Ten Years of Civil SAR and Its Societal Support Landscape

In the 2000s and early 2010s, the number of fatal shipwrecks in the Mediterranean increased, leading scholars to use terms such as »border deaths« and »let die«, first as observations, then as descriptions of strategic elements of the European border regime (Cuttitta/Last 2020; De Genova 2017; M’charek 2018). Nevertheless, over the past decade, European Union (EU) authorities have gradually dismantled measures aimed at minimizing migrant deaths in the Mediterranean. In this regard, more and more non-state actors committed themselves to SAR in the Mediterranean, starting in 2014. Several non-governmental SAR organizations have sprung up in the last ten years to save the lives of migrants in distress at sea. These NGOs operate on legal terms: Rescuing people, crews, and vessels in distress on high seas is legally binding and, thus, obligatory under international (maritime) law (Farahat/Markard 2020). Yet, we see discursive strategies of criminalization, for instance, by far-right parties, in order to delegitimize (non-governmental) SAR operations. But since these SAR NGOs react to a humanitarian emergency, we assume that saving lives provides them with legal and ethical grounds to justify their actions. Still, their activity is both voluntary and mostly unpaid, since it is not provided for by the state. From this perspective, it is open to public discussion and contestations and needs societal support.

While new NGOs keep on emerging since the first ones were established in 2014/15, societal support for the NGOs has also gradually developed in churches, political parties, municipalities, academia, the arts, journalism, and the like. Various people take up the topic of SAR and are prepared to give the NGOs backing through support in discourse and concrete actions. Since they are not themselves directly involved in SAR activities, they can provide the NGOs with external moral and political legitimacy as well as financial support, on which the NGOs’ donation-financed work largely depends. The obstruction of rescue operations and the attempts by other actors to discredit civil SAR politically also (counter-)mobilize support within civil society (Interview #D10). The group of people we are interested in uses their respective audience to draw attention to both the dying in the Mediterranean as well as the efforts to save lives by civil society actors. Very prominent examples of this group are Pope Francis (Scavo 2023), the former chairperson of the German Protestant Church Council, Heinrich Bedford-Strohm (Evangelische Kirche Deutschland 2019), the former Mayor of Barcelona, Ada Colau (ZEIT online 2018) or street artist Banksy (Banksy 2020). Also, especially in Germany, support structures have emerged to assist rescue activities through civil society work on land. This is how the United4Rescue association and the Seebrücke movement were formed, which support civil SAR in general but are not part of a particular NGO (Interview #D5).1

We assume that the practice of civil SAR would not have been possible without the support of these societal actors. Especially in Italy, where we find that »in the public discourse there is this extreme stigmatization of the work of search and rescue organizations« (Interview #I5), alliances, for example, with the Catholic Church or trade unions, are of major importance for the NGOs’ legitimacy. According to our research, the group of supporters mostly consists of well-educated white middle-class people. However, we also talked with people who crossed the Mediterranean and became supporters of SAR NGOs to help others who need to flee and face serious challenges during both their crossing and arriving »as migrants« in Europe (Interview #I7). However, due to their structurally deprived living conditions in Europe, they represent a smaller proportion of that group. As a Sudanese activist in Italy explained, for people arriving in Europe becoming politically active is »very advanced. For the meantime, they are just searching for the basics of the life [sic], like work, staying in a home. Yeah, this is the very fundamental things [sic]« (Interview #I7).

Many of our interviewees turned to the topic of SAR themselves, but it can also work the other way around. In need of support, such as the production of professional footage of their work, SAR NGOs approach filmmakers and photographers and ask to work with them. Support can be very practical, for instance, through donations. Alternatively, it can take on the form of a broader moral support through alliances. As an interviewee told us, Sea-Watch approached the leadership of the German protestant church: »They needed social actors who had influence, so to speak. (...)2 They were practically in this niche of civilians, of activists, and had no strong social organization behind them. And that’s why they turned to us, with good reason. Because they knew, and rightly so, that it was written into our raison d’être, so to speak, to stand up for the weak« (Interview #D13).

In principle, we find a great closeness between the NGOs and their supporters, although the actual main task of rescue is carried out exclusively by NGO members and staff. Especially the transfer of knowledge about the situation in the Mediterranean and rescue operations in particular requires close communication between these two groups.

Analyzing Supporters’ Narratives on Search and Rescue

Our approach to studying narratives on (civil) SAR draws on Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis (CDA). We explore this particular discourse in relation to other social elements (Fairclough 2012: 11), most importantly, the concrete practice of civil SAR. From a methodological perspective, we thus differentiate between discourse about SAR and the actual practice of SAR (see editorial of this issue), based on the assumption that the concrete actions of civil SAR actors significantly shape the debates surrounding them. Understanding discourse as a »particular way of talking about and understanding the world« (Jørgensen/Phillips 2002: 1), we inquire how various actors from Spain, Italy, and Germany give meaning to SAR activities, why the issue is relevant to them, and how it aligns with their worldview. We examine discourse fragments that we consider to be embedded in societal negotiations. Concretely, we assume that there is a discursive struggle (Jørgensen/Phillips 2002: 6) over which approaches and interpretations of (civil) SAR are legitimate, central, or necessary.

We chose these three countries because each is home to several SAR NGOs operating in the Mediterranean, many of which are actively engaged in the public debates. In Spain, these include the Catalonia-based Open Arms, the organization Proem AID and the Basque-based Salvamento Maritimo Humanitario (which operates the Aita Mari), all of them under the Spanish flag. In Italy, Mediterranea Saving Humans, sailing under the Italian flag, is the most publicly active NGO. Two other NGOs are based in Italy (Emergency and ResQ). These NGOs are typically active off the Italian coasts, which means that mainly Italian authorities are confronted with the reception of refugees from NGO vessels. The debates on civil SAR seem to be particularly polarized in the Italian political context. In contrast, the Spanish government seems to generally neglect SAR NGOs operating off its coasts and focuses on rescues through its state maritime rescue agency Sociedad de Salvamento y Seguridad Marítima (SASEMAR). Germany is a contrasting case as it is not a Mediterranean coastal state and is not responsible for the initial reception and registration of asylum seekers arriving in the EU by boat. Nonetheless, the topic of SAR in the Mediterranean has garnered significant political and public attention (Laube/Ullrich 2023). According to our data, as of April 2025, ten German-based SAR NGOs are operating, namely Sea-Eye, Sea-Watch, SOS Humanity, Louise Michel, Mission Lifeline, Resqship, Sea Punks, r42, Grenzenlos, and Search and Rescue for all Humans (SARAH).3

In our methodological approach, we adhere to the principles of discourse-oriented ethnography (Smart 2012) and focus on understanding how those taking a positive stance towards civil SAR give meaning to SAR activism, (potentially) uncovering shared worldviews (ibid.: 147). Such an approach requires conversational settings that are preferable to analyzing media outlets, since these contents are always mediated and transmitted by a third party. The ethnographic approach has been crucial for identifying supporters, whether through observation of demonstrations, research on social media activities, or participatory observations at workshops and conferences.

For this contribution, we use a part of a larger data collection from the ZivDem project that consists of over 60 narrative interviews (also with many SAR NGOs), field notes, media outlets from SAR actors, reports by state authorities, and observations of public events. We chose a sample of 26 interviews conducted in Italy (#I1-3, 5-8), Spain (#ES1-4), and Germany (#D1-13), as well as one observation from a public event (#I4), to dive into our research question. The data contains narratives of civil SAR by politicians, artists, journalists, scholars, public administrators, representatives of two Christian churches, and several members of other civil society organizations, such as representatives of a local group of German-based Seebrücke, of the umbrella organization United4Rescue, and of the migrant self-organized Comunita Sudanese in Italy.

Engaging with members of organizations, such as political parties or churches, means we get to know both their individual as well as the organizational perspectives. Efforts to engage with actors who oppose the involvement of SAR NGOs or sea rescue of migrants in general have proven challenging, with many interview requests unanswered. While opponents are rather hesitant to speak openly about what is, as we will show, a fundamental moral issue for many, we assume that actors supporting civil SAR expect something out of talking about it with scholars. We conducted field research in Spain (mainland and the Canary Islands) and Italy, consisting each of five-week stays for interviews and observations, along with several interview trips and observations in Germany. The group of interviewees consists predominantly of male people between approximately 20-70 years, with those closer to the practical work of SAR (such as photographers or filmmakers partaking in a SAR operations) tending to be between 25-40 years.

The interviews followed a narrative approach and were conducted using problem-centered (Witzel/Reiter 2022) and expert interview techniques (Bogner/Menz 2009). They typically lasted around 90 minutes, though occasionally shorter, especially in the case of politicians due to time restrictions. The problem-centered part of the guided interview focused on the interviewees’ perceptions of the failures in the Mediterranean border space. Through open-ended questions, we sought to find out which values and norms are central to the interviewees in this context and what is special about sea rescue for them. They expressed their vision of a desirable future when reacting to the question of how they would like forced migrants coming by boat to be treated by European authorities. Additionally, we discussed specific cases that emerged during data collection, such as the decision of the Scholz government to provide financial support for civil SAR. When we identified central narratives, we reflected them back to the interviewees during the interviews. While the NGOs’ activism has often been framed as solidarity (see Mareike Gebhardt in this issue), humanitarian action, or resistance to state power, both in the literature and by the NGOs, we avoided mentioning such interpretations throughout the interviews to prevent imposing prefabricated narratives on the interviewees.

Data analysis followed the approach of qualitative content analysis (Mayring 2021) and involved coding processes in MaxQDA to extract central narratives about why interviewees position themselves on the issue of SAR in the Mediterranean and what the ships symbolize to them. The initial categories, each presented in italics in the following, derived from content analysis, are outlined in the following and illustrate the two main rationales that come together in the support of civil sea rescue: Against inaction and for democratic values.

Narratives of Civil Search and Rescue

In this empirical part, we proceed as follows: First, we present our systematic analysis of the main issues, conflicts and contradictions that interviewees name in light of the current situation people on the move and SAR NGOs find themselves in on the high seas as well as in public debates on civil SAR. Second, we turn to the explicit and implicit norms and values that guide the narratives of our interview partners as they justify their support.

Problematizations Associated with the Mediterranean Border Space

The problem-centered interviews cover a variety of issues associated with the Mediterranean border space that have led the interviewees to take a position and address the topic of SAR in their work or voluntary activities. The issues mentioned are often discussed with dismay, anger, or irritation. Generally, we find that questions surrounding the opening or closing of borders, as well as whether it is legitimate to treat Black people and People of Color inhumanely at borders, are central to their narratives and problematizations (Mau/Lux/Westheuser 2023: 188ff.).

In the following, we first present the four most prominent issues addressed, and then two less frequently but regularly recurring narratives:

• closed border policies and inhumane treatment and deterrence of migrants

• criminalization of SAR NGOs

• violations of the law by state authorities

• indifference and inaction by state actors

• polarization and instrumentalization of (forced) migration

• racism and the accusation of unequal treatment of people in distress at sea

With regard to the issue of closed border policies and inhumane treatment and deterrence of migrants the starting point for many interviewees is their observation that people are continuously left to die off Europe’s coasts. A photographer argues that »the most important point in 2024 is that it [leaving people to die] is still happening« (Interview #D6). Many see a strategic approach behind the migrant deaths in the Mediterranean and accuse governments of using the dead to supposedly prevent further ›unwanted‹ migration. The willingness of authorities to treat forced migrants inhumanely to deter othered populations is impossible to accept for all interviewees in Germany, Spain, and Italy. They recall a lot of grievances, such as violent behavior against people on the move, exclusion of migrants from rescue (Interview #D6, #I2, #I7) or save travels (Interview #D13, #ES1), ignoring distress calls by Maltese or Italian Maritime Rescue Coordination Centers (MRCC) (Interview #D10), militarization of border guards (Interview #I5), closed harbors (Interview #I3), prolonged detention of migrants at the border (Interview #D3), and no proper identification procedures of dead bodies (Interview #D12).

While interview partners report the grievances associated with the closing of borders with dismay and sometimes disbelief, the second issue, the criminalization of SAR NGOs, including restrictive administrative measures, provokes particular outrage and appears, especially in Germany, as a crucial reason for engagement. Many interview partners criticize that SAR NGOs are obstructed in their work (Interview #D12, #I5). They see various mechanisms in place, such as hindering their operations through delays in the disembarkation of rescued people (Interview #D4, #D5), detention of rescue ships in Italian ports (Interview #D13), stigmatization of rescuers as traffickers, terrorists, mafia or other hostile images (Interview #D4, #D5, #D8, #ES1, #I6), or new laws that impose more restrictions on SAR NGOs and penalties if they violate them (Interview #D8). Especially with regard to Italy, interviewees see the authorities as having turned against civil sea rescue since 2017 (Interview #I5), with the Meloni government continuing this course (Interview #D5), allowing for a debate about NGOs that strongly stigmatizes them. The criminalization of SAR NGOs by Italian authorities seems to mobilize a willingness to donate. Therefore, criminalization not only brings disadvantages but also more attention to civil SAR, as some interviewees critically reflected (Interview #D5, #D10).

Another issue raised by many interviewees is violations of the law by state authorities. They critically discuss a normalization of the fact that European states do not fulfil their legal obligations under international maritime law. The interviewees assume that the lack of rescue operations and the deaths of migrants are widely known and often refer to these issues merely as »what is happening in the Mediterranean« (Interview #I5). Meanwhile, they insist that they cannot get used to the violations of rights and are »not willing to accept the situation« (Interview #D10). We see the risk that this could lead to a loss of trust in governments and a loss of faith in equal treatment and the reliability of institutions. Some even accuse state authorities to »create this emergency, I mean, this permanent emergency in the Mediterranean Sea«, as an Italian scholar puts it (Interview #I6). According to Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (Consolidated version European Union 2016), the values on which the EU is founded are »respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law, and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities«. To ensure that these values are respected, Article 7 of the treaty provides for an EU mechanism to determine whether there has been a serious breach by a member state and whether sanctions should be imposed. Against this background, a staff member of United4Rescue reports that she is confronted with the question of why SAR NGOs are prosecuted while state authorities are not when they fail to provide life-saving assistance (Interview #D10). Thereby, the interviewees are also more generally concerned about the reliability of the rule of law and the assurance that all people are treated equally, especially with regard to illegal push-backs (Interview #D5, #D12). Strong criticism is also voiced when new laws effectively force NGOs to violate international law, as in this statement by an Italian civil society actor:

»They say they have just to take one rescue and go. Not to seek for others. It’s incredible. It’s something you cannot imagine. You are away, there is a boat, you have to stay here because I just took my 30 places. [...] It’s against all the international conventions, against all the law, the seal, it’s against everything. Nobody is able to respond in terms of justice to this« (Interview #I5).

Such state behavior at borders, also described as a new toughness (Kohlenberger 2024; Pichl 2024), clashes with the interviewees’ worldview; the deliberate violation of the law seems inconceivable within the liberal-democratic system they believe they live in. Some see the attempt to please right-wing voters in Europe as the cause (Interview #ES1), others see a failure of the EU to agree on refugee protection as the main reason (Interview #D11).

Next to problematizing the violations of the law and the criminalization of helpers, a further issue is discussed in the interviews in all three countries, partly as a shock or deviation from normal expectations, namely the indifference and inaction by state actors (Interview #D9, #D12, #ES1, #I2, #I8). A photographer who accompanied and documented a civil SAR operation states:

»So instead of thinking about how to save people and how to do it intelligently, they [the EU] somehow make strange deals with some very questionable authoritarian countries. And you try to outsource it somehow. And I don’t think that’s going to work. Because the dead will just pile up off the coast of Europe« (Interview #D6).

In Germany, where we spoke to several members of the Bundestag or the EU Parliament who had taken a stance in favor of SAR NGOs, all spoke out against the political indifference to the deaths in the Mediterranean. They either call for a state-led rescue operation or, in line with initiatives of the Scholz government (Laube/Ullrich 2023), argue that at least civil society actors should be supported to save lives if European governments are neither willing nor capable of reaching an agreement to do so (Interview #D2, #D4, #D11). This approach to support SAR NGOs financially and by ensuring greater legal certainty contrasts sharply with Italian policy.

Another issue, mentioned less frequently, is the polarization and instrumentalization of (forced) migration, which is mainly blamed on far-right and center-right parties in Europe. Interviewees in Germany problematize the strategy of stirring up fears towards ›irregular migration‹ (Interview #D1, #D5, #I2, #I5) and of accusing sea rescuers of bringing ›unwanted‹ people to Europe without being asked to do so (Interview #D4). A Catalonian activist explains:

»And then [when people are struggling economically] this is an opportunity for parties on the right side of the political spectrum to prey on these vulnerable people and say, ›you are struggling, so if you let people come, you will struggle more‹. So, they just saw the opportunity and then started to use this kind of fear, like, narrative to get more votes« (Interview #ES1).

The issues mentioned in the interviews also include a number of statements on racism and the accusation of unequal treatment of people in distress at sea because of their origin and skin color. In all three countries, at least half of the interview partners either directly criticize the EU or the respective national governments for racist policies (Interview #D9, #I8) or identify racism in the national or European discourse on forced migrants, especially those from sub-Saharan countries (Interview #D7). Some also address the issue that »racialized hierarchies can also be reproduced in rescue« (Interview #D8).

While all interviewees refer to border violence and migrant deaths in the Mediterranean as a grievance, this Italian journalist explicitly recognizes this as racist:

»Abandoning people without water, without food in the desert or throwing them in the middle of the sea and going to take out the engine when they have gone 3-4 miles away from the coast, that means to bring them to certain death. The Holocaust was deliberately bringing certain people to death because they were not deemed worthy of the Aryan race, right? And so the sub-Saharan today is not worthy of belonging to our race […] and so they are […] thrown away like they are garbage. And so this thing here, on this point, there is really the United Nations and the European Union should intervene very seriously. Because we talk about rights but these rights are not respected to their full extent« (Interview #I1).4

When asked what images come to mind when they think of civil sea rescue, the first images interviewees mention are those of abuses at the European borders: dead children in the Mediterranean, like Alan Kurdi, unanswered emergency calls, sea rescuers on trial, and illegal push-backs at sea (Interview #D10, #D12, #D13, #ES4). As we have shown elsewhere, SAR NGOs critically highlight these abuses, they respond through concrete interventions on the high seas, are present, witness, and document violations of rights, and work towards their elimination, while urging and mobilizing authorities and civil societies to take action (Laube/Ullrich 2023). As seen in the case of the Italian journalist above, once the interviewees have talked about an issue, they often name the moral principles that apply to them or that should guide European policy (e.g., individual rights) and address the institutions from which they expect a solution (e.g., UN, EU). They place the responsibility for the deaths at the heart of policy areas (e.g., border or integration policies) and institutions (national governments, EU, UN), identifying the failure of these institutions to address the issues as their fundamental shortcoming.

Norms and Values Associated with Civil Search and Rescue

With regard to the explicit or implicit norms and values that guide the interviewees’ narratives, we find that they have a clear moral sense that civil sea rescuers do the right thing. They often stated that, when it comes to policies surrounding forced migration, there are »sometimes no easy answers« (Interview #D9) or they indicate dilemmas European societies are confronted with (Bauböck 2019; Kohlenberger 2022, Interview #D5). However, the need to send ships and rescue people in distress regardless of their origin is of great moral clarity for all interviewees: »They will either be saved or they will not be saved. That is a very simple question« (Interview #D2). Hence, civil SAR seems to have a somewhat relieving effect. Here, the political and social complexities that shape the discourse on migration, of which the interviewees are well aware, can be disregarded when it comes to saving the lives of people in distress and supporting those who operate the ships. Several interview partners said that what makes sea rescue so distinctive is that it is not complicated and that the moral principles are clear. They recognize that people can disagree about many things (Interview #D5), but »you don’t let people drown. Full stop« (Interview #D13).5 Consequently, consternation is great when other societal actors in Europe appear to question such a »key moral issue« (Interview #D5), e.g., by hindering the NGO ships from leaving the port. The commitment to civil SAR is therefore also linked to an awareness of the interviewees that a (formerly perceived) societal consensus on refugee protection is in danger of being lost.

Our analysis of the interview data on how individuals justify their support revealed two dominant narratives on humanitarianism/human dignity and on human rights, to which almost all interviewees referred. In addition, we identified four further recurring narratives that appeared less frequently but were still noteworthy. Altogether, we distinguish the following six narratives:

• humanitarianism/human dignity

• human rights

• civic democracy

• rule of law

• solidarity

• freedom of information

When using a humanitarianism/human dignity narrative our interview partners often point to the situation of forced migrants on the Central Mediterranean route and at the external borders of the EU (Interview #ES3, observation #I4). In this vein, the former chairman of the German Protestant Church stated: »When people suffer and when people are persecuted or when people simply flee for whatever reason and end up in bad situations, you can’t close your heart, you can’t look away« (Interview #D13). Helping other people when one goes to sea is often interpreted as a natural human impulse (Interview #ES1, #I2). In Germany and Italy, the commitment to sea rescue is also frequently motivated by a Christian worldview that values every human life per se (Interview #D1, #D12, #D13, #I5, #I8, observation #I4). From this Christian self-understanding, supporters often call on the EU to adopt a humanitarian approach to SAR (Interview #D8, #I6).

Interviewees in all three countries also directly claim that it is a violation of human rights when people seeking protection are left to die after distress calls have been received by European authorities (e.g., Interview #D1, #D8, #ES3, #I2). The reference to human rights shifts the justification for supporting civil SAR from a moral to a juridico-political level. We find that these two lines of reasoning are not mutually exclusive, but are often used together to give more weight to the argument as a whole: The unacceptably brutal consequences for people seeking protection are addressed when human rights are violated and when states breach the law of the sea or refugee conventions. Human rights narratives emphasize the equality of all human beings, as this Italian politician calls to respect human rights obligations and to feel more »responsible even for our brothers and sisters who were not born in the house next door« (Interview #I8). Many interview partners in Germany, Italy, and Spain also express their concern or anger about European governments violating their own standards and undermining shared values (Interview #D4, #ES1, #I2, #I5), which they perceive as playing with fundamental rights, state failure, fraud, hypocrisy, etc. Frequently, especially by German interviewees, their call for human rights is articulated through the lens of historical and political reference points, such as the founding of the EU on the principle of international human rights or the lessons of WWII (Interview #D4, #D11, #D12). They see political promises which relate to the consequent enforcement of human rights in Europe unfulfilled, as the ongoing deaths in the Mediterranean so blatantly demonstrate. In this vein, a German journalist summarizes the fears of many people in view of the deaths in the Mediterranean in an intriguing question: »Is Europe actually the continent of letting people die and not of saving lives?« (Interview #D5)

Moreover, civil society actors argue that the demands of civic democracy are compromised in debates on sea rescue, like this member of the Italian Council for Refugees: »The debate is about our fundamental values. […] These are fundamental values of our society, of our democracy and people don’t get it« (Interview #I2). Other actors feel called upon to act together as civil society (Interview #D13, #I5) and support SAR NGOs in their attempt to uphold legal norms and democratic values in rescuing people from drowning if the state is unwilling or unable to fulfil its responsibilities to individuals. The interviewees highlight the role of civil society in a democracy to hold the governments accountable for their behavior towards people in distress at sea (Interview #D5).

References to the importance of the rule of law are surprisingly prominent in the narratives of supporters, considering that this aspect has so far received little attention in the literature on civil SAR. Several interview partners see a fundamental threat to the rule of law when states suspend individual rights for certain groups (Interview #D1, #D2, #D5, #ES4, #I8). For the interview partners, the violation of the right to be rescued is a particularly clear violation of the principle of the rule of law, but it is extended to other individual rights. A German member of the European Parliament for the party VOLT is very clear on this issue:

»The rule of law, including the European rule of law, is failing when it comes to asylum. And I think that’s why it’s important that we get a lot better very quickly. And for me, this is why sea rescue is a super important part, because that’s where the whole horror of the system is actually revealed, so to speak. But it’s still just a symptom and part of the systemic failure« (Interview #D11).

Narratives of solidarity with forced migrants trying to cross the Mediterranean appear much less than expected in the interviews, and are mostly mentioned by scholars, journalists, and left-wing party members (Interview #D2, #D5, #I3, #I8). It is noteworthy to us that few people argue with solidarity, since for various SAR NGOs, such as Sea-Watch, Sea-Eye or Open Arms, the concept of solidarity with people on the move is a central feature of their self-conception and is prominently displayed in their official media outlets. References to solidarity are rather varied and multi-directional. They include solidarity between SAR NGOs (Interview #D4, #D8), solidarity of German authorities with German SAR NGOs (Interview #D13) or intra-European solidarity that ends abruptly at Europe’s external borders.

It is also noticeable, albeit less frequently, that people consider SAR NGOs important because they provide information and raise public awareness about the permanent deaths in the Mediterranean and human rights violations. The value referred to is freedom of information (Interview #I3); again, this is connected to the role of civil society in democracies, sometimes even connected to freedom of expression (Interview #I7). The filmmakers and photographers share the objective of documenting and informing the public with several NGOs. They are pleased when people reflect back to them that through their work they have learnt »what’s really going on« (Interview #D3, #D6, #D7, #ES4). An Italian member of parliament sees the ships’ presence as the real provocation towards politics:

»It’s the idea of an eye of the civil society in the Mediterranean Sea, I think maybe this is the most disturbing thing for states from a certain point of view. So, it’s what really annoys governments, the fact that somebody is in the Mediterranean and is actually watching what is happening« (Interview #I8).

In summary, we identify the value of human rights at the core of justifying the support for SAR NGOs. Perceived as the most basic principles of the political communities to which our interviewees belong, human rights serve as a link to further values, such as equality of all people, the rule of law, and democracy, including a vibrant civil society. Moreover, interviewees closely link the situation of migrants at the EU’s external borders to the failure of European legal norms and values. How state actors position themselves in relation to these norms and values in the event of law breaches always plays a major role in the narratives (Interview #D5). Therefore, we argue that civil sea rescue provides an opportunity for state, supranational, and civil society actors (including the SAR NGOs themselves) to position themselves with respect to these norms and their violations. As a German Seebrücke activist puts it:

»Civil sea rescue keeps the wound open, so to speak, and that’s always embarrassing and every time a huge accident happens, they come and politicians shed crocodile tears, but it doesn’t make any progress, but they keep the wound open and at least they save a few« (Interview #D12, similar »finger in the eye of Europe«, Interview #I5).

In this context, the growing willingness of many European politicians to restrict human and refugee rights at European borders to reduce ›irregular‹ migration creates a major political and moral conflict for those supporting SAR NGOs. Against this background, it is remarkable when an employee of the very broad social alliance United4Rescue expresses:

»I have the feeling that politicians [...] have been very keen in recent years to actually say things like ›you have to get used to it‹. And ›then there will be ugly pictures‹ etc. So, the wind has really shifted towards ›we can’t take everyone in here […] and we have to keep our borders‹ and ... No. So you can just feel how the policy of closed borders is also affecting our open societies, so to speak. That it has a very strong inward effect« (Interview #D10).

For many, the criminalization of sea rescuers and the migrant deaths in the Mediterranean are impossible to accept. This suggests that there are significant parts of civil society that are not prepared to give up the values that, in their view, have defined European political communities for decades. Instead, they have become a central part of their personal political and/or European identity.

What Do the Ships Stand For?

After analyzing the narratives of problematizations and normativity, we find that the NGOs and their rescue ships stand both for fighting inaction in light of those grievances and standing up for values and norms that are important to the interviewees. It is hardly about a specific ship of a specific NGO but about the practice of sending ships in general. Even when asked, the interviewees are reluctant to position themselves in favor of specific NGOs. Instead, they present themselves as supporters of rescue practices. Our analysis shows that, from the interviewees’ perspective, the methodological distinction between practice and discourse becomes blurred—what guides their narratives are the tangible actions of civil search and rescue. It is the practical implementation of values that enables supporters to imagine a different form of democracy that commits to its own proclaimed values or even begins to think beyond existing conceptions of statehood.

In almost every interview, the mere fact that someone is taking action to counter the routinized deaths in the Mediterranean is described as exemplary, meaningful, and admirable—particularly against the backdrop of continued inaction by state actors. Thereby, the SAR NGOs not only intervene in the Mediterranean, but they also create avenues for action for the individuals we interviewed. The supporters can each act as »ship sponsors« in their own way and thus have an impact on the respective audiences they have, e.g. as journalists or church members. We assume that people who are confronted with injustice feel an impulse to act and push for a solution, whereas they feel powerless if they simply and continuously have to watch the deviation from their moral values and their worldview (Pesso/Thole-Bachg 2007). Accordingly, a church representative summarizes the effect of civil sea rescue as follows:

»Having to watch and having the feeling that I can’t do anything when injustice has happened. [...] And here really is a special case of overcoming powerlessness. Because the television images. Now I know that I can donate to United4Rescue, I can make sure that there are people there and that they are not hindered. Who are really saving these people’s lives whose bodies I usually see on TV. And that is very direct, very concrete« (Interview #D13).

Interviewees share the positive experience of witnessing activists making a tangible difference in the Mediterranean, rescuing individuals who might otherwise have become part of the countless unknown victims lost at sea. At the same time, the activists provide an opportunity for others, like our interview partners, to become active through financial, political, or moral support.

Our interviewees appreciate the SAR NGOs’ willingness to help and their effectiveness in doing so. The ever larger and more professional rescue ships, especially those of large NGOs, such as Sea-Watch, Sea-Eye, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)6, and Emergency, are a symbol of reliable and competent intervention. Another dimension of the willingness to act emerges as particularly relevant for the individuals we interviewed: they interpret the sending of ships as an act of resistance and standing up for values they consider relevant, as shown above. Interestingly, the idea of civil SAR as resistance is rather connected to smaller, maneuverable vessels of the ›civil fleet‹, such as the Nadir or the Louise Michel (Interview #D3, #D7). Considering that rescue ships stand for values such as human rights, it becomes clear that positionings on civil sea rescue can serve as a political litmus test for these very values.

Regarding the specific values at stake, our findings reveal a frequent intertwining of humanitarian and juridico-political principles, such as human rights. This challenges the assumption that such arguments align strictly with either a humanitarian or a political perspective. The call for humanitarian aid acknowledges the inequality between white Europeans, who can provide rescue capacities, and Black people and people of color, who seek protection. References to universal human rights, on the contrary, emphasize the equality of all people in terms of their dignity and their fundamental rights. We interpret these partly ambivalent references as an acknowledgement of the structurally complicated situation rescuers and survivors find themselves in when they meet on the rescue ships. Thereby, it is completely clear to the interviewees that under the current conditions, the civil sea rescues are justified and necessary.

Through their immediate intervention to help people in distress, SAR NGOs are seen to comply with the existing legal framework of the European Union and the law of the sea. Thus, they stand in sharp contrast to state authorities that remain inactive, tolerate border deaths, and even attempt to justify them politically. Many interviewees express particular outrage over the criminalization of the SAR NGOs, as it highlights the governments’ failure in the most drastic way—not only neglecting their own responsibilities but also preventing others from saving lives. When speaking about the rescue ships operated by civil sea rescuers, our interview partners report of »raw emotions« (Interview #D7), »powerful imagination« (Interview #D8, similar also Interview #D10), impressions of hope (Interview #ES2) and »a truly central venue for negotiating a progressive Europe and how societies can be conceived differently« (Interview #D8). It is precisely the concrete and tangible intervention of SAR NGOs in saving lives—where governments are (mostly) failing—that seems to inspire supporters to envision the possibility of a politically different reality at the European borders.

Many of our interview partners link the practice of civil SAR to a broader political vision that challenges exclusionary (border) regimes and calls for a reimagining of democracy—one that is rooted in the unconditional recognition of human dignity, regardless of origin or legal status. In doing so, interviewees express different understandings of the values at stake: for some, they are European or national; for others, regional, universal, or rather personal. These interpretations sometimes reflect the interviewees’ respective national contexts (Interview #D5, #D8, #D9, #D12, #I6, #ES2). Accordingly, references vary not only in terms of which (state) actors are seen as most relevant, but also with regard to forms of democracy. Some democratic visions articulated by supporters transcend the values to which states in Europe and the EU have formally committed through their founding principles and legal frameworks. When talking about civil sea rescue, some interview partners envision a Europe that changes its relations with other regions of the world, »build a new society with the North and South parts of the Mediterranean, East and West, too« (Interview #ES4) and follow a post-national approach in which human mobility would not be seen as a problem (Interview #D8, #I7) but an individual right (Interview #I3). In a similar vein, a German filmmaker is critical of shooting a film exclusively about the European SAR NGOs, because she wishes to show a world in which not only white people act (Interview #D3). She finds that developing footage of civil sea rescuers can be challenging and carries the risk of perpetuating global inequalities, despite an awareness of them. An employee of the city of Barcelona, who is involved in sea rescue as part of his work, shares the desire to break old patterns of thinking about regional perspectives and responsibilities:

»We are Europeans, but we are Mediterranean, right? We have to reclaim the Mediterranean as an area of, as a neighborhood […] of mutual care, of respect, of mutual development, despite the fact that in recent years we have always been looking at Europe, but we should look more at the Mediterranean. […] we should look more to the Mediterranean, which is the most unequal border in the world. And then the rescue factor is also an advocacy factor, isn’t it? It is a moral duty, but it is also a way to support a demand for another Europe, a Europe that is less hypocritical, that behaves with respect and the values it claims to have, that it deploys them in concrete policies« (Interview #ES2).

Conclusion: Saving Lives and Implementing Values

In our ZivDem project, we argue that civil SAR activists can enact a more democratic future for Europe and create a new momentum for other civil society actors to negotiate a »democracy to come« (Laube/Ullrich 2023; Vehrkamp/Gebhardt 2023; see Mareike Gebhardt in this issue). In fact, for many interviewees, the NGOs’ ships stand for the rescue of forced migrants in the Mediterranean like nothing else. Although the Italian Coast Guard itself performs many rescues (see Paolo Cuttitta and Luca Queirolo Palmas in this issue), our interview partners, as well as the European media, focus primarily on the rescues carried out by civil society actors (Interview #D5). Their rescue ships stand for the possibility of a response to the routinized deaths in the Mediterranean. They represent two important aspects: First, supporters perceive the ships as a symbol of a vibrant civil society taking action when the state is unable or unwilling to fulfill its obligations. They serve as a powerful counter-image to the persistent inaction of state actors, embodying a civil society that refuses to accept indifference in the face of human suffering. Our interviewees appreciate the NGOs for addressing the issues that lead to the inhuman treatment of people on the move in the Mediterranean border space. Second, by rescuing people from drowning, the ships represent the tangible implementation of the persons’ values, such as providing humanitarian aid and protecting universal human rights. Thus, supporting sea rescues is connected to larger political questions. The narratives about civil sea rescue reveal how societal actors beyond the NGOs seize the opportunity to negotiate their visions of democracy, human rights, and Europe’s historical responsibilities extending far beyond the context of migration.

Through initiatives such as church projects, the production of films, or integrating the topic of sea rescue into party programs, our interview partners engage with the issue as a way to implement their personal values. Given the strong moral clarity described earlier, the topic of civil sea rescue—particularly through the evocative symbolic imagery of their ships—is especially well-suited for this purpose. However, it is noteworthy that narratives about norms and values often center more on the interviewees’ self-conception than on the challenges faced by people on the move. As a result, the welfare of displaced individuals is not always the primary focus when making sense of the practice of civil sea rescue. This self-referential engagement with rescue at sea risks uncritically perpetuating global structures of inequality and discrimination.

Strictly speaking, it seems questionable whether it is progressive if the support of SAR NGOs is mostly about the practical implementation of an existing legal framework and the preservation of already enshrined rights within Europe. And yet, the implementation of universal human rights in the Mediterranean border space seems to be a utopia for many of our interview partners. The more democratic future that many of them envision in the face of civil sea rescue is a political community that strives to live up to the principles on which the EU was once founded (Interview #D1, #D2, #D4, #D11). Accordingly, the member of the Italian Council for Refugees praises the NGOs because they »help people to arrive in a safe way, to be received in a dignified way« (Interview #I2). When such—arguably modest—demands are linked to broader visions of Europe, interviewees are not calling for a fundamentally different Europe. Rather, they imagine one that lives up to its own commitments. In this case, the ships give them hope that compliance with human rights, the rule of law, and other democratic values is possible.7

Nevertheless, the activists’ approach is considered radical: »It is radical in its demands, it is radical in what they -, what we put forward, but at the same time it’s also capable of talking with institutions when it’s necessary« (Interview #I6). Radicality is thus closely linked to the SAR NGOs’ extensive networks and wide-ranging communication activities. The perception of such broad connectivity can be explained, on the one hand, by a common value system to which the NGOs appeal, which enables them to align discursively with other societal actors on the fundamental importance of preventing death. On the other hand, the NGOs’ capacity for connection stems from their concrete practical activities, specialized knowledge, and presence in the Mediterranean.

The ships symbolize certain (›European‹) values for quite a number of actors supporting the NGOs, especially politicians and interviewees from the German context. However, as we know from numerous observations of public events, interviews, and media outlets, members of these NGOs often reject these values as being European, exactly because they find them neglected at the EU external borders. For those activists, solidarity with forced migrants or, more generally, people on the move, and resistance towards state-induced injustice are more plausible narratives than we found for the group of supporters. Most of the NGOs tend to favor alternative concepts that are visibly different from the usual EU jargon because they question the common basis of values. Against this background, it has proved conceptually relevant to distinguish between SAR NGOs and their societal support landscape.

This conceptual distinction has allowed us to illuminate the mutual functions that these two actors fulfill for each other. On the one hand, civil SAR organizations provide supporters with a concrete vehicle through which they can take a stand against state inaction and in favor of democratic values. The rescue ships become tangible manifestations of norms and values that the supporters themselves seek to enact. On the other hand, supporters play a crucial role in enabling and legitimizing the work of SAR NGOs: through public visibility, political positioning, and broader civil society support. Many of the supporters link the practice of civil SAR to a broader political vision: a critique of the routinized deaths in the Mediterranean and a call for a reimagined democracy based on the unconditional recognition of human dignity, regardless of legal status, skin color, or nationality. Our study shows that this civil society engagement is shaped by dynamic interactions between NGOs and their supporters, and that these relations generate political meaning and legitimacy through and beyond the immediate rescue activities. Taking this wider support landscape seriously opens up new avenues for research that connect civil SAR to larger questions of the relevance of societal actors in contesting European (border) politics and for more democratic futures.

List of interviews

Acknowledgements

First, we would like to thank our interview partners for taking the time to speak with us about civil sea rescue, you provided us with valuable insights into the field and the conflicts at stake. We also wish to thank the Gerda Henkel Foundation and the Forum Internationale Wissenschaft at the University of Bonn for their financial support and their confidence in us as a team. We are especially grateful to our colleagues Mareike Gebhardt, Sarah Spasiano, and Doris Westhoff for their unique cooperation and support in implementing the ZivDem project over the past years. The processing of the research data would not have been possible to this extent without the dedicated help of our student assistants Carlotta Laumann, Jace Proske, Oliver Schröder, Bahia Amellal, Isabel Vehrkamp, and Nina Arndt at both the University of Bonn and Münster. Finally, we would like to thank our co-authors of this movements issue, the reviewers of our paper, and the movements editors for their constructive feedback and support.

Literature

Alagna, Federico / Cusumano, Eugenio (2023): Varieties of criminalization: Italy’s evolving approach to policing sea rescue NGOs. In: Mediterranean Politics 28 (2). 141–163.

Banksy (2020): Like most people who make it in the art world I bought a yacht. In: Instagram. URL: https://www.instagram.com/p/CEefvxlJM8R/ [01.09.2025].

Bauböck, Rainer (2019): Mare Nostrum. The Political Ethics of Migration in the Mediterranean. In: Comparative Migration Studies 7 (1). 1–15.

Berti, Carlo (2020): Right-wing populism and the criminalization of sea-rescue NGOs: the »Sea-Watch 3« case in Italy, and Matteo Salvini’s communication on Facebook. In: Media, Culture & Society 42 (7–8). 1210–1229.

Bogner, Andrea / Menz, Wolfgang (2009): Das theoriegenerierende Experteninterview. Erkenntnisinteresse, Wissensformen, Interaktion. In: Bogner, Alexander / Littig, Beate / Menz, Wolfgang (Eds.): Interviewing Experts. Basingstoke. 61–97.

Cusumano, Eugenio (2018): The Sea as Humanitarian Space: Non-Governmental Search and Rescue Dilemmas on the Central Mediterranean Migratory Route. In: Mediterranean Politics 23 (3). 387–394.

Cusumano, Eugenio / Villa, Matteo (2020): From »Angels« to »Vice Smugglers«: The Criminalization of Sea Rescue NGOs in Italy. In: European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 27 (1). 23–40.

Cuttitta, Paolo (2017): Repoliticization Through Search and Rescue? Humanitarian NGOs and Migration Management in the Central Mediterranean. In: Geopolitics 23 (3). 632–660.

Cuttitta, Paolo / Last, Tamara (Eds.) (2020): Border Deaths: Causes, Dynamics and Consequences of Migration-related Mortality. Amsterdam.

De Genova, Nicholas (Ed.) (2017): The Borders of »Europe«. Autonomy of Migration, Tactics of Bordering. Durham.

European Union (2016): Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union. In: Official Journal of the European Union C 202 from 07.6.2016. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu [08.09.2025].

Evangelische Kirche Deutschland (2019): »Europa verliert seine Seele«, Bedford-Strohm und Orlando auf dem Kirchentag. Erklärung von Innenminister Seehofer. URL: https://www.ekd.de/bedford-strohm-und-orlando-auf-dem-kirchentag-47311.htm [01.09.2025].

Fairclough, Norman (2012): Critical Discourse Analysis. London.

Farahat, Anuscheh / Markard, Nora (2020): Places of Safety in the Mediterranean: The EU’s Policy of Outsourcing Responsibility. Brussels. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung. URL: https://eu.boell.org/en/2020/02/18/places-safety-mediterranean-eus-policy-outsourcing-responsibility [01.09.2025].

Friede, Judith / Kalchschmidt, Louis / Marx, Fabian / Mayer, Anna-Maria / Nothardt, Benno / Slat, Milan / Sydow, Christian (2022): Deutsche Rettung? Eine Kritische Diskursanalyse des Fluchtdiskurses um Carola Rackete und Moria. Münster.

Funke, Benedikt (2018): Shaping the Discourse. How Search and Rescue NGOs Got Under Fire in the Debate on Migration. In: Sociology of Migration Working Paper Series 2018/03. Osnabrück. Institute for Migration Research and Intercultural Studies (IMIS).

Gordon, Michael (2020): Bordering Through »Crisis«. Migrant Journeys, Border Industries and the Contestation of Control. In: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 46 (16). 3421–3437.

Heins, Volker / Wolff, Frank (2023): Hinter Mauern: Geschlossene Grenzen als Gefahr für die offene Gesellschaft. Berlin.

Irrera, Daniela (2016): Migrants, the EU and NGOs: The »Practice« of Non-Governmental SAR Operations. In: The International Spectator 51 (4). 51–62.

Jørgensen, Marianne / Phillips, Louise (2002): Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. London.

Kohlenberger, Judith (2022): Das Fluchtparadox: Über unseren widersprüchlichen Umgang mit Vertreibung und Vertriebenen. Wien.

Kohlenberger, Judith (2024): Asylpolitischer Unterbietungswettbewerb ohne Gewinner: Warum es europäische Lösungen braucht. In: Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft 53 (1). 67–74.

Laube, Lena / Ullrich, Maria (2023): Search and rescue NGOs as a focal point in debates on the reception of refugees in the EU. Research essay on an Italian and German case study. In: Culture, Practice & Europeanization 8 (2). 166–182.

M’charek, Amade (2018): »Dead-Bodies-at-the-Border«: Distributed Evidence and Emerging Forensic Infrastructure for Identification. In: Social Studies of Science 48 (3). 342–365.

Mann, Itamar (2020): The Right to Perform Rescue at Sea: Jurisprudence and Drowning. In: German Law Journal 21 (3). 598–619.

Mau, Steffen / Lux, Thomas / Westheuser, Linus (2023): Triggerpunkte: Konsens und Konflikt in der Gegenwartsgesellschaft. Berlin.

Mayer, Ralf / Schäfer, Alfred / Schüll, Maren (2024): Umstrittene Solidarität: Spannungsfelder und Praktiken eines Kampfbegriffs. Bielefeld.

Mayring, Philipp (2021): Qualitative Content Analysis. A Step-by-Step Guide. London.

Musarò, Pierluigi (2016): Mare Nostrum: The Visual Politics of a Military-Humanitarian Operation in the Mediterranean Sea. In: Media, Culture & Society 38 (3). 320–335.

n.a. (2024): Seenotrettung: Ärzte ohne Grenzen stoppt Einsatz der Geo Barents. Tagesschau.de of 23.02.2024. URL: https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/europa/aerzte-ohne-grenzen-rettung-fluechtlinge-100.html [01.09.2025].

Pesso, Albert / Thole-Bachg, Melanie (2007): Die körperlichen Wurzeln der Gerechtigkeit. Bearbeitung eines Vortrages von Albert Pesso in Osnabrück vom 06.11.2006. München.

Pichl, Maximilian (2024): Drittstaatskonzepte und beschleunigte Asylverfahren—wie der materielle Flüchtlingsschutz ausgehöhlt wird. In: Zeitschrift für Ausländerrecht und Ausländerpolitik 44 (2). 57–63.

Pomares-Pastor, Ricardo-Ángel / Israel-Garzón, Estrella (2021): Refugiados sin puerto. Análisis de estrategias y discursos en la información televisiva del caso Open Arms. In: Revista Latina de Comunicación Social 79. 21–40.

Scavo, Nello (2023): Migranti. Papa Francesco incontra i soccorritori di Mediterranea. Avvenire of 22.03.2023. URL: https://www.avvenire.it/attualita/pagine/papa-francesco-incontra-i-soccorritori-di-mediterranea [01.09.2025].

Schwenken, Helen / Schwiertz, Helge (2021): Transversale und inklusive Solidaritäten im Kontext politischer Mobilisierungen für sichere Fluchtwege und gegen Abschiebungen. In: Dinkelaker, Samia / Huke, Nikolai / Tietje, Olaf (Eds.): »Nach der Willkommenskultur«. Geflüchtete zwischen umkämpfter Teilhabe und zivilgesellschaftlicher Solidarität. Bielefeld. 165–192.

Smart, Graham (2012): Discourse-oriented Ethnography. In: Gee, James Paul / Handford, Michael (Eds.): The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis. London. 147–159.

Stierl, Maurice (2018): A Fleet of Mediterranean Border Humanitarians. In: Antipode 50 (3). 704–724.

Vehrkamp, Isabel / Gebhardt, Mareike (2023): »So sieht es in der Hölle aus«. Judith Butlers Konzept der Betrauerbarkeit als Analyseperspektive auf Diskurse der zivilen Seenotrettung. In: ZEUGS Working Paper Series, Zentrum für Europäische Geschlechterstudien, Universität Münster. URL: https://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:hbz:6-38948601751 [01.09.2025].

Witzel, Andreas / Reiter, Herwig (2022): Das problemzentrierte Interview: eine praxisorientierte Einführung. Weinheim.

ZEIT online (2018): Spanisches Rettungsschiff darf in Barcelona anlegen. ZEIT Online of 30.06.2018. URL: https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2018-06/fluechtlinge-seenotrettung-mittelmeer-spanische-hilfsorganisation [10.03.2026].