Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People

People on the Move - N° 86, September 2001

Key Trends and Developments Affecting International Migration
To and Within the "New World"*

Lydio TOMASI
Director
Center for Migration Studies, New York

The complexity of migration issues forces analysts to develop a dialectic of migrants' vulnerability and to use simplifying abstractions such as primary sub-systems.
Of the worlds' six primary regional migration sub-systems, two are found in the New World, the Western Hemisphere: the North American-centered sub-system (U.S. and Canada) and the South American sub-system (Southern Cone countries and nearby states).
The United States of America and Canada constitute a vast immigrant-receiving zone which attracts emigrants from around the world, but principally from Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. South American immigrants have also long figured importantly in south to north intercontinental flows and there are indications that emigration from several South American countries northward, especially of Ecuadorians and Brazilians to the Northeast of the United States, is increasing significantly.
The overall volume of international migration in the South American sub-system pales in significance compared to the North American-centered sub-system. However, the dynamics shaping both arise from socio-economic and demographic disparities, globalization, the spread of market mechanisms and interdependency which forge complex but recurrent large-scale international migration. One should note that these two primary sub-systems by no means encompass all international migration within the New World. Flows of Haitians to the Dominican Republic or to other nearby Caribbean islands and of Colombians to Venezuela testify to the many layers of complexity that comprise the migratory phenomenon in the New World.

Looking Ahead, Is Migration Going to Increase or Decrease?

A number of scholars have suggested reasons to expect overall volume of international migration to increase globally. These scholars point to globalization, the end of colonialism, the demise of communism, advances in technology, and the ease of travel, among other factors, to explain their expectation. A complementary perspective raises the spectre of imploding states in which a combination of factors like governmental incapacity and overwhelming socio-economic problems result in mass emigration from vast areas which become swamps, in current U.S. Department of State lexicon.
Critics retort that notions of massive, inexorable and uncontrollable migration are not borne out by statistical evidence. In this optic, the volume of migration affecting the New World at the start of the third millennium is comparable to that of the 1870 to 1914 period which witnessed huge inflows, primarily of Europeans, to North and South America.
In the light of the disagreement over the interpretation of contemporary trends in global migration, perhaps it is best to focus on specific trends that are key to understanding the overall patterns of migration. I will select four trends:

1. Uncertainty over the future course of Mexican migration to the U.S.
2. Upsurge in human trafficking.
3.Concern over security implications of international migration.
4.Growing significance of migration questions in domestic politics in foreign policy and regional affairs.

Then I will answer the question on whether these trends are changing migration policies.

1. Uncertainty over the future course of Mexican migration to the U.S.

Roughly ten percent of Mexicans reside in the United States, about half legally. Seven years after the ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), some experts predict an ebbing tide of emigration northward. The Mexican economy is growing rapidly and labor shortages loom for firms in some areas. A Mexican expert forecasts an end to "complementarity" between Mexico and the U.S. in five to seven years. In other words, economic growth coupled with the effects of a declining birth rate should result in cohorts entering the labor market finding employment in Mexico.
On the other side of the ledger, overall Mexican emigration to the U.S. seems to have increased significantly since 1993; although estimates of illegal flows vary. NAFTA has had brutal economic effects upon Mexican workers and the poor. There are signs of a great migration of rural Mexicans northward and southern (largely Indian) areas of Mexico have now become zones of emigration. Mexican school children often plan to emigrate to the U.S. It may be that such plans or projects would be a better indicator of future emigration than the growth rate of the Mexican economy.
Meanwhile, the U.S. has beefed up border enforcement which is indirectly responsible for a growing threat of death due to drowning or exposure for migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border. Despite intensive bilateral discussions in recent years, and some areas of progress such as upon Mexican consular facilities in the U.S., Mexican and U.S. officials remain far apart on many issues. The increased border enforcement has required many illegal entrants to hire smugglers. It is more difficult, dangerous and costly for illegal entrants to cross the border than a decade ago. However, once beyond border areas, they run a minimum risk of detection. Given the inexpensiveness and availability of fraudulent documents and the ease of their fraudulent use, unauthorized alien workers in the U.S. can easily circumvent the 1986 law. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has virtually ended enforcement of employer sanctions due in part to persistent shortages of low-skilled workers. Demand for unskilled foreign labor remains very high in diverse industries like meatpacking, labor-intensive agriculture, hotels, restaurants, gardening and domestic work. The ready availability of jobs in the U.S. continues to lure Mexicans northward. Despite the progress of the Mexican economy, the average Mexican worker continues to be able to make eight to ten times more in the U.S. than in Mexico.
Additional uncertainty clouds the picture because there is growing political support for the renewal of legalization and the expansion of temporary foreign worker recruitment in the U.S. The American Federation of Labor - Congress of International Organizations (AFL-CIO) recently declared its backing for large-scale legalization while withdrawing its support for the enforcement of employer sanctions. However, it remains opposed to the expansion of temporary foreign worker admissions. Improvements in prospects for legalization probably encourages further emigration from Mexico that points south and east.
The 1996 U.S. immigration law did enhance the ability of the U.S. government to detect, detain and remove criminal aliens. Indeed, this has since become top priority of the INS. Consequently, deportations have soared. The 1996 law increased the number of crimes considered as felonies, and hence deportable offences, while reducing INS discretion to waive deportation on humanitarian and other grounds. This has resulted in broken families and in some instances, the return of immigrants, particularly teenagers, to homelands which they scarcely know.
Other imponderables affecting the U.S.-Mexico migration relationship include growing evidence of trafficking of migrants from Asia and also from Guatemala and other Central American countries through Mexico to the U.S. Also, could the improving Mexican economic picture turn Mexico into a zone of emigration and immigration? Mexico recently legalized the status of over one hundred thousand Guatemalan refugees. Earlier, hundreds of thousands of Guatemalans were forced back into Guatemala which, despite the end of the civil war, has remained very dangerous in several areas.

2. Mounting evidence of an upsurge in human trafficking, especially from the People's Republic of China

Since the arrival of the ill-fated Golden Venture off the port of New York City, the U.S. and Canadian governments have increased efforts to deter human smuggling from China, especially from the southern Fujian Province, which appears to be the starting point for much of the trafficking. Government and scholarly research has provided greater insight into the mechanisms of this trafficking.
While organized criminal elements play a significant role in this, it is believed that many of the snakeheads, as the smugglers are called, operate autonomously and on a free-lance basis. This greatly complicates the task of law enforcement officials. Moreover, the "big" snakeheads, or major organizers of trafficking, are much more difficult to detect and punish than the small ones. Big snakeheads often sub-contract out to small snakeheads for various services. Hence, the voyages of smuggled Chinese vary enormously depending on whether a land, sea or air route is taken. Often, certain parts of the trip are not illegal. Candidates for smuggling typically make a down payment and then pay the remainder of the fee after a successful arrival. Chinese arriving in New York City often pay $25,000 to $30,000 to be smuggled in, although some pay far more. Some of the trafficked Chinese run terrible risks and some are mistreated or abused. Others enjoy relatively safe and uncomplicated trips and have business-like relationships with their smugglers. Typically those smuggled in are detained at safe-houses until their debt is paid. A researcher, Ko-Lin Chin, found out that, contrary to the belief that most such smuggled Chinese become locked into debt bondage, most are able to pay off their debts quite quickly. Many borrow much of the cost of the trip from relatives at a low or no interest.
Some scholars view the seeming upsurge in smuggling as a perverse effect of border enforcement or imposition of employer sanctions. By cracking down on illegal immigration, states increase incentives for smugglers. On the other hand, distinctions between relatively benign although unlawful immigration, smuggling and human trafficking are not always clear-cut. Most scholars differentiate trafficking from smuggling by defining the former as involving coercion and/or deception. Other scholars view illegal immigration, smuggling and human trafficking as constituting a single and undesirable fabric to be curbed.
Growing concern over trafficking increasingly affects bilateral and regional relations. The People's Republic of China has taken a number of steps to prevent and punish human smuggling, ranging from information campaigns to fines and imprisonment for Chinese citizens detected in smuggling operations. These counter-measures do not appear to have had much deterrent effect. The future course of emigration from China looms as a vital concern in developing North American-Chinese relations. Some observers believe that "normalization" of trade relations between the Americas and China will inevitably result in increased trans-Pacific international migration. Studies concerning smuggled Chinese, however, have revealed amazingly complex routes, often taking the smuggled Chinese through Africa, Europe or Central America before bringing them to the U.S. or Canada.
While smuggled Chinese seem to be attracting the bulk of governmental and scholarly attention, the human trafficking phenomenon is global and brings people from around the world to an apparently growing number of points in the Americas, sometimes for purposes of transit to a final destination. Diaspora populations, such as ethnically Chinese communities, often provide a critical link and cover. Most of the smuggling of Chinese nationals, for example, seems to be done by ethnic Chinese.

3. Growing concern over the security implications of international migration

The arrest by a U.S. Customs officer of an Algerian Islamic fundamentalist, crossing from Canada into the U.S. with a car packed with explosives, caused widespread consternation. Indeed, U.S. security agencies were on a high state of alert throughout December of 1999.
A perceived threat of spillover of political violence from the Middle East has haunted the U.S. and Canada since the World Trade Center bombing in New York City. Although the largely immigrant perpetrators of that attack were quickly apprehended, tried and convicted, the U.S. adopted a counter-terrorism and effective death penalty law with important implications for immigrants. The law empowered the federal government to detain aliens considered to be terrorists or involved in terrorist organizations indefinitely without habeas corpus and on the basis of secret testimony. About fifty immigrants, mainly Palestinian Arabs, subsequently have been detained. In 2000, the U.S. and Canada announced a series of measures designed to prevent terrorism with important implications for cross-border travel.
A major focus in the U.S., and more recently in Canada, is upon fundraising in immigrant communities. Counter-terrorism officials in the U.S. allege that certain heavily immigrant communities raise funds that end up financing "terrorist activities." Similar charges were made in the past concerning fundraising by certain Irish-American organizations. The shadow of suspicion now, however, weighs most heavily on Islamic migrants and communities. Potentially, the counter-terrorism measures of the 1990s could adversely affect Muslim immigrant integration in North America and perhaps prove to be fatefully counter-productive.

4. The growing significance of migration questions in domestic politics in foreign policy and regional affairs

U.S. President Clinton's trip to the Caribbean and Central America in the wake of Hurricane Mitch was emblematic of the trend. The President spent most of his time addressing immigration and refugee issues whether directly or indirectly. The degree of economic interdependency between emigrant-sending and receiving societies, particularly the homeward flow of wage remittances, was portrayed as vital. One side-effect of the growing place of migration in the U.S. diplomacy has been diminishment of the role of the U.S. Congress, which long viewed immigration and refugee policy as its prerogative.
A session of the American Assembly several years ago pointed to the growing salience of migration in U.S. foreign policy and called for better coordination of immigration, refugee and foreign policies. Recommendations such as those from the American Assembly led to the creation of a new bureau within the U.S. Department of State. And, there is little doubt that the U.S. increasingly views migration issues as interconnected with those like democratization and development.
Some scholars have suggested that migration processes have fostered democratization in faintly understood but important ways. Several emigrant-sending lands, such as Ecuador, permit their citizens abroad to vote. So Ecuador candidates regularly take to the hustings in New York City. Others, such as Mexico, require emigrants to return home to vote. While systematic knowledge concerning the political behavior of emigrants is lacking, it can be surmised that the vastness of migratory flows is significantly affecting political landscapes both in the lands of emigration and those of immigration.
Mexico now recognizes dual nationality. On the one hand, this has contributed to the upsurge in Mexicans becoming U.S. citizens which has also been influenced by Proposition 187, the 1996 law and federal and state campaigns in favor of naturalization and voter registration. On the other hand, the so-called Latino or Hispanic vote is an increasingly important factor in U.S. elections with profound implications for the future course of U.S. immigration and refugee policies. Will new immigrant and refugee "lobbies" become as politically powerful as Cuban voters in states like Florida? Already the growing weight of immigrants in elections and related matters, such as in union membership and political mobilization, appears to be affecting policy outcomes on key questions like guestworker policy, legalization policy and employer sanctions enforcement.
Not all immigrant groups, however, have achieved the electoral clout to affect policy. Haitians appear electorally weak vis à vis Cubans in Florida. The vast and continuing migration of Haitians to the U.S., despite humanitarian intervention, does not seem to have greatly advanced democratization in Haiti. Nor has that emigration appreciably diminished mass poverty and underdevelopment in Haiti. Another wave of Haitian boat people is on the horizon. A U.S. Department of State survey concluded that a large part of the Haitian population aspires to emigrate.

Plus ca change…

Reflecting on these trends one might be tempted to conclude that the more things change the more they remain the same! Debates over the political and developmental consequences of international migration appear fated to continue although most observers now agree that migration increasingly drives foreign and domestic politics. While there is an all-around growing appreciation for the significance of migration in hemispheric affairs, this has not yet led to fundamental changes in approaches and policies. Region-wide discussions of international migration issues have begun through the Puebla Process. There have been fruitful discussions concerning the Caribbean and on the bilateral level. Thus far, the most far-ranging innovations in the diplomacy surrounding migration have occurred in South America, particularly as a result of Argentinean initiatives. And, there has been a discussion of South American regional initiatives concerning international migration.
In the end, the fundamental dynamics propelling international migration, the disparities in life chances and prospects, remain. Hence, the best guide to the future of migration in the Americas undoubtedly remains its past. There seems to be little prospect for major increases in U.S. or Canadian foreign assistance seeking to foster sustainable development in zones of emigration. The remarkable and sustained growth of the American economy continues to generate demand for skilled and unskilled labor which is met, in part, by international migrants. Despite some recent success by trade unions in organizing immigrant workers, a big factor behind the shift in AFL-CIO strategy, wages and working conditions in sectors with large numbers of low-skilled immigrant workers lag behind. The agricultural migrant workforce in the U.S., for instance, which is heavily immigrant, comprises the poorest population group in the United States. Indeed, even Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan observed that immigration has reduced inflationary pressures in the United States. Poorly-paid workers have not reaped the same benefits from the prolonged economic upturn as have other workers and the largely unchecked influx of low-skilled, frequently illegal foreign workers largely accounts for that stagnation or relative decline.
There are no reasons to anticipate fundamental changes in this state of affairs. Possible legislative "reforms" in the U.S., additional temporary foreign worker admissions, legalization policy, rescinding of employer sanctions will likely serve to increase already massive, indeed rampant illegal migration. The restrictionist sentiment, manifest in the U.S. in Proposition 187 and the 1996 immigration law, appears to have faded, although public opinion polling in California indicates that there is still strong support for Proposition 187 despite it having been voided by a Federal judge. Disconsenus and policy disarray have become the hallmarks of U.S. immigration policy despite the enormous infusion of budgetary and personnel resources into the regulation of international migration during the Clinton Administration. A recent survey of U.S. immigration in The Economist concluded that the contradictory and inept state of U.S. immigration policy probably endures because that is what is wanted. So the obvious question with no obvious answer is:

What is to be Done?

Realistically, the scope for private or public mobilization and engagement to translate human rights and ethical values into daily realities is limited. Nevertheless, certain principles and ideas can be suggested to serve as a basis for Inter-American coordination and engagement concerning international migration.
Education about international migration looms as a priority concern. Unfortunately, there is a great deal of scholarly disconsensus and gaps in knowledge about the subject. The more completely the complex matters pertaining to international migration are understood, the better-equipped all will be to engage in meaningful dialogue. This suggests an urgent need to continue and deepen exchanges of knowledge about migration trends and issues throughout the hemisphere.
One needs only to consider Mexican President-elect Fox's call for expanded temporary foreign worker authorization in the U.S. and the deepening and widening of NAFTA to grasp the urgency of renewal and a deepening of hemispheric dialogue and exchanges of information.
Advocates in the U.S. and in Mexico have been critical of temporary foreign worker policies. Such policies usually involve limitations on the labor market mobility of foreign workers and tie the foreign worker to a particular employer. They thereby create a legally disadvantaged workforce relative to citizen or resident alien workers. Moreover, NGOs have long criticized policies which separate family members from one another. Usually, temporary foreign workers live separated from their loved ones as spouses and children are not accorded visitation rights in the land of temporary employment. Those agencies have also been critical of temporary foreign worker policies which do not enable temporary foreign workers to become resident aliens after a number of terms of employment.
Judging from the historical record, it is not self-evident that expansion of temporary foreign worker admissions will substantially reduce illegal foreign worker employment. Nor is there any historical basis to predict that such policies foster better bilateral relations over the long term.
Similarly, President-elect Fox' advocacy of expansion and deepening of NAFTA requires careful scrutiny. Unlike the situation that prevailed in the history of European regional integration, with the limited and temporary exception of the Italian case, NAFTA does not involve partners at roughly similar levels of socio-economic and political development. Already NAFTA has had quite uneven effects upon the signatory states, including untoward effects in Mexico, that should give pause to concerned individuals everywhere. The quest for deeper regional integration must be subjected to a number of tests in which human rights' concerns for social justice figure centrally.
Legalization should be another focus of inter-hemispheric learning and dialogue. Many states in the hemisphere have authorized legalizations, several repeatedly. Advocates in countries like Argentina and the United States were deeply involved in legalization efforts which often fared poorly. History has shown that it is one thing to proclaim or authorize legalization and quite another to succeed in legalizing aliens in unlawful status. To be successful, legalization policies require extensive word of mouth publication and community support from the institutions which are trusted by large segments of illegally resident populations and in touch with them.
Calls have been made upon states everywhere to mark the coming of the third millennium by authorizing legalization for illegally resident aliens. Precisely how such policies could or should be implemented, however, remains unclear. Perhaps there are models or examples of best practices that deserve emulation elsewhere. Perhaps certain strategies employed by advocates in one national context can serve to foster better legalization policies in a neighboring state. When viewed from the perspective of the United States, gaining hemisphere-wide cooperation from NGOs may mean the difference between a successful or unsuccessful legalization policy.
The renewal and deepening of hemispheric dialogue and learning about international migration should not be artificially delimited. As noted above, migration has affected national security and security concerns loom large in post-Cold War migration policy discussions. After all, then President Salinas's proposal for NAFTA was first referred to the U.S. National Security Council which recommended its approval. Security refers to perceptions of threat and, of course, is centrally concerned with international migrants whose personal security is often at stake. Within the needed hemispheric migration and security dialogue, priority should be given to questions attending to humanitarian intervention, including the possible use of force to prevent civil strife, socio-economic chaos and even state implosion giving rise to mass emigration. Matters such as the worsening strife in Colombia and the growing intervention of the United States in Colombian matters or the declining state of affairs in Haiti are clearly affecting international migration in the Western hemisphere in significant ways.
Efforts to handle international migration in the Western hemisphere cannot be a one-shot affair but must become routinized because there is every reason to suppose that international migration will weigh more centrally in hemispheric affairs in the future than it does today. How this question is addressed already centrally affects the post-Cold War Western hemisphere. Can current trends continue, however, into the foreseeable future without adverse effects? Will those processes and trends foster new hemispheric relations and structures that can now only be dimly imagined? Clearly, leadership will matter a great deal in all of this, regardless of the delimitations of the modern, sovereign territorial state.

* Paper presented at the Regional Consultation of National Directors for the Pastoral Care of Migrants in America (Mexico City, 17-20 September 2000)