There are three things (I refer to them as “Parameters” of the problem) that we do know
about the immigration influx into Europe (the “Influx”):
- The Influx cannot be abated with
policing measures – the notion of “Fortress-Europe” is a chimera (unless
we suspend our humanitarian ethics and laws and we start sinking boats,
which would be a lamentable outrage that nobody seriously proposes … yet).
- Wholesale forced repatriation is
impossible and unaffordable.
- Permanent establishment of such
great numbers in such short timeframe is unsustainable.
These three Parameters combined render the
problem seemingly unsolvable. No serious solution has been suggested by any
government or intergovernmental institution in Europe or in the UN. All
discussion is limited to tinkering around the edges (search and rescue,
processing of asylum applications, financial assistance to frontier member
states, etc.).
A couple of obvious points need to be pointed out
respectively about the root causes (“Causes”)
and the implications (“Implications”)
of the Influx:
Ø Causes:
- War and persecution
- Poverty and lack of opportunity
All Causes combined make life unbearable, with
diminished prospects and zero opportunity in the source countries (“Source Countries”). This creates
tension between the vast inequality of life’s prospects in the Source Countries
compared to the prospects in the destination countries (“Destination Countries”), primarily in Europe. As in Physics,
tension between opposite poles generates current. Extreme tension is bound to
generate extreme current. The obvious long term answer is to ease the tension
in order to ease the current. But this is easier said than done.
Ø Implications:
- Marginalisation, exploitation dehumanisation
and intensified suffering of immigrants on arrival in Destination
Countries (as well as during transit)
- Socio-economic disruption in
Destination Countries
- Abandonment and further
depression of Source Countries (with their most vibrant members departing)
- Rise of political extremism and xenophobia
in Destination Countries – with corresponding resentment and animosity in
Source Countries
- Political tension between
frontier countries (Greece, Italy, Spain) and final destination countries
(Western or Northern Europe) because of current policy approach, which
undermines European unity and encourages centrifugal and disruptive forces.
In short, the Causes are grave and seemingly unmanageable,
whereas the Implications are potentially lethal and devastating. The Influx has
the potential of shattering Europe, unless something is done to get it under
control.
Tinkering will not do. Something big has to
happen. This is the biggest challenge of our generation. Europe (with the rest
of the world) needs to think big, needs to think outside the box (of
conventional wisdom because the dimensions and Parameters of the problem are
unconventional) and of course Europe needs to act big. Nothing short of
vigorous intervention with a bold multi-layered approach will even begin to
make a dent.
Wishful thinking is a luxury we cannot afford. We
need to accept reality and work within its limitations. Wishing the problem
away will not solve it. Our starting point has to be the above 3 grim
Parameters of the problem. We cannot assume any solution that ignores them, or
pretends it can find a magic wand to do away with them. And we certainly cannot
allow ourselves and our morality to be compromised in the unspoken and
unthinkable idea that any death toll in the passage across the Mediterranean
wet cemetery of the thousands drowned could act as a deterrent for the many
more who dream to make the same crossing.
Well, if we can’t stop immigrants from coming and
we can’t force them all back and can’t keep them all here permanently, then
what is to be done?
Europe needs to embark on an energetic,
benevolent, interventionist foreign policy in an unprecedented grand scale. And
it needs to attempt bold reform internally. Easing the root Causes requires
enhanced and urgent cooperation with Africa and Asia. Give equal if not greater
priority and prominence to multilateral trade and political accord (the “Accord”) between the three continents
(Eurasia and Africa), as is currently being attempted with North America. Launch
such ambitious policy in a joined European-Asian-African summit to be held
abroad (e.g. Tunisia, or Istanbul, or Cairo). Pledge some headline – grabbing
amount of say over a trillion euros in direct public and private investment in
Source Countries in Africa and Asia, within an agreed framework and subject to
conditions, over the next 30 years. Work towards the lifting of trade barriers.
Engage in the transfer of know-how in good governance and nation building, in
the establishment and nourishment of a functioning democracy, with open
economies and with functioning banking system with uniform, harmonised rules
across all continents. Invest in the knowledge economy in these deprived areas,
establish and support schools and universities. Establish secure industrial
areas and build ports and factories and hotels and safe heavens. Boost the
economies. Assist on the security front with active intervention and far bolder
resolve in the pacification of the region. Assist the moderate forces
everywhere and ensure there are opportunities and prospects for all. Engage in
massive investment and cooperation in the energy sector and in the renewables
and not only build power stations (e.g. in Sahara) but transfer the technology
so that the renewables units (solar panels, or wind turbines) can be designed,
developed and manufactured locally by people in the Source Countries.
It may take fifty years, but there isn’t a moment
to lose for the deployment of such ambitious policy agenda so that we can begin
to tackle the root Causes of this menacing Influx.
But more immediately Europe needs to introduce a
brand new radical approach on immigration. Rather than merely trying (in vain)
to stop or police the Influx, or ex post trying (ineffectively) to address its
Implications, we can begin instead to get the Influx under control by
harnessing the migratory flows. Here is an outline of what such radical policy
could entail:
- Establishment of new adequately
resourced European Immigration Agency (the “Agency”) with branches and physical presence in key locations
in the Source Countries to operate within the framework of the above
proposed Accord between Europe, Asia and Africa.
- Agency is responsible for
implementing a Deferred Benefits Temporary worker scheme (“DEBT”
scheme)
- The Agency will set appropriate quotas
between EU member states based on an objective algorithm taking into
account population, unemployment, economic growth, etc. and offer to
perspective migrants a European “Green
Card” based on a five year “Contract”
which should be open to unskilled workers particularly from the most
deprived areas from the Source Countries of Asia and Africa, offered upon the payment of a “Fee” of say €1,000 (approximately a tenth of the going rate
for illegal “passage” in the trafficking black market), which would cover
the cost for: (i) a return flight directly into a European host country,
(ii) the processing of the application and (iii) the creation of two bank
accounts in the name of the temporary worker (the “TW”) with reputable European banks, one in the Source Country and
another in the EU.
- The Contract will entitle a TW
to a basic pay (a little lower than the minimum in the Destination
Country, which of course will be a very handsome pay by the standards of
the Source Country), together with subsistence and (shared) accommodation
(that should meet minimum quality and health standards).
- The paid salary to be split in
three parts: 1/3 paid in the Destination Country every month. 2/3 in the
form of “Deferred Benefits”
paid in Euros in their bank account in the Source Country, which will only
be available for them upon their return there, in the form of (a) a lump
sum on their return (the “Lump Sum”);
(b) a small annuity (the “Annuity”)
paid over a minimum of 5 further years after their return.
- The TW will be entitled to free
tuition during the weekend (e.g. learning a European language or some
other basic skill, such as numeracy, information technology etc). After
the payment of the Annuity has ceased, they will be entitled, to reapply
for a new Contract and re-join the DEBT scheme, whereby the same process
will be followed.
- Thanks to employer contributions
and a small state subsidy, TW will be entitled to free medical care in the
Destination Country (where they have been allocated) and a very small
supplement pension payable in their home country after the age of 68,
which will depend on the total number of years they have worked in Europe
in the DEBT.
- If there is no available
employment opportunity during the Contract, the Agency will still be
obliged to provide food, shelter and medical care but the salary during
that period will be limited to 50% of the amounts normally paid in the
home bank account towards the Deferred Benefits. If work becomes available
the TW will need to accept it or forfeit their hitherto accumulated
Deferred Benefits.
- A bidding system between the
Agency and the EU member states will entitle the reduction of some country
quotas upon the payment of a subsidy payable to any other member state
that would agree to take in additional numbers (but only if there is such
willing member state). This way, European countries with greater needs for
labour will be able to attract a higher number, whereas other countries
with intense internal political opposition against taking more immigrants
would (up to a specified limit) be able to do something about it.
There are two key arguments in opposition of the
introduction of a similar DEBT scheme: deferring part payment to the future, or
allowing lower payment is discriminatory and against European legal norms and
legal culture. And more importantly, taking in millions of workers in such a
scheme would undercut low wages and put pressure on the native European working
classes. I think both arguments can be explained away.
The deferment of part of the remuneration and its
payment in the Source Country upon the condition of repatriation (for the
further 5 year period) is the only way to achieve a voluntary repatriation of a
materially high number of immigrants, most of whom actually want the safety of
Europe, the opportunity to earn, in the hope of one day going back, if
conditions are right (primarily if their safety and subsistence can be
guaranteed).
Such a Deferred Benefits Temporary Worker Scheme
aims to allow Europe to take direct control of the migratory currents, to
create transparency, to ensure people are documented upon departure (not upon
arrival), they travel with safety and have somewhere to go when they arrive,
rather than landing in some beach. And this then can help set in motion a
massive circular human conveyer belt lifting desperate destitute people from
poverty, allowing them the opportunity to safely generate income in Europe for
a period and then “seeding” them back into their home societies with spending
power, enhanced skills and improved education, while at the same time using
their inexpensive labour contribution to boost growth in Europe. They will be
returning home (as newcomers take their place in the opposite direction)
emancipated, dignified, skilled citizens standing tall in their own countries.
They will have investing power (the Lump Sum) and spending power (the Annuity) for
a five year period after their voluntary repatriation and might perhaps start a
business upon their return. With thousands returning home each year on similar
circumstances, these countries will begin to flourish. Based on the deposits of
the Deferred Benefits a healthy and profitable banking system will be
established which is crucial for the development of deprived countries.
Schools, universities, shops and factories will
eventually be created across all the Source Countries with European assistance
within the framework of the Accord. A DEBT scheme is an essential element in
the nation building toolkit. In 2 or 3 generations, there will be sufficient
opportunities available at home to ease the haemorrhage of economic migrants or
refugees fleeing failed states. Democracy and prosperity will surely follow.
With security and optimism these returning temporary workers will be “forces
for good” equipped with new progressive ideas on their return. Rather than
harbour anti-Western resentment that breads a fertile ground for terrorist
ideologies, they will each be international ambassadors of the dream that is
Europe. The ghettos, the criminality, the health hazards, the chaos and the
denigration of city centres will be eradicated, and European economies will
regain competitiveness and grow again at phenomenal rates last seen in the
1960’s, with benefits far outweighing any temporary pressures in the European
labour market. And Europe will then have a vast mature, affluent, pacified and
stable Asian-African market-place to trade with and prosper beyond anyone’s
dreams.
Most importantly, Europe will salvage the
integrity of its humanist values, without discounting the effectiveness of its
resolve, by decisively addressing the grave Implications of the Influx. In
doing so, Europe will share in a practical way the European post-colonial
vision for a fairer more balanced and evenly prosperous world. We must tame the
great “monsters” of our time and put capitalism, mass migrations and
globalisation into good use and effectively “socialise” and share the resulting
wealth in a cordial, equal and dignified embrace with the developing world,
engaging in liberal trade rather than corrupting aid. Europe must show the
leadership that the world expects of it and which our heritage commands and thus
turn what seems like a daunting, unsolvable problem, into a unique opportunity
to inject vitality in our economies and build lasting bridges lifting those parts
of the world from poverty and deprivation. Let us not shy away from this
necessary radical and liberal new thinking of combining high principles with
base practicality, in order to boldly and vigorously tackle stubborn problems
yet unsolved through the old, small, defensive and frightened conventional
wisdom of containment.
No comments:
Post a Comment