Migration

At the end of every week we will offer a regular look at the ‘top stories’ on migration, integration, fundamental rights and the movement of people in general.

• In news from Europe, a riot at the Parisian Gare du Nord crystalizes the debate over immigration and national identity as a key issue in the French elections. The BBC features the story of a new project in Linconlshire county to help migrants learn about their rights and learn the English language in the UK.
• A number of interesting stories on immigration from the US over the past few days: The International Herald Tribune offers a first glimpse at the White House plan to grant work visas to undocumented migrants. For weeks now, Republican Senators have held closed-door meetings on the draft immigration legislation. Under the plan, undocumented workers could apply for three-year work visas, renewable indefinitely. Yet, these come at a hefty price tag. The clear need to reform current US immigration legislation was underlined by the immigrant rights rallies across the country last March. On March 26, 5,000 immigrants and their supporters gathered in Los Angeles to mark this occasion. Meanwhile, this week’s Economist reports that more and more illegal immigrants are leaving Los Angeles, in part because they are seeking out better economic opportunities elsewhere, in part because they want a better life for their children. This is a mixed blessing for the City of Angels, the article argues. On the one hand it takes the pressure off public services, on the other hand “their departure suggests that a place is losing some of its economic dynamism.” Despite the difficulties in devising a functional policy toward undocumented and illegal migrants, green card holders and other legal immigrants are increasingly opting to become American citzens, as the New York Times reports.
• The IHT also features a number of Associated Press stories on migrants trying to make their way toward a better life. This story covers the journey of a Somali migrant to the rich Gulf states, while this article examines the plight of over 100 Haitian migrants as they attempt to reach the shores of Florida.

Spring has sprung all across Europe. With the warming of the waters off the Spanish and Italian coasts, thousands of African migrants will again try to make their way to the promised land: Europe. Many, desperate for a better life, will become victims of human traffickers – will risk life and limb on open waters, essentially sold into slavery until they can repay their debts to those who have furnished the fishing boats they pack hundreds of would-be migrants on to. Last week’s IHT features yet another of the evocative stories about the desperation that drives people into the hands of traffickers.

But there is hope on the horizon for these illegal migrants – apparently. Spring promises to see the unveiling of at least one European Directive on the employment of illegal immigrants. In a recent speech at the London School of Economics, Franco Frattini, the Union’s Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner reiterated that mass illegal migration was above all a ‘root causes’ problem, which needed to be addressed at home. In keeping with the ‘law and order’ approach many Member States advocate, he also highlighted the positive development of FRONTEX, the Union’s border agency and outlined his dream of a pan-European coastguard “for our own security and to help save lives at risk.”

All well, all good. In the meantime, however, Member States are steering as far from a comprehensive European solution to the problem of illegal migration as possible: where Spain has regularized illegal long-term resident migrants in waves over time, the UK Home Office recently unveiled new ways to cut benefits to illegal migrants and essentially achieve faster expulsion. John Reid, the UK interior minister has called illegal migrants “scroungers,” who “steal our benefits”.  His plan involves possibly sending foreign nationals text messages (um, excuse me? How many illegal migrants register their phone numbers?) who are about to overstay their visas. Other ideas Dr. Reid is currently exploring is how to confiscate driver’s licences of illegal migrants. Let’s look at that one: the majority of illegal migrants live clandestine lives, conscious of not leaving a paper trail. Many of them will not apply for a UK driver’s licence for exactly that reason.

And what of the Franco-German tandem? Its harmonious peddling kept the Union afloat and moving ahead even through its deepest historic crises. In a Union of 27 and in the absence of a Constitution, this formerly great alliance seems little more than a chorus of two among many other a capella singers on many issues. Addressing immigration issues together – whether legal or not – has never been on the program. Joint military forces – sure, but immigration policy? Far too complex.

Much of this can largely be linked to differing historical approaches to the phenomenon of migration: France, given its colonial history, has long seen itself as a country open to migrants (though not a country founded on immigration, like the USA), which sought to integrate (or assimilate!?) through the power of its school system alone. Successive German governments, on the other hand, chose to ignore the phenomenon almost entirely until 1998, when a Social-Democrat/Green coalition came to power that was willing to acknowledge the country for what it was – the EU member state with the largest number of foreign nationals in the Union. Alas, perhaps not an immigration country (Einwanderungsland) per definition, but certainly an immigrant destination.

So, back to illegal migration. Throughout history in the 5^th Republic, migrants have had it better under Socialist rule: France’s ’sans papiers’ (without papers) were regularized at different intervals. Under Nicolas Sarkozy, one of the leading contenders for the office of the presidency in late April and former interior minister, immigration policy was tightened and expulsion goals for illegals set. Now, Segolene Royal, presidential hopeful of the French Socialist Party is putting illegal/tolerated immigrant children ahead of their parents. In keeping with the French tradition of putting all hope into the assimilative qualities of education, she argues that parents with children in school cannot be sent back to their home countries. Students should be allowed to finish their education. Truly, a revolutionary approach, and one which runs directly antithetical to Nicolas Sarkozy’s ‘law and order’ approach to appeasing the situation in the immigrant-heavy banlieus throughout France.

And what of Germany? In a complete volte face since 1998, Germany has not only managed to introduce more functional ‘foreigner rights’ (Ausländerrecht), it has also just passed the legislation discussed in an earlier blog on this website: it has managed to give the nearly 180,000 tolerated migrants (asylum seekers, illegals, etc.) a ray of hope – providing they have been in the country for more than six years, entered in 2001 AND can prove that they will be gainfully employed by 2009. The new law also regulates the lives of these migrants spouses and children: all next of kin must be able to speak at least a little German upon entry.

Thus, as the days get longer and warmer, as African migrants prepare to spend their life’s savings - up to $ 8,000 dollars – and often their future earnings, or their bodies to traffickers, Europe continuous to sing off tune. Germany gives illegal migrants more rights, the UK cracks its whip and France, well France could still go either way, with Royal advocating a calibrated ‘case-by-case’ decision mechanism and Sarkozy arguing as a hardliner. While Member States try to deal with the concrete problems at hand, the Commission works toward addressing root causes in Africa. Illegal immigration was written into the Berlin Declaration. Apparently, it’s a presidential matter. Now is the time for European leaders to assume their roles – to lead with humanity, integrity and respect for the suffering of these migrants – toward creating functional, comprehensive solutions to theses issues, toward singing one tune in a choir of many.  

Canadians Abroad Part 2: 

The question of the rights of Canadian citizens abroad has recently come to light in the case of Mohamed El-Attar. El-Attar was put to trial on Feb 24th 2007 in Egypt for allegedly being a spy for the Israeli Mossad in Canada. He was picked up on January 1st on a flight from Toronto to Cairo and was accused by Egyptian authorities for attempting to recruit Arabs in Canada to work for the Israeli Mossad and accepting payments to issue spy reports on Arabs in Canada. He was also accused of being seen working with the Israeli embassy in Turkey and further for being a homosexual and a Zionist according to Mackinnon and Freeze of the Canadian publication the Globe and Mail.

The question of why El-Attar was arrested is as complex as what assistance he should or shall receive by the Canadian Government. According to Brigitte Pellerin of the Ottawa Citizen, Arab-Canadian organisations have been less than generous in assisting Mr. El-Attar possibly because of the alleged affiliations with the Mossad, but also possibly because of his sexual orientation. After the attention and repositioning of the Canadian Government with the Arar Commission and its effects on politics and policy, the assistance that would be expected from possible Canadian allies of Mr. El-Attar has not helped him in his case in Egypt.

Further to the issues surrounding Mr. El-Attar, there has been many accusations of torture surrounding his confession to the Egyptian authorities. Despite being a Canadian citizen, it is felt by many in Egypt that he will be guilty of the crimes and be sentenced to 25 years of hard labour. So much is the opinion of his guilt, that his first lawyer refused to defend him in the case. While Mr. El-Attar did confess to much of the accusations, it is well regarded that torture is not an uncommon issue in the Egyptian legal system. According to CBC reporter Peter Armstrong who reported on the trial:

 ”He was bellowing out his innocence, saying that the police beat him and made him drink his own urine”

While Canadian Embassy officials did attend the trials, there has been no official comment to date on what action the Government plans to take regarding Mohamed El-Attar. There is no question that he is a citizen of Canada and that many in Canada and abroad believe the trial is mired in false accusations and politics, but with the history of inaction of the past Canadian Government and the possibility of an election drawing closer, it remains to be seen what decision Prime Minister Harper will take in regards to Mohamed El-Attar.

Video on El-Attar Trial - March 27th 2007 - CTV.ca:

http://video.sympatico.msn.com/v/en-ca/v.htm?g=c94fd416-5a08-44ba-a823-b893a9c3b3a0&f=37&fg=rss

Canadians Abroad Part 1: 

The question of how immigrants should be treated, or considered equally among all social and cultural groups in a country was put to its greatest test in Canada in the summer of 2006. During the conflict between Israel and Lebanon last summer there was a flood of protests and criticisms against the new Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, in delays in helping Canadian citizens trapped in Lebanon during the conflict. When thousands of Lebanese with Canadian status, either Citizens or Permanent Residents of Canada, sought assistance from the Canadian Government to extradite them as soon as possible, the realization that citizenship was held by thousands of people who actually were born and resided outside Canada sparked a debate about the nature of citizenship and the degree in which Canada should accommodate foreign nationals who had legal status in Canada yet resided in their country of birth abroad.

The debate continued with the case regarding a Mr. Mahar Arar, a Syrian born Canadian citizen who was deported to the US under evidence that he was associated with Al-Qaeda, but later was returned to Canada after being tortured in Syria. Arar, a full Canadian Citizen was given compensation this past February by the Canadian Federal Government for errors which lead to his deportation from Canada. A Commission to investigate the affair was arranged. Noted in the Report, false accusations of his affiliation with terrorism and final rights being recognized as a citizen of Canada lead to the resignation of the head of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police commissioner, compensation, and a formal apology from the Prime Minister.

Recognition of the rights of Canadian citizens abroad was always veiled in the belief by many that the Government of Canada never did enough to assist its citizens abroad. A Canadian Journalism of Iranian descent and birth, Zahra Kazemi was beaten to death in Iran in 2003. Acknowledgement of the story and actions by the previous Canadian Government was virtually absent until her son, Stephan Kazemi pushed for public protests and for help from the Canadian Government. While the Government took some actions, a combination of the Kazemi affair and the fact that the same Government was later accused of the errors relating to Mr. Arar placed the status of foreign-born Canadians in a quagmire of policy, security and rights for citizens of Canada abroad.

See: Part 2 - A Canadian in Egypt, or an Egyptian from Canada? concerning the current state of affairs for Canadian Citizens Abroad and the recent case of Mohamed El-Attar, a Canadian citizen who was detained in Egypt for spying for Israel.

Berlin played host to the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the signature of the Treaties of Rome, the cornerstone of the modern European Union over the weekend. Germany’s presidency of the Council is a fortuitous coincidence, imbuing these celebrations with a particularly symbolic air. As one of the founding nations, a country divided until 1989, it serves as a reminder of the Union’s initial purpose: to allow Europe’s citizens to live together in peace.

To mark the day, the Berlin Declaration was signed by all 27 Heads of State and Government. Say what you will about the political significance of this document, it includes a number of key features which are a sign of the development the Union has undergone over the past 50 years and the challenges it faces today.

Including the fight against illegal immigration in the Berlin Declaration was particularly important to the Spanish government, who has demanded Europe provide additional resources to help it tackle the onslaught of African migrants that risk their lives to land on the Canary Islands. More than 31,000 migrants reached the islands last year, six times more than in 2005. FRONTEX, the EU border control agency, has been working toward finding practical solutions to return migrants to their home countries.

In addition, the fight against racism and xenophobia was formally written into the declaration:

“We will fight terrorism, organised crime and illegal immigration together. We stand up for liberties and civil rights also in the struggle against those who oppose them. Racism and xenophobia must never again be given any rein.”

The latter reflects Europe’s commitment to fundamental rights, formally anchored in the Charter. In the absence of a ratified European Constitution, these kind of declarations, the commitment to the European Year of Equal Opportunities and the Court of Justice’s decision to uphold the provisions of the Charter in its rulings are the only means to express the importance of these guiding principles for EU policy making.

Nearly 180,000 undocumented migrants in Germany will soon be able to live in the country legally - providing they have a job by 2009. This is one of the core provisions etched into the compromise solution hammered out between the members of the ruling coalition, the Social Democratic and Christian Democratic Parties last week. The new regulations on the so-called “right to remain” (Bleiberecht) have been heavily criticized by migrant rights groups and the Green Party opposition. German news magazine, Der Spiegel, offers an English overview of the commentaries featured in various German dailies. The German Parliament is set to vote on the compromise before the Easter break.

Migrants who have either entered the country illegally, have outstayed their asylum periods or have seen their asylum claims rejected will have their cases reexamined according to these new provisions. First criteria, however, is that they entered the country prior to July 2001. Migration organizations, such as the Refugee Board (Fluechtlingsrat) Berlin have been particularly critical of the fact that this new law does not take a comprehensive approach, but again includes some and excludes others. The SPIEGEL-article underlines a number of other limitations: “Spouses can only follow “tolerated” immigrants to Germany if they are aged 18 or over and can demonstrate language competence in German. Likewise, various services available to German residents can be withheld, such as child credits and welfare. The new legislation would also allow authorities to verify the background of immigrants.”

Commentators accross the country agree that giving asylum seekers and undocumented migrants the right to look for work is a key step toward facilitating integration. Previously, asylum seekers were barred from working until their eventual fate had been decided. This led to the outbreak of racist violence, particularly in Eastern parts of Germany in the early 1990s and again in the early years of this decade.

Critics of the compromise are outspoken against the power given to local state bodies to decide the terms of aid payments for this group of migrants. Bavaria has been a long-standing advocate of giving asylum seekers only basic supplies (food, shelter) instead of direct welfare payments. Migrant organizations criticize this approach as a way of keeping the social status of these migrants as low as humanly possible. And what of these former illegal migrants who cannot be gainfully employed due to illness or old age? No provisions have been made with regards to their status.

Migration organizations are also doubtful of the role immigration officers are to play in assessing the potential terrorist threat of these type of immigrants, as suspects or those with a criminal record are to be deported upon full assessment of their files.

A commentary in the left-leaning Berliner Zeitung, closes by saying “it (the proposed legislation) also says a lot about the German attitude toward those who have fled their home countries to escape war, persecution or economic distress. They’re tolerated, but not accepted.”

A reform of other pieces of the legislative puzzle on immigration is next on the Interior Minister’s agenda. In keeping with the framework laid down by the previous government and the goals set by the EU’s Hague Program, these changes must be comprehensive, functional and cognizant of Germany’s changing needs with respect to migrant labor. Again, commentators aren’t too hopeful: “Now Germany is returning to an immigration policy that denies reality. In a globalized world where nation states are increasingly in need of the knowledge immigrants bring, Germany’s governing coalition is setting up further obstacles to immigration. It’s heading in the wrong direction.”

With approximately 12 million illegal immigrants from Mexico currently living in the United States, the focus of the last leg of Bush’s Latin America Tour in Mexico was dominated by immigration issues. In the article “Mexico presses Bush over Immigration on Tour“, writer Steve Holland suggests that President Felipe Calderon of Mexico surprised many by placing the issue of immigration as a priority in his meetings with President Bush who has focused most of his tour on trade and anti-drug policies as opposed to immigration. Calderon, a fiscal conservative, took to primarily encouraging the US to “acknowledge the rights of the migrants and workers.” Calderon prioritising immigration surprised many as drugs and trade issues are of serious concern with recent new drug related conflicts in cities such as Acapulco and the loss of much of Mexico’s trade opportunities from the US to China and India. In speaking about Mexicans in the US, Calderon stated:

“They are people who work and who respect that country, people who pay taxes, who grow the vegetables you probably eat, people who serve in restaurants,”

President Bush has pledged to reform the immigration laws in the United States, but with much pressure from Calderon, his own Republican Party and constant criticism from the Democrats, Bush will be hard pressed to satisfy all sides in the last few months of his Presidency. While the law reform will not allow for an Amnesty, Bush hopes to develop a guest worker program in order to appease the numbers of illegal migrants coming to the US. Bush also hopes to pull some of the focus away from Iraq and never ending controversies such as with Alberto Gonzalez this past week. Forming a balanced “rule of law” and respect for “humanity” in a new immigration law with both parties in Congress will be a difficult task for Bush. With new candidates for the next elections already being the focus of much of the attention in Washington, it remains to be seen if Bush’s attempt at a balanced approach to immigration reform will satisfy both parties, Mexico and the future candidates. Many who appear to be distancing themselves from Bush due to his low approval rating and ever problematic criticisms of those in the Bush administration may delay any real reform of the immigration law in the near future. The immigration issue also is not always a positive for Bush, who would like to avoid protests similar to last summer in forming a new immigration law.

Elihu Root, a leading American International Lawyer argued in 1910 for the rights of Foreign Nationals. In states in which they were not citizens, there was an obligation under Customary International Law that national law must treat aliens as equal to that of their own citizens, as well, that there is an International Minimum Standard of treatment for these individuals beyond national laws.

Many of the ideas that Root promoted lead to the establishment of standards and practices throughout the world regarding the treatment of foreign citizens abroad. Initially these customary laws were sought to protect post-colonial investors from expropriation of their investments, but in the modern era the trend of Non-Legal Migration to developed nations has lead to a reinterpretation of how laws are applied to foreign nationals. The current trend is evident in almost every city and town in the US, in which a great number of non-documented individuals are settling inside countries such as the United States every year, every week and even every day.

Stephen Dinan of the Washington Times points out in his article “Bush Stresses Immigration” that President Bush’s tour of Latin America in the last 5 days is focused on the increasing trade between Central America and South America, reducing drug trafficking and “legal” immigration to the United States. The new trade agreement between the US and many Central American countries shows that while trade and aid is a focus of Bush’s reconstituted Americas policy, places such as Guatemala are more focused on their citizens abroad in the US than what benefits a possible Free Trade Agreement with the US can provide. With 1 in 10 Guatemalans being born outside Guatemala according to the White House, the treatment of US Nationals in Guatemala with new investments after the Free Trade Agreement may be a secondary issue compared to the number of Guatemalans crossing into the US and residing ultimately on US soil.

”The United States will enforce our law. It’s against the law to hire somebody who’s in our country illegally, and we are a nation of law,” - George Bush

In the article “Bush backs Bogotá” the focus in places like Colombia is not on immigration but on renewed aid towards fighting poverty and drug trafficking, as well as increasing trade among the US with its South American neighbours. The trend seems to be the focus of much of Bush’s tour of South and Central America with a new fuels agreement between Bush and Brazil’s President Lula da Silva and a promise of more aid and trade to Guatemala, where the US has been second to the EU in aid to Central America for much of the Bush administration. Immigration, while likely the most pressing issue to face US-Latin American relations to date, has been somewhat neglected by the focus on trade, aid, drugs and above all protests by groups in each of the countries Mr. Bush has visited. The most evident and persistent criticism of the President comes from Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, who has chosen to tour on an Anti-Bush stance absorbing much of the media attention during the US President’s tour of Latin America.

The real focus on the immigration debate will likely come with the eagerness of many inside the US to open up a proper dialogue with the newly elected President Felipe Calderon of Mexico in addressing the challenges which burden the legal, economic and social structures inside the US and Mexico. In the article “Napolitano to Bush”, Governor Napolitano of Arizona urges not only President Bush, but President Calderon to achieve economic goals which are “realistic, flexible and innovative” during Bush’s meetings with Calderon at the end of his Latin American tour this week. With much of the focus on Iraq and the War on Terror in the last 8 years by Mr. Bush, there is a current resurge in interest in the US Border since last summer. While there may not be enough time for constructive changes before the next US Presidential election, there is a generally positive impression of Mr. Calderon in the US in the present view of many Americans, or at least via CNN and much of the US mainstream media. The results of Bush’s Mexico meeting remains to be seen, but it seems that Mr. Bush who began his Presidency on the issue of Mexico, will likely attempt to end it as well on the issues surrounding trade, aid, drugs and Latin America and if not by choice…perhaps immigration as well.

TIME Magazine featured an interesting cover story a few weeks ago. In it, author Jumana Farouky highlights five steps toward a true muticultural society in Europe. She suggests that the debate on headscarves take on a more rational approach accross Europe, as a sign of a true acceptance of Islam into the multi-facetted spectrum of religion in Europe. Her discussion of the issue is over simplified, yet nevertheless compelling. She argues in favor of allowing women to wear the hijab (i.e. the headscarf) in public places, including their place of employment. This should also hold true for teachers, who have been banned from wearing the headscarf in many federal states in Germany and accross France. Teachers, she says, would then have the option of which school to teach at. (This vision, however, is incompatible with the French and German constitutions, which codify the separation of church and state). Nevertheless, her’s is an interesting approach.

In her second short piece, she advocates the creation of affirmative action-like quotas to get immigrants into mainstream European political parties. While it is hard to contest the need for migrant participation in traditional party politics, the introduction of quotas would be highly controversial in many European countries, who have just recently struggled through the process of adopting formal anti-discrimination legislation. Established parties in Europe, for example the Social Democrat and Green parties in Germany, have long pushed for an increased number of first, second and third generation migrants as active party members. Only few, such as Cem Oezdemir, have made it to the front lines of federal politics. But many are at the front lines of grass-roots and local politics. Introducing quotas, while an idea worth playing through in practice, would introduce a number of follow up questions: to vote and be elected into political office in most European countries, you must hold citizenship of that country. Naturalization of migrants has been dropping steadily in Germany, since 1997, however.

Her third point about inclusion in education is valid. Immigrants must have access to additional language education and if necessary, subject specific assistance in addition to help them live up to their full potential in their new countries. The Europe-wide PISA studies, conducted with middle school children proved that immigrants across Europe were suffering from unequal treatment in the classroom and were underperforming in comparison to most natives. In Sweden, the example that the TIME correspondent quotes, bilingual education (i.e. in the migrants mother-tongue and Swedish) is practiced from kindergarten onwards. The Nordics, with their emphasis on life-long learning lead the way - the rest of Europe must follow.

Developing smarter methods for legal migration is a point that has long been advocated, especially on the EU level, and it is Farouky’s fourth point. In exploring modern immigration policies that can apply across Schengen countries, the EU has been closely examining the Canadian, US and Australian points-based systems. A number of EU countries have developed their own, albeit none too functional, Green Card systems. For long these systems have been geared toward attracting the most highly-qualified migrants to a country. But even this has been difficult. To enter Germany as a highly-qualified migrant on the Green Card system, you must prove an earning power of at at least EUR 85,500. The leading industry association in the country has advocated that this be dropped to EUR 40,000 to fill the currently existing skills gap, left by German scientists and engineers who - as part of the inevitable brain drain - have left the country for greener pastures. For other countries, it’s not the highest qualified migrants they need. The British NHS system is overly dependent on an influx of well-trained Phillipino nurses, for instance. EU countries must be able to fill their skills gap in a sustainable matter. What of the German Green Card migrants who were left unemployed, when the IT market turned sour a few years ago. Europe needs migrants, in part to quell its looming demographic crisis. This need must be communicated and immigrants welcomed to Europe through a calibrated, functional and controlled migration system. Point blank.

“Think locally, act locally” - is her closing advice and nothing could be more true. Plenty of good examples exist, but we need to hear more about them. Sharing best practice examples and models across countries is at the heart of initiatives, such as USable, a competition run by the German-based Koerber Foundation. The initiative invites Germans and Americans to examine best practice examples in the other country and write project proposals on how best to transfer these good ideas to the other cultural context. Reporting on positive projects is a political necessity. Unfortunately, good news rarely makes headlines.

Central America: Part 1:

In communities all over North America since the 1980s there has been an ever-growing community of Central Americans among American, Canadian and Mexican cities. The destruction of many communities due to the Central American wars in the 1980s have left permanent scars among not only the economic, social and political structures of many Central American states, but have also left a lasting legacy of social and economic issues among those youth growing up inside Central America and in those growing communities abroad.

In the article from Ft.com, the author Edward Alden gives an overview of the reasons why many migrants from Central America and other regions of Latin America come to the United States. With the history of Central America, many have come as political refugees, but Alden points out that much of the recent migration is economic migration. According to Alden, Central Americans now make up 22% of the ”unauthorised population” in the US. Considering the small population most Central American countries have in comparison to their neighbours, the great urge for Central Americans in making up the large number of undocumented migrant workers currently working in the United States is impressive, and will only grow in the future.

While many Central American states were wrought with Civil War, Costa Rica, one of the few countries in the world with no official Armed Forces has been comparatively peaceful throughout the last few decades. An exchange has developed, as many Costa Ricans have come to Canada on only tourist visas and have stayed and found legal and illegal employment, many Canadians have now chosen the small Central American state as their new retirement home. Economic migrants from both countries, like Bruce Callow suggests in the CBC article on A Changing Costa Rica shows how the traditional migrant from Central America coming to work in Canada or the US has been complimented by Canadian migrants coming to stop working in Costa Rica.

In the second part, I will discuss the effects of the CAFTA Trade Agreement on Immigration to the US and discuss trends of Immigration from the Region to Canada.