Is the rise of exclusionary politics a symptom of democratic populism, or a broader response to economic precarity across regime types? In Welfare Nationalism in Europe and Russia, Linda J. Cook offers a compelling answer by examining what she terms the “toxic mix of immigration and austerity” (p. 33) that spans the democratic–authoritarian divide. Moving beyond simple descriptions of anti-immigrant sentiment, Cook shows how states use welfare policy as a dynamic tool of boundary-making. In an era of retrenchment, the welfare state does not merely distribute benefits; it actively defines the moral and political limits of the imagined national community.

By comparing Western European democracies with electoral-authoritarian Russia, Cook develops a generalizable logic of welfare nationalism. Drawing on Andrzej Marcin Suszycki, she begins from a familiar premise: the “observed reluctance of those belonging to a national state to share welfare benefits with immigrants” (p. 3). Yet Cook pushes beyond this descriptive insight to elevate welfare nationalism into a broader analytical framework that explains how states actively construct boundaries of belonging through social policy. In doing so, she distinguishes her approach from the more established but narrower concept of welfare chauvinism, which treats ethnicity as the “sole criterion for inclusion/exclusion” (p. 14). Whereas chauvinism is typically understood as a relatively static form of exclusionary out-group prejudice and remains the dominant framework for analyzing the far right, Cook instead conceptualizes welfare nationalism as a state-centered logic of boundary-making in which co-ethnicity is the most important criterion, but not a sufficient one, and which can generate both exclusionary and inclusionary outcomes.

At the heart of this framework are two competing “migration cycles”: exclusionary (vicious) and inclusionary (virtuous) (pp. 22–23). Structural economic factors—rising labor market precarity, fiscal austerity, and the erosion of postwar social contracts—create the conditions under which welfare nationalism emerges. Crucially, however, Cook argues that political elites determine the direction these cycles take. This emphasis on elite agency is central. Exclusionary politics are not inevitable responses to globalization or migration pressure but are contingent outcomes that can be activated, redirected, or avoided. The vicious cycle channels economic insecurity into hostility toward distant or culturally different outsiders, while the virtuous cycle allows states to preserve or even expand national solidarity by incorporating those deemed to fall within the circle of deservingness.

Cook’s analysis centers on the “deservingness matrix” (p. 17, Figure 1.2), an analytical tool designed to illustrate the moral economy underlying contemporary welfare states. This matrix shows how states weigh multiple criteria to adjudicate who gains access to national solidarity and who is administratively excluded. Cook identifies four core dimensions shaping these judgments: ethno-cultural closeness, perceived need or vulnerability, anticipated economic contribution, and security considerations (pp. 13–16). Importantly, nationalism here operates not simply as an exclusionary ideology but as a boundary principle that can be selectively recalibrated.

When these criteria align negatively, as during the 2015 Middle East and North Africa (MENA) migration crisis, a vicious cycle of exclusion emerges, resulting in what Cook terms “failed solidarity” and the securitization of welfare provision (Chapter 6). When they align positively, a virtuous cycle becomes possible. One of the book’s most original contributions is its treatment of “security deservingness.” Cook shows that the rapid inclusion of Ukrainian refugees after 2022 was driven not only by ethnic affinity but by a strategic geopolitical framing. Ukrainians were cast as defenders of the European order, transforming them from potential welfare burdens into desired insiders (Chapter 8). This case demonstrates that the selectivity of solidarity is a contingent political outcome, shaped as much by strategic state interests as by identity or humanitarian norms.

In organizational terms, the book is structured into four parts that combine theoretical development and comparative analysis to trace exclusionary and inclusionary migration cycles across Eurasia over the past two decades. Following the theoretical introduction in Chapter 1, Part II (Chapters 2 and 3) establishes the structural and political foundations of welfare nationalism. Chapter 2 documents the shared effects of austerity and labor market precarity in both democratic Europe and post-Soviet Russia, highlighting the erosion of the post-World War II social contract. Chapter 3 then turns to political mobilization, showing how populist actors and mainstream elites alike have narrowed definitions of welfare deservingness in response to these pressures.

Part III (Chapters 4–6) examines vicious cycles of exclusionary migration. Chapter 4 analyzes large-scale labor migration from Central Asia to Russia, detailing how subnational elites deployed sectoral bans and “ethical panics” to scapegoat an estimated eleven million migrants for the failures of social infrastructure. Chapter 5 traces the gradual withdrawal of social rights from Central and Eastern European labor migrants in the EU15, with particular attention to the United Kingdom. Cook’s account of the “thousand bureaucratic cuts” (p. 144), including Right to Reside tests and administrative barriers, demonstrates how welfare retrenchment became a precondition for Brexit-era mobilization. Chapter 6 addresses post-2011 MENA migration to Europe, characterizing the response as one of failed solidarity that culminated in the securitization of welfare provision and the externalization of borders.

Part IV (Chapters 7 and 8) turns to the inclusive side of welfare nationalism. Chapter 7 examines co-ethnic resettlement programs in Russia and Poland, such as the Karta Polaka (Polish Charter), showing how states used welfare access to bolster national demographics by offering semi-citizenship and full social rights to “brotherly Slavs.” Chapter 8 provides one of the book’s most novel analysis: the response to the 2022 Ukrainian refugee crisis. Unlike earlier migrations, this influx triggered an immediate collective protection response through the EU’s Temporary Protection Directive. Cook convincingly shows that this rapid inclusion, which extended welfare access to over eight million refugees, was driven by security deservingness rather than humanitarian sentiment alone.

Cook’s effort to elevate welfare nationalism into a comprehensive analytical framework represents a major contribution, but it also raises questions of conceptual precision. By encompassing both aggressive exclusion and rapid inclusion under a single label, the concept risks overstretch. If welfare nationalism explains nearly all state responses to migration, from bureaucratic denial to expansive protection, critics may ask whether it becomes a catch-all that obscures distinctions between identity-driven politics and more pragmatic concerns such as fiscal capacity or geopolitical strategy. At times, structural economic drivers recede into the background of the case studies, as elite and bureaucratic agency take center stage. Yet this focus on administrative mechanisms is also among the book’s most engaging contributions. The detailed analysis of how welfare bureaucracies quietly retract rights demonstrates how immigration control increasingly operates through routine governance rather than overt border enforcement.

Ultimately, Welfare Nationalism in Europe and Russia offers a detailed analysis of how welfare institutions have become the focus of political boundary-making, alongside more familiar forms of border control. By showing that immigration control increasingly operates through the governance of welfare access in both democratic London and authoritarian Moscow, Cook situates contemporary migration politics within the broader transformation of welfare governance under conditions of austerity. The book will be of particular interest to scholars of comparative welfare states, migration politics, and nationalism, and will serve as a good reference for those researching the intersection of welfare governance and migration across regime types.