This Blog is also posted in the FPA Latin America Blog.

Europe and the United States had often inherited many benefits from economic growth in the pre-2008 era. One of those consequences, especially for those countries on the border or across the sea from developing nations is legal and illegal migration into their economies. Due to the recent economic troubles a lack of work has prevailed and often manual labour jobs have dwindled, leaving legal and illegal migrants with few options for employment. Signs of “reverse migration” back towards their countries of origin took hold with many illegal migrants living in the United States eight to nine months ago. Now with unemployment rates pushing 20 percent in many European countries, many immigrants in European countries are making their way back to their hometowns.

In a New York Times article this week an analysis of why and how European migrants are returning home was published. The focus of the article was on migrants in Spain, often coming from Eastern Europe and South America to work in an economy that was the source of the EU economic boom since 2000. Spain and Ireland were known as the two EU countries in the last few years that have benefitted from innovative and continuous economic growth after the year 2000. The rate of inter-EU and immigration from abroad expanded their economies, population and cultures in return. Now many immigrants to Spain have become the first to leave the country with an unemployment rate of 17.4 percent. Responses to these issues have come from many sources. The Czech Government, in an attempt to ease the pressures on Czech émigrés has offered 500 Euros to help their citizens return to the Czech Republic. In Spain, the Spanish Government has offered legal immigrants from South America their unemployment payment in one lump sum if they agree to leave Spain and not return for three years. Many others have simply left back to their home countries without any assistance as one migrant to Ireland said: “it is much easier to be at home with family and with friends and not to have a job,” she said, “than to be here and not to have a job.”

Problems in places like Europe and the US might be difficult, but problems from the Economic Crisis in Eastern Europe and South America have not been much better. This week the World Bank and IMF have been working out methods and strategies to help economies in the developing world and now even developed countries in dealing with financial problems worldwide. While unemployment rises and the debate carries on within global financial institutions, problems in developing nations continue to rise and develop into massive crises as the result of increased poverty. One notable example is the conditions in Mexico. With a full scale drug war competing with deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq combined, losses from the financial crisis and the current Swine Flu taking hold in Mexico, reverse immigration may have unknown consequences as a result of millions of people not being able to cope within their home country or their new country. While unemployment rates in the US and Canada are no where near 17 percent like in some European countries, the difference in the economic structure of the systems in North America may not provide decent paying jobs which help families to survive an economic crunch for more than 8 months or so. In the end, policies to help stabilise developed and developing economies might help some people, like those returning to South America from Spain in providing some living expenses for a few months or a few years.

 This blog is also posted in the FPA Latin America Blog.

The European Union and Latin America have always had amicable ties, via trade, culture and administrative and legal traditions. Immigration from Latin America to the EU has often been able to avoid the conflict and debate that are common in the United States, where millions of immigrants from Latin America are more of a campaign issue than a sociological blessing. The European Union may have angered some of their Latin American friends however, with the new EU Immigration Policy creating a collective grumble throughout immigrant communities in Europe and among Latin American leaders themselves.

It is not common to have so many Latin American leaders, often with varying political stripes, to have complete agreement on an issue or a set of issues. Ironically, the past two weeks have produced not only new relations between Hugo Chavez and Alvaro Uribe, but produced a collective grumble by all leaders during the Mercosur regional summit and other policy discussions against the new EU Immigration measures. It is not secret that Spain and the EU have become the new destination for many legal and some illegal immigration from Latin America. The new EU policy seeks to detain possible illegal immigrants for a period of up to 18 months before deporting them, leading many Latin American leaders to perceive the EU as placing issues of immigration on the immigrants themselves, allowing policymakers to avoid the responsibility in dealing with immigration in the EU on a proper legal and equitable level. This led Latin American leaders to sign a joint declaration against the new EU immigration policies during Mercosur summit. In addition, some leaders threatened restrictions of Venezuelan oil, and possible restrictions of grain and other agricultural products leaving the rich fields on Brazil, Argentina and other countries that have been hit by the recent food crisis. While Latin America is not the only region to be angered by the new EU policy, it is one of the regions that are considering a collective reaction against Europe on behalf of the hundreds of thousands living there illegally which originate from Latin America.

The question that remains is whether the new EU policies are a just approach in dealing with illegal immigration or whether they warrant a strong reaction from Latin America and other countries around the globe? While the 27 member EU nations did pass the new Immigration Policy to be implemented in 2010, many have varied time restrictions regarding detentions of illegal immigrants. In reality, the EU policy is not only addressing illegal immigration coming from Latin America, but is greatly focused on the 51,000 illegal boat people coming into Spain, Italy, Greece and Malta that arrived in 2007 alone. Many of these illegal migrants end up drowning on their voyage to Europe, presenting the EU with a diverse humanitarian problem in dealing with illegal immigration. The new policy awards voluntary deportations, but also penalizes migrants who attempt to frustrate officials in dealing with their deportations as well. Families and children also have some rights extended, but as a whole the new policies are a lot stricter than previous laws protecting the EU from illegal migration.

After the EU Policy is implemented in the long run, the true effectiveness of the EU Immigration Policy will show its true colours. Protests from Latin America will likely not lead into true economic sanctions however, unless there are massive abuses against their citizens in the EU. In the end, many still will enter the EU illegally, and this is unlikely to change. The effectiveness of the new policy will come when people are actually caught and deported, which is still the fate of the minority of illegal immigrants in most countries in the world. Morality and immigration policy is still to be debated in Latin America and the EU, but it is certain that a solution to these issues is far from an absolute success in immigration policy in any region of the world.

For Video on the Mercosur Summit and Latin American leaders and EU Immigration, click here.

French President and current EU figurehead, Nicolas Sarkozy claimed an early boost to his country's presidency of the Union yesterday, with the conclusion of the much anticipated ‘European Pact on Immigration and Asylum.’ Of course, it was a watered down version of the document that French immigration minister, Brice Hortefeux, was peddling to Member State governments earlier in the year - and rightfully so. Spain threw a wrench in the French Presidency's plans a few days ago, when it refused to agree to an addendum on integration and a Europe-wide ban on regularisations. 

According to those who have actually seen it, (it is not public information - at least not yet) it is built around five guiding principles:

So, at the end of the day, nothing in this pact is really new. 

For the most part, the Commission has already proposed legislation (EU Blue Card) and frameworks (Hague Programme) or, in fact, legislation has already been concluded as is the case for the Returns Directive.

However: Because Mr. Sarkozy has done what few others have done before him in recent EU politics (bar Angela Merkel on the environment) -  namely claim ownership and assume leadership - the media is keeping a close eye not only on him as EU President, but on the commitments made by all 27 Heads of State and Government as part of this pact. In the absence of a clear legal base for Justice and Home Affairs policy (which is linked to the adoption of the Lisbon Reform Treaty), and in light of demographic and economic need, the EU needs momentum in this crucial policy area. 

For ten years, since the initial EU Summit on immigration policy in Tampere, plans were made, legislation was written but major problems remained unadressed. Member states failed to realize the benefit of common approaches to a policy area, which by nature of the Union's open borders, could no longer be controlled unitlaterally.

We have a new window of opportunity: Europe needs migrants economically, and Europeans are beginning to understand the benefit of controlled migration. Europeans, by and large, want the Union - not their individual national governments - to develop functional policy in this area. Now is the time to turn the end the closed-door decision-making that started in Tampere. The European Parliament, NGOs and migrant organizations have to use this new window of opportunity in their favor, to ensure that the European Union gives itself the robust, humantiarian, just, equal and functional immigration and asylum policy it needs for the 21st century and beyond. 

*This entry has been cross-posted to the EU at 50 blog

The European Commission will soon present a Green Paper (i.e. a non-legislative document) examining the changes to the European education landscape to accomodate migrant children, the institution's press service is reporting.

Also, the recent Eurobarometer survey shows that European citizens want to see the Union - not national governments - take the lead on key issues in interior policy (dubbed Justice and Home Affairs in EU jargon), including on counter-terrorism and immigration measures. The Lisbon Treaty foresees a change of legal basis under which legislation can be proposed and approved for matters in this area, giving greater influence to the European Parliament, the only directly elected body of the European Union.

The French EU Presidency's whistle-stop tour of European capitals in preparation for a restrictive immigration and integration policy has hit a major roadblock: Spain. As one of the EU Member States who has profited both from regular and illegal migration (the Spanish government has issued a number of amnesties for illegals over the years), Prime Minister Zapatero has rebuffed French plans for the creation of an integration contract obligation, which requires immigrants adjust to their recieving country's “national identity.”

Experts now expect a watered down version of the original proposal to be presented by the French Presidency. In absence of the Lisbon Reform Treaty, whose ratification as is now looks unlikely following the Irish referendum, immigration policy falls under the remit of member state governments assembled in the European Council, rather than the European Parliament. As has been the case for previous immigration proposals and those pretaining to the free movement of so-called 'third country nationals’ a ‘lowest common denominator’ solution with respect to immigration can be expected.

The Mezze plate, if unknown to readers is a mix of different appetizers of various Middle Eastern foods, often combined together in a mix of powerful flavours and textures. Food in the region is often like its people, a combination of tastes that while creating a wonderful mix of culture and language also can create indigestion in some cases. The following is a mix of issues that have charged the region and its people abroad in the last week, often celebrating victory in conflict and enraging further problems.

-Israel at 60: Last week was the 60th anniversary of Israel's independence as a sovereign nation. At the same time, for many Palestinians it was the remembrance of the Naquba, or ”Catastrophe” of the migration of many from their original homes and towns upon the creation of the new state of Israel. Festivities took place in Israel and among Israelis and Jewish communities all around the world. In 1948, the State of Israel was created as a home for the Jewish people after the mass genocide of the European Jewish community and pogroms of Eastern Jews bringing many into the newly formed nation. While 1.5 million Israeli-Arabs live inside Israel and are a part of Israel society with full legal rights, legal challenges for increased rights for Israel's Arab minority, Palestinians and even some Jewish people with Eastern roots push the system to promote a better equality among the multicultural Jewish State. Separate from the systemic stresses faced in the Israeli context, the West Bank and Gaza Strip are embroiled in a Hot Peace between Fatah and Hamas who periodically debate and often fight for power and control of a future state of Palestine. While some movements for peace between Israel and Fatah in the West Bank have started to produce results, rocket attacks coming in from Gaza leaves little chance for change despite the best and very last minute efforts of Carter or Bush. Unknown to most outside Israel, the conflict in 2006 did not produce the release of Gilad Shalit who was kidnapped by Hamas at the time. The continued attacks and retaliations, blockades, increased poverty and the maintained hostage taking of Shalit will not help produce any peace in Israel anytime soon and will give more support for creating more walls between the various people in the region.

-Muslim Immigrants to Europe: In a Foreign Policy Association Religion and Politics blog post by one of our charming and intelligent bloggers, Karin Esposito, the integration of Muslims into European society is discussed on her posting: Integrating Immigrant Communities. Karin points out in refer to author Olivier Roy, that after 9/11, the French immigrant riots and the killing of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh there is a feeling that assimilation and multiculturalism was a failure in the European context. In reference to a HRW report in Immigration in the Netherlands, she points out that tests sent to the home countries of many immigrants may act as indirect discrimination, targeting specific immigrant groups even before they come into the country as detailed in the report. The challenge is far from being resolved, as a new way to view integration will likely have to be created to promote any dialogue between communities, preferably without the use of Cartoons.

-Beirut the next Baghdad?: In a May 18th New York Times article and among media worldwide, the issue of sectarian violence taking charge over the fragile democracy that exists in Lebanon is becoming a great concern to the region. After Hizbollah attacks against Sunni citizens, media and political parties put the Lebanese government and the often targeted and assassinated Hariri family into the spotlight again, Lebanon may be approaching a large conflict between its Shi'a and Sunni communities. Like in Iraq, indiscriminant violence by one community over the other has lead to the declaration of blood feuds among Lebanon's communities. In the Middle East the extremity of violence often intentionally created humiliation and dishonour to many proud groups and cultures which can only be met by delicate diplomacy or outright revenge and conflict. While the international community often focused its attention on the Israel-Lebanon conflict in 2006, attention and understanding of the divisions now taking place needs to have the attention it deserves to avoid an all out civil war in Lebanon.

France assumes the rotating Presidency of the European Union on July 1 of this year. Immigration policy is set to be one of the main issues to which President Nicolas Sarkozy, long-time defender of a hard-line stance, wants to find a tenable solution across 27 member states. Borrowing from the successful negotiation tool-kit established by Angela Merkel on environmental policy, Mr. Sarkozy has sent his controversial immigration minister, Brice Hortefeux, on a whistle-stop tour of the European capitals in an effort to forge compromise before key issues come to the table at the October 15 European Council meeting. Hortefeux's intinerary has already seen him hit 18 capitals by mid-April and he hopes to bring his insights back to Paris ahead of July 1, in an effort to design an immigration compromise that could actually see it through negotiations, in which the unanimity of the Council is still required on a number of issues, thus making actual progress especially elusive. More on Mr. Hortefeux's travels can be found here and we here at the blog will keep a watchful eye out for what might be in the works.

Across Germany thousands of young immigrants are facing one of the most difficult decisions of their young lives. Beyond the typical teenage musings on their place in their own social sphere among family and friends, almost 4,000 of the country's teens turning 18 this year will have to make a choice on their nationality.

In 1999, the Social-Democrat/Green coalition government signed into law a compromise on dual citizenship. It was no more than that - a compromise, but it in part reversed a principle of German citizenship law, which was traditionally based on jus sanguinis, blood right. Until then German citizenship was only open to those who could prove German roots through genetic linkage. As a result newly arrived Soviet migrants with German ancestors but without language skills were granted German nationality quasi automatically, while third generation Turks, for example, who were born and raised in the country and often spoke only German or a local dialect were excluded from the right to vote and exercise German citizenship rights. Hoping to further the integration of these long-resident migrants, lawmakers decided to change existing provisions to allow a limited dual citizenship for certain cases. Thousands of young Turks born in Germany thus gained the right to carry both passports.

Over the next few years, 300,000 young dual nationals will have to give up one of their passports. As German newsmagazine, Der Spiegel, reports many are conflicted. “Until now, I haven't had to decide more than what T-shirt looks cooler or whether to take the bus or the bike to visit my friends. But this is big,” says 17-year-old Cem Sezek. “For many teenagers the decision between the Turkish and German passport is like deciding between your mother and your wife,” explains Sevim Dagdelen, herself a turkish-born member of the German the federal parliament. “Instead of forcing them into this decision and creating stumbling blocks, we should be focusing on how to improve their career options,” argues Green Party member, Volker Beck.

Some, like 18-year-old Tuerkiz Tamalta, have vowed to take their case to the highest German court. And a number of legal experts could see the Constitutional Court deciding in her favor: Ruediger Wolfrum, Director of the Max-Planck-Institute for Human Rights Law argues that a constitutional right is at stake. The right to the freedom of free development of ones personality is in question when teenagers are forced to make this type of decision he argues. Astrid Wallrabenstein, a Constitutional Court expert believes that dual nationals are subjected to unequal treatment: “Germans don't have to reaffirm their citizenship when they turn 18,” she says.

Dual citizenship provisions exist across the globe - some combinations are allowed, others aren't. This is even the case in Germany - I am living proof. As the daughter of an American and a German, born in Germany, but on American soil (I was born in an American military hospital), I carry both a blue and a burgundy passport. I am slightly circumscribed in my citizenship rights, but this hardly has any bearing on my daily life. The two passports have been my ticket to a mobile life - one, I would argue that has benefitted both my countries of origin. Through both my education and my professional life, I have contributed to both societies: I file taxes on both sides of the Atlantic, I vote in the country of my residence, I take an active interest in the politics of both. The opportunity to be educated in both systems, to live and work in the US and across Europe has allowed me to be a better journalist, has allowed me to become an effective communicator across cultures. Most importantly it has increased, not decreased my allegiance to both countries and made me the kind of mobile citizen the global economy is constantly calling for.

So, why should I get to have both and young Turks shouldn't? The fact that I have mixed parentage? In many cases we attended the same schools, speak German just as fluently and feel allegiances to both sides. Once Turkey becomes a European Member State mobility for those that chose a Turkish passport will once again be possible. But until then, their opportunities will be limited. There is an inequality at work here that will continue to separate, not integrate people.

*This post has also been cross-posted in the FPA's Latin America Blog.

Two countries have stood out in their respective regions as economically progressive policy successes in the last ten years. In Europe, Spain along with Ireland have seen much of the positive development and economic growth when the rest of the EU has been wrestling with high unemployment rates and drastic changes in governments. In Latin America, Brazil under Lula and under the former Cardoso Administration have grown at a steady positive rate, breaking the traditional Latin American plague of economic collapses and large booms that seem to be commonplace in almost all South American economies to date. With success, the importance of Spain and Brazil have taken on a new form in their regions and abroad. Traditionally the place of the United States, these emerging regional powers now seem to be inheriting some of America's traditional problems.

Brazil has always been a country of immigration. The population of Brazil, while taking in only some immigrants from Asia, Africa and Europe in the last few years, was one of the countries that absorbed much of the world's immigration since the 1880s. This open policy remained, and while economic problems and changes from populist, to military, to democratic governments took shape since the 1930s, immigration remained strong as long as there were jobs to be done in one of the world's largest countries. With traditional economic instability and some recent success, many Brazilians have chosen to go abroad to either find more work or utilize their assets to enjoy life abroad. In Spain, this emigration from Brazil has taken a foothold with both emigrants coming and living illegally for work or working in legal low paying jobs, as well as those upper middle class Brazilians coming to make a life and career in Spain as professionals and entrepreneurs.

While the general impression of Brazilians in Spain is a positive one, there have been some problems against immigrants at the main Spanish airports and in society as a whole. Many immigrants, including many Brazilians often enter Spain and stay illegally. This has been a problem one many fronts, as many Latin Americans, Africans and other Europeans do not go through the normal procedures to live and work in Spain but come as temporary workers or as refugees or simply pass through the border and disappear. With Spain having some economic expansion and the closing off of the US to many immigrants, the Spanish immigration system has become overwhelmed. Since 2006, the number of Brazilians coming into Spain has nearly "tripled or quadrupled", while at the same time in Spain eight Brazilians a day are deported.

The solution to the Brazil-Spain situation needs to be addressed by both countries. Brazil needs to reform its immigration to fit with its position as an emerging power in the world. With 3-4 millions Brazilians living abroad, Lula will have the responsibility to create and international Brazil without losing all of the most talented to other countries and still maintain funds coming from those emigrants abroad. Spain will also have to accept Brazilians and the diversity of the Brazilian social strata now living throughout the Iberian Peninsula. It will take a long time to adapt the infrastructure to treat foreigners in a respectful fashion, but attempts need to begin immediately. Brazilians and others will be challenged living in Spain in becoming Spanish. While it might be easier from some, it is doubtful that those migrants to Spain who are not seen in a positive light will be so easily welcomed in the near future.

Hugo Brady, analyst at the Centre for European Reform, one of the leading-EU think tanks, has compiled a compedium of migration issues (PDF) that affect the European Union. The ‘A-Z’ approach offers a useful look at the issues and areas that shape migration policy now, as Justice and Home Affairs policy is in constant flux. From Africa to ‘Zero-tolerance’, Brady offers a summary and additional reading, which helps in getting a handle on this complex policy area.