rely on and reinforce three migration narratives: the fetishization of borders as fixed and inviolable entities, the framing of migration as a threat and a burden, and the stigmatization of migrants as criminals. Ultimately, externalization policies serve exclusionary logics, offloading state responsibility for a humane approach to migration while enabling governments to assert a form of control and sovereignty by proxy over their imagined bounded spaces.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Discourse & Society
Published
2025-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265251389136
Primary Topic
Migration, Refugees, and Integration
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The rhetoric of externalizing migration policies: The cases of British and Italian sovereignty by proxy

Franco Zappettini
Discourse & Society
Migration, Refugees, and Integration
article

The rhetoric of externalizing migration policies: The cases of British and Italian sovereignty by proxy

Franco Zappettini
article en

Abstract

This paper conducts a Critical Discursive Analysis of the institutional rhetoric employed by the British and Italian Prime Ministers to legitimize their respective migration externalization policies – the Rwanda and Albania agreements. While both governments primarily rely on securitization and deterrence arguments that intertextually hark back to electoral promises, the British corpus appeals to an imagined post-Brexit British community, whereas the Italian corpus appeals to the imagination of Fortress Europe. These legitimation strategies rely on and reinforce three migration narratives: the fetishization of borders as fixed and inviolable entities, the framing of migration as a threat and a burden, and the stigmatization of migrants as criminals. Ultimately, externalization policies serve exclusionary logics, offloading state responsibility for a humane approach to migration while enabling governments to assert a form of control and sovereignty by proxy over their imagined bounded spaces.

Discourse & Society
Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 55%
Migration, Refugees, and Integration
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.