Migration

The failure of Immigration reform in the US marked a special occasion in recent US political history where both parties have come to complete consensus over an issue, and have decided that NO ONE can agree on anything when it comes to reforming the unworkable immigration laws in the United States. The plan was finally put to rest when members of both the Democrats and Republicans could not come to any consensus in reforming the key issues tied in with immigration last week. The main points of disagreement among US politicians were debates over border security, what to do with the approximately 12 million illegal immigrants in the US, and allowing a new process for foreign workers to be able to work legally in the US. Addressing these three main issue were considered by many as asking too much too soon in altering current US immigration policy.

The effect on the Bush Administration disallows any attempt to improve domestic support and his overall reputation before he leaves office. Many political experts see immigration as a dead issue until 2009, when a new President can adopt the issue to gain their own support and leave the Bush legacy with only Iraq and scandals as its main points of historical debate. It remains to be seen how future candidates will address immigration, if at all in the upcoming US elections.

The real losers however are immigrants and Americans themselves. In the June 30th article by the New York Times: Immigrants Work On as Bill Dies and Views Divide, news of the failed reforms met some concerned groups with quiet mediocrity while others were happy to know that they may still have a good chance to make it to America without increased border security hindering their chances. Workers currently in the US, like Ediberto Perez reacted by saying: “Well, I am just going to keep working, What more can I do?” Also spoken about in the New York Times article was Mr. Brito, who thought him and his companions would never gain legal status. He has his wife and four children living in Mexico and while said he would love to become legal, it would not stop him from working at any job he can find.

Criticisms of the continuation of the labour situation in the US have met criticism from across the border in Mexico. Mexican President Felipe Calderon called the Senate’s decision a “grave error” and a failure to find a “sensible, rational, legal solution to the migration problem.” Jorge Bustamente of the UN human rights commission for migrants criticized the lack of reform measures by stating, “It means the continuation and probably a worsening of the migrants’ vulnerable conditions.” Mexican newspaper El Universal also commented on the failure of the immigration reform by stating that while American politicians want labour, they are unwilling to legalise the labour they require.

While delaying approaching the immigration issue until 2009 may not solve any current problems, it is evident that there is still a severe lack of consensus in dealing with immigration in the United States. While agreeing to disagree is the result of this latest round of immigration issues across America and beyond its borders into Mexico and abroad, everyone concerned must deal with its political paralysis for the time being.

On Tuesday, another attempt to bring the Senate Immigration Reform Bill into the crosshairs of American policymakers and bring the reform bill back to the Senate floor was created by President Bush and supporters of immigration reform in the United States. The general impression is that the bill will likely fail to be passed again, with objections to over two dozen amendments shadowing the lack of support and likely terminal end of the reform process, the opportunities in having the bill passed are few and far between.

The simple and overwhelming problem is that Americans just can’t agree on what to do with immigration reform. House Republicans have consistently opposed the reform bill, and the Democrats have clearly stated that without a certain level of Republican support, they will not support a failed bill.

Americans themselves are divided on the issue, with appx. 47% opposed to the bill and 30% supporting it in recent CNN polls, still it is shown that 45% of people still support friendly policies towards immigrants within any new legislation to be presented.

There are many reasons why immigration has become an issue in the US. An often neglected point of view on immigration was highlighted in the New York Times article: Anxiety in the land of the Anti-Immigration Crusader, where the author discusses why in one region of Colorado, with some of the lowest numbers of immigrants in the US has a unique concern over immigration. In the Colorado district the concern is twofold. One concern is that highly skilled workers are seen to be limiting well paying jobs for Americans under the H1B visa which allows for highly skilled and technical foreigners to come and work in the US. The other concern is China, which is seen as taking manufacturing jobs away from the northern regions of Mexico and creating a situation where Mexicans with no employment opportunities come to the US as an after-effect of Globalisation.

In the end, the debate is really a mix of having compassion, while upholding the law of the land and producing an immigration system where immigrants who are welcome are treated as “Americans” and are willing to become part of the American social fabric. The problem is that no one exactly knows how to make someone truly American, or even agree on what that entails. While upholding the laws to keep illegals out or at least in a regulated process is difficult, the idea of what it is to be truly American or European or part of any society is the great catalyst of debate in discussing Immigration in all countries.

Much happened in migration related matters across the globe this week. Following the conservative victory in the parliamentary elections, the French president moved ahead on realizing his new restrictive immigration policies, while at the same time creating the most inclusive government in the country’s history. Elsewhere, US conservatives are stepping up the pressure to move ahead on the immigration bill, while the UK joins the chorus of European countries introducing measures to attract the most talented migrants to the country to fill existing skills gaps. This week’s news roundup also features two new pieces of analysis from the MPI and ECRE. Happy clicking:

• This week’s edition of the Economist features an article about Malta’s changing attitude towards migration and the start of Operation Nautilus II, designed to control the waters between Africa and European islands.
• We recently reported that France’s new government is moving swiftly to implement changes to existing institutional structures governing immigration affairs and changing legal requirements for family members looking to join migrants in the country. Well, not without a fair amount of opposition, as is the French tradition. Plans for a national ministry of immigration and national identity caused controversy during the Presidential campaign and drew protest from various groups. Now, the IHT reports a new petition has been published in the left-leaning newspaper Liberation. These types of protests will have little impact on M. Sarkozy’s plans, but are a part of the French democratic tradition.
• While he seems to be cracking down in his policies, M. Le President’s most recent cabinet reshuffle (following the parliamentary elections) produced the most inclusive government France has ever seen. In what is largely interpreted as a move to reconcile withe the minority groups he isolated throughout his campaign and his tenure as interior minister, Sarkozy has named three women (WOMEN!) of Northern African origin to his cabinet. Two new junior ministers now join the already appointed justice minister, Rachida Dati, around the president’s cabinet table.
• In the run-up to the presentation of Germany’s national plan for migrant integration on July 12, a number of federal states are publishing and promoting their individual approaches. On June 21st I attended a panel discussion hosted by the Koerber Foundation, which featured one of Berlin’s leading integration policy makers, Guenter Piening. He presented parts of the new program, which is available in full here (in German). The plan includes a number of functional changes that will facilitate access to basic social services, including full and equal access to education and the full integration of migrants into the work force - changes, which are long overdue. Monitoring and measuring the success of integration policies is another new element introduced in this updated plan. I will review Berlin’s approach in the context of Germany’s new  toward integrating migrants in a separate post. To understand the evolution of Berlin’s integration concept, Piening’s 2005  policy action plan (in English) is an interesting read.
• The Senate immigration bill is still one of the hottest topics on the Hill. On Thursday, Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff went on the record to oppose an amendment, which could make a new program to stop businesses from hiring illegal workers less burdensome. In a letter to Senators he said that taking such a decision “would be a serious step backwards in our enforcement effort.” This statement came as news broke that Federal agents had arrested 81 suspected illegal immigrants during a raid at a manufacturing plant in the Pocono mountains in Pennsylvania. The company said an agency that provided temporary workers was , the IHT reports. Mr. Chertoff, meanwhile, might have other recent worries: the ACLU is suing the Department of Homeland Security in the name of two migrants who say they were drugged by department officials to ease their deportation. Just days earlier and hoping to influence the Congressional debate on the immigration bill, the White House released a study citing the positive effects of immgrant labor on the nation’s economy. The New York Times has a full report.
• The first Muslim prayer site was opened on Friday in Athens, Greece since the end of the Ottoman Empire, the New York Times reports.
• We recently reported that German industrial organizations were pressuring the German government to ease up their requirements on admitting labor migrants into the economy. Britain seems to be interested in doing the same. Where only a mere three years ago, critics complained that the generous welfare system was attracting too many unwanted migrants, the Guardian is now reporting that immigration minister Liam Byrne is planning to launch an “an international marketing campaign designed to attract businesses and people with the right skills” - the global war for talent is on.
• On the reports and analysis front: the always prolific Migration Policy Insitute issued a new report coinciding with World Refugee Day entitled “Bridging Divides: The Role of Ethnic Community-Based
  Organizations in Refugee Integration” (pdf).   As the German EU Council Presidency comes to a close and the Portuguese government prepares to take over, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles has prepared a memorandum on EU asylum and refugee policy over the next six months.

This week’s news roundup covers the aftermath of the failed reforms US Immigration policy initiative as well as covering further developments on the tragedy of the missing migrants and the EU response to this new scandal. Also a story on possible inequalities in the UK immigration system for skilled migrants is included:

• The Financial Times discusses the perplexing political issues with both Democrats and Republicans over the lack of support for real reform of US Immigration Policy. FT states that in reality no one fully supported the new policy, or if they did support it, perhaps they did not think it would actually be successful. To see this interesting commentary see the link to the June 12th article here.
• The EU and the EU Commissioner for Migration, Franco Frattini are facing many questions regarding the death of 27 migrants who spent 3 days sitting in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea with no assistance from the EU (see last week’s Update). The responsibility and legal obligations of the EU and its member states to protect illegal migrants has become a very heated issue among member states, as some have more control over resources than others, while certain states like Spain and Malta absorb much of the burden in finding and protecting illegal migrants. For a further discussion see the Reuters article here.
• Immigration reforms in the UK since 2003 seek to qualify applicants for citizenship based on skills, age, education and previous earnings as opposed to family links. Recently there has been some controversy as retroactive rules which apply to skilled migrants who came before the programme are said to not comply with the UK’s race equality assessment measures which gave a failing grade to the new highly skilled migrants programme (HSMP) that has been in effect since 2003.  See the Guardian article here.

This week’s news roundup covers EU initiatives to create a Common European Asylum System as well as France’s possible new focus on immigration policy as well as highlighting opinion tools for Americans on their attitudes towards immigration after the failure of the Immigration Bill to be passed through the US Senate. Also stories on Aid workers killed in Lebanon and links towards the refugee tragedy in the Mediterranean are highlighted:

• French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said last Friday in his tour of Africa that France will not tolerate waves of African migrants coming to France. Since the election of France’s new President Nicolas Sarkozy, many migrants have been worried about the possible changes to France’s immigration policy. While Kouchner did show a tough stance on France’s new approach to immigration, he did clarify that France’s immigrants should be treated fairly and that much of the concern came from the high risk illegal immigrants. He may have been influenced by events last week where 110 bodies where discovered in the Mediterranean Sea between Malta and Libya, thought to be illegal immigrants who became victim to their “uncertain vessels” and a fortuneless journey.
• On June 6th 2007 the European Comission published a Green Paper to create the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) as well as an evaluation of the Dublin System and a Directive on long-term residence for the beneficiaries of International Protection. It is hoped that the focus on irregular migrations, which has dominated European Immigration Policy in the past, will be refocused towards the rights and obligations of all EU Member states on the rights of Asylum seekers in the EU. After the tragedy mentioned above, a mechanism to ensure the rights of Asylum seekers needs to be established equally in all EU states.
• With the failed progression on the Immigration Reform Bill, MSNBC has created a website to gain American’s opinions on the immigration issue and the reform bill from American citizens. While the Bill has been set aside indefinitely, the issue of immigration in the US still holds strong among many people. See the links here for opinions.
• In a June 11th article for the Guardian Newspaper, two Red Cross workers were killed and one seriously wounded today in Lebanon. The shell that hit their vehicle came from Fatah Islam militants held up inside the Northern edge of the Nahr al-Bared camp. For more information see the Lebanon post below.

The focus of President Bush’s weekly radio address often takes to speaking about how support for the war in Iraq is necessary and how his immigration policy must be supported. While unfortunately there is no end to the War in Iraq in sight, the President’s Immigration Reform might have had met it’s final end this past weekend when the Immigration Bill was set aside indefinitely.

Bush’s attempts at reforming the US Immigration system are unique in his eight year Presidency. While Democrats often shy away from supporting any policy of the Bush Administration, with regards to immigration varied opinions from both Democrats and Republicans placed members of both parties at different ends of the chess board. Ironically many Democrats supported much of the Bill’s reforms, while many Republicans felt the Bill offered too much of an Amnesty and not enough security against illegal immigrants and possible terrorist threats. Not all Democrats supported the Bill however, seeing the Bill not going far enough in forming a realistic immigration policy. In the end, the lack of support from both parties allowed the Bill to be set aside last Thursday in the US Senate.

Bush and supporters of the legislation still are seeking to push the Bill forward despite the major setback in the US Senate. While Bush attempted to placate some Republican’s concerns over the Bill by saying in his Radio Address that the Bill is far from being an “Amnesty” for illegal immigrants, he also is fully aware that the Bill is not perfect. Supporters of the Bill, both Democrats and Republicans feel that the Bill was extinguished much too soon, and that “stall tactics” and “fear mongering” (see video in above link) on both sides arising from past tensions has really not given a chance to immigration reform that was really lost too soon for legislation that is too crucial to be forgotten.

Bush’s legacy will not be one of the Compromising President, but with regards to immigration reform the work and efforts and necessity of the new Bill should be considered more important than the quick dismissal it has received in the US Senate last week. While immigration reform is most likely a dead deal right now in the US, its importance has not diminished despite bi-partisan conflict and lack of support for Presidential initiatives on all fronts. The next President, whoever they will be, will likely face similar bi-partisan challenges on all policy decisions in the future…and it is likely that the lack of support for this Bill and the millions of legal and illegal immigrants in the US will be one of the next major campaign issues for the future President….Second as always to Iraq of course!

This week’s news roundup covers the worrying situation of African migrants adrift at sea between the coasts of Libya and Malta and the failure of EU member states to act quickly and adequately to this human tragedy. We have also gathered the newest reports on the growing Iraqi refugee crisis and what European countries can do to help ease the situation.

• The pictures of 27 African would-be migrants clinging to tuna nets for dear life in the Mediterranean for over three days, while EU governments deliberated who might be responsible for them, have finally prompted the EU to admit its policies were endangering lives. The International Herald Tribune’s Dan Bilefsky reports EU Commission spokesman Friso Roscam Abbing both admitting failure and demanding member states do a better job: “We call on EU member states to do a better job of sharing the burden to avoid humanitarian tragedies.” The Commission has also announced a full investigation into the incident that left the migrants stranded at sea after their boat sank off the coast of Libya. The Maltese fish trawler had refused to take the Africans onboard to transport them to safety in Malta. An Italian boat finally came to their rescue. The situation has sparked an outcry by human rights organizations. The European Council on Refugees and Exiles, ECRE, and the UNHCR issued press releases urged Malta to accept the recent amendments to the maritime conventions (SAR and SOLAS Conventions), which aim to ensure that the obligation of the ship master to give assistance is complemented by a corresponding obligation of states to co-operate in rescue situations. Malta is one of the few countries that did not accept these amendments. ECRE Secretary General, Bjarte Vandevik said ““It is shocking and shameful to see how humans are abandoned to their fate at sea, while States of the European Union argue about who is to bear the responsibility, instead of fulfilling the humanitarian imperative to rescue and protect people facing the risk of drowning at sea.” Laura Boldrine, a Rome-based spokeswoman for the UNHCR meanwhile warned states of creating a “Wild West in which human life has lost its value and people in danger are left to fend for themselves.” The UNHCR points out that another vessel with 51 to 53 Africans on board remains missing at sea, after an SOS call was issued (the BBC reports on the story here). The EU’s border control operation FRONTEX is stepping up its efforts to react quickly to these incidents, though is having a number of equipment sourcing problems. At the same time, any border control measures must respect existing human rights laws and with that assure and create legal means for refugees and asylum seekers to gain access to safe third countries, some of which might be EU member states. Human rights organizations will likely reissue these claims on June 20, the international refugee day.
• Migration from Iraq and the internal displacement of those seeking to escape the sectarian violence that rocks the country remains a hotly discussed topic, as countries refuse to take on additional migrants (see our earlier story on Switzerland). One of the countries most committed to international agreements on accepting Iraqi migrants is Sweden. In its international edition, German newsmagazine, Der Spiegel, reports on the life of Iraqi refugess in the small town of Alvesta, Sweden. Author Charles Hawley chronicles the life of a few of Alvesta’s 144 newest residents, who appreciate the calm respite their new home offers them. The crisis, however, is far from over. A photo gallery illustrates the hardships migrants face. The article quotes ECRE statistics according to which the number of Iraqis displaced within Iraq — already some 1.9 million — is growing by 40,000 to 50,000 each month. Well over 2 million have made it across the border to neighboring countries — Syria now hosts some 1.2 million Iraqi refugees, and Jordan has crammed in 750,000, representing an almost 15 percent boost to that country’s population. The UNHCR recently awarded $2.06 million in aid for the rehabilitation of public hospitals in Damascus, capacity-building for medical staff and the provision of new medical equipment. This agreement, the fourth between UNHCR and the Syrian government, is part of UNHCR’s commitment to supporting the country’s response to the crisis of Iraqi refugees. ECRE meanwhile has issued a set of comprehensive guidelines on the treatment of Iraqi asylum seekers and refugrees in Europe. In it, ECRE calls for the suspension of mandatory return of Iraqi migrants to their country, as their safety cannot be guaranteed and calls upon EU member states to refrain from transferring migrants to other member countries under the Dublin II Convention (which regulates which EU country is responsible for managing a migrants’ claim based on point of entry), if that country is known to not properly consider Iraqi refugee claims. The report includes a detailed annex on the situation in all Iraqi provinces.
• If they weren’t close before, they surely are spending a lot of time together. The EU interior ministers have almost settled into a groove of seeing each other every few days in a different constellation. On May 20-21 they followed German interior minister Wolfgang Schaeuble’s call to the quaint Rheingau town of Eltville to discuss the future of EU Home Affairs policy after 2010. Over a few glasses of Riesling, the newly established ‘Future Group,’ consisting of Commissioner Franco Frattini, the six interior ministers of the current and upcoming “trio presidencies,” (Germany, Portugal and Slovenia, and France, the Czech Republic and Sweden) a representative of the subsequent “trio presidency” (Spain, Belgium or Hungary), and experts from individual member states, discussed recommendations on European home affairs policy after the end of The Hague Programme. The ‘Future Group’ is to compile a report to present to the Commission as a basis for a post-2010 program.
• Just two days later (some of them are starting to look like the travelling Wilbury’s), G8 interior ministers met in Munich to discuss the integration of immigrants in the context of state security, among other issues. While the meeting apparently brought “major breakthroughs” on international judicial cooperation and counter-terrorism, the section of concluding document on immigration and integration leaves much to be desired: “The G8 agree that migration and integration have become everyday experiences in our globalised world. The phenomenon of major, sustained migration flows, with all the attendant problems, is here to stay.” (You don’t say!!) “If migration is not to become a problem for inner tolerance and for the stability of our accustomed system of civil liberties, migrants must manage to integrate into their host society.” Indeed, now, what are you really going to do about it? I say: Talk, talk and more talk.
• Speaking of talk, The New York Times is giving its readers the means to talk expertly on the opinions of US presidential candidates with their excellent compilation of their views on the immigration question, as arguments on Capitol Hill and the campaign trail continue to fly left and right.

That’s all folks..at least for now..

In a report by the CBC.ca, a discussion of the wage gap between Canadian Immigrants since the 1960s and American Immigrants since the same period shows that there is a significant difference between the two groups of immigrants. The report states that in Canada there seems to be less of a wage gap, as 4 in 10 immigrants to Canada have an undergraduate university degree or greater, while in the US it is 2 in 10. This has to do with the Canadian policy of taking in mostly skilled labour in the immigration process, as opposed to the US policy of taking mostly immigrants connected by family into the United States. While both countries also take in family related immigrants and skilled immigrants alike, the main engine might be where the immigrants come from and the need for certain skills in the American and Canadian society respectively.

Much of the US immigration comes from Mexico and Central America. As well, the US is a beneficiary of the Brain Drain from other countries, where highly educated people from one country flood to another for better opportunities and payment. Canada itself loses a great number of its educated citizens to the US which might explain while 2 in 10 are skilled immigrants to the US, it still is a large number of individuals from all over the world working and promoting the US economy.

Regarding Canada, in last week’s post on What Exactly is “Canadian Experience”?, we see that while Canada may take in many more skilled immigrants, there is strong evidence that the arbitrary barriers to employment for these skilled immigrants may dissolve any benefit to bringing in 4 in 10 skilled immigrants. In reality, many end up taking jobs in very low income sectors despite having a university education or higher. The situation in Canada has become so bad for many skilled immigrants that stories of foreign surgeons driving taxis or similar horror stories abound and a consensus among many skilled immigrants that Canada has become more of a trap for skilled immigrants than a benefit. Many skilled immigrants come to Canada to find that they will have an almost impossible task in requalifiying as well as living with lower real income than in their state of origin.

While Canada may bring in more skilled people, it is evident that the US benefits more from the skilled labour it does accept. There are of course many other factors in this comparison that require a full analysis, but in the meantime more attention needs to be brought on the issues of employment and economic rights in the debate on legal immigration in the US and Canada.

In her column on May 25th, Eleanor Clift of Newsweek discusses the benefits President Bush is gaining in the debate on new immigration policy. Her overview of the complex political views of Democrats who will most likely support Bush’s initiative under the guidance of Ted Kennedy is an interesting dynamic since most Democrats have tried to distance themselves as much as possible from the Bush Administration on almost all issues posed to them. Ironically, Bush will likely have more opposition from Republicans who think the immigration bill does not do enough to curb illegal immigration.

In reality, among all the issues surrounding Iraq and the War on Terror, the Bush Administration pre-9-11 was very focused on immigration policy and building stronger ties with Mexico and a Free Trade Agreement of the Americas. His efforts did not go unrewarded, gaining 41% of the Hispanic vote from 21% during his years in office.

Despite small successes in his Immigration Policy, Bush also has had much criticism of his years in office regarding Border Security. In a report issued by the organization The Third Way, it was found that apprehensions on the Southwest border have declined by 350,000 per year, almost 30 percent from the Clinton years. In addition, the number of deportable aliens found at the northern border and border locations other than the Southwest has dropped by almost 40 percent.

Despite the study and opposition from his own party, any progressive movement on the immigration front is positive in comparison to criticisms about Iraq and everlasting current scandals to hit the White House. Clift suggests that the biggest problem in a Republican position against the proposed Bill is that it is likely to take more votes away from the Republicans in states where the Hispanic vote may make the difference between it becoming a Blue or Red state. In any case, Bush might have some luck in pushing the Bill through, although not from traditional allies of the President.

In a continuation of last week’s weekly update on the deal reached in the US Senate on Immigration Reform, approval and criticism of the bill has been voiced by both sides of the political right and political left. While perspectives on the right of the debate will likely claim the bill to be somewhat of an “amnesty” for illegal immigrants, the opposing end of the political spectrum might claim the bill to be “not humanitarian enough” according to Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

While the bill is aimed at allowing illegal immigrants to right their status, it will also focus on border security and even adopt laws for fines against employers who are using undocumented labour in the conduct of their business. While many of these goals are accepted in a general sense, the technical issues and how policy is affected are fueling much debate over the Immigration Reform Bill.

One of the contentious issues surrounding the bill is the proposal of an altered Guest Worker Program. Many see the new bill as focusing more on job skills and education, and less on family connections. This merit based system is seen by many Democrats as unrealistic and likely the most disturbing part of the new bill as most illegal immigrants in the US would not achieve possible merit based qualifications proposed in the new bill. Beyond the qualifications issue, a proposal to cut the number of guest workers to 200,000 and capping the number of workers is also adding flames to the fire on the debate over the immigration bill.

“The point system does not reflect how much Americans value the family ties that bind people to their brothers and sisters or to their parents,” he said. “How many of our forefathers would have measured up under this point system? How many would have been turned back at Ellis Island?”-Barak Obama

Many Republicans also are concerned with the new bill, as Border Security is thought to take a second seat to immigration and newly proposed programs. This criticism is not new, as critics of the new bill point to past failures in immigration reform to secure the border and the current situation where illegal immigration has become almost unmanageable.

Beyond Democrats and Republicans, the concern of many immigrants in the US is also divided with regards to the new bill. While many illegal aliens, approximately 12 million may be able to gain legal citizenship, the new system changes connections via family ties in place since 1965 towards a system which values skilled labour and education. While people will likely adapt to the new system, it may be a challenge to both legal and illegal immigrants as much as it runs the debate on Capitol Hill. With much of the voting population taking clear sides on immigration as well, the issue may clarify the next election with Iraq as the two issues of most concern to all Americans, new and old.