1 - 10 of 10
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. The Traumas of Ethiopian Male Migrants: Re-integration efforts must put vulnerabilities at the centre
- Author:
- Adam Moe Fejerskov and Meron Zeleke
- Publication Date:
- 03-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Danish Institute for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Every year, several hundred thousand migrants return to Ethiopia, where they struggle to integrate back into society. They must deal with the traumatic events of their journeys while also facing social stigma and exclusion. KEY FINDINGS ■ All Ethiopian migrants using irregular routes have experienced or witnessed violence and trauma ■ Sexual violence and abuse are widespread among Ethiopian male migrants yet taboo, and psychosocial support should address the vulnerabilities of men ■ Livelihood interventions should address the problem of social stigma ■ Re-integration is difficult as social positions and relationships will never be as they were before migration
- Topic:
- Development, Migration, Border Control, and Fragile States
- Political Geography:
- Africa and Ethiopia
3. Maximizing the Shared Benefits of Legal Migration Pathways: Lessons from Germany’s Skills Partnerships
- Author:
- Michael Clemens, Helen Dempster, and Kate Gough
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for Global Development
- Abstract:
- The world is experiencing significant demographic shifts. By 2100, Europe’s working-age population will have declined, and sub-Saharan Africa’s working-age population will have greatly increased. Many of these new labor market entrants will seek opportunities in Europe, plugging skill gaps and contributing to economies in their countries of destination. Germany is one country piloting and implementing projects that can help alleviate such demographic pressures and maximize the potential mutual benefits of legal labor migration. We discuss these projects, and highlight differences in their potential impact on development in the country of origin. We recommend that European governments build on, adapt, and pilot-test one of Germany’s approaches, also known as the Global Skill Partnership model: training potential migrants in their countries of origin before migration, along with non-migrants. Ideally, governments should pursue such pilot-tests with those countries that exhibit rising future migration pressure to Europe, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Neither the conclusion nor the results of this analysis reflect the opinion of the Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) or Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).
- Topic:
- Migration, Labor Issues, Immigration, and Border Control
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Europe, Germany, and Sub-Saharan Africa
4. EU Pressure on Niger to Stop Migrants is Reshaping Cross-Border Economies: From migrants to drugs, gold, and rare animals
- Author:
- Hans Lucht and Luca Raineri
- Publication Date:
- 12-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Danish Institute for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Though the four-by-fours with migrants still leave regularly for Libya, there’s little doubt that EU driven anti-migration efforts in the Agadez region of Niger has been a blow to the local cross-border economy. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ■ EU interventions in Niger have had an unintended negative effect on the safety of migrants. It’s therefore important to maintain focus on rescue missions in the desert. ■ Europe must ensure that conflict and context sensitivity remain paramount as well as promoting alternative development opportunities and good governance. ■ National, local and traditional authorities should continue to avoid conflicts linked to natural resources, including gold, uranium, pasturelands and water, by promoting transparency and participatory decision-making.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Development, Migration, Poverty, Border Control, European Union, Inequality, Fragile States, and Global Political Economy
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Libya, North Africa, and Niger
5. The Niger-Libya Border: Securing It without Stabilising It?
- Author:
- Mathieu Pellerin
- Publication Date:
- 11-2018
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
- Abstract:
- Often described as an “ungoverned area”, the Niger-Libya border is nevertheless at the centre of major economic, political and security challenges. Both the Libyan authorities and the Nigerien state are struggling to establish tight control over this particularly isolated area. However, local actors who live there are making their own modes of governance, based on individual and so far, barely institutionalised relationships. These local forms of regulation provide states in the sub-region and their international partners with the opportunity to consider the possibilities of indirect administration. The current priority appears to be for outsourced forms of security, as the agendas of these actors are geared towards anti-terrorism and the fight against so-called irregular immigration. Indeed, this area is nowadays facing unprecedented militarisation, raising a key question: does excessive militarisation not risk producing more insecurity than it fights in the medium or long term? The stability of this border area is partly based on maintaining economic, political and social balance which risks being challenged by a purely security-based approach. Designing a holistic governance of security requires states being able to arbitrate sovereignly on the cornerstone of long-term human security.
- Topic:
- Security, Governance, Border Control, Counter-terrorism, and Borders
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Libya, North Africa, and Niger
6. From Right to Permission: Asylum, Mediterranean Migrations, and Europe’s War on Smuggling
- Author:
- Maurizio Albahari
- Publication Date:
- 01-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal on Migration and Human Security
- Institution:
- Center for Migration Studies of New York
- Abstract:
- The European Union (EU) and its member states have sought to curb unauthorized maritime migrant arrivals through a proactive combination of deterrence, intelligence, surveillance, anti-smuggling activities, border enforcement, and policing and readmission collaboration with Turkey, Libya, and Libya’s African neighbors. Through these actions, the right to seek asylum is being de facto transformed into a state-granted permission to seek asylum. Containment policies ensure that one cannot ask for sovereign permission without first paying smugglers. In support of their policies, EU and national authorities widely employ an anti-smuggling discourse that focuses on the ruthlessness of smugglers and the passive victimhood of migrants, including asylum seekers and refugees. This rhetoric aligns itself with what is perceived to be politically palatable, and contributes to preserving a volatile status quo. EU and national policies have failed to curb significantly maritime arrivals. Migrants face worsened conditions on Libyan soil, and death at sea. In recent memory, 2011 was seen as the deadliest year on record for Mediterranean migrations, only to be surpassed first by 2014 and then by 2016. During 2017, at least 3,119 persons died or went missing in the Mediterranean Sea (UNHCR 2017b). Deterrence, containment, and the related war on smuggling prove ineffective, and do not justify such a heavy cost. They quell the outrage cyclically generated by powerful images of Mediterranean carnage, even as they fail to mitigate the carnage itself. European and other liberal-democratic governments can act in more pragmatic, just, and dignified ways, including by attending to migrant agency and to local civic engagements. Provisions for family reunification, refugee resettlement, study visas and temporary protection should be enhanced. More ambitiously, governments need to reverse the very policies that eviscerate the right to seek asylum. Additionally, labor immigration quotas should be set that go beyond attracting skilled “talent” and seasonal workers, to reflect the demands of the job market and of Europe’s ageing societies, while protecting worker rights. Such measures would lessen unauthorized arrivals and the demand for smugglers, ease asylum workloads, and challenge nativist arguments. There is always a political market for effective policies such as these, but until European authorities begin to reject easy resort to tropes of ruthless smuggler criminality, that market will remain disturbingly untapped.
- Topic:
- Migration, Border Control, European Union, and Asylum
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Europe, and North Africa
7. Multilateral Damage: The impact of EU migration policies on central Saharan routes
- Author:
- Jérôme Tubiana, Clotilde Warin, and Gaffar Mohammud Saeneen
- Publication Date:
- 09-2018
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
- Abstract:
- This online report studies the effects of EU migration policies and the externalisation of EU border control on Saharan migration routes and on practices in the border regions connecting Niger, Chad, Sudan and Libya. Authors Jérôme Tubiana, Clotilde Warin and Gaffar Mohammud Saeneen find that, in response to the obstacles and opportunities that border externalisation policies present for migrants, migration routes diversify and move to other countries. Beyond the fact that migration is a transnational phenomenon not linked to one particular route or itinerary, this continuous moving of routes is made possible by cross-border Saharan trade and trafficking networks that have put in place the necessary logistics to facilitate migration and which often fall outside government control. Pushed by EU efforts to curtail migration, states such as Niger, Chad and Sudan have shored up border patrols and anti-smuggling operations in the border regions under study here. The report shows that this has been done in a manner that is often not conducive to stability in the region and which contributes to the ‘militia-isation’ – the growing power of militias whose presence undermines the state – of the countries at issue.
- Topic:
- Migration, Border Control, European Union, and Trafficking
- Political Geography:
- Sudan, Libya, Chad, Niger, Sahara, and Africa
8. Post-Conflict Peace-Building in a Contested International Border: The Nigeria-Cameroon Border Conflict Settlement and Matters Arising
- Author:
- Kenneth Chukwuemeka Nwoko
- Publication Date:
- 06-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Brazilian Journal of African Studies
- Institution:
- Brazilian Journal of African Studies
- Abstract:
- The political solution under the Green Tree Agreement which led to the handover of the contested Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon by Nigeria following the International Court of Justice (2002) ruling signaled the end of the protracted Nigeria/Cameroon border conflict, at least on the surface. However, some analysts believed that it marked the beginning of what may result into a future conflict (Agbakwuru 2012; The Guardian 2006). From the analysis of the verdict of the Court, it would appear that while the interests of the two states involved in the conflict appeared to have been taken into cognizance, the interest of the indigenes and inhabitants of Bakassi was not. Apart from alienating these local people from their ancestral homes, cultural sites and livelihood opportunities, activities such as fishing; interstate water transportation, trading etc, which were operated as early as the precolonial days by the local inhabitants, appear to have been disrupted, thus, endangering their means of livelihood and survival. The Anglo-German agreement of March 1913 which the ICJ ruling relied on for its verdict on the Nigeria-Cameroon border conflict represents the earliest milestone in the process of alienation of the inhabitants of the Bakassi Peninsula, the causus bellum; especially since the kings and chiefs of Old Calabar exercised sovereignty over the Bakassi3 , a title which was subsumed in that part of Nigeria as the sovereign state during the period of this conflict. While the ICJ ruling gave precedence to contemporary western constructions of the notions of boundaries and sovereignty to the detriment of the historical consolidation (Sama & Johnson-Ross 2005-2006, 111), “protectorate treaty made without jurisdiction should not have taken precedence over a community title rights and ownership existing from time immemorial” (Nigerian Information Service Centre 2002; The Guardian 2002, 1-2) In other words, Germany transferred to Cameroon what it did not derive from Britain, since the right to title ownership lay with the kings and chiefs of Old Calabar. The focus of this article is not to delve into the juridical issues relating to legal ownership of the territory since the ICJ ruling had put that to rest. Rather the objective is to analyse matters arising from the settlement that could jeopardise the “cold peace” between the two countries; issues relating to psychological, socio-economic and political fallouts which the method of settlement of the conflict and its application brought on the indigenes and inhabitants of the Bakassi Peninsula as well as proffer recommendations for lasting peace in this troubled region.
- Topic:
- Territorial Disputes, Border Control, Conflict, Peace, and Settlements
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Nigeria, and Cameroon
9. The “Right to Remain Here” as an Evolving Component of Global Refugee Protection: Current Initiatives and Critical Questions
- Author:
- Daniel Kanstroom
- Publication Date:
- 01-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal on Migration and Human Security
- Institution:
- Center for Migration Studies of New York
- Abstract:
- This article considers the relationship between two human rights discourses (and two specific legal regimes): refugee and asylum protection and the evolving body of international law that regulates expulsions and deportations. Legal protections for refugees and asylum seekers are, of course, venerable, well-known, and in many respects still cherished, if challenged and perhaps a bit frail. Anti-deportation discourse is much newer, multifaceted, and evolving. It is in many respects a young work in progress. It has arisen in response to a rising tide of deportations, and the worrisome development of massive, harsh deportation machinery in the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Mexico, Australia, and South Africa, among others. This article’s main goal is to consider how these two discourses do and might relate to each other. More specifically, it suggests that the development of procedural and substantive rights against removal — as well as rights during and after removal — aids our understanding of the current state and possible future of the refugee protection regime. The article’s basic thesis is this: The global refugee regime, though challenged both theoretically and in practice, must be maintained and strengthened. Its historical focus on developing criteria for admission into safe states, on protections against expulsion (i.e., non-refoulement), and on regimes of temporary protection all remain critically important. However, a focus on other protections for all noncitizens facing deportation is equally important. Deportation has become a major international system that transcends the power of any single nation-state. Its methods have migrated from one regime to another; its size and scope are substantial and expanding; its costs are enormous; and its effects frequently constitute major human rights violations against millions who do not qualify as refugees. In recent years there has been increasing reliance by states on generally applicable deportation systems, led in large measure by the United States’ radical 25 year-plus experiment with large-scale deportation. Europe has also witnessed a rising tide of deportation, some of which has developed in reaction to European asylum practices. Deportation has been facilitated globally (e.g., in Australia) by well-funded, efficient (but relatively little known) intergovernmental idea sharing, training, and cooperation. This global expansion, standardization, and increasing intergovernmental cooperation on deportation has been met by powerful — if in some respects still nascent — human rights responses by activists, courts, some political actors, and scholars. It might seem counterintuitive to think that emerging ideas about deportation protections could help refugees and asylum seekers, as those people by definition often have greater rights protections both in admission and expulsion. However, the emerging anti-deportation discourses should be systematically studied by those interested in the global refugee regime for three basic reasons. First, what Matthew Gibney has described as “the deportation turn” has historically been deeply connected to anxiety about asylum seekers. Although we lack exact figures of the number of asylum seekers who have been subsequently expelled worldwide, there seems little doubt that it has been a significant phenomenon and will be an increasingly important challenge in the future. The two phenomena of refugee/asylum protections and deportation, in short, are now and have long been linked. What has sometimes been gained through the front door, so to speak, may be lost through the back door. Second, current deportation human rights discourses embody creative framing models that might aid constructive critique and reform of the existing refugee protection regime. They tend to be more functionally oriented, less definitional in terms of who warrants protection, and more fluid and transnational. Third, these discourses offer important specific rights protections that could strengthen the refugee and asylum regime, even as we continue to see weakening state support for the basic 1951/1967 protection regime. This is especially true in regard to the extraterritorial scope of the (deporting) state’s obligations post-deportation. This article particularly examines two initiatives in this emerging field: The International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Expulsion of Aliens and the draft Declaration on the Rights of Expelled and Deported Persons developed through the Boston College Post-Deportation Human Rights Project (of which the author is a co-director). It compares their provisions to the existing corpus of substantive and procedural protections for refugees relating to expulsion and removal. It concludes with consideration of how these discourses may strengthen protections for refugees while also helping to develop more capacious and protective systems in the future.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Cooperation, Border Control, Refugees, and Humanitarian Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Africa, United States, Europe, France, South Africa, Germany, Australia, Mexico, and Global Focus
10. Explaining South African Xenophobia
- Author:
- Christopher Claasssen
- Publication Date:
- 06-2017
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Afrobarometer
- Abstract:
- South Africa now has the unfortunate reputation as one of the more hostile destinations in the world for African migrants. Widespread attacks targeting foreigners took place in May 2008, killing 62 people and making international headlines. Another wave of violence occurred in April 2015, leading to an outcry across Africa and the recall of the Nigerian ambassador. These are not attacks caused by small bands of provocateurs or criminals; both qualitative and quantitative evidence suggests widespread participation in, and support for, the violence in the affected communities (Claassen, 2014). Indeed, a number of commentators have remarked on the elevated levels of xenophobia observed in South Africa (see, for example, Mattes, Taylor, McDonald, Poore, & Richmond, 1999), with African nationals, in particular, facing everyday hostility and violence (Everatt, 2010). Thus, rather than a case of rare and sporadic attacks disturbing otherwise peaceful relations between locals and African immigrants, South African xenophobia appears to take the form of widespread antipathy and intolerance punctuated by acts of hostility and violence. South African xenophobia has national and regional political consequences. The violence that took place in 2008 and 2015, as well as the hate crimes that occur with everyday regularity, present a pressing human rights concern. Furthermore, as Landau (2011, 2012) has noted, such levels of intergroup hostility are a symptom of a deep social and political malaise. Finally, as the sharp international reaction to the 2015 attacks indicates, South African xenophobia now constrains the country’s international relations, particularly within Africa. This paper investigates the determinants of South African xenophobia. Despite a great deal of reflection, commentary, and research by government, civil society, and scholars, we have a poor understanding of the factors that influence and shape hostility toward African immigrants. The problem is not a scarcity of explanations, but an overabundance. With up to a dozen explanations proffered by experts, we have little idea what actually causes hostility toward immigrants. Moreover, the laundry list of possibilities gives little clue whether some causal factors are contingent on others, as is often the case in social processes.
- Topic:
- Migration, Border Control, Violence, Xenophobia, and Racism
- Political Geography:
- Africa and South Africa