In a shifting context where the new U.S. administration is reshaping the rules of the international system—including aspects like migration, population movements, and economic globalization—there is a clear contradiction between the desire of international powers, led by the United States, for greater geopolitical and commercial influence, and a contrary urge to close borders and restrict human mobility worldwide. Based on over twenty years of research in various fields across both the Global North and South, as well as in areas of departure, transit, and reception, Thomas Lacroix’s recently published book The Borderless State: How Migration Is Changing the State from Lyon University provides specialists with a conceptual toolkit for understanding migration practices and state policies, highlighting the relationship between the state and contemporary transnational dynamics.
A Different Perspective on Migration:
In the introduction, Lacroix reviews the political and social literature on contemporary transnational migration, which has, for decades, revolved around the context of Western capitalism’s development post-World War II, particularly through the emergence of communities in the Global South within a context of uneven international division of labor. Migration theorists have rarely concerned themselves with the notion of the state; migration has been interpreted as a shared result of pull factors in destination countries (labor market, wage levels, security) and push factors in departure countries (war, unemployment, poverty, demographic change). Migration has remained a phenomenon of greater importance to societies and their economies than to the states themselves.
The fall of the Berlin Wall, the transformations of the early 1990s, and the end of bipolarity did not call into question this economic reading of migration. The works from that era provided a reading of migration globalization saturated with liberalism, viewing population mobility across borders as liberation from post-colonial labor division. Thus, the author does not adopt a single economic approach to migration; rather, he reintegrates migration globalization within the context of state transformation and policies.
He defines migration as a product of the relationship between the transnational state—meaning the set of policies and mechanisms adopted by states to regulate cross-border flows—and the transnational community, defined as the network of social institutions that facilitate maintaining ties, practices, and relations across borders. The goal is to understand how the state relates to transnational flows to either halt, encourage, or direct them.
The Structure of the Book:
The book is divided into two parts. The first section explains the dynamics of cross-border migration, from the emergence of these social fields across borders to their disappearance or continuation in the form of diasporas. The second part deals with the role of the state and its evolution in response to changes in migration globalization. It investigates how states develop a transnational institutional fabric relying on components of transnational communities: social institutions, and connections of religion and culture that organize relations among migrants. Notably, it looks at the end of the Westphalian state model, which was content with managing its population within its borders. The researcher draws on previous literature published on migration globalization and its impacts on the development of departure regions. Methodologically, this work combines various field studies conducted in departure areas in Morocco and Punjab, and receiving areas in France, Britain, Belgium, and the Netherlands.
The Transnational State:
States have long faced social processes that transcend their territorial boundaries. Migration literature indicates that public policies regarding expatriate citizens are not new; governments have been working on strategies to engage with diasporas to assert who is part of the national whole and to garner migration returns, whether in the form of financial remittances, economic investments, political support, professional skills, or as a leverage for diplomatic pressure on host countries.
However, globalization has imposed a new approach for states in dealing with migration, regardless of whether they are receiving or sending countries. What Thomas Lacroix refers to as the transnational state now possesses geopolitical tools for subjugation and pressure through the migrant population. The ongoing debate surrounding migrants between the United States and Latin American countries exemplifies this power. Conversely, sending countries can threaten to withdraw their migrants from job markets and regions that rely heavily on foreign labor, with ensuing economic risks. Lacroix defines the transnational state as the institutions, policies, and concepts that states use to encourage or restrict migration-related cycles; it is a set of institutional policies targeting flows resulting from their citizens’ migration (both outward and inward flows, as well as incoming flows of money or ideas).
These policies rely on direct legal, administrative, and punitive tools targeting various forms of exchange and symbolic discourse practices, framed according to what authorities seek (restriction/prohibition or guidance/encouragement) and the type of targeted flow (migratory flows, economic, and social remittances). Among these tools, we find selective immigration programs, policies to combat irregular migration (outsourcing border control, deportation processes, voluntary return), sectoral immigration programs (skilled workers, seasonal labor), international student exchange programs, control over political, religious, or cultural activities, and policies against “brain drain.” Additionally, diaspora diplomacy may involve sending qualified personnel (teachers, doctors, etc.) and conducting courses to teach the language of the home country to migrant children. Economically, states may reduce remittance transfer fees and support so-called “charitable” initiatives by expatriates and their associations.
The transnational state expands its influence through both a formal network, the consular network, which has long been the only tool allowing states to manage issues concerning their citizens abroad, and an informal—though more effective—network of connections to migrant associations, including student and cultural organizations, mosques, and religious centers. Receiving countries regulate foreign presence in their territories through formal networks and, in parallel, engage religious, political, and social middlemen to monitor and manage this presence.
Three Scenarios:
Thomas Lacroix presents three potential scenarios for the future of the transnational state:
- Disastrous Scenario: Anticipates large-scale climate migration waves. By 2100, many areas of the Earth are expected to become uninhabitable (parts of South and Southeast Asia, Central America, the Sahel), while other regions will open their doors to human settlement (Northern Canada, Siberia). This scenario also includes geopolitical tensions arising from China’s emergence as a global power and its repercussions across continents; therefore, a wave of populism fueled by fears of a massive influx of migrants will subject states and societies entirely to efforts aimed at halting migration flows. Biotechnologies, artificial intelligence, and detection equipment will open new horizons for border control and surveillance.
Migration is expected to become a diplomatic tool leveraged across all relations between states, utilized as a pressure tool in negotiations unrelated to migration itself. Furthermore, we can expect a regionalization of migration governance driven by increased migration from South to South (which has surpassed migration from South to North since the mid-2010s), and the establishment of regional migration centers that attract migrants (e.g., South Africa, the Maghreb, Brazil, Colombia, Thailand, China). The outcome will be a real imprisonment of the world.
- Alternative Path: Seems to point towards a completely different route for building multi-scalar migration governance. This trend could be supported by the impacts of global demographic changes. The decline in fertility rates in Europe, East Asia, Russia, and North America creates labor needs that cannot be fully compensated for through digital transformation and competitive gains. This is especially true in sectors such as personal care, construction, agriculture, medicine, education, and skilled industrial jobs.
These conditions make it possible to achieve a dramatically different scenario: reaching an international consensus to establish migration governance, which the Marrakech Compact has laid the groundwork for; thus, multi-scalar divisions have emerged to work on managing various migration flows. Countries could adopt this governance model by reallocating resources designated for controlling flows to a genuine system supporting labor and student migration. Such openness could take various forms, such as enhancing and expanding areas of freedom of movement.
- Crisis Management Scenario: Focuses on managing crises without addressing them fundamentally. This scenario relies on producing policies that respond to short-term issues without establishing a stable framework for managing international migration flows.
Source: Lacroix, T. (2024). L’État sans frontières: Comment les migrations transforment l’État. NS Éditions.
