Migration: Complete control

As the last issue of IV made clear, immigration was a central topic of discussion at the European Council meeting in Seville on June 21-22, 2002 - on both sides of the barricades.

For those who manage to slip through their defences and are caught, the punishment is increasingly draconian. People whose only 'crime' is to flee the worst ravages of neoliberalism are imprisoned in camps and detention centres. People are taken in the middle of the night and put on planes in secret so that protestors cannot prevent this inhumanity.
Those who escape even this inner defence are also condemned. Without rights, they are left to eke out a desperate existence, subject to poverty, to extreme insecurity at work (because their work is clandestine) and to racism in every sphere of life.
Those who hold up capitalist globalization as the model of a world without inequality, without want, without classes are the very ones who also show in practice that this is no more than a mirage. When people want to come to Europe, they say that we are full up, there is no room at the inn or the table....
Even though the Seville summit did not reach final agreement on all the punitive measures it considered, it did make some moves in that direction. At any rate, legislation and practices are becoming increasingly harmonized in each member state (towards the worst that already exists, of course). For the anti-globalization movement in Europe, defence of the rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers has become an increasing focus - even if it isn't given the consistent priority that those active in the anti-racist movement think is necessary.
The No Borders camp at Strasbourg from July 21-28, 2002 saw 2,000 people opposed to capitalist globalization and its repressive arsenal come together from all over Europe. Strasbourg is the site of one of the key elements of fortress Europe: the Schengen system of information (SIS) which organizes the recording of information on immigrants on a European scale. Demonstrators took action against hotels belonging to the Accor group - which is involved, together with the police in the expulsion of immigrants - and subsequently there was massive police repression. The chief of police also made an exception decision to ban any form of demonstration, placing the city centre under a state of siege for the rest of the week. No Borders nonetheless succeeded in organizing some other events that passed off without incident. This camp was another example of developing co-ordination on a European level and is not the first - or the last - of these actions. Developments like this, together with the huge demonstration of migrant workers in Italy in the spring and the church occupations during the Spanish EU presidency must be built on and generalized, as well as the more visible mobilizations of French youth against Le Pen.
The appeal of the Madrid Conference of the anti-capitalist left (see IV 342) made the fight against racism and immigration controls one of its central themes and the conference decided that fighting around these questions should be a common campaign of the organizations involved. This reflected both the offensive of the established order but also the growing resistance.
The appeal of a number of French immigrant and anti-racist organizations in relation to the forthcoming European Social Forum (see box) should also be supported - both in its demand that these issues are given greater priority by the anti-globalization movement as a whole and in their attempt to increase the involvement of organizations of immigrants and their supporters in the ESF and the wider movement.
The appeal itself also reflects the increasing self-organization of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. Of course the experience in France is well known through the militant organization of the sans papiers who were able to wring at least some concessions from the state. However, these dynamics are not confined to one country - in Germany, for example, the increasingly important caravan movement is based on self organization. In Britain, things lag behind at this level, but at least much of the increasingly united movement understands the need to give voice to those who are most directly affected. The tactics of fighting deportations must always be determined by those directly affected, while those working from the outside against immigration detention have been inspired many times by those who have taken up the only weapon left to them, the hunger strike, with such courage.
Today we are dealing with different forms of racism - both racism directed against those who have been in the country concerned all their lives (and often for several generations) and those who are newly arrived and often have no legal status. For both the extreme right and the traditional parties one of the sharpest cutting edges of their offensive is against asylum seekers and migrants - this is where increasingly restrictive laws are proposed, but also where street attacks and other hate crimes are focused.
There are also other targets of racism today that must be mentioned. In the wake of the fall of the Berlin wall, the Roma communities have not only been subject to increasing persecution within Eastern Europe, but have been treated in a particular pernicious way when they have fled westwards. This has combined with racism directed at Gypsy communities and individuals who supposedly have the protection of EU citizenship.
Then, in the wake of September 11, we have seen a major rise in Islamophobia. This phenomenon, which of course first surfaced in a major way during the Gulf war, has a crude functionality - it is a major ideological weapon in justifying war and is itself fed by it. At the most concrete level, we have seen the imprisonment without charge or trial of thousands of people, not only in the US but in virtually all European countries. The parallels with immigration detainees are striking. There have also been street attacks and the manipulation by the far right of these questions. For example, the British National Party undoubtedly played on Islamophobia in its strong election campaigns in the North West of England in May 2002.
Those who migrated some time ago also suffer from these reactionary moves. When someone throws a firebomb at a house or beats someone up on the street because they are black, or speak a different language or look "foreign" they don't stop to ask the people if they have papers or where they were born.
But despite this reality, the response of some organizations of more settled communities has not been to throw themselves into the fight for asylum rights but rather to try even harder to become integrated into the 'host' community - saying that this has nothing to do with us. This is particularly true of some organizations which had been offered some crumbs from the imperialist table during a more settled political and economic period during the 1980s and 1990s and whose leadership is now desperate not to lose their privileges again.
Of course there are other black organizations and community organizations of peoples who have lived in the advanced countries for a long time which put forward militant politics, who work to fight racist attacks, against the rise of the far right and to defend asylum seekers and 'illegal' workers.

Post-war migration patterns
Western Europe saw a huge upturn in immigration during the post-war boom as the need for labour increased - as did the desire to get it at the cheapest possible rate. The pattern varied from country to country.
Britain, France and the Netherlands could relatively easily make use of labour from their colonies or former colonies. Other European countries did not have this access and therefore had to set up more developed labour recruitment systems to bring in temporary workers - who were allowed to stay only as long as their labour was needed.
These arrangements existed in countries such as Switzerland, Belgium and Sweden but the best known - and most developed was the German "Guest-worker" system. Some of these "guest" workers came from the countries of the European periphery - from Spain, Portugal and Italy, from Yugoslavia or Turkey and others from further afield - with the pattern shifting over time.
The existence of these two systems had a different impact on the ability of those coming to Europe to organize. Workers who came to the 'host' countries for only short periods of time, who often lived in special accommodation and were isolated economically, socially and politically from others in the society in which they lived had less ability to organize collectively than for example Commonwealth immigrants coming to Britain who formally had full rights - for example the right to vote and to work - even though they were subjected to many racist policies and practices. Questions of immigration are not issues only in Europe. Though Canada, the USA and Australia were all created as capitalist countries through immigration - and the subjugation of the First nations, stealing their land and resources - there too this phase of capitalist globalization is one that demands strict border controls.
Some of the most dramatic stories both of right wing policies on asylum and resistance against them over the last year have come from Australia - from the horrendous treatment of the Tampa refugees in August 2001 (they were refused the right to land on the Australian territory of Christmas Island) to the heartrending story of the Baktiyari brothers, who escaped from Woomera detention centre, sought and were denied protection from the British consulate and are now back in Woomera. Australia has also been the site of many protests- both from those in mandatory detentions in the camps and by supporters outside. m
It is interesting to look briefly at the history of immigration policy in Australia. The government initiated a mass immigration programme after 1945, aiming to increase their population of 7.5 million people for both economic and strategic reasons. The initial target was 70,000 people a year - but with 10 Britons to every 'foreigner'. It was only when it became clear that the targets for British migration could not be met, that these were shifted to include other Europeans.
Initially all non-European immigration was forbidden - the White Australia policy that was developed in the nineteenth century remained militantly in place. Asian immigration in particular was seen as a threat to Australia's identity as a 'European' nation. However, this began to change in the 1960s and 1970s with the removal of some discriminatory restrictions. By the 1990s about half of all new immigrants to Australia came from Asia. In 1994, the estimated Asian born population was 826,000 - 4.6 per cent of the total population.
It is beyond the scope of this article to consider in any great detail the processes of migration within the underdeveloped countries. However, migration cannot be understood only as an issue of the North. In fact, the greatest movements of population take place within the countries of the South.
For example, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) statistics for 2001 show that of the top 10 countries which received refugees during that year, none are in the advanced capitalist world. In 2001, Pakistan received 199,900 Afghani refugees - with very little assistance from international agencies or countries in the developed world who since September 11 have purported to care so much about the people of Afghanistan.
This reality should be no surprise, because these are the very countries that pay the greatest price for capitalist globalization. Given that most people who leave their homes do so with virtually no resources as well as with the hope and expectation that they will return as soon as possible, then on both counts they will travel the smallest distance possible. This is important for all activists to take on board because these realities are completely ignored by the politicians and the media hacks who talk about the advanced capitalist countries as being full.
In a world where there is more and more movement of capital making profits from even plant or animal genes, from air, from water, any free movement of people is completely forbidden. These are the values of the world which the anti-capitalist left is working to change. Our anger at this inhumanity is one of the things which fuels our declaration that another world is not only possible but absolutely necessary. This world that we are working to build is one without borders, in which no one will be illegal and in which every person will have full rights.

Fortress Denmark

It's really too early to make any kind of qualified assessment of the longer term effects of the new laws on Foreigners and Refugees that came into force in Denmark on July 1, 2002. July is the holiday month in Denmark, most people and the political establishment are off to the beach with their buckets and spades and the newspapers are full of stories about Elvis being sighted (or the Danish equivalent thereof).
For now one can at least see that the first effects of the increasingly shrill xenophobic tone in Denmark has been a dramatic fall in the number of people seeking asylum here. This has already saved quite a lot of money and the establishment are quietly patting themselves on the back. Unfortunately, the whole package of reforms hardly took stage centre in the political debate. The social democrats (and even the left wing SF to an extent) silently agreed that 'something had to be done', even if they 'deplored' the tone adopted by the Liberal/Conservative regime and their cheerleaders on the extreme right. The social democrats are actually probably quite grateful that the right has grasped the nettle they were toying with whilst in government. They would certainly have put together a package that was less unpalatable for the unions (refugees working for their reduced benefits plus) and probably for the employers too - the Danish employers' organization has been icily cool over such solutions from the Liberal populists.
Protests were and are confined largely to the 'usual suspects' (Enhedslisten, AFA and so on) plus those who work with or have some insights into being refugees. The union of social workers annoyed the minister by encouraging its members to protest and a useful initiative called '7 years' (after the minimum time it will take to acquire citizenship and full legal equality) has been launched.
It's probably most useful to make an assessment of the reforms in-line with the overall strategy and thinking of the government. The ruling parties still retain a slim majority of support in recent polls despite a spectacular inability to meet any of their extravagant pre-election promises on welfare and taxation (except for the very rich). They have degraded a few environmental standards and promised longer jail sentences but these few swallows have made for a wet and windy summer. Their first attempts to structurally weaken the Danish trade unions have received a miserable reception from the employers who would rather 'stick with the devil they know'- the Danish negotiating system which guarantees a low level of disruption at the cost of reasonable wages and a high level of institutional union recognition. Really, the only area where the government have delivered is being nastier to foreigners, and even here strains have arisen.
Firstly, the balance within the governing coalition has tilted even more to the Liberals. The Conservatives and especially the Danish Peoples' Party have fallen in the polls. The DPP are perceived to have sold their social profile far too cheaply for influence on immigration - this, while not a non-issue to their supporters, is only a part of their appeal as a party which 'stands up for the little Dane'. The DPP will probably now re-maneuver themselves to a more critical, welfare-orientated populism, forcing the government to the centre and away from the bloc-politics of the last 9 months.
The second and more long-term effect is that this xenophobic binge has obscured any debate on the need for attracting foreign workers. Despite unemployment, there are massive bottlenecks in the Danish economy where foreign workers are needed. Unfortunately, these are often in areas that are not very well represented amongst refugees, which Denmark is so bad at absorbing. Foreigners are always welcome, so long as they are roughly the right colour, approximately the right religion and arrive on Denmark's shores with an adequate grasp of the Danish language and culture. More enlightened sectors of the Danish bourgeoisie are beginning to realize a more nuanced debate is necessary but can they shut their government up?

M. W.



Holland: asylum policy dead and buried
Jurgen de Wit

Supposedly, the idea behind policies towards asylum seekers is some small, even token degree of compassion towards those forced to leave their countries because of circumstances beyond their control. But the new right-wing Balkenende government in the Netherlands (made up of Christian Democrats, Liberals and right-wing populists) is taking the existing asylum policy, which was already in intensive care and carrying it to its grave. Under the previous government (made up Social Democrats, liberals and Social Liberals) asylum policy was already directed towards kicking people out. They were proud that the number of asylum requests fell drastically (from 44,000 in 2000 to 33,000 in 2001, according to the Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics in January 2002). The legislation had become stricter and stricter over the years and reached a temporary nadir in 2001 with the new Foreigners Law.
Anyone who thought that it couldn't get worse has now been disappointed. The new plans defy the imagination. In the run-up to the May 15, 2002 parliamentary elections, there was already a competition under way among the various parties about who had the strictest asylum policy. This was particularly the responsibility of the Pim Fortuyn List, which made crime, immigrants and refugees the focus of the election. Fortuyn himself wanted to close the Dutch borders to new refugees. Everyone was just supposed to get asylum in their own region.... However, he also said that those who have already been in the Netherlands for years but have not yet got asylum status could hypothetically count on a general amnesty and thus be legalized.
When the negotiations to form the new government took place and "Pim's heirs" brought this up, there was a little hope among asylum seekers and the organizations that defend them. However, it soon became clear that this was a vain hope.
For it was the first part of Fortuyn's proposals that were taken up: refugees must be taken care of in their own region. And that's what's there, in black and white, in the Strategic Accord that was agreed as the basis for the new coalition government.
What it says is that Asylum seekers without papers must prove their identity immediately and also explain why they didn't apply for asylum somewhere else. If you arrive at Schiphol (the airport for Amsterdam) without papers, then you can just forget it. Of course, people who are fleeing from persecution don't first collect their papers and then go take their seats on a plane.
The previous rule, according to which asylum seekers got residence permits after waiting three years for their applications to be processed, is being abolished. Appeals after rejection of an asylum application are also a thing of the past.
Being illegal is being made punishable, and expelling 'illegals' is to be accelerated. The next step may be to go after people and organizations who defend 'illegals' as well, because in principle you are then complicit in a criminal offense. The government agreement already says that municipalities may not offer any compensatory housing for asylum seekers who have exhausted their appeals, although no punishment for doing so is indicated so far.
'Illegals' are thus to be repatriated to their country of origin. Governments that refuse to take them back will be ineligible for development aid - a proposal that was made at the Seville summit by Aznar for European wide application but not agreed this time round at least. For the Netherlands, however, this blackmail tactic is not so effective, since Dutch development aid has been limited to about 20 countries and many refugees come from places that aren't even considered for development aid. So there are hard times ahead for refugees who come to the Netherlands and for organizations that defend their interests. And the right-wing government is going on the offensive in other areas too: immigrants, the environment, employment schemes, development aid...
Fortunately, it is dawning on organizations that are active in these areas that it is necessary to act together against the government's plans. A coalition called 'Turn the Tide' has been established in which social organizations and a number of opposition parties have come together. Discussion days and rallies are taking shape. The first important appointment is Budget Day (September 17), the day on which the government announces its budget plans.



Spain: No Legal Way In

The first ever Immigration Act in Spain was passed in 1985. Before that, the big waves of migration had either been outwards (first to the ex-colonies in Latin America, then into exile following the defeat of the Republic in the Civil War and finally in search of work in Europe) or internal (with hundreds of thousands moving from rural Andalusia to work in the factories of Catalonia).
Even as late as the mid-1990s, the foreign population was relatively small and contained a majority of EC-nationals. As workers started to arrive in bigger numbers from Morocco, West Africa, South America and the Philippines, they had little trouble finding jobs, even if poorly paid and in bad conditions, but huge problems coping with the Kafkaesque requirements for becoming - and staying - 'legal' imposed on them by the 1985 Act.
Despite certain changes (for the worse) the basic situation remains that people are expected to obtain an employment contract while still in their country of origin, produce this at the Spanish embassy to apply for a visa and only then come to take up their job, which is supposed to have been kept open for them for however long this process may last. Of course, this is not how the labour market functions and everyone knows it. In the real world, with legal entry into the country virtually impossible, whole sectors of the fruit-growing and construction industries, for instance, have thrived on employing migrant workers who officially don't exist and therefore have no recognized rights. Never the less, combined pressure from immigrants and their supporters has forced the government to concede several amnesties, known as 'special regularization processes', for those who have managed to get in.
Charged with guarding the European Union's southern flank against 'illegal' immigrants, the Spanish government has obliged by reinforcing its coastal and airport controls and building massive walls around Ceuta and Melilla, its two North African enclaves. This does not prevent access - new immigrants continue to come in all the time - but does make it considerably more dangerous and lucrative for the 'mafias'. Countless hundreds have been drowned braving the currents of the Straits of Gibraltar or attempting the route to the Canary Islands in boats that are hardly seaworthy. There has been little difference between the Socialist Party (PSOE) and the Popular Party (PP) on this question.
Until fairly recently, migrant workers' main problems stemmed from state and institutional racism in the form of police harassment and the enormous obstacles in the way of obtaining permits. Immigration was not a major political issue and overt anti-immigrant racism (as opposed to that against Spanish gypsies) was generally absent from society at large. However, a new, tougher Immigration Act was passed at the end of the PP's previous term of government and yet another, still tougher, one almost immediately upon its return to office. This, the focus on the 'immigration problem' at the Seville summit at the close of its EU presidency and openly blaming (illegal) immigrants for a sharp rise in crime, sent out a clear signal on what was considered legitimate. Racist outbreaks and simmering conflicts have become more frequent. The climate has changed. When hundreds of immigrants occupied first one church, followed by another ten, in the centre of Barcelona in January 2000, they stirred up a tremendous surge of sympathy. Their determination and tenacity, together with the active support of several sections of society, managed to wring 'papers' from the government for practically all those concerned as well as opening the door for thousands of others.
Unfortunately, the occupation of a university in Seville, on the eve of the EU summit there, by over 400 migrant workers also demanding 'papers' did not meet with the same response, even though the government has been under more social pressure (including a general strike) than at any time since it first came to power, and so did not have the same success.
Rifts in the anti-racist movement will have to be healed, the global justice movement will have to be convinced of the need to become more involved, new alliances forged with the workers' movement and co-ordination sought with others across Europe if resistance is to be effective in the future.
B.A. 28-7-02

To immigrant and immigrant solidarity organizations
Appeal for participation in the European Social Forum


Florence 7-10th November 2002

Associations, trade unions and political organizations have started to prepare the European Social Forum which will take place in November 2002 in Florence, Italy, following on from the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre. The European Social Forum is based on three major themes: neo-liberalism and globalization; war and militarization; democracy, citizenship and social rights. In this framework, the immigrants movements in Europe are directly concerned, precisely because the European Union has made control of immigration one of the foundation stones of its policy, with the closing of its borders.
The EU is currently preparing a new set of anti-immigration measures. Following the electoral breakthrough of the far right and populist parties in several countries, the heads of government from Spain and Great Britain agreed on new measures for border control and the 15 countries of the European Union made immigration the central question of the Seville summit, aiming to achieve a hardening of their policy.
The presence of foreigners in Europe is accepted on the basis of draconian conditions that are difficult to meet. This creates a situation of precarity and marginalization for hundreds of thousands of immigrants who are condemned to earn their living in the black market. Demands for asylum are arbitrarily rejected, women's independence is rarely recognized, the right to join families is sometimes restricted. Police powers are constantly growing and the confusion between immigrants and delinquents accepted by leading figures in the European Union.
With the pretext of the fight against terrorism, Europe is hardening up and the ministers for home affairs of the 15 are discussing introducing a joint border police. The Italian parliament has voted for the stocking of fingerprints of foreigners asking for residence permits, a potential danger.
During the ESF, there will be a forum 'Migrants against Fortress Europe'. We will discuss the following subjects: freedom of movement and residence; the right to asylum; citizenship; independence of immigrant women; equal rights. On each of these points, we will seek to formulate joint demands which would encourage Europe-wide mobilizations.
In addition, we ask that questions relating to immigration, freedom of movement, the rights of migrant, immigrant and foreign men and women are discussed in all the themes because they are relevant to all of them. To make the importance of these questions relating to immigration more visible we ask that the word 'Immigration' be added to the title of Theme III.
We call on you to get involved in the preparation of the ESF and to participate in it.
First signatories:
Association citoyenne des originaires de Turquie (ACORT), Association des Marocains en France (AMF), ASECA, Association de solidarité avec les femmes algériennes démocrates (ASFAD), Coordination nationale des Sans Papiers (CNSP), DROITS DEVANT !, Fédération des associations franco-africaines de développement (FAFRAD), Fédération des associations de solidarité avec les travailleurs immigrés (FASTI), Fédération des Tunisiens pour une citoyenneté des deux rives (FTCR), Groupe d'information et de soutien des travailleurs immigrés (GISTI), Pour une véritable citoyenneté européenne (PVCE), Réseau pour l'autonomie juridique des femmes immigrées et réfugiées (RAJFIRE), Service national pastoral des migrants (SNPM), Parti communiste français (PCF), Union des juifs pour la paix et la justice (UJPJ). Contact: c/o FASTI, 58 rue des Amandiers - 75020 Paris - Tél. 01 58 53 58 53 - Fax : 01 58 53 58 43 Email : solidarite@fasti.org

Reactie toevoegen

Plain text

  • Toegelaten HTML-tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Web- en e-mailadressen worden automatisch naar links omgezet.
  • Regels en alinea's worden automatisch gesplitst.
Uw reactie zal niet meteen verschijnen, deze wordt eerst goedgekeurd door de beheerder.
pagetoptoptop