All the rightists parties, in America and Europe, have one common agenda that tops all others and it is the issue of immigration. So much skewed is public opinion against immigrants that even Sweden known for its liberal immigration policy has opened detention centres to keep illegal immigrants before deportation. The conservative government in the United Kingdom (UK) under Rishi Sunak was hell-bent to send illegal immigrants to Rwanda by way of deportation. The Labour party that is now in power has ditched the Rwanda plan but is expected to adopt a tough policy with a humane face. In America, where the population comprises overwhelmingly immigrants, the Biden Administration has been forced to renege on its liberal immigration policy in the wake of uninterrupted arrival of migrants from Latin American countries at the US-Mexico border and has adopted a zero tolerance policy on illegal immigration. Donald Trump has promised to complete the wall with Mexico that was begun during his second term if he is re- elected.
A growing number of politicians and members of the public in America and Europe have come to show hostility to immigrants with a degree of vehemence that was not seen before. The hatred and intolerance of immigrants give the impression as if they are new, causing nuisance and trouble in western societies. The situation that gives rise to hostile attitude can be explained by several factors some of which are due to ignorance of the history of migration in the past, lack of planning and enforcement of policies on immigration by developed countries and the failure to integrate by immigrants with the people of the host country giving rise to social tension. The problem of migration is a composite of cultural, social, political and economic factors, often intertwined with each other and as such it cannot be explained away simply by pointing to one factor.
First, the general public in countries suffering from immigration phobia should be told that that migration in the world has been going on for a long time.
From pre-historic period: In fact, migration of people from one place to another began from pre-historic times. Early migration took place during Palaeolithic age (175000 BCE) to regions where there was little or no human habitation. Pre-modern migration began with the movement of homo erectus out of Africa across Europe and Asia. Homo sapiens, their successors living in Africa, saw some members moving out of their habitat 70,000 years ago to Asia. It is recorded that later migration by homo sapiens to Asia, Europe and Australia took place between 70,000 to 50,000 years ago when they moved out of Africa. Migrations to the Americas are thought to have taken place between 20,000 and 15,000 years ago as well as in small numbers during the Neolithic age. The Aryans from north-east Europe walked all the way to India and settled there between 1700 to 1300 BCE in successive waves, giving rise to displacement of locals to the south. The next major wave of migration was seen during turn of the first millennium when Semitic people ( Jews) left Levant (Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine) after being expelled by the Romans and spread all over Europe and America. In the mediaeval age the second wave of Semitic people comprised Arabs who settled in the Levant, north Africa (Maghreb) and Spain. About the same time migration of Turkic people took place in central Asia in large numbers. Migrations from Scandinavian countries, particularly Denmark and Sweden to Europe and Britain and from Germany and Normandy (France) changed the population mix in Britain in the middle age. Evidence suggests that migrants from south China sailed to Australia, New Zealand and other Pacific islands about 8,000 years ago. In Africa significant internal migration took place when Bantu-speaking people moved south, displacing the pygmies who were forced to live around Kalahari desert. Thirteenth century saw eastward migration of Germans following the footsteps of Goths, while the Mongols invaded Eurasia and European steppes around the same time. The Mongols spread out their settlements as far east as China, making Mongolia their centre. The Huns, Bulgars and Slavs settled in north and southern Europe after invading those areas. After the Renaissance, the age of exploration and international trade saw temporary and permanent settlements by Europeans in North America, Latin America, Asia, Africa, Australia and New Zealand, all on the back of colonialism. While temporary settlements ended with the demise of colonialism after the Second World War, settler colonialism remained firmly entranced in north America, Latin America, Australia and New Zealand. The mosaic of world population that emerged from this ‘primordial soup’ is variegated with intermingling of races, leaving no country with people of one race. In the gene pool of every race today there are traces of genetic inheritance of other races. Those who inveigh against immigrants on racial grounds need to realise this hard fact. Immigrants knocking at their doors may be new, but migration that has brought them across is not.
from developing to developed NATIONS: Reverse migration from developing countries to the developed ones began after the end of colonialism on the back of former relations between the rulers and the ruled. Migrants from former colonies were ungrudgingly accepted because of the need for unskilled labour. Though their entry was without any restrictions at first, conditions were imposed gradually as the number of immigrants from former colonies rose. With the tightening of qualifying criteria for immigrants, attempts at illegal entry with the help of human traffickers have increased. The tipping point was reached in the last decade when it became a burning issue in national political and social discourse. This has led political parties to come down hard on immigration, invariably placing the issue at the top of their manifesto in national election.
Some opposition to immigration may be based on racist sentiment by extremist elements in society and polity. But overcrowding in residential areas, pushing rents and unemployment in times of economic stagnation often make a strong case against admission of new arrival of foreign workers who seek jobs and accommodation. The critics, of course, do not take into consideration the valuable contributions made by immigrants. This antagonism used to be reserved for immigrants with low skill competing for jobs in sunset industries. But now a day even gilt-edged jobs in financial institutions in Wall street and tech industries in Silicon valley are up for grabs and competition from an immigrant, however qualified he or she may be, inevitably raises hackles.
Ironically, most of the new aspirants to enter the job market in developed countries are driven by economic necessity. Even when they apply for political asylum, they are in fact economic refugees. While poverty and unemployment force most of the low skill migrants to seek a better fortune abroad, the jobseekers with degrees from blue-ribbon educational institutions are also economic migrants as they seek jobs abroad that pay many times more than local employers. This being the reality, governments in developed countries should draw up employment plans for each sector and calculate the number of immigrants required to fill the shortage of manpower in that sector. Depending on the length of their contracted job, some of them may be allowed to settle permanently.
BOAT PEOPLE: It is in respect of the unskilled and low-skilled immigrants that resentment is most intense. This category of immigrants is also the largest who try to enter the country of their choice illegally, at great financial cost and physical risk. Not a month goes when there is no news about illegal asylum or job seekers and their family members losing lives in boat capsize or in crammed vans without ventilation. In a sensational news recently the Greek coast guards were alleged to have wilfully sunk boats with illegal migrants. Greek island of Lesbos and Italian island of Lampedusa have been overwhelmed with ‘boat people’ with such regularity that the ire and animus of local people are understandable. The plan to distribute the migrants equitably among countries of European Union had been successful when the number of arrivals was low. However, uninterrupted flow of illegal migrants has seen the EU plan unravel. Very recently, EU member countries held meeting with Morocco to work out a system under which the illegal migrants can be stopped at the staging point for the journey across the Mediterranean. The scheme had worked when EU had an agreement with late Muammar Gaddafy of Libya and therefore it is worth trying with Morocco.
There is another model that might reduce the flow of illegal migrants which has not been tried so far. Since majority of illegal migrants leave their countries because of poverty and unemployment, developed countries in the frontline facing the problem can give financial help to concerned developing countries for projects that provide jobs at home to potential illegal migrants. This will be Rwanda plan with a human face as beneficiaries will remain in their own country. For donor countries the scheme should not appear as a dark horse. Until recently, most of them had given bilateral aid to many developing countries for poverty alleviation with which employment generating projects had been implemented. The development aid model being proposed will be along the same line, with the target group being potential illegal migrants. Fortunately for the donors, the countries that are candidates for this aid are few in number and already known. For instance, countries responsible for the illegal flow of migrants to Europe and UK are Syria, Afghanistan, Ghana, Angola, Mali and a few others in sub Saharan Africa. America, on the other hand, will have to deal mostly with Mexico and Columbia, Peru, Venezuela as its hinterland. Comparison of the financial aid involved for implementation of the proposed model with the cost involved in the surveillance and detention of illegal migrants promises to be favourable to the adoption of the model. Since the taste of the pudding is in eating, the model can be tried and tested for a couple of years. It should not be a big deal for the concerned developed countries.
END NOTE: There is good news for unskilled workers who are potential illegal migrants. In most of the developed countries the number of working age people will soon be far outweighed by senior citizens. The resultant gap in the supply of unskilled and low skilled workers will yawn continuously. This gap can only be bridged with admission of migrant workers. Whether these guest workers should be allowed to settle permanently or given temporary status can be decided after considering the willingness and capacity of the migrant workers to integrate into the local environment. If any guide is required in this regard, the practice of the Middle Eastern countries and Malaysia, where large number of migrant workers live temporarily, can be studied. Irrespective of the tenure of residency, what is important is to draw up plan for admission of legal migrants with low and intermediate skill lest human traffickers come to rule the roost.
Migration of people has a chequered history. It has helped civilisation to evolve in the past. The future of mankind may depend on this age old practice. Advance and rational planning holds the key to this.
hasnat.hye5@gmail.com