The Aspect of the Xenophobic Approach of the EU - Essay Example

? This proposal forms the basis for the subsequent mini dissertation on what the EU’s (European Union) policy of free movement of persons discriminate against the non European “others”? The EU is known to be hostile towards immigrants and since the member states of the EU permit free movement of persons within the union through the Schengen arrangement, immigrant refers to the “extra communitarian” movement of people i.e. non-EU citizens1. It is indeed ironical that the EU allows movement of people freely within its member states but takes a harsh approach towards immigrants. This Xenophobic approach of the EU is rooted in historical, political, social and economic contexts as we shall discuss in this proposal: Historical The first paragraph will talk about the historical perspective or aspect of the Xenophobic approach of the EU whereby it will expound on this idea: Even before the EU was formed as an entity, the countries of Europe adopted a policy of restraint in matters of immigration as it was felt that given the size of the economies, it would not be possible for the member countries to welcome immigrants with open arms2. Economical The second paragraph discuss the economic aspect of the Xenophobic approach of the EU whereby it will talk about the exceptions in the form of the UK and France that threw their doors open to immigrants as a means of enhancing productivity and access to cheap labour for low skilled jobs and as a means to attract the best talent possible for high skilled jobs3. The third paragraph will be a continuation of the ideas in the second paragraph that the approach did pay off for these countries though a certain point was reached in recent years where these countries feel that they can no longer sustain the pace of immigration at the earlier levels4. Social The fourth paragraph will discuss the high levels of immigration into these countries that has resulted in creation of ethnic communities and the rise of ghettos in the UK and France which has added impetus to the anti-immigrant lobby’s drive to restrict immigration as they point to the lack of assimilation by these communities and the resultant loss of social cohesion5. In the fifth paragraph, we will analyze how the ideas in the fourth paragraph have led to a strong feeling that immigrants are unwelcome because they do not fit in to the culture of the countries to which they immigrate6. The six paragraph will state how further the instances of riots in France in 2005 and more recently in London and other parts of UK have been blamed on the immigrants and their lack of respect for the culture of these countries7. The seventh paragraph will examine how all these trends have resulted in the EU adopting a tough stance on immigration. What adds to the situation is that many countries in the EU do not need low skilled immigrants any longer since they have gone up the economic and technological curve and so there are no low skilled low wage jobs anymore8. This eighth paragraph will examine how further, the proportion of immigrants who apply for these positions is disproportionate to the size of their population which makes these countries look askance at these immigrants9. The ninth paragraph will talk about how, even in the high skilled and high wage category, the growing trend is to hire locals and only when the locals are not available can the employers look for immigrants to fill the positions. This has resulted in laws being mandated that require the employers to justify the need for immigrants to be hired and hence there is a legal aspect to the hiring of immigrants as well10. Political In the tenth paragraph, we will examine the political aspect of the issue whereby, talking of the legal angle, the EU has put in place strict anti immigration policies in place that restrict the number of people who would be accepted into its member countries. This has resulted in the EU closing its doors to asylum seekers and immigrants because of the reasons outlined above11. This eleventh paragraph will see how what was once a bastion of human rights and the right to social justice by welcoming asylum seekers and victims of repression from other countries has now become “Fortress Europe” thanks to the growing intolerance among the policy making elite of the EU towards immigration. This has implications to the practice of universal principles of human rights as many countries like France and Germany have sequestered the immigrants and those wishing to settle down in EU and the way in which these people are treated by the public authorities is a direct contravention of international law and the law governing refugees12. The twelfth paragraph will talk about how even the United Nations has pointed to the need for a fair and just treatment of the refugees though in the aftermath of 911 where worldwide the trend is to close doors to foreigners, there has been little teeth to the protests from various human rights activists. The strict immigration and deportation rules have meant that the EU has one of the highest deportation rates as a percentage of immigrant applications in the world. This is a dubious distinction which the EU can do without13. In the thirteenth paragraph, we will examine how the overt and covert racism towards immigrants is visible to any casual visitor to the EU. This manifests itself in the way foreigners and particularly those who are not white are treated by the authorities and public alike. Though in many countries in the EU, racism is still not in the face there have been instances of overt racism in some countries with immigrants being targeted just because they looked foreign14. As mentioned earlier, in this paragraph, we will see how the inherent xenophobia of the Europeans when combined with the rhetoric emanating from the policy making elite and the intelligentsia has combined to produce a lethal cocktail that explodes from time to time. This is evident in the statements by the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel and the leaders of France and the UK where they openly talk about how immigration is undesirable and contrary to the spirit of EU. Though this is open to interpretation, it is the case that many political parties in the member states of the EU have established themselves on anti-immigrant platforms. This is indeed a dangerous trend and something that is contrary to the principles of international amity among nations15. In the fifteenth paragraph, we will see how there is precious little that the immigrant population can do except take the rhetoric and the xenophobia in their stride, since much of the anti immigrant rhetoric is backed by law as well. This has resulted in simmering social tensions that have contributed to the already gloomy outlook in the EU because of the ongoing global economic crisis16. Possible solution There is an urgent need to reverse some of the policies in the EU as they relate to immigration. Granted that the EU is legally well within its rights to accept or reject immigrants17. This paragraph will talk about how there is no issue with the policies towards new immigration. Rather, the issue here is the treatment of those who are already settled there. The point is that these immigrants were welcomed (in the case of the high skilled categories) with open arms or at least were granted residence permits (for other categories) and if the EU turns its back on them now, it is a clear case of breaking the promise18. The legal position is also not that strong in this case as the immigrants have a right to protest their treatment with local, regional and international courts. A flip side of such harsh immigration policies has been the rise of illegal immigration to these countries because the immigrants who are desperate do not see any other way except to break the law. This is indeed undesirable from the point of view of the immigrants as well as the EU since it creates a self perpetuating loop where the immigrants break the law forcing the EU to adopt harsher policies which again lead to more violations of the law19. Hence, it is the case that the EU and the policy making elite wake up to the problem of immigration and take appropriate and legally tenable steps to address the issue of immigration (both new immigrants and those who are already settled there)20 Bibliography C Mooney, Pregnant pause: an international legal analysis of maternity discrimination. (6th edn Farnham, Ashgate 2010) 95. D Bailey, Industrial and regional policies in an enlarging EU. (3rd edn Abingdon, Routledge 2009) 47. D Dinan, Encyclopedia of the European Union. (Boulder, Lynne Reinner Publishers 1998) 57. For a detailed account see N. Blake QC and R. Hussain, Immigration, Asylum and Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003). For a full analysis see R. Cholewinski, Borders and Discrimination in the European Union (London, Immigration Law Practitioners Association, and Brussels: Migration Policy Group, 2002) 43-49. B Hepple, et al. For similar findings on Dutch anti-discrimination see T. Havinga, 'The effects and limits of anti-discrimination law in the Netherlands' (2003) 31 International Journal of the Sociology of Law 1. J Diamond et al, Urban regeneration management: international perspectives. (2nd edn London, Routledge 2010) 136. J Kantola, Gender and the European Union. (4th edn Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan 2010) 74. M Westlake, The Council of the European Union. (Rev. Ed, London, John Harper 1999) 215. R (Sivakumar) v Home Secretary[2003]1 W LR 840, HL CE),per Lord Steyn at 846 approving Dyson LJ [2002] INLR 320-321 Report of the Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain [the Parekh Report], The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain (London: Profile Books, 2000). S. Fredman, 'Combating Racism with Human Rights: the Right to Equality' in S. Fredman (Ed), Discrimination and Human Rights. The Case of Racism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) 9, 26-29. See A. Favell and R. Hansen, 'Market against politics: migration, EU enlargement and the idea of Europe'(2002) 28 Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 581; and H. van Amersfoort', International Migration and Civil Rights: the Dilemmas of Migration Control in an Age of Globalisation' in E. Guild (ed), The Legal Framework and Social Consequences of Free Movement of Workers in the European Union (Hague: Kluwer, 1999) 73. Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain (London: Palgrave3, rd Ed, 2003) 6-8. For the background to the 1968 Act see Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC, 'The East African Asians Cases Revisited' [2002] PL 52. Read More