Migrants Form Within Host States example essay topic

"What are the major causes and significance of international migration in global society?" Formative Essays Y MiahDynamics of Change in International Relations Formative Essay "What are the major causes and significance of international migration in the global society?" The Oxford dictionary defines the act of migrating as meaning: "to move to settle to a new area in order to find work". 1 This seems to be presupposing that the primary motivation of migrants is employment. However, as I will go on to highlight, economic social and political factors in various combinations have always affected the various constant waves of migration throughout history 2. I will look at how past and modern flows compare and their effects on global society.

There are two main issues around migration: firstly how states can control and regulate migration levels. States are after all sovereign and reserve the right to be able to choose who to allow in and out of its boundaries. The second issue that has come about in the modern era is how to deal with the minority communities that migrants form within host states. This depends on the causes that it perceives the people migrated for and the political, social and economic circumstances of the receiving state itself. If the migrant community has strong links with its previous community in the home state still and actually works to affect political and social affairs over there, perhaps even using the power and protection of the host state, they are known as diasporas.

They will be discussed further on. Causes of migration can be divided initially into whether the migration was involuntary, or political due to war, natural disasters, ethnic, persecution, coercion or exploitation, or voluntary. State responses to involuntary migrants are under the ruling of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951. However, all an applicant state is obliged to do is to consider all applications for asylum, not grant them. There is though the clause which states that a host state cannot turn the asylum seeker back to their country of origin if there is evidence their life is in danger. Voluntary migrants on the other hand have no such guarantee as their motives for migration are social or economic, not deemed to be necessary or they are illegal migrants.

This definition of illegal depends on the circumstances of the host country and who they choose to allow in according to their laws or not. The mixing of political and economic though would seem to be more inevitable in future as society develops its more global aspect where international co-operation is becoming more and more necessary as the free market expands, bringing with it technological and communication advances that allow migrant communities to stay in touch with their home lands. It can be argued that this does not allow differences between the host community and the migrant community to close up 3. This can lead to implications in the host lands foreign policy with the home land. For example Sikhs from the Punjab were granted leave to settle in the UK during a time when labour was needed in the. However the government could not have foreseen the future political situation where persecution of Sikhs in India would lead them to take Indian Sikhs so that they could flee from persecution and be with family in Britain.

Global migration began from regional migration with a colonial impetus to gain more land, jobs, raw materials for the rapidly industrializing Europe so many moved to the "new world" of America and Australia 4. There was forced slave labour migration from the West African coast, replaced by indentured labour from other groups like the Chinese until that was banned too to be replaced by a new labour force from the Indian Sub-Continent 5. The post war economic slump in the 70's however led to host land policies which implicitly required the minimizing of permanent settler migration opportunities though new areas sprang up in the Gulf and Israel for example. However the world still suffered from a deluge of refugees as conflict and fear of conflict increased significantly in places such as Vietnam and Palestine 6.

Now I will look at how governments try and deal with their migrant minority populations. Firstly, migration has come to the fore of the international agenda for a number of reasons. In modern times, due to vastly improved advertising, transport and communication links, people are much more aware that there is another way of life out there and the rapid democratization and promotion of meritocracy seems to dangle the opportunities beneath the noses of the world's poorest. However, as more people scramble to join the bandwagon, the more the host state and their people worry about diluting and lowering their own lifestyles as a consequence of this "burden" of migrants. To combat this negative social perception of this "flood" of migrants and refugees, despite the fact that the majority of refugees are absorbed by neighbouring third world countries, receiving states have moved towards a more conservative, nationalistic, and trend and steadily tightened their migration laws without quite accounting for the now very mixed types of migrants, such as permanent from refugees 7. This could lead to the political and social isolation of old migrant minorities and possible strife.

For example, in Fiji in 1987, there was a military coup to get rid of the elected government which happened to be made up of Indians who had become indentured citizens since around 19108. Global population is racing ahead, faster than the need for labour. Migrant working conditions vary between good due to rapid naturalization by granting full citizenship, mainly in the states with the most restrictive migration policies, or complete denial of them, like the UAE where the migrant worker population can be up to 85%, to discourage the problems that a large migrant population who would want to bring their family over and so on would entail. A number of problems could occur in a situation such as: unemployment, resentment in the local population against migrants, pressure on facilities such as hospitals and schools, remittances being sent home thus not helping the economy, or even slowing down structural development as cheap labour can lead to a labour intensive economy as opposed to a more capital intensive one. The Japanese have labour shortages yet refuse to loosen their migration controls and instead outsource their work abroad so as to maintain its cultural homogeneity 9. Integration is becoming a problem as larger numbers of people are on the move and cannot be absorbed so form their own, often successful, enclaves, especially with the emphasis on multiculturalism.

However in actuality migrants can actually help to reduce pressure on facilities be paying taxes either in the home or host state, either way, saving the host state money in remittances and taking jobs that the locals do not want to. Often they bring an enterprising spirit with them or capital with them from their home state to invest. Also they will be spending at least some of their earnings in the host state helping the host economy 10. This subsequent wealth has meant that they can exert influence in their host and home states and use this to promote multi cultural policies in the host state and promote democratic values on their home state improving ties between the two.

A more negative interpretation could be that they are just manipulating the international system as they are in the ideal position to do so and waiting until the home government is weak enough that they can tilt the power balance towards themselves. This could be the beginnings of what one would now a days call a diaspora - a people who permanently live outside their home land and is perceived to have fled persecution and is looking to over throw the oppressor from abroad. Gypsies for example do not live in their original homelands yet they would not consider themselves a diaspora as the Israeli's or the Armenians would 11. Diaspora's lobbying activities can be both productive and threatening to the relations between states if they tug hard with their transnational ties.

Diaspora motivations can be narrowed down to four key areas. The first is identity. They have no territorial identity claim, thus they have to find an identity in themselves. That is according to constructivist theorists, their struggle for a cause, for power over others in the diaspora, the home and the host government as then they can choose what that identity should be. They also challenge traditional, ideas of state boundaries, sovereignty and identity as they live outside territories yet that they have a legitimate claim to call their own. A community that seems to be insoluble by any physical means at the hands of the state can seem threatening to a state 12.

Some even see them as playing a role in the "Clash of Civilisations" role by eroding the boundaries of culture and identity 13. Secondly they may have personal stakes in the homeland so they will want to ensure that they are secure. So for example, should the Jewish diaspora have a say in the security of the state as they have less stake in it than Israelis? Also they may act if they feel that their position in the host state is becoming uncomfortable due to actions by the home state. For example, the Jewish diaspora had to put pressure on the Israelis to cut links with the apartheid government in South Africa. Finally, their motives could be organisational.

They act when they feel that their organisation is being threatened by homeland policy as then, they won't be useful or powerful. The degree of influence that a diaspora may wield depends on various factors: how united and motivated they are, how democratic and thus permeable to suggestions the home and host land are, so how valuable the diaspora is to each, and if the homeland is weak, politically like Israel or financially like Armenia, how much aid the diaspora can offer and expect back in return. So what responses are being thought up to migration? Migrants are still at the whims of the state they are applying to and the strength of public opinion or the relations between the states.

Nowadays, the EU has started to try and create a united migration policy as they have realised that monitoring and regulating migration will become almost impossible if the EU enlarges any further. To discourage the right wingers in their country, traditional host states have taken a hard line on migration to maintain social stability. In actuality, it can be argued that by doing so, the governments have undermined the very stability they sought as, people will not stop being persecuted and seeking shelter, whether legal or not 14.

Bibliography

Sita Bali, 'Migration and Refugees' in Brian White, Richard Little, and Michael Smiths (ed. ), Issues In Politics (London, Macmillan Press Ltd., 1997) David Held et al.
Global Transformations (Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Cambridge, 2003 S.
P. Huntington, "The Hispanic Challenge", Foreign Policy, Volume 141 (March / April 2004) p.
30 - 45 A, McKeown, "Conceptualizing Chinese Diasporas, 1842-1949", The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol.
52, No. 2 (May 1999) p.
306-337 Yossi Sha in and Aharon Barth "Diasporas and International Relations Theory", International Organisation, Vol. 57, (Summer 2003) p.
449-479 Compact Oxford English Dictionary [ web oed / migrate ? view = uk] 25th November 2004.