I wrote this back in 2016, but never posted it for some reason. Now I am involved in a debate about it on Twitter, so it is time to put it up.
Mass
migration on the scale we have seen over the past few years is a
symptom of global political and economic dysfunction. It cannot be
met by individual countries putting up barriers, with simple
obstruction or unthinking denial. Mass migration is a major
international challenge and demands major international action to
address it.
Addressing
the present situation
First it is necessary
to accept that we are in this situation. Mass migration is a reality
at present. We may or may not like it, but it is necessary to accept
it as a given, and react rationally rather than just with negative
emotions such as fear and anger.
Short term policy may
be sorted in two ways: Obstructive or Humanitarian.
Obstructive measures
against migration aim to make it difficult for migrants to travel.
They are epitomised by Donald Trump with his "beautiful wall".
British Government
foreign policy is often based on a crude behavioral psychology which
aims to apply negative reinforcement (punishment in common speech) to
unwanted behavior. For example, they are deliberately driving
immigrants into poverty
i.
This punitive approach
is shown in the non-involvement of the UK Government in Operation
Triton, where the Government specifically stepped away from saving
lives of drowning people because being saved from drowning might (in
their view) encourage other to migrate.
The shameful situation
at Calais is another example of the punitive approach, as is the
failure to honour promises to help children in Calais.
The punitive approach
is irrationally applied by the UK Government if it does not also
supply authoritative information to the people in sending countries
stating that they are putting themselves at risk by taking the
journey, and that the British Government will not help them if they
get into difficulties. The suffering caused by the policy would have
no impact on the motivation of the next wave of migrants unless this
information is widely known in sending countries.
The Channel is our
wall, but it is pretty certain that if we completely stop taking
people in from the continent as UKIP and some Conservatives seem to
wish, the busiest sea lane in the world will be filled with boats
stuffed with people trying to enter illegally.
The punitive approach
is simply inhumane. By pursuing this policy the Government is not
only denying the humanity of migrants, it is also degrading Britain's
own claim to being a nation that pursues high standards in human
rights. Many within Government will be prepared to accept this
status, and will be able on that basis to talk down many other points
of humanitarian action within Government. The end result will be a
continuous movement away from democracy and towards authoritarianism
within Britain itself.
This is clearly not
acceptable.
Therefore the
obstructionist approach must be opposed. In its place, we must put a
humanitarian approach to the present cohort of migrants, and a
preventive, global approach aimed at reducing future waves of
migration.
Humanitarian
response to the present cohort
Since
the obstructive response is not effective or humane, a humanitarian
approach must be used instead.
Basic
needs - water, food, shelter, sanitation and health care - must be
provided at set points on the journey.
There is no reason that
"Processing" (filling in official paperwork) cannot be
carried out in camps and at way stops while travelling. The data
gathered in this way will help to filter off children, women,
bona-fide asylum seekers, and those with relatives in host
countries, who can be put into a fast track to their destination.
The
Green Party's policy of amnesty to all illegal immigrants at present
in the UK, pulling them out of the black market and away from the
control of the criminal underclass, and enabling them to contribute
to the economy and pay taxes makes good sense.
Government
should take out one page advertisements, advertorials and commission
articles in newspapers and broadcasts in sending countries to inform
people of the difficulties of the hardships and mortal risks of the
migrant trail.
An
extension of this information policy is to increase integration with
well communicated information about the cultural norms
that obtain in our society, such as respect for all regardless of
their race, sex and sexuality.
Goverment
must expand services (education, NHS, housing, social services etc)
to meet the need of the UK's expanding population, whatever the
cause.
Addressing
the root causes of migration
In this section, we can
only put up the headlines, sketching out the kind of political
changes and reforms that are needed to create a world where people
feel less motivated to migrate.
It
will be objected that we have been trying for ages to address these
international problems, without success, and why should it be any
different now?
First,
there has been success. Wars are on the decrease over the last 70
years. More countries are democracies than ever before. The literacy
rate is growing. We are making progress.
On
the other hand, there has been a concerted effort to downgrade and
denigrate the UN as a legitimate source of authority, because the
dominant neo-liberal ideology deeply distrusts any pooling of power.
The key here is the
political will. These problems are permanent items on the agenda of
international summits, and as such, they become routine, and do not
get addressed urgently. Once the connection has been made in the
minds of public and politicians that we will never control migration
until we control war, poverty, oppression and environmental
degratation, we can expect to see positive change.
War
Politicians
are treading water on issues like war and militarism, paying lip
service to peace initiatives, but in reality the interests of
corporations carries more weight. It is shameful that the UK is one
of the major arms producers in the world.
If
we look at the wars happening in the present century, we find that
Separatism, War on Terror, Ideology, Dictator/political,
Corporations, The "War on Drugs", Ethnic rivalry and
warlordism account for most of the larger conflictsii.
There
is a case for the United Nations to set up a framework for
discussion and resolution of separatist aspiration, and also to
provide diplomatic and logistical help both for areas where
separatist conflict is ongoing, and where there is a clear
separatist sentiment that has not yet turned to violence.
The
UN has recently concluded a successful arms control process, and it
is time now to move on to ammunition control. A practical
possibility for inhibiting irregular fighters is to concentrate on
seizing ammunition, which is detectable by trained dogs. Without
ammunition a gun is nothing but a very expensive clubiii.
Future
wars will be fought over resources, especially oil unless we rapidly
move away from reliance on fossil fuels.
Poverty
As we have seen above,
remittances are an immensely important component of the economy in
Less developed Countries (LDCs). Increasing aid budgets is unlikely
to be able to compensate, since remittances are three times greater
than the aid contribution. Therefore the only sustainable solution
is to increase the wages paid to workers in LDCs, as part of a new
package of workers rights, perhaps mediated through the
Internatinoal Labour Organisation. This would put prices up for good
originating in emergent economies, which would in turn help UK
manufacturing.
Oppressive
, authoritarian and totalitarian regimes cause people to try to
emigrate, and also tend to become embroiled in civil war as people
try to break free of the regime. The Green Parties of the world have
adopted the idea of a Global Human Rights Indexiv
published annually by the United Nations to show clearly at a glance
the relative position of every government in terms of human rights.
The worst performers could then be helped to improve their record,
and regimes on the slippery slope to dictatorship could be given
incentives to move towards democracy.
DfID's
international Aid programmes should be comprehensively reviewed. If
there is a large amount of migration from any country, the causes
should be examined in case and adjustment of the focus of aid might
be able to help to stabilise the situation.
Climate
change is being addressed in a
desultory way. The Paris Agreement is excellent, but there is
widespread expectation that it will not be ratified and implemented
byu many countries. A change in attitude and urgency would make a
huge difference. Many measures are required, but the most important
issue in the UK is fracking. If this can be blocked, we will be
constrained to meet the energy niche filled by gas from biogas and
also energy storage.
Population
growth needs to be discussed
seriously. We should look at successful non-coercive programmes as
in Thailand and Kerala, and focus on empowerment of women, provision
of contraceptives, and education.
Conclusion
Migration is not just a phase that will go away of
its own accord, it is a part of human social behaviour, but is on a
rising trend that is amplified by war, oppression, poverty and
environmental degradation. Its impact on the economies of receiving
countries' economies is weakly positive, but right wing tabloid
newspaper stories stir up resentment that threatens social cohesion.
Migration contributes significantly to a population overshoot in the
British Isles. Therefore efforts must be made to reduce migration at
source.
Obstructive policies are incompatible with
humanitarian values, and migration pressures can only be reduced by
an intensive and serious global, long term drive against militarism
and for peace, against dictatorship and human rights abuses, against
poverty, and against climate change. Addressing the causes of
migration therefore will motivate us to work for true improvements in
the state of the world.
Resources
Anodyne
report on migration and climate from the British Government
https://www.populationmatters.org/resources/articles-reports-papers/migration/
Richard Lawson
