(PDF) Terrorism and Refugee Perceptions: Comparative Analysis of Germany and Türki̇ye

TERRORISM AND REFUGEE PERCEPTIONS: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GERMANY AND TÜRKİYE1 2 Article Submission Date: 26.10.2023 Gizem AKŞİT ERGEN PhD Candidate Yıldız Technical University Institute of Social Sciences, İstanbul, Türkiye

ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4064-3337 Fulya MEMİŞOĞLU ZAİMOĞLU Assoc.Prof.Dr. Yıldız Technical University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, İstanbul, Türkiye

ORCID ID: 0000-0001-8113-813X Accepted Date: 20.12.2023 Kafkas University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty KAUJEASF Vol. 14, Issue 28, 2023 ISSN: 1309 – 4289 E – ISSN: 2149-9136 ABSTRACT Since the 1990s, the dynamics between migration and security have undergone a profound shift, notably influenced by pivotal events such as 9/11, the Arab Spring, and conflicts in the Middle East. States now perceive migration as an asymmetric threat within the migrationsecurity paradigm, extending concerns to border security, economic stability, ethnic identity preservation, and heightened xenophobia. This study explores the intertwined concerns of migration and security, examining shifts in perceptions of terrorism and refugees. The research uses an exploratory case study approach, focusing on Turkey and Germany, both hosting significant refugee populations post-Arab Spring. The analysis centers on the discourse surrounding terrorism, migration, and refugees in Turkish and German mass media, with a specific emphasis on widely circulated national newspapers. The study covers the period from 2015 to 2020, a critical time marked by heightened migration flows to Europe. The primary goal is to discern whether the discourse on "terrorism" functions as a securitization tool within this intricate nexus. Keywords: Migration, terrorism, securitization, Germany, Türkiye JEL Codes: F22, H56, F52 Scope: Political science and international relations Type: Research DOI: 10.36543/kauiibfd.2023.036 Cite this article: Akşit Ergen, G. & Memişoğlu Zaimoğlu F. (2023). Terrorism and refugee perceptions: Comparative analysis of Germany and Türkiye, KAUJEASF, 14(28), 902-932. 1 2 Compliance with the ethical rules of the relevant study has been declared. This article is based on a PhD thesis. TERÖRİZM VE MÜLTECİ ALGISI: ALMANYA VE TÜRKİYE'NİN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ANALİZİ Makale Gönderim Tarihi: 26.10.2023 Yayına Kabul Tarihi: 20.12.2023 Gizem AKŞİT ERGEN Doktora Adayı Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul, Türkiye

ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4064-3337 Fulya MEMİŞOĞLU ZAİMOĞLU Doç.Dr. Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İstanbul, Türkiye

ORCID ID: 0000-0001-8113-813X Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi KAÜİİBFD Cilt, 14, Sayı 28, 2023 ISSN: 1309 – 4289 E – ISSN: 2149-9136 ÖZ 1990'lardan bu yana göç ve güvenlik arasındaki dinamikler, özellikle 11 Eylül, Arap Baharı ve Orta Doğu'daki çatışmalar gibi önemli olaylardan etkilenerek köklü bir değişim geçirmiştir. Devletler artık göçü, göç-güvenlik paradigması içerisinde asimetrik bir tehdit olarak algılamakta ve kaygılarını sınır güvenliği, ekonomik istikrar, etnik kimliğin korunması ve artan yabancı düşmanlığına kadar genişletmektedir. Bu çalışma, terörizm ve mültecilere yönelik algılardaki değişimleri inceleyerek göç ve güvenliğin birbiriyle bağlantılı endişelerini araştırmaktadır. Her ikisi de Arap Baharı sonrası önemli mülteci nüfuslarına ev sahipliği yapan Türkiye ve Almanya gibi örneklere odaklanan araştırma, keşfedici bir vaka çalışması yaklaşımı kullanmaktadır. Analiz, Türk ve Alman kitle iletişim araçlarında terörizm, göç ve mültecileri çevreleyen söylemlere odaklanmakta, özellikle de yaygın olarak okunan ulusal gazetelere vurgu yapmaktadır. Çalışma, Avrupa'ya yönelik göç akımlarının arttığı kritik bir dönem olan 20152020 yılları arasını kapsamaktadır. Öncelikli amaç, "terörizm" söyleminin bu karmaşık bağlantı içinde bir güvenlikleştirme aracı olarak işlev görüp görmediğini ortaya çıkarmaktır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Göç, güvenlikleştirme, Almanya, Türkiye JEL Kodları: F22, H56, F52 terörizm, Alan: Siyaset bilimi ve uluslararası ilişkiler Türü: Araştırma KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 1. INTRODUCTION Migration, an inevitable fact of human history, is a complex phenomenon that has always been intertwined with global events and changing dynamics. This phenomenon has been shaped by the combination of social, economic and political factors and has been addressed in different aspects over time. Particularly since the mid-20th century, global conflicts, persecutions, economic inequalities and various catalysts have caused millions of people to leave their countries. These extensive population movements have necessitated the international legal protection of both states and migrants, resulting in the conceptualization of terms such as "refugee" and "asylum seeker" 3 within the purview of international law (Martin, 1988, pp. 598-599). Neverthless, migration has begun to be addressed as a security issue rather than just a perspective on people's need for asylum over time. The phenomenon of migration has evolved into a multifaceted global challenge, gaining prominence in the wake of events like the 9/11 attacks, the global rise of terrorism, the Arab Spring, and regional conflicts. Migration, inextricably intertwined with issues ranging from national security to border control, economic stability, ethnic identities, and the rise of xenophobia, remains at the forefront of global concerns (Massey, 1988; Li et. al., 1995; Phinney et al., 2001; International Labour Office (ILO) et al., 2001; Adamson, 2006; Ting, 2006; Crush & Ramachandran, 2010; Estevens, 2018; Isaksen, 2019). Particularly in the last two decades, an escalating emphasis on security concerns 3 It is important to remark that the terms "refugee," "asylum-seeker," and "immigrant" are often used interchangeably but it is important to distinguish between these terms hold distinct legal and conceptual meanings within the discourse of migration. A refugee is defined under international law, particularly the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol, as an individual who has fled their home country due to a wellfounded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group (UNHCR – The UN Refugee Agency, n.d). On the other hand, an asylum seeker is a person who has left their country basen on same criteria as a refugee and is seeking protection in another country, but who hasn’t yet been legally recognized as a refugee and is waiting to 904eceived a decision on their asylum claim (Amnesty International, 2023). An immigrant, in contrast, is a broader term encompassing a person who has moved to a foreign country with the intention of settling there and living in a country other than that of his or her birth, regardless of the reason for their migration. “Immigrant” is not a term used universally. Other often-used terms include "migrant," the "foreign born," and "international migrant" (Bolter, 2019). Due to the fact that in common usage, the distinctions between such terms are not paid attention to and the terms are used interchangeably, the content analysis in this study focuses on the news articles in which all three terms are mentioned. 904 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 related to terrorism has eclipsed the economic and cultural dimensions of migration. Migration has undergone a discernible process of securitization, becoming entwined with stringent border controls, immigration policies, and national security measures. This paradigm shift is also reflected in academic studies, with studies on the migration-security axis, migration-terrorism nexus, and the securitization of migration gaining prominence in the literature. The securitization of migration has been a topic of significant scholarly interest. Ibrahim (2005) highlights the racial discourse inherent in the securitization of migration, particularly in the context of Canada's immigration legislation, while Baker-Beall (2009) argues that EU counter-terrorism policy reflects a deep-rooted fear of the 'migrant other', leading to the securitization of migration. Messina (2014) critically assesses the securitization of immigration in Europe and the United States, questioning the veracity of its central claims. Dixit (2016) introduces the concept of "terroristization" as a way to analyze the usage of the rhetoric of terrorism, highlighting its sociopolitical consequences. On the other, there are also studies on terrorism and migration, although not through securitization. Schmid (2016) highlights the complex role of state and non-state terrorism in causing migration, and the potential for refugee camps and diaspora communities to be targeted for radicalization while Saux (2007), using the case of Spain, argues that the link between counter-terrorism policy and more restrictive legislation for foreigners is a construct. Helbling (2020) suggests that while there is little evidence that increased migration leads to more terrorism, terrorist attacks can lead to more restrictive migration policies. Dreher, Gassebner and Schaudt (2017) find scarce evidence that terror is systematically imported from countries with large Muslim populations or countries where terror networks prevail, but also argues that policies excluding foreigners already living in a country increase rather than reduce the risk that foreign populations turn violent, and so do terrorist attacks against foreigners in their host country. While Bove and Böhmelt (2016) suggest that migrants stemming from terrorist-prone states moving to another country are indeed an important vehicle through which terrorism does diffuse, Dragičević (2019) finds no significant correlation between immigration and terrorism in European countries. Although such topics of the securitization of migration and the links between terror and migration have been addressed in different cases and on different perspectives, there are no studies focusing on securitization of migration on the use of terrorism discourse. These studies collectively underscore the need for a critical examination of the role of terror discourse in the securitization of migration. In this respect, the study aims to be a bridge 905 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 between studies on the terrorism-migration nexus and studies on the securitization of migration. This paper aims to address the challenges arising from the convergence of migration and security concerns, with a particular focus on terrorism. It explores the interactions between migration and security and their implications for host countries. To provide a comprehensive understanding, we analyze the discourse and public perception surrounding migration following terrorist events in Türkiye and Germany, two pivotal host countries with substantial refugee populations in Europe. Employing an exploratory case study approach, we are trying to find out the complexities of how migration becomes a security concern and, more significantly, the prominent role of the "terrorism" discourse within this context. We adopt a multi-layered approach, starting with selecting instances of terrorist attacks causing at least one fatality or injury in Türkiye and Germany between 2000 and 2020. This timeline allows us to discern temporal trends in terrorist incidents, especially post-2015, a critical juncture in the context of the refugee crisis. The reason we focus on the post-2015 period is that migration tended to be considered together with security concerns again during the "European refugee crisis”. The intervening of migration and terrorism holds profound consequences, impacting policy decisions and societal attitudes towards migrants and refugees. Our analysis begins by providing context to the migration-security nexus, dissecting the interactions between these two domains. It's essential to acknowledge that migration concerns encompass more than logistics and humanitarian assistance; they extend into national security, socio-political stability, and cultural identity. Therefore, it is imperative to dissect the multifaceted dimensions of the migration-security nexus in a global landscape. The European context serves as a compelling backdrop for this study, given the substantial influx of migrants in recent years, particularly during the European refugee crisis that gained momentum around 2015. This crisis posed substantial questions about security, integration, and migration management. Türkiye and Germany, within the European context and both dealing with the European refugee crisis, are essential case study countries. Europe's diverse cultures and histories offer a unique space for studying the interaction between migration and security. The region's political and socio-economic context provides valuable insights into migration management, perception, and securitization. Furthermore, the differing approaches of Türkiye and Germany present a rich comparative landscape for understanding various strategies, policies, and societal attitudes towards migrants and refugees. We explore how 906 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 the "terrorism" discourse has influenced national policies and shaped public perceptions. By scrutinizing the media portrayal of migration and terrorism, we aim to illuminate the interplay between security discourse and migration, unveiling the underlying dynamics that affect the lives of millions of refugees and host populations. The analysis is based on the Copenhagen School's securitization theory, which provides a robust foundation for comprehending the dynamics of security discourse. The study encompasses several stages. Initially, we identified terrorist attacks resulting in at least one fatality or injury in Türkiye and Germany between 2000 and 2020. Our choice of this timeframe was motivated by the intention to observe temporal trends in terrorist incidents, particularly in the post-2015 period, a pivotal juncture in the refugee crisis. Subsequently, we examined content from a high-circulation national newspaper discussing immigrants in relation to terrorist incidents within five days before and after events occurring from 2015 to 2020, with a specific focus on incidents involving refugees or immigrants. The inception of our newspaper review in 2015 aligned with the initiation of the "European refugee crisis," while our analysis concluded in 2020 for the sake of transparency. This endpoint was selected due to a significant event, namely the martyrdom of 33 soldiers on February 27, 2020, from a Syrian airstrike. This event prompted a shift in Türkiye's migration policy, adopting a non-intervention stance toward those wishing to leave the country, which resulted in a new wave of migration towards the European Union (EU). It requires separate consideration in future research. Additionally, the accuracy and reliability of the data post-Covid-19 pandemic, declared in March 2020, remain uncertain, further justifying our selection of this endpoint. The paper unfolds by discussing the broader theoretical framework in the "The Evolution of Migration and Security Discourse" section, followed by an evaluation of Europe's unique challenges in dealing with migration in the "Europe and Migration" section. The paper then illustrates how the fear of terrorism impacts perceptions of migration in the "Migration and Terrorism Perception" section. Finally, we conclude our study by summarizing our findings and discussing the implications of securitizing migration in the "Analysis of the Securitization of Migration and Its Implications" section. 2. METHODOLOGY The analysis aims to understand how the terms "terror" and "migration/refugee/immigrant /asylum-seeker" appear together in newspaper reports. We use data from the Global Terrorism Database (GTD), which is an 907 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 open-sources database including information on terrorist events around the World, and examine high-circulation national newspapers in both countries between 2015 and 2020 in detail through content analysis. It's essential to clarify that our study does not seek to determine the success or failure of securitization. Complete securitization entails public acceptance of security speech acts, restrictions, and the recognition of an existing threat. While certain indicators like far-right party voting patterns and public opinion surveys may offer insights into the public attitude, they do not provide a comprehensive understanding. Determining public acceptance of securitization requires a separate and resource-intensive research effort conducted by a substantial team. Following the peak of the refugee crisis, countries such as the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and Romania openly voiced their opposition to forced migration. Hungary, in particular, fortified its border with Serbia by erecting razor wire fences, staunchly advocating for the preservation of the Dublin system. As the situation deteriorated and migration flows were increasingly depicted as a crisis, several member states, including Austria and Slovenia, temporarily suspended the Schengen Agreement, reinstating border controls (Akşit-Ergen & Memişoğlu 2020, 181; The Guardian, 2015, 15 September; The Guardian, 2016, 9 March; Granados et al., 2016, 14 October). At the same time, the rhetoric surrounding refugees has assumed a more security-oriented tone in some EU countries, occasionally intersecting with the discourse of "terrorism." This study endeavors to explore the potential securitization of refugees through the lens of "terrorism" in Türkiye and Germany. Preliminary findings indicate that, despite hosting the largest refugee populations in Europe and experiencing jihadist-inspired terrorist attacks post2015, the inclination to associate migration with "terrorism" discourse appears relatively limited. 3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: SECURITIZATION Before delving into the relationship between migration and securitization, it is essential to provide a brief overview of securitization itself. Securitization emerged as a prominent framework in the 1990s, notably articulated by Ole Waever, a representative of the Copenhagen School. Waever's argument posits that security predominantly arises from discursive practices, occurring both within and between states, rather than being a purely objective and material condition (Waever, 1989; Waever, 1995, p. 54). According to Waever, security is a socially constructed concept shaped by discourse and discursive actions, serving to perpetuate historical structures and issues at both the domestic and international levels. Buzan, Waever, and de 908 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 Wilde (1998), in their foundational work "Security: A New Framework for Analysis," highlight that the use of the term "security" has the potential to elevate an issue to a political priority, paving the way for extraordinary measures and potentially legitimizing the use of force. These conditions may lead to interventionist state policies, the curbing of civil society, and adverse economic consequences (Buzan, Waever & de Wilde, 1998, pp. 195-213). Seizing upon an issue and labeling it as a security concern is a deliberate political choice, signifying a particular conceptualization. When an issue undergoes securitization, it tends to be approached as a threat, necessitating defensive measures and frequently state-centric solutions (Waever, 1995, pp. 61-62). Waever characterizes security as a "speech act". A successful securitization process hinges on several essential elements: the presence of existential threats, the implementation of emergency measures, and the audience's acceptance of the threat claim and the ensuing emergency measures (Buzan et al., 1998, p. 26). Additionally, crucial components facilitating securitization include the referent object, securitizing actors, and functional actors (Buzan et al., 1998, p. 36; Balzacq, 2005, p. 178). According to the Copenhagen School, designating a subject as a threat to the referent object's existence triggers the speech acts of security. If an issue is taken up within the realm of security through speech acts, and if extraordinary measures follow suit, with the target audience endorsing this narrative, successful securitization is observed (Buzan et al., 1998, p. 26). After a brief overview of the Securitization Theory, it is essential to reiterate that the aim of the article is not to determine the success of securitization. Rather, examining the evolution of migration in conjunction with the security discourse becomes crucial for understanding the stages of securitizing migration. The subsequent section intends to provide a concise historical background of the consideration of migration within the scope of security. 3.1. The Evolution of Migration and Security Discourse: From Historical Perspectives to Contemporary Challenges The political role of "international migration" can be traced back to the late 19th-century European Empire collapses, and the 20th century witnessed an amalgamation of wars, political upheavals, economic shifts, conflicts, and substantial cross-border migrations, all of which brought the concept of international migration into sharp focus (Panayi, 2011, pp. 3-4). The end of the Cold War brought about a transformation in the conventional notion of "security," expanding its purview beyond mere "state" security. This transformation entailed a broader definition of security, involving a diverse 909 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 array of actors and attracting critical perspectives (Krause & Williams, 1996, p. 230). Within this evolving landscape, "migration" became an integral part of security discourse (Geddes, 2003, p. 40; Walters, 2010, p. 218). Nevertheless, the post-Cold War era, particularly in the aftermath of crises such as the Yugoslav War and the Rwandan genocide, sharpened the focus on these concepts. The 1990s, characterized by the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, introduced new challenges: apprehensions about the future, regional conflicts, and humanitarian crises spurred migration flows from Eastern Bloc countries to Europe. This surge began to be perceived as a national security challenge, both socially and economically, especially in countries unaccustomed to managing mass migration (Heywood, 2013, p. 215). Consequently, this shift gave rise to stricter migration policies, particularly within European nations, and a notable shift towards a security-oriented perspective when examining migration policies. The unpreparedness of receiving countries for the influx of migrants, coupled with the sweeping global socio-economic and socio-political changes brought about by these migrations, further fueled the adoption of stricter migration policies. The tragic events of September 11, 2001, added another layer to the discourse linking migration and security, particularly in Western countries, as the perpetrators were foreigners (Bourbeau, 2011, pp. 99-101). In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, the EU's security discourse underwent a shift that underscored the imperative of controlling irregular migration (Triandafyllidou & Dimitriadi, 2013, p. 599). Moreover, in the 21st century, events like the Arab Spring and the Syrian Civil War raised security concerns, prompting individuals from these regions to seek asylum in other countries. Importantly, alongside the longstanding economic and political factors driving immigration, the motivation of "survival" emerged as an additional driver. Consequently, migration is now discussed within a broader security context. The global war on terrorism, coupled with heightened political concerns regarding migration and security, have created a less welcoming environment for refugees. States have become increasingly hesitant to accept asylum or resettlement requests, deviating from historical trends (Betts, 2017, p. 68). All these global events have contributed to the securitization of migration. The subsequent section will endeavor to shed light on the process of securitizing migration. 910 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 4. ANALYSIS OF THE SECURITIZATION OF MIGRATION AND ITS IMPLICATIONS The notion of security is inherently linked to existential threats, and the very mention of "security" carries profound implications, often signaling an urgent need for immediate action and the suspension of ordinary political processes (Fierke, 2017, p. 7). The transformation of terrorism as a case in point illustrates this phenomenon. Prior to the tragic events of 9/11, terrorism was typically categorized as a criminal activity. However, in the wake of the September 11 attacks, the perception of terrorism underwent a seismic shift, especially within the United States. It began to be regarded as an existential threat, with claims that the very existence and identity of America were imperiled. This reframing of terrorism elevated it to an unparalleled priority on the security agenda. The extensive use of the term "security" and the rhetoric of war created a state of emergency, compelling political elites to demand the authority to employ any means necessary to counter this perceived threat. This encompassed the adoption of a prevention policy, entailing deterrence measures against states harboring terrorists. This shift allowed authorities to circumvent the usual constraints on their actions, thereby legitimizing the implementation of extraordinary measures. The post-9/11 era witnessed a notable expansion of surveillance and detention powers, all justified under the banner of security. Fast forward to 2015, a pivotal year marked by both escalating migration flows towards Europe and the EU’s struggles to manage this influx. Europe found itself grappling with what would become known as the "European refugee crisis". This period witnessed some states interpreting these migration flows through a security lens. Consequently, the securitization of migration reemerged as a central theme. This "European refugee crisis" stands as one of the most significant migration movements since World War II. While some decision-makers, mass media outlets, and societies addressed this phenomenon within a humanitarian framework, advocating for open borders and assistance, others construed it as a threat to their economic well-being, welfare state, cultural identity, and personal security. Furthermore, the year 2015 witnessed a series of shocking terrorist incidents across Europe, distinct from the refugee crisis but nevertheless impacting how EU states and institutions approached migration. The emergence of terrorist attacks in France and Germany, starting with the Charlie Hebdo incident in 2015, served as a pivotal moment in alerting European nations. On one hand, these events ignited discussions on national and collective security policies in Europe. The other hand, it triggered intense 911 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 debate about whether European Muslims, particularly refugees, many of whom were of the Islamic faith, posed a security threat. Concerns arose regarding the potential infiltration of radical Islamists, terrorists, and even members of terrorist organizations who disguised themselves as refugees (Can, 2015). Moreover, the tightening of asylum policies, coupled with the ascent of rightwing parties in Europe, has further complicated the experiences of Muslims residing in Europe and newcomers arriving from beyond the continent, subjecting them to discriminatory treatment (Elbir, 2016). When coupled with the unfavorable treatment of immigrants by right-wing political elites, these events contributed to a growing perception of immigration as a security concern. In the context of migration's securitization, a range of stringent policies were adopted, including the reinstatement of border controls and the development and deployment of policing mechanisms like FRONTEX in the Mediterranean. These measures, while seemingly contradictory to the EU's values and free movement principles, reflected the urgent need perceived by European states (Robinson & Milne, 2017; Lutterbeck, 2006; Segura, 2016; Saleh, 2017; Beck, 2021, p. 1312). Additionally, a noteworthy trend in Western societies has been the association of immigrants with potential threats to the economy, the Western way of life, and public order (Karyotis & Skleparis, 2016, p. 266). Terrorism, a primary source of insecurity, has become intertwined with migration. In this context, Huysmans (2006) argues that the existential problem lies in the free movement of terrorists rather than the threat posed by refugees and asylum seekers. Asylum seekers and refugees have been increasingly associated with terrorists and existential threats. This perceived association serves as a justification for the adoption and enforcement of restrictive immigration policies. Boswell (2007, p. 590) posits that terrorism, with its attendant threats, provides a pretext for the implementation of stricter immigration controls. Subsequent to the surge in migration flows and the terrorist attacks perpetrated by violent-non state organization or terrorist groups like ISIS in Europe in 2015, media and political actors sought to draw associations between these phenomena. This environment effectively paved the way for the securitization of migration, particularly through the discourse of "terrorism" (Stivas, 2020). Following a brief overview of the securitization process of migration, it would be beneficial to examine the situation in Germany and Turkey, which constitute the examples in this article. Below, the numbers of refugees faced by Germany and Turkey, along with their changes over the years, are presented in 912 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 comparison to other EU countries and the EU overall average, providing insight into the migration flows. 5. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: GERMANY AND TÜRKİYE AS CASE STUDIES The provided figure offer a comprehensive overview of refugee populations within the EU and Türkiye from 2010 to 2020. Notably, Germany and Türkiye emerge as pivotal actors in refugee hosting, with their figures significantly surpassing those of other EU nations. Figure 1: Refugee Population by Country or Territory of Asylum, Worldbank Data Figure 1 highlights the considerable disparity in refugee populations, underscoring the substantial influx of refugees into both Germany and Türkiye. Germany's willingness to embrace refugees, particularly in the aftermath of 2015, is clearly evident, with a notable spike during that period. Between 2015 and 2017, Germany embraced an influx of over 600,000 refugees. However, in the subsequent five years (2017-2020), a discernible shift towards a more cautious refugee acceptance policy is discernible. In contrast, an examination of Türkiye's figures illustrates a remarkable escalation in the refugee population, commencing around 2013. Türkiye's remarkable commitment to providing refuge is vividly demonstrated, as it consistently surpasses the cumulative refugee population of the entire EU. 913 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 Despite minor fluctuations, Türkiye accommodated a staggering population of over 3.5 million refugees during the interval from 2015 to 2020. These data-rich figure unveil the dynamic nature of refugee inflows and shed light on the differing approaches of Germany and Türkiye in addressing this multifaceted challenge. In the subsequent sections of the article, the focus will initially be on Germany. In this context, the refugee perception in Germany will be examined within the framework of migration-security. Following this, an analysis of the content, based on the news articles from Bild newspaper, will shed light on the narrative shift concerning the migration crisis and the altered discourse in Germany. Secondly, the refugee perception in Turkey will be scrutinized in the context of migration-security. Subsequently, through content analysis of news articles from Hürriyet newspaper, an attempt will be made to illuminate Turkey's approach to the Refugee Crisis and the utilization of terrorist discourse. 5.1. Refugee Perceptions in Germany and the Migration-Security Nexus Germany, while officially not categorizing itself as a traditional immigration destination, has consistently maintained a substantial foreign population within its borders since the 1960s (Hamann & Karakayalı, 2017, p. 72; Simon & Lynch, 1999, p. 457; Sökefeld, 2017, p. 73). This dynamic has made immigration a recurring and central topic in German discourse. As from 2015, Germany witnessed a dramatic influx of international immigrants, earning it the highest number of international immigrants in the OECD and the EU (IOM, 2018, p. 24). The surge mainly originated in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, contributing to a 45% increase in the refugee population (IOM, 2018, p. 71). From the point of view of terrorist incidents, according to the data collected from the Global Terrorism Database (GTD), an open access database, covering the period from 2000 to 2020, Germany experienced a total of 284 incidents meeting the criteria for terrorism, including both successful and unsuccessful attempts. Notably, a significant portion of these events, precisely 215 out of 284, occurred between 2015 and 2020. Among these 284 incidents, 80 resulted in casualties or injuries. Approximately 46 of these events specifically targeted foreigners, their workplaces, and places of worship, while 20 incidents were aimed at refugees, asylum seekers, or the areas they inhabited. Furthermore, 4 out of the 80 incidents were directed against mayors or members of political parties 914 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 advocating pro-refugee policies or taking a positive stance on refugee acceptance. The remaining 204 incidents, without fatalities, included 56 directed towards asylum seekers, refugees, their shelters, or their places of residence. Two attacks specifically targeted businesses owned by Syrian nationals, two targeted foreign civilians with anti-immigrant motivations, one was directed at Muslim civilians with anti-Muslim motivations, and six were aimed at individuals, groups, or politicians supporting pro-refugee policies. These statistics reveal a significant number of attacks with anti-foreigner sentiments and a focus on specific religious or racial groups. While relatively rare, there were also attacks or protests against political groups and individuals supporting anti-immigrant policies. Between 2015 and 2020, 56 incidents resulted in deaths or injuries, with 27 targeting people of foreign origin, refugees, asylum seekers, immigrants, or their workplaces or places of worship. Among the perpetrators of these 56 incidents, 12 were recorded as being of foreign origin, with nine of them identified as refugees or asylum seekers. Additionally, 14 out of the 56 incidents were carried out by individuals with jihadist-inspired, Muslim extremist, ISISsympathizing, or direct ISIS membership backgrounds. Most notably, the majority of terrorist incidents in Germany over the last two decades occurred after 2015, many of these events driven by far rightwing ideologies deeply rooted in Germany's history, or because of antiimmigrant, xenophobic motivations, or anti-Semitic/anti-Muslim sentiments. It has also been observed that attacks targeting Turks and people of other nationalities are relatively high in Germany, reflecting an overall trend of extreme right-wing and xenophobic sentiments, irrespective of the context of refugees and asylum seekers. A report from ECRI (2017) provides alarming insights in 2016, approximately 10 daily attacks occurred against immigrants in Germany, injuring 560 people, including 43 children, and targeting nearly 1,000 homes. These incidents coincided with the polarization of opinions following Chancellor Merkel's decision to accept individuals fleeing conflict and persecution. Hate crimes surged in response to this decision, which, combined with Germany's struggles in processing accumulated asylum applications, exacerbated security concerns in the wake of a series of terrorist attacks across Europe (BBC, 2017, 26 February). Acts of violence against immigrants and religious minorities in Germany stood in stark contrast to the country's open policy of hosting and assisting refugees in 2015. Researches show that in 2017, 44% of Germans 915 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 surveyed expressed a desire to ban Muslim immigration, compared to 36.5% in 2014 (Eurobserver, 2018, 9 November). Reports on terrorism trends further indicate that between 2014 and 2018, far-right terrorism, rather than Islamic or immigrant-based terrorism, saw an increase (GTD, 2019). 5.2. Germany and the Migration Crisis: A Shifting Narrative In this analysis, we explore the content of Bild Zeitung, a mainstream conservative-right newspaper in Germany, which maintained a consistently high circulation exceeding one million copies between 2010 and 2020. Despite the uptick in post-2015 terrorist incidents, some involving foreign-born individuals with asylum seeker or refugee status associated with jihadist-motivated groups, it was observed that political leaders, especially those not aligned with far-right ideologies, predominantly adopted soothing and inclusive language over divisive rhetoric. The analysis examined Bild’s news articles between 2015 and 2020 related to terrorist attacks, assessing their content within before and after five days of the incidents. Each article mentioning refugees, asylum seekers, terrorism, or immigrants (Flüchtling, asylanten) was analyzed for its portrayal of the connection between these groups and terrorism, as well as the prevailing tone. It also identified news promoting inclusivity, peaceful coexistence, and non-violence towards foreigners and individuals of different religions. Between 2015 and 2018, articles on refugees maintained neutral or positive tones, emphasizing inclusivity and empathy. Messages of support and aid campaigns were widespread, with Germany implementing practices like providing shelter and incentivizing citizens to offer their homes to refugees, backed by state financial support and suitability assessments. Regional differences existed due to Germany's federal structure, with some regions successfully housing refugees and others facing criticism for mistreatment by security personnel. Post-2015, articles began addressing concerns about the state's capacity to accommodate the refugee influx and potential increases in terrorist acts, with authorities highlighting the risk of terrorist militias posing as refugees and stressing that this threat didn't apply to all refugees, emphasizing rigorous screening, while emphasizing the primary threat from individuals radicalized in Syria/Iraq who had "returned" to Germany. Concurrently, instances of actions and harassment against individuals of foreign origins or different religions, along with escalating actions and attacks by far-right movements and arson attempts targeting refugee accommodations, were observed post-2015. The emergence and growth of far-right movements like Pegida raised concerns among various stakeholders, including refugees, immigrants, 916 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 individuals of diverse religious backgrounds, politicians, and officials. While movements like Pegida gained traction, anti-Pegida movements garnered even more support. In the aftermath of the Paris attacks, discussions unfolded about monitoring radicalized citizens and those returning from Syria/Iraq, involving stricter entry and exit controls due to the challenge of directly apprehending returnees. Despite heightened fears and concerns regarding the potential for attacks in Germany post-Paris attacks, political officials continue to adopted cautious rhetoric, emphasizing inclusivity and unity. Representatives of various religions also stressed the importance of not attributing attacks to all Muslims or immigrants. Germany faced mounting migration challenges, with concerns about the nation's capacity taking center stage in news reports. Worries centered on accommodating newcomers in venues like sports halls and concert spaces, as dedicated refugee housing was lacking. Moreover, Bild covered anti-refugee campaigns and actions in several countries, including Hungary, Serbia, Romania, Greece, and Denmark, along with instances of border police and media misconduct toward refugees. Germany highlighted the contrasting refugee policies among EU states, especially Poland, Hungary, and England, which displayed reluctance to accept refugees. Chancellor Merkel criticized the EU, citing issues like Austria and Hungary's non-compliance with the Dublin Regulation, Hungary's use of barbed wire, and the detention of refugees at border crossings. (Bild, 2015, 31 August) Over time, migration management issues escalated in Germany and across Europe, leading to increased coverage in the media and political discourse. Pressing concerns included accommodation shortages, austerity measures, disputes among EU countries regarding the distribution of 160,000 refugees, and Germany's inability to address the situation singlehandedly. Opposition parties expressed fears about financial and social burdens, integration, and labor market issues. The media also began highlighting governance-related integration challenges, such as refugee children's education, language instruction, and workforce integration. As it became apparent that a common European refugee policy could not be implemented, and Germany could not manage the situation alone, high authorities issued reproachful messages to other European countries and called for burden-sharing. These messages underlined that the "inability to manage migration together" poses a threat to the common values of European identity, even though a positive line is tried to be maintained against refugees. Here, migration was depicted as a danger not in terms of terrorism but in terms of 917 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 impacting "common identity and culture". In Bild's content, calls for solidarity and cooperation were frequently conveyed, emphasizing shared values and responsibilities while acknowledging the challenges. In the summer of 2015, with the refugee influx, in contrast to securitization discourses and actions, Chancellor Merkel famously declared, "Wir schaffen das" (we can do this) (Bild, 2016, 30 August). However, over time, this optimistic stance began to erode as the initial positive atmosphere waned, evolving from "refugees welcome" to "the refugee flow does not stop," signaling that migration was now viewed as a governance threat (Liebe et al., 2018, p. 2). The news on the return of a new wave of refugees, procedures for asylum application rejections and subsequent returns, and the number of deportations began to surface. Criticisms arose regarding the slow functioning of the asylum bureaucracy, and calls for establishing rules for deportations, especially for individuals from safe countries, gained prominence in political discourse and media reports. From August 2015 to 2020, Chancellor Merkel was occasionally criticized by other EU states such as Hungary, members of the CSU/CDU ruling coaliton, and German opposition parties such as the SPD, AfD and others for her immigration and refugee policy, faced intensifying calls for her resignation unless she altered her stance (Roloff, 2015; Link, 2015; Bild, 2018, 19 June; Bild, 2018, 7 November; Schlee, 2019; Kain, 2019). As a result of debates on refugee policy, Merkel's party, the CDU, and its coalition partner, the CSU, lost favor with voters, while the far-right AfD gained traction with its antiimmigrant rhetoric and became the third-strongest political force. Over time, Merkel and her party succumbed to pressure, and even the CDU initiated a voluntary return aid program for individuals lacking the means to return home. Consequently, the news landscape gradually shifted from stories of pride in refugee acceptance to reports on the increasing number of deportations in the span of a few months. Examining the news landscape following major terrorist incidents in Germany and France, where the perpetrators either possessed local passports but were foreign-born or entered the country as asylum seekers or refugees, reveals a discernible shift in news tone towards concern. Investigations into the attackers reveal a diverse profile, ranging from individuals affiliated with ISIS and similar extremist organizations to "lone wolves" who became radicalized, oftentimes entering the country using falsified identities or having arrived prior to their radicalization. In the German context, authorities initially stress the importance of focusing on domestic radicalization rather than fixating on immigrant and 918 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 refugee identities, urging increased controls. However, in the aftermath of these attacks, there was a noticeable increase in daily news coverage, averaging at least three pieces per day, with a greater emphasis on intricate details about the attackers. These details include their radicalization, organizational affiliations or sympathies, birthplaces, residences, and backgrounds. There is more emphasis in the news on Islamic terrorism, radicalization, and extremism, and less focus on refugees. There is growing recognition of the vulnerability of refugees to radicalization, as well as discussions about the potential presence of Islamists within refugee camps (CDU-Politikerin Fordert, 2015, 19 September). Following the Würzburg attack, discussions on how to handle interactions with young refugees were sparked due to the attacker's young age. Efforts to identify radicalized individuals more effectively were initiated, involving various stakeholders such as district supervisors, municipalities, aid groups, foster families, and volunteer coordinators. These attacks evoke fear and anxiety among refugees, evident in reactions such as the slogan "Sie handeln nicht in meinem Name" (Not in my name) adopted by refugees in Germany after the Würzburg attack, signifying both their condemnation of the attack and apprehensions about potential targeting. Notably, some of right-party members, like parties closer to the centreright such as the CSU and far-right parties such as the AfD, members adopt a more aggressive stance following these attacks, often portraying Merkel's refugee policy as perilous. For instance, after the Paris attacks, one of the CSU members and Bavarian Minister Markus Söder's tweet, "Paris ändert alles" (Paris changes everything), and similar statements underscore the tendency of far-right parties to associate refugees with terrorism (Bild, 2015, 15 November). Nevertheless, a substantial portion of the population argued that refugees seek asylum to escape threats like those posed by ISIS, advocating against associating refugees with acts of terrorism. Furthermore, a growing sentiment emerged, especially in politician discourses that refugees should not be conflated with terrorism and also immigration policies should not be conflated with counterterrorism efforts (Bild, 2016, 15 November). Despite occasional criticisms of Chancellor Merkel's refugee policy from various political parties, with the exception of the far-right, none have gone to the extent of associating refugees with terrorism. Nevertheless, it's evident that some ruling parties express unease with Merkel's policies, particularly in states like Bavaria (CSU) and Baden-Württemberg (CDU), which have responded to significant terrorist incidents with tightened refugee policies and increased security measures. Notably, certain CDU members, including Schnuster, advocated for a more consistent deportation process for rejected 919 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 asylum seekers, emphasizing the need for "a culture of farewell" ("Wir brauchen eine Abschiedskultur") (Bild, 2016, 26 July). In these responses to terrorist attacks, there is a notable effort to delicately avoid directly linking refugees to "terrorist" acts. Instead, the focus is on discussing Islamic terrorism, radicalization, and extremism. However, because some perpetrators had foreign origins or infiltrated with refugees, there has been an increase in security measures at border controls. While refugees are not explicitly accused of involvement in terrorist activities by political leaders, there has been a rise in physical and verbal attacks on refugees and their shelters, particularly by extreme right-wing or extremist individuals. The media is handling this situation cautiously, and authorities are taking steps to prevent such attacks from escalating. To prevent future attacks and inform the public, informative articles have been published, addressing topics such as evaluating asylum applications after each attack, refugee settlement locations, refugee rights, and the monitoring of underage and unaccompanied refugee children. News coverage, especially following major terrorist incidents, prominently features calls for unity against terrorism and higlighting the distinction between Islam and terrorism and between refugees and terrorism, advocating for solidarity, particularly in the wake of significant acts of terrorism. 5.3. Refugee Perceptıons in Türkiye and the Migratıon-Security Nexus Türkiye has experienced a substantial number of terrorist incidents spanning from 2000 to 2020, with close to 2000 such incidents recorded. Since the 1980s, Türkiye has had to struggle with terrorist organizations such as the PKK and its extensions, which have mostly with Marxist-Leninist ideology or extreme-left and ethnic separatist motivations. These incidents reflect Türkiye's prolonged struggle with various terrorist organizations, particularly the PKK and its ideological offshoots. Consequently, the perpetrators of these terrorist acts are predominantly affiliated with ethnic separatist or far-left organizations. Notably, these attacks have frequently targeted security forces, transportation infrastructure, governmental entities, and public officials. In the context of migration, Türkiye plays a multifaceted role as both a receiving and sending country. Historically, Türkiye has been both a source and a transit country for migrants, but more recently, it has also become a target country for migrants. Türkiye has been significantly affected by the international forced migration movements, particularly due to humanitarian crises and instability in its neighboring regions. The Arab Spring in 2010, ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, and the humanitarian crisis that emerged 920 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 in Syria in 2011 have collectively led to the arrival of approximately 5.5 million people seeking asylum in neighboring countries, primarily Türkiye, Jordan, and Lebanon. Since 2015, Türkiye has emerged as the country hosting the largest number of refugees globally, driven by its humanitarian approach and opendoor policy implemented at the outset of the crisis. In addition to hosting over 3.5 million Syrian citizens under temporary protection status, Türkiye has received more than 450,000 individuals from countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and Somalia (Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Interior Presidency of Migration Management, 2022). However, it is essential to note that Türkiye's legal framework diverges from the 1951 Convention on the Legal Status of Refugees due to a geographical limitation. Consequently, Türkiye formally designates individuals arriving from Europe as "refugees," while those coming from regions like Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan are legally classified under temporary protection status. When examining attacks in Türkiye from the onset of the Syrian Civil War to the present, it is apparent that the number of incidents targeting refugees and asylum seekers has remained relatively low. However, the confluence of the Syrian War and increased activities of terrorist organizations in border regions, capitalizing on regional instability, unfortunately exposes both refugees and local residents to acts of terrorism, resulting in casualties. Furthermore, though their numbers are limited in Türkiye, there have been documented attacks against refugees perpetrated by various actors, including organizations involved in the Syrian War, far-left or separatist groups, or individuals without any clear organizational affiliation. A comprehensive analysis of attacks in Türkiye reveals that, since 2015, three of the incidents involved foreign perpetrators. In one notable incident, the attack that occurred on January 12, 2016, in Sultanahmet Square was attributed to Nabil Fadlı, a member of ISIS, who was identified as a Syrian citizen and had entered the country as an asylum seeker. 5.4. Türkiye's Nuanced Approach to the Refugee Crisis and Terrorism Discourse During the peak of the European refugee crisis from 2015 to 2018, Türkiye's most widely circulated newspaper, Hürriyet, extensively covered various refugee-related topics, both positive and negative, from 2015 to 2020. This coverage included discussions on refugee policies in other countries, attitudes and actions toward refugees, anti-immigrant and anti-refugee activities by neo-Nazi groups, and criticisms of EU policies. Hürriyet consistently emphasized three critical dimensions: Türkiye's status as the largest host of 921 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 refugees, its geographical proximity to conflict and terrorism-prone regions, primarily dealing with the PKK and, to a lesser extent, ISIS, and the need for a more equitable sharing of the burden among European countries as Türkiye couldn't handle its fight against ISIS in Syria and hosting refugees alone. The newspaper covered various topics, including Türkiye's refugee crisis solutions, creating opportunities for Syrian refugees, EU refugee acceptance, financial aid, border security enhancement, and combating human smuggling. Notably, while "terror" and "refugee" often appeared together in articles due to Türkiye's internal security concerns, accusations of terrorism against refugees were notably absent, indicating a deliberate avoidance of securitizing refugees through the "terror" discourse. Instead, the focus was on refugees fleeing terrorism and seeking safety in Türkiye, where they sometimes became victims of terrorism. The news stories emphasized the need for creating safe zones, free from terrorism, where refugees could safely return to their homelands. There was a consistent commitment to combat ISIS and other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria. Establishing areas within Syria's borders free from terrorist organizations was considered vital to protecting the Syrian population's right to life. Türkiye expressed disappointment with European countries' responses to the ongoing refugee influx and emphasized that the issue should be approached from a fundamental human rights perspective. The statements consistently avoided linking terrorist incidents to refugees, influenced by Türkiye's prolonged conflict with the ethnic separatist group PKK, advocating for Kurdish citizens' rights. Türkiye maintained a clear distinction between Kurdish ethnicity and the PKK organization, both in relation to refugees and broader contexts. The emphasis was on not unfairly attributing terrorism to specific ethnic, religious, or national identities. In the aftermath of major terrorist attacks, Türkiye prioritizes cautious and reconciliatory explanations in the news. Concerns arise regarding the potential infiltration of malicious terrorists among refugees, akin to the discourse in Germany. There are also discussions about the risk of terrorist organizations radicalizing vulnerable young Syrians. The prevailing sentiment underscores the need for a collective effort against extremism and the establishment of strong, cooperative intelligence networks as essential for finding a solution. Following the tragic Paris attacks, alarming revelations came to light regarding the nefarious tactics employed by ISIS. The group had fabricated fake ID-passports, using the identities of Syrians with clean criminal records. This disturbing scheme aimed to facilitate the transfer of suicide bombers and armed 922 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 militants into Europe under the guise of asylum seekers and refugees. One notable instance involved the identity of one of the Paris attackers, eight more individuals were found to have been issued passports under the name of Ahmed Almohammad, identified as one of the Paris attackers. This revelation serves as compelling evidence of how malicious militias exploited the identities of innocent refugees. In response to these incidents, Türkiye, a predominantly Muslimmajority nation, consistently emphasized the principle that terrorism should never be unjustly associated with all Muslims and refugees. Türkiye called for global cooperation, constructive dialogue, prudence, and a rejection of prejudice, particularly in the wake of significant worldwide terrorist attacks. Following the January 2016 Sultan Ahmet attacks, carried out by a Syrian asylum seeker, Türkiye's leaders initially adopted a reassuring tone, aligning with Germany's response. However, this incident led to increased scrutiny, focusing on the attacker's background, entry method, and radicalization. In response, border security was a priority, leading to the construction of an 837-kilometer border wall with Syria in January 2016 to prevent illegal crossings by asylum seekers, smugglers, and unidentified "terrorist organizations." Between 2015 and 2020, Türkiye transitioned from inclusive and tolerant news tones seen from 2010 to 2015 to more anxious ones. Economic worries, unemployment, cultural concerns, and limited accommodation capacity contributed to this shift. Media narratives critiqued the government's open-door policy, the significant $40 million expenditure on refugees, the EU's perceived failure to accept an adequate number of refugees, and its lack of material and moral burden-sharing. Opposition parties voiced concerns about the uncontrolled refugee influx, fearing economic crises and unemployment. Calls for creating safe zones and emphasizing repatriation became more common, with demands for transparent and auditable aid distribution and shared responsibility among European countries and international organizations. Notably, When the news in Hürriyet covering a 5-year period are analyzed, both ruling and opposition parties addressed Syrian refugees from economic and political perspectives, with opposition leaders like Devlet Bahçeli highlighting an "economic crisis" and Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu critiquing the ruling party's policies. These discussions had political implications and were used as election propaganda, raising concerns about public perception. President Erdoğan's responses, on the other hand, appeared more constructive regarding refugees, but none of the leaders' statements implied a connection between terrorism and refugees. 923 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 Despite Türkiye's open-door policy towards Syrian refugees and its efforts in constructive dialogue, it occasionally used the refugee issue to protect its position in conflicts with European counterparts. Notably, in early 2020, as the EU failed to fulfill promises under the Immigration Agreement, President Erdoğan declared his inability to protect the borders of Europe alone, allowing those who wanted to leave. Subsequently, this led to hundreds of people from various countries such as Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and similar nationalities gathering at the Turkish borders opening to Europe. Unfortunately, stringent border protection measures imposed by Bulgaria and Greece, including harsh interventions and passage restrictions, resulted in a humanitarian tragedy, highlighting the complexities of the global refugee challenge. 6. CONCLUSION In conclusion, this study has illuminated the divergent approaches taken by nations when confronting the refugee crisis, notably exemplified by the evolving rhetoric of leaders like Davutoğlu and Merkel. The response to the refugee crisis has been a dynamic process, influenced by both internal and external factors. Dynamic changes in political discourse can be observed, particularly in the aftermath of events such as the Charlie Hebdo incident, the Paris attacks, and the tragic death of baby Aylan Kurdi. Both Türkiye and Germany, despite hosting substantial refugee populations compared to other European countries, initially demonstrated a resolute commitment to inclusivity. While several nations swiftly closed their borders, Germany and Türkiye opted for a more accommodating approach. Germany even publicly declared its intent to temporarily suspend the Dublin Convention, to which it is a signatory, and Türkiye maintained an open-door policy. However, over time, their steadfastly inclusive attitudes faced challenges and gradually evolved. Pressure from opposition parties and the public, coupled with concerns about the capacity to host refugees, prompted more cautious policies. The emergence of major terrorist incidents further contributed to these shifts, as fears of potential security risks, even if unrelated to genuine refugees, prompted enhanced border controls and security measures, resulting in tightened immigration policies. Türkiye, being in proximity to conflict-prone regions, erected an 837-kilometer border wall with Syria to monitor the entry and exit of potential security threats and illegal immigrants, later extending this measure to cover borders with Iraq and Iran. Between 2015 and 2018, there was a discernible surge in news coverage on refugees in Germany, with a primary focus on their shelter conditions, 924 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 employment prospects, integration efforts, the financial and physical capabilities of German states, criticisms of EU refugee policies, and negative policies towards refugees in other EU member states. Significantly, the media devoted more attention to these aspects than to the potential for "terrorist" attacks originating from refugees. Nevertheless, the increased influx of migrants triggered the rise of farright and anti-immigrant groups, particularly in Germany. These groups intermittently exploited the situation with provocative statements to bolster their electoral support, while the media demonstrated a prudent approach in this context. Reports from the global press also highlighted that discussions about refugees intensified following terrorist attacks, contributing to the rise of farright movements and Islamophobia in both Germany and France. Germany's heightened sensitivity to the actions and discourses of farright movements is linked to its historical experiences, influencing the nation's cautious stance. Discrimination based on race and religion is addressed with care, and there are immediate, unequivocal condemnations after discriminatory actions. However, public discourse on integration sometimes includes references to cultural differences. Initially, in 2015, Germany's response to the surge in migration flows did not involve securitization, exemplified by Chancellor Merkel's "Wir schaffen das" (we will overcome) statement, which sought to maintain a sense of normalcy in handling the refugee issue. Merkel aimed to avoid treating the situation as an extraordinary and relatively steadfast discourse policy aimed at countering the escalating xenophobia and right-wing populism. However, demands for extraordinary measures by other politicians and securitizing actors eventually led to the securitization of the "refugee crisis" in Germany, making a departure from her initial approach. Although Chancellor Merkel initially resisted compromising her refugee policy between 2015 and 2018, her initial embrace of "Willkommenkultur" gradually waned, likely influenced by the rise of right-wing populist discourse and actions, even if not hegemonic. She eventually withdrew from political duties post-2018 due to reactions from her party, the coalition, other parties, and societal feedback. Taking advantage of this crisis environment, the far-right party AfD, known for its anti-immigrant stance, made significant political gains in this context and relatively increased its votes. Both Germany and Türkiye primarily grapple with socio-cultural and socio-economic concerns related to refugees, in addition to concerns about their overall capacity. The discourse surrounding refugees in Germany centers on "jobs," "economy," "integration," "capacity," "security control," "repatriation," 925 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 and mostly "governance problem," contributing to securitization efforts. Conversely, in Türkiye, economic concerns and unemployment issues played a more central role alongside capacity-related worries. These concerns also played a significant role in shaping concerns about Türkiye's refugee policy. Both countries have witnessed sporadic attacks against refugees and their residences, with Germany, in particular, experiencing an upsurge in antiimmigrant terrorist incidents after 2015. Despite this, it is essential to underline that the discourses of political elites and securitizing actors in both nations have not explicitly attempted to securitize immigrants through accusations of terrorism. Instead, the discourse emphasizes the need for caution in light of potential risks, avoiding direct accusations against refugees. This nuanced approach reflects an attempt to balance security considerations with a commitment to humanitarian principles in the face of complex challenges. 7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT The article is prepared by a single author, since it is produced from a thesis, the thesis advisor is written as the second author. 8. FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research received no specific grant from any funding agency. 9. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS The article is prepared by a single author, since it is produced from a thesis, the thesis advisor is written as the second author. 10. ETHICS COMMITTEE STATEMENT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COPYRIGHTS Ethics committee principles were complied with during the study process. The methods and data used in the study do not require ethics committee approval. 11. REFERENCES Adamson, F. B. (2006). Crossing Borders: International migration and national security. International Security, 31(1), 165–199. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4137542 Akşit-Ergen, G. & Memişoğlu, F. (2020). ‘Refuge Crisis’ in the context of EU-Turkey relations. In A. Bilgin (Edt.). EU/Turkey relations in the shadows of crisis, (pp. 175-192). London: Lenxington Books. 926 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 Amnesty International. (2023, September 18). Refugees, asylum seekers and migrants Amnesty International. https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/refugeesasylum-seekers-and-migrants/ Baker‐Beall, C. (2009). The discursive construction of EU Counter-Terrorism Policy: writing the ‘Migrant Other’, securitisation and control. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 5(2), 188–206. https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v5i2.161 Balzacq, T. (2005). The three faces of securitization: Political agency, audience and context. European Journal of International Relations, 11(2), 171–201. BBC. (2017, 26 February). Germany hate crime: Nearly 10 attacks a day on migrants in 2016. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39096833 in 28 December 2022. Beck, M. (2021). On the making of the German ‘refugee crisis’: securitizing muslim immigrants in 2015 and beyond. Journal of Refugee Studies 34(2), 1307-1326. Betts, A. (2017). Zorunlu göç ve küresel politika. Ankara: Hece Yayınları. Bild. (2015, 31 August). Bundeskanzlerin redet Klartext: Das will Merkel gegen die Flüchtlingskrise tun. bild.de. Retrieved from https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/angela-merkel/das-wird-merkel-jetzt-tun42398008.bild.html Bild. (2015, November 15). “Paris ändert alles”: Wirbel um Söders Flüchtings-Tweet. bild.de. https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/markus-soeder/veraendernanschlaege-die-fluechtlingsdebatte-43406506.bild.html Bild. (2016, 26 July). Kriminalität: Bayern geht schärfer gegen gewalttätige Flüchtlinge vor. bild.de.. Retrieved from https://www.bild.de/news/aktuelles/bombenanschlag-in-ansbachtatverdaechtig er-46976834.bild.html Bild. (2016, 30 August). Das hat sich seit dem Ausspruch der Kanzlerin zur Flüchtlingskrise getan1 Jahr nach „Wir schaffen das“. bild.de. Retrieved from https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/fluechtlingskrise/ein-jahr-nach-wirschaffen-das-47573470.bild.html Bild. (2016, 15 November). Paris Ändert Alles: Wirbel um Söders Flüchtings-Tweet. bild.de. Retrieved from https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/markussoeder/veraendern-anschlaege-die-fluechtlingsdebatte-43406506.bild.html Bild. (2018, June 19). Asyl-Zoff zwischen Merkel und Seehofer - Die Welt spricht über unsere Macht-Schlacht | Politik. bild.de. https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/angela-merkel/die-welt-spricht-ueberunsere-macht-schlacht-56052630.bild.html Bild. (2018b, November 7). Exklusive Umfrage: Soll Angela Merkel als Kanzlerin abtreten? | Politik. bild.de. https://www.bild.de/bild-plus/politik/inland/politikinland/exklusive-umfrage-soll-angela-merkel-als-kanzlerin-abtreten58253616.bild.html?wt_eid=2153669433153368749&wt_t=215416084203725 8320 927 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 Bolter, J. (2019, June 10). Explainer: who is an immigrant? migrationpolicy.org. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/content/explainer-who-immigrant Boswell, C. (2007). Migration control in Europe after 9/11: Explaining the absence of securitization. Journal of Common Market Studies, 45(3), 589-610. Bourbeau, P. (2011). The Securitization of migration: a study of movement and order. London: Routledge. Bove, V. M., & Böhmelt, T. (2016). Does immigration induce terrorism? The Journal of Politics, 78(2), 572–588. https://doi.org/10.1086/684679 Buzan, B., Waever, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A new framework of analysis. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publisher. Can, S. (2015). İslamofobi’yi zirveye tırmandıran Paris saldırılarının gölgesinde Avrupa Müslümanları. ORMER. https://ormer.sakarya.edu.tr/20,3,,45,islamofobi_yi_zirveye_tirmandiran_paris _saldirilari_nin_golgesinde_avrupa_muslumanlari.html Cdu-Politikerin Fordert, (2015, 19 September). Anwerbung für terror soll strafbar werden!. Bild. Retrieved from https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/politikinland/sympathie-werbung-fuer-terror-soll-bestraft-werden-42638558.bild.html Crush, J., & Ramachandran, S. (2010). Xenophobia, international migration and development. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 11(2), 209– 228. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452821003677327 Dragičević, D. (2019). Is there any correlation between terrorism and immigration? evidence from Eu countries. Journal of Business Paradigms, 4(2), 4-21. Dixit, P. (2015). Securitization and terroristization: analyzing states’ usage of the rhetoric of terrorism. In Springer eBooks (pp. 31–50). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-11181-6_3 Dreher, A., Gassebner, M., & Schaudt, P. (2020). The effect of migration on terror: Made at home or imported from abroad? Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne D’économique, 53(4), 1703–1744. https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12469 ECRI (2017). ECRI conclusions on the implementation of the recommendaions in respect of Germany subject to interim follow-up (No. CRI(2017)6). https://rm.coe.int/ecri-conclusions-on-the-implementation-of-therecommendations-in-respe/1680a807d2 Elbir, H. Ç. (2016). Avrupa’nın aşırı sağ haritası: Zenofobi, İslamofobi ve Türkofobi. AVİM. https://avim.org.tr/tr/Yorum/AVRUPA-NIN-ASIRI-SAG-HARITASIZENOFOBI-ISLAMOFOBI-VETURKOFOBI Estevens, J. (2018). Migration crisis in the EU: developing a framework for analysis of national security and defence strategies. Comparative Migration Studies, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-018-0093-3 Eurobserver, (2018, 9 November). Xenophobia on the rise in Germany, study finds. Eurobserver. Retrieved from. https://euobserver.com/migration/143336 in 22 July 2019. 928 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 Fierke, K. M. (2017). Critical theory, security, and emancipation. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.138. Global Terrorism Database. University of Maryland National Consortium for the study of terrorism and responses to terrorism an emeritus center of excellence of the U.S. department of homeland security. https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/ Geddes, A. (2003). The politics of migration and ımmigration in Europe. London: Sage. Granados, S., Murphy, Z., Schaul, K., & Faiola, A. (2016, 14 October). Fence Out: A new age of walls (Episode 2). The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/world/border-barriers/europerefugee-crisis-border-control/ Hamann, U., & Karakayali, S. (2017). Practicing willkommenskultur: migration and solidarity in Germany. Intersections: East European Journal of Society and Politics, 2(4), 69-86. Helbling, M., & Meierrieks, D. (2020). Terrorism and migration: an overview. British Journal of Political Science, 52(2), 977–996. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123420000587 Heywood, A. (2013). Küresel siyaset. Ankara: Adres Yayınları. Huysmans, J. (2006). The politics of ınsecurity: Fear, migration and asylum in the EU. London: Routledge. Ibrahim, M. (2005). The securitization of migration: a racial discourse1. International Migration, 43(5), 163–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2435.2005.00345.x International Labour Office (ILO), International Organization for Migration (IOM), & Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). (2001). International Migration, Racism, Discrimination and Xenophobia. World Conference Agaınst Racısm, Racıal Dıscrımınatıon, Xenophobıa And Related Intolerance (Wcar). https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/international_migration_racism.pd f International Organization for Migration (2018). World migration report 2018. https://publications.iom.int/books/world-migration-report-2018 Isaksen, J. V. (2019). The impact of the financial crisis on European attitudes toward immigration. Comparative Migration Studies, 7(24). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-019-0127-5 Kain, F. (2019, February 12). BILD-Analyse: Abrechnung mit Merkels Flüchtlingspolitik | Politik. bild.de. https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/politikinland/bild-analyse-zum-cdu-migrationsgipfel-das-thema-ist-zurueck-auf-deragenda-60076528.bild.html Karyotis, G., & Skleparis, D. (2016). Resistance to the criminalization of migration. In R. Furman, A. Ackerman & G. Lamphear (Eds.), The immigrant other: Lived experiences in a transnational world (pp. 266- 282). New York: Columbia University Press. 929 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 Krause, K., & Williams, M.C. (1996). Broadening the agenda of security studies: Politics and methods. Mershon International Studies Review, 40, 229-254. Li, F. L. N., Jowett, A. J., Findlay, A. M., & Skeldon, R. (1995). Discourse on Migration and Ethnic Identity: Interviews with Professionals in Hong Kong. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 20(3), 342–356. https://doi.org/10.2307/622655 Liebe, U., Meyerhoff, J., Kroesen, M., Chorus, C., & Glenk, K. (2018). From welcome culture to welcome limits? Uncovering preference changes over time for sheltering refugees in Germany. PLOS ONE, 13(8), e0199923. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199923 Link, V. A. (2015, October 27). Angela Merkel verteidigt ihre Flüchtlingspolitik: „Ja, es sind sehr, sehr viele. Aber wir sind 80 Millionen“ | Politik. bild.de. https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/angela-merkel/buergerdialog-zurfluechtlingskrise-43152640.bild.html Lutterbeck, D. (2006) Policing migration in the Mediterranean. Mediterranean Politics 11(1), 59–82. Martin, D. (1982). Large-Scale migrations of asylum seekers. American Journal of International Law, 76(3), 598–609. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0002930000212347 Massey, D. S. (1988). Economic development and international migration in comparative perspective. Population and Development Review, 14(3), 383– 413. https://doi.org/10.2307/1972195 Messina, A. M. (2014). Securitizing immigration in the age of terror. World Politics, 66(3), 530–559. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0043887114000148 Panayi, P. (2011). Imperial collapse and the creation of refugees in Twentieth-Century Europe. In Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks (pp. 3–27). https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230305700_1 Phinney, J. S., Horenczyk, G., Liebkind, K., & Vedder, P. (2001). Ethnic identity, immigration, and well-being: An interactional perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), 493–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00225 Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Interior Presidency of Migration Management, Up-toDate statistics, Retrieved from https://en.goc.gov.tr/international-protection17 Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Interior Presidency of Migration Management (2022). https://en.goc.gov.tr/internationalUp-to-Date statistics. Retrieved from protection17 Robinson, D. and Milne, R. (2017, May 2) EU states told to lift Schengen border controls within 6 months. Financial Times. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/0f96d0f2-2f4c-11e7-9555- 23ef563ecf9a Roloff, V. H. (2015, August 29). Flüchtlingspolitik der Kanzlerin: Wie Merkel im Ausland gefeiert und zuhause kritisiert wird | Politik. bild.de. https://www.bild.de/politik/ausland/angela-merkel/fluechtlingspolitik-imausland-gefeiert-zuhause-kritisiert-42373552.bild.html 930 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 Saleh, M. (2017). Border control and migration fatalities in the Mediterranean Sea. Ehttp://www.eInternational Relations. Retrieved from ir.info/2017/05/10/border-control-and-migration-fatal ities-in-themediterranean-sea/ Saux, M. S. (2007). Immigration and Terrorism: a constructed connection. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 13(1–2), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-006-9031-2 Schlee, M. (2019, April 18). Orbán: Merkel is ‘not in charge’ of Hungary’s refugee https://www.politico.eu/article/viktor-orban-angelapolicy. POLITICO. merkel-is-not-in-charge-of-hungarys-refugee-policy/ Schmid, A. P. (2016). Links between terrorism and migration: an exploration. ICCT Research Paper. https://doi.org/10.19165/2016.1.04 Segura, N. (2016, 26 October). Frontex’s New Mandate, a Controversial EU Approach to the Refugee Crisis. European Public Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.europeanpublicaffairs.eu/frontexs-new-mandatea-controversial-euapproach-to-the-refugee-crisis/ Simon, J. R., & Lynch, J. P. (1999). A comparative assessment of public opinion toward immigrants and immigration policies. International Migration Review, 33(2), 455-467. Stivas, D. (2020). The Securitization of the European refugee crisis. a novel approach to the ‘Audience acceptance’ of the Copenhagen school of security studies. (Unpublished PhD Thesis). Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong. Sökefeld, M. (2017). Between humanitarian and political realism: Anthropological perspective on the refugee crisis in Germany. NUST Journal of International Peace & Stability, 1(1), 72-85. The Guardian. (2015, 15 September). Crowds build at border with Serbia as Hungary cracks down on refugees. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/15/hungary-strict-new-bordercontrols-crackdownrefugees-serbia The Guardian. (2016, 9 March). Balkan countries shut borders as attention turns to new refugee routes. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/09/balkans-refugee-routeclosed-say-european-leaders Ting, J. C. (2006). Immigration and national security. Orbis, 50(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orbis.2005.10.004 Triandafyllidou, A., & Dimitriadi, A. (2013). Migration management at the outposts of the European Union: The case of Italy’s and Greece’s borders. Griffith Law Review, 22(3), 598-618. UNHCR- The UN Refugee Agency. (n.d.). The 1951 Refugee convention | UNHCR. UNHCR. https://www.unhcr.org/about-unhcr/who-we-are/1951-refugeeconvention Waever, O. (1989) Security, the speech act analysing the politics of a word, Working Paper, Research Training Seminar, Sostrup Manor, June 1989. 931 KAUJEASF 14(28), 2023: 902-932 Waever, O. (1995). Securitization and desecuritization. In Ronnie D. Lipschutz (eds.), On security (pp. 46–86). New York: Columbia University Press. Walters, W. (2010). Migration and Security. In J. P. Burgess (Eds.). The routledge handbook of new security studies (pp. 217-228). London: Routledge. 932