'Helping them where?' A critical discourse analysis of the Norwegian debate on burden-sharing following the Syrian refugee crisis

Abstract

The Syrian refugee crisis has both highlighted the limitations of, and created new possibilities for, burden-sharing in refugee protection. This thesis conceptualises burden-sharing as an international norm. The implementation of international norms, however, depends upon domestic political processes, actors and structures. The thesis therefore conducts a critical discourse analysis of the Norwegian political field, until late September 2015. The analysis uncovers three dominant discourses in the political field - the humanitarian discourse, the cost-and-capacity discourse, and the nation-state discourse. These discourses take part in a discursive battle over conflicting norms, meanings and values. The outcome of this battle, in turn, shapes the political space for burden-sharing. In particular, the hierarchical relationship between the different discourses has significant consequences for Norwegian burden-sharing initiatives. The thesis argues that the cost-and-capacity discourse maintains discursive hegemony in the field. However, it also highlights aspects of discursive transformation as well as reproduction. As the humanitarian discourse gradually has been accorded a stronger role, actors who are largely identified by this discourse have attempted to transform the discursive structure and the political space for burden-sharing.