Global Migration - Assignment Example

policy critique Introduction European immigration is an important issue which is receiving more and more attention in light of global economic flight from the poorest regions of the world and the humanitarian crises forcing people to abandon their lives and seek a better life. Along with the United States, Australia and Canada, the UK and the European Union remain one of the most sought after destinations for migrants from around the world and the United Kingdom receives its fare share of migrants, both legal and illegal. Seeking to explore immigration policies with respect to asylum seekers and refugees in comparative perspective, this paper proposes will analyze the dispersal of asylum seekers as part of the EU’s Dublin Convention (to which the United Kingdom is a party). We will begin with background policy review which will relate the policy to changing welfare ideologies over the post-war period. Following this we will describe the policy in comprehensive detail, provide a concise yet essential critique and conclude with a summation of our findings. Background policy review Migration is an important issue which is gaining increasing attention in an era of economic interdependence and globalization. Why do people choose to migrate from one place to another? This question has confounded theorists for more than a century and Ernest Ravenstein sought to answer this question in the late 19th century. Accordingly, his “Laws of Migration” emphatically argued that international migration was the result of a push and pull process, meaning that unfavorable living conditions in one place would “push” people out while favorable conditions in another location would “pull” people in. From his analysis of British census data from the 1880s, Ravenstein discerned that external economic opportunities were the most important cause for external migration and that the volume of migration decreased as the distance from point “A” to point “B” increases. Although quite illuminating when it was first published, Ravenstein’s theoretical analysis of the social underpinnings for migration has been challenged as being irrelevant in the modern 21st century and overly simplistic. Accordingly, this analysis did not explore the political and/or social factors for migration and has been critiqued for its exclusive focus on economic opportunities. Despite some detractors, one could reasonably argue that the decision of the Irish to immigrate to the United States during the height of the Potato Famine – it estimated that approximately 3.5 million Irishmen and women immigrated to the United States alone from 1820 to 1880 – supports some of the conditions elaborated upon in the push and pull theory of migration. Thus extreme and unfavorable conditions in Ireland paved the way for a large influx of migrants to the United States following economic crisis in the homeland. A similar model, which focuses on the economic underpinnings of a person’s decision to migrate abroad is the core/periphery model which will be explored below (Portes and Merton 22-43). Arguing for a “global migration market”, scholars such as Borjas advocate an alternative model for global immigration. At its essence the core/periphery model argues that the world is divided into two major spheres: that of the core states and those which are on the periphery. The states which make up the core are most generally those of the industrialized and economically advanced regions of the developed Western world. These countries included the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, Australia and other countries which are at advanced stages of economic, social and political development. The countries which make up the periphery, by contrast, are underdeveloped regions of the world which are at earlier stages of economic, social and political development. Much of Africa, Latin America and Asia could be said to be part of the world’s economic periphery. At its heart, the core/periphery argument argues global economic imbalance can account for recent migratory trends. This theory has definite economic underpinnings and the notion of the world being divided into a core and periphery was first articulated by economic dependency theorists such as the Latin American statesman Raul Prebish. Importantly, migrants are drawn to the developed core not only because of the economic opportunities that abound in these developed Westernized states but also due to the social and political freedoms which have come to characterize much of the developed Western world. Arguing that the core/periphery argument can help account for much of the international migration from poorer regions to the developed Western world, the following will analyze refugee migration to the UK and the European Union and will argue that such migration adequately fits the core/periphery model of immigration (Portes and Merton 22-43). Utilizing the perspective of changing welfare ideologies, the social democracies of the West, including the UK, the EU and the developed countries of the Western world have responded to the influx of refugee seekers and asylum applications through concerted attempts at addressing this human rights concern. The ways in which the UK and European Union members respond to the concerns associated with refugee claimants and asylum seekers has been through the Dublin Convention (also known as the Dublin System) which shares the “burden” of refugee claimants across EU member states. Immigration and the Dublin System Immigration to the European Union has been a hot button issue since the inception of the transnational economic, political and social organization. The Dublin convention, or alternatively the Dublin System, is an EU law which seeks to create a coherent process for refugee applications across the UK and the European peninsula. Refugee seeking political asylum apply for this status under the Geneva Convention and the purpose of the Dublin System is to provide a clear and stable system whereby it is clarified which member state is responsible for the claim of individual asylum seekers. Accordingly, this system was enacted to ensure that at least one member state is able to deal with the asylum application. Created in 1990, the Dublin System was established to ensure that the refugee asylum process was streamlined across the board and aims to prevent individual refugee applicants from submitting their requests in multiple member states. Issues associated with the Dublin Convention include the belief that border states face an undue burden when it comes to processing asylum seekers since historically speaking, it is the country of first contact which is responsible for processing and handling the particular refugee claim. Accordingly, many of these states are the least able to offer support and there is a perception, certainly within the border states themselves, that an undue burden is placed upon them. Border states such as Spain face many migrants from the shores of Africa and feel disproportionately burdened by the refugee influx. Switzerland, known internationally for her steadfast neutrality, is a non-EU signatory to the treaty, becoming a member in late 2008. Member states which are party to the Convention include the UK, Belgium Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. The Dublin system allows for the transfer of refugee claimants between states of the European Union but persecution remains an important consideration when undertaking the physical transfer of claimants. The European Union reports that between September 2003 and December 2005, 17,000 refugee claimants from third-party states were transferred from one EU member state to another in order to have their asylum claim investigated. Accordingly, the EU also reports that approximately 12% of all claimants have lodged their refugee claims in multiple member states, despite the proposed goal of the Dublin system in eliminating this occurrence. This system remains controversial and hotly contested. Refugee immigration to the European Union is most generally the result of people seeking a better life in core states of the developed world (European Union 2009; Warleigh 20-55). Policy Critique The European Union is arguably the world’s most successful attempt at regional integration. The motto of the EU is “unity in diversity” and collective bargaining, negotiation and a plurality of opinion are attributes of today’s EU. The European Union represents democracy at work and recent treaties obligating all members to abide by common standards in the political and social realms affirm a common standard among the states of Europe. In fact, “by agreeing to pursue that interest within an organization as constraining as the European Union, the member-states have recognized the ultimate superiority of multilateral, as opposed to unilateral, decision making and action in a variety of policy arenas”. Accordingly, multilateralism, democracy, and collective decision making are at the heart of today’s European Union. As we shall see, refugee protection and immigration have become a multilateral concern as thousands are drawn to European shores each and every year (see Almond et al 2002). How has Britain and other states of the EU responded to this recent influx of refugee migrants seeking a better life on the shores of the UK and European continent? Immigration remains an important issue in a global world and the rights of migrants are rarely brought to the fore. Principle issues included in the study of deportation, detention and disposition include the respect for human rights and the inaliable rights of individuals seeking a better life, regardless of race, creed or nationality. From a social and political analysis, the core/periphery theory can best account for international refugee migration. What does the literature say about the rights of migrants and their potential abuse as part of the European immigration process? In “Used, Abused, Arrested and Deported”, Dina Francesca Haynes examines the maltreatment of migrants in to the EU and argues for legislative change to combat their maltreatment at the hands of traffickers and malicious immigration authorities. In “The Deportation Machine: Europe, Asylum and Human Rights” Liz Fekete examines the human rights of migrants through a race and class-based lens. Furthermore, in Citizenship Today, Aleinikoff et al. provide a succinct analysis as to why people choose to immigrate abroad and explore the ethical and moral issues associated with transnational migration. Accordingly, modern immigration to the European Union supports the core/periphery argument for the basis migration to one of the most developed regions of the world (Fekete, 78; Haynes, 34; see Aleinikoff et al., 2001). The “othering” of asylum seekers ensures that these people are treated like second-class and are shipped from one member state to another, without proper form of recourse. Refugees – individuals seeking political asylum and fleeing persecution abroad – are drawn to the UK and EU as a result of the unique confluence of freedoms which can be found in the developed countries of the Western world. Our case study has focused on refugee migration to Europe and has emphatically demonstrated that European migration can be best explained by a core/periphery analysis. By looking thoroughly at the means through which a united Europe has attempted to account for the growing migratory pressures it has faced we have discovered much about the EU’s commitment to helping those in need. By developing in line with its ideals, the European Union has shown strength and sustainability and will continue to grow, for the benefit of Europe as a whole. Global migration remains an important issue which will certainly be studied for years to come. Conclusion How has the Dublin Convention helped to share the responsibility for refugee protection in Europe? The Dublin Convention has been beneficial to EU member states with respect to sharing the “burden” of refugee and asylum claimants but does not necessarily take into the needs and concerns of the individual claimant. Accordingly we have argued that refugee migration to the European Union is an example of the “core and periphery” theory of immigration as other theories, including the “push and pull” theory of migration, negate the social and political factors in accounting for migratory trends. The needs and aspirations of asylum seekers need to be understood and respected. At present the Dublin System does not appear to take the welfare of asylum claimants to heart and thus must be replaced with more equitable multilateral legislation. References Aleinikoff, T.A. et al. Citizenship Today: Global Perspectives and Practices Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2001. Almond, G.A, Dalton, R.J & Powel Jr., G.B. European Politics Today, 2nd edition. New York: Longman, 2002. Dosman, Edgar J. The Life and Times of Raúl Prebisch, 1901-1986. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2008. The European Union. (2007). Report on the Evaluation of the Dublin System. Last Accessed August 18, 2009 http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/07/227 Fekete, L. “The deportation machine: Europe, asylum and human rights”, Race & Class, 47.1: (2005), 64-78, Haynes, D.F. “Used, Abused, Arrested and Deported: Extending Immigration Benefits to Protect the Victims of Trafficking and to Secure the Prosecution of Traffickers”, Human Rights Quarterly, 26. 2: (2004), 33-54. Portes, Alejandro & Merton, R.J. The Economic Sociology of Immigration: Essays on Networks, Ethnicity and Entrepreneurship. London: Russell Sage Foundation, 1998. Warleigh, A. European Union: The Basics. New York: Routledge, 2004. Read More