CROSSING THE BORDERS OF THE LEVIATHAN: ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION, POLICIES, AND IMPACTS OF HUMAN...

Executive Summary

The purpose of this case research is to examine, dissect,

and analyze the attitude and policies of the European Union (EU)

and its individual member states (MS) towards the foreign

population and to present the situation of immigrants, either EU

nationals or non-EU nationals, in the 21st century Europe in an

economic perspective. Moreover, this paper would reveal and

evaluate the impacts of immigration to the economic development

and society in the both the EU Level and MS Level. The kind of

engagement in tackling the issue would be an inverted pyramid

approach, starting from the union level then converging towards

the national level (United Kingdom and Luxembourg), and a multi-

perspective analysis- social (including internal security),

history, politics and economy. Results of the research display

that despite commitment to drive for a common migration policy,

as stated in the Lisbon Treaty in 2007, individual MS retains

autonomy in determining their respective border controls when

relating to non-EU nationals. When relating to EU nationals, each

MS adheres to the Schengen Agreement which allows the free

movement of people. Both cases have caused disproportionality of

the foreign population in each MS. Furthermore, it would also

reveal that across EU, Third country nationals are discriminated

in terms of political and economic status, though this varies in

each MS, which causes increasing unemployment rates and

mismatching of skills for their part. This report concludes that

the EU, though having the Stockholm Program initiative, does not

out of 24- Crossing the Borders of the Leviathan

adhere to a common policy framework on the human mobility in EU

and that MS are still responsible on the integration and

admission policy on migrants. It is then recommended in this

paper that MS should unite and conclude a common policy on this

issue so as to protect the foreign population from discrimination

which would maximize their potential in the EU’s labor market. In

addition, the EU should revisit its internal and external borders

and must adapt to a regulation procedure in which the foreign

population are accordingly and proportionately distributed

between MS.

I. Introduction: The Era of Globalization

With the advancement of technology, emergence of

multinational market, and increasing tolerance for pluralism, the

world has shifted into interconnectedness through the spheres of

politics, economy, and society. People of varying origin, nation,

race, religion, and identity are enabled to interact with each

other in numerous ways. The realm of the Internet allowed

conversations more convenient. The concept of free trade

abolished regulations that restricted the movement of products

and capital. Transportation vehicles such as aircrafts and


automobiles equipped individuals to travel to any place in the

world.

Alongside with these radical changes, humans gained more

opportunities and choices for improving their lives. Thus,

immigration became a popular trend which allowed them to transfer

to territories with a more conducive kind of living, particularly

to the west.

The European Union (EU), in 2012, received 32.5 million

foreign citizens, of which 20.2 million were non-EU 27 citizens1,

comparable to the 40 million (rounded off) foreign population of

the most immigrated country, the United of America2. The EU, in

its 60 years of existence, envisaged its own as a migration

destination due to its tolerant policies towards foreigners.

Moreover, in succeeding years, as it stands as a global economic

power, more migrants, specially from Third-world and its neighbor

countries, would transfer to the EU as both to improve their

standard of living, whether as an asylee or an employee or an

entrepreneur, and to augment for its growing labor demand.

Currently, although the EU has compelled for significant

decisions towards migrants, the EU does not adapt to a common

policy on immigration (on some areas at least), indicating the

autonomy of member states (MS) on some policy areas, which

results to disproportionate inflows between MS and various

1 Eurostat. (2011). Foreign citizens made up 6.5% of the EU27 population in 2010 . EuropeanCommission. Brussels: Eurostat Press Office.

2 U.S. CENSUS BUREAU . (2012). The Foreign-Born Population in the United States: 2010 . U.S.CENSUS BUREAU , U.S. Department of Commerce . Washington, D.C.: U.S. CENSUSBUREAU.


attitudes towards immigrants. Due to the disparities in these

policies, uprising concerns such as terrorism and crimes, illegal

immigration, increase in multi-ethnicity, employment and

resources allocation, and the 2008 Euro Debt Crisis in the EU are

not properly addressed. It is then dawning for EU politicians,

both at national and regional level, and citizens to consider a

common policy, or at least establish closer cooperation, on

integration and regulation for migrants in the EU juxtaposed with

its native inhabitants which would determine the overall future

development of EU.

II. Key Concepts in Mobilization

Before proceeding to a comprehensive analysis on the foreign

population in the EU, the parameters of the key concepts must be

defined to establish a common understanding for discussions of

this paper. According to Christina Boswell and Andrew Geddes, a

migrant is “someone living outside their country of origin either

regularly or irregularly for a period of 12 months or more”3.

Generally, there are two types of migration- intra-migration

and inter-migration. The former, from the prefix “intra-“ meaning

within, refers to the movement of migrants within its territorial

regions/boundaries. While the latter having the prefix “inter-“

expresses in between or among different states/ countries4.

Moreover, people who are leaving his current state are identified

as emigrants. Thus, that country is now referred to as an

3 Boswell, C., & Geddes, A. (2011). Migration and Mobility in the European Union (pp. 2-3; 8-9). Great Britain: Palgrave Macmillan.

4 Ibid. pp. 2-3


emigrated country. Likewise, people who are entering a foreign

state are considered immigrants and that state as an immigrated

country.

Other key terms such as asylum and family reunification

would be explored along the discussions of this paper.

III. Movement Throughout Europe’s History

Human Migration in Europe is not only a 21st phenomenon but

it had already existed even at the Period of Ancient Greece. At

around 750 BC, Sparta, reaching its population limit, relocated

its excess persons to conquered neighbors, the Messenians 5.

Between AD 300 and AD 500, the Roman Empire adopted Germanic

Tribes, the Visigoths, who were refugees from the eastern

pressures, the Huns6. In the Middle Ages, The Black Death or the

spread of the “Bubonic Plague” in 1348 testified human migration

particularly from the east to the west. British Diasporas in the

17th century sailed to the North America as a separation from the

monarchy of homeland Great Britain7. At the Age of Encounter/

5 Butler, C. (2007). Birth of Western Civilization: Birth of Western civilization: Greece, Rome, andEurope to c.1000 CE. Retrieved February 18, 2013, from The flow of history: Adynamic and graphic approach to teaching history:http://www.flowofhistory.com/units/birth

6 Ancient History of Encyclopedia. (2010, July 15). Migration Age. RetrievedFebruary 18, 2013, from Ancient History of Encyclopedia:http://www.ancient.eu.com/Migration_Age/

7 Hanft, S. (2013). English Americans. Retrieved February 18, 2013, fromCountries and their cultures:http://www.everyculture.com/multi/Du-Ha/English-Americans.html


Colonialism, African Diasporas were present in Europe ever since

the 16th century Transatlantic Slave Trade8.

Migration, though mostly restricted to respective allied

states, in Europe also occurred with the emergence of the World

Wars from 1914-1945. During and between the wars, people from the

two opposing sides respectively- Allied vs. Central in World War

I and Allies vs. Axis in World War II- were transferring between

and outside of colonies and states for the reasons of military

enforcements and occupation and escaping the war, particularly

the Jews9.

In the post-war period, notably after the Cold War (1991),

Fall of Communism (1989), Dismantlement of the Iron Curtain

(1989) which collectively demolished the barriers separating

Western Europe and Eastern Europe. With the high demand of human

labor specially from Northern European countries, migrants

Eastern and Southern European countries such as Turkey,

Yugoslavia, Greece, and Spain transferred to Germany, United

Kingdom, and France to augment economic employment for its

economic development. However, in the early 1970s, immigration to

these countries was ceased due disproportionately high levels of

8 United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (n.d.).Transatlantic Trade Slave. Retrieved February 18, 2013, from United NationsEducation, Scientific and Cultural Organization:http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/dialogue/the-slave-route/transatlantic-slave-trade/

9 Phillips, J. (2012, July 13). History of immigration - The Second World War: 1939 to1945. Retrieved February 18, 2013, from Te Ara - the Encyclopedia of NewZealand: http://www.TeAra.govt.nz/en/history-of-immigration


unemployment and on welfare services. Nevertheless, because

immigrants of the 1950s in these countries have already settled,

they claimed for family reunification rights which still

increased immigration10.

At the same period, the EU, in each treaty concluded, had

acceded neighboring states (e.g. EU-8, EU 14) of Central Europe.

With the expansion of the EU and the establishment of the

Schengen Agreement (1995), migration within the EU (intra-

migration) became possible. Moreover, the EU, specifically in the

Treaty of Amsterdam (1997), had also introduced the provisions on

asylum which consequently allowed citizens to seek refuge from

non-EU states11.

Taking into consideration these historical episodes,

although situated in different timeframes with each having

various key motives- competition for land, labor, and resources,

and struggle for survival- human migration had constantly

possessed a single goal which is to improve the standard of

living.

IV. Enhancing the Standard of Living via Migration

In the previous section of this paper, alongside with the

discussion Europe’s migration history, some of its factors and

reasons were already revealed which includes expansionism, excess

population, economic opportunities, colonialism, environmental

10 Hansen, R. (2003). Migration to Europe since 1945: Its history and itslessons. The Political Quarterly , 25-38.

11Europa. (n.d.). EU treaties. Retrieved February 18, 2013, from Europa:http://europa.eu/eu-law/treaties/index_en.htm


condition, and asylum. Since examining each of these strands

would be tedious, it would be convenient if these factors would

be categorized accordingly- environmental, political, economic,

cultural and historical.

Firstly, environmental factors are linked with the physical

environment in which societies occupy. The first concern is if

the habitat is sustainable enough for human life- access to pure

water, clean air, adequate resources, sufficient land and

shelter. Another concern is if the climate and weather patterns

are at tolerable levels for living. The health condition of each

individual should also be examined- whether a person or more

suffers from contagious disease/s- and the population should be

monitored- whether population are proportionate to the available

resources.

Among the immigrants in Europe, these environmental issues

are usually associated to Africans which contribute 24.9% of

total immigrants as of February 201312. The situation of these

people is depressing as resources, specifically water, are

continuously depleting, due to agricultural discharges,

industrial and mining activities, and other mismanaged wastes,

which have contributed to the decline of life expectancy to 47

years13

Secondly, political factors include internal and external

wars, invasions, political and religious movements/ armies which

12 Eurostat. (2013). Migration and migrant population statistics. European Commission.Brussels: Eurostat Press Office.

13 BBC News. (2007, July 2). Key facts: Africa to Europe migration. BBC News .


have generated fear and unrest to the persons in those

territories. These individuals then, specially those who are not

and does not want to get involved in wars, travel to safer

territories, applying as asylees- related to foreigners seeking

for refugee from the fear of persecution fear of persecution for

reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a

particular group, or political opinion14. For example, since

2010, the Arab world has been afflicted with series of wars and

invasion internally and externally primarily by Muslim

demonstrators. Consequently, some Arab communities are forced to

travel outward, one of which is Europe (approximately 5 million

Arab immigrants), for protection and survival15.

Thirdly, economic factors relates to the weighing of

financial opportunities- employment, income, cost of living and

travel- in one’s origin country juxtaposed with that of a foreign

country. This kind of immigration accounts for approximately 90

million or around half of the foreign population, part are from

South Europe moving northward16 while most of which are from the

east or Third-world countries moving westward or to economic

giants17.

14 Goodwin-Gill, G. S. (2008). Convention relating to the status of refugees: Geneva, 28 July1951; Protocol relating to the status of refugees: New York, 31 January 1967. Retrieved February18, 2013, from Audiovisual Library of International Law:http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/prsr/prsr.html%00

15Fargues, P., & Fandrich, C. (2012). Migration after the Arab Spring (pp. 3-5).Migration Policy Centre, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. SanDomenico di Fiesole: European University Institute.

16 Martin, G. (2009). Europe's North-South divide- A stubborn chasm.


In the context of the EU, approximately 45% of its migrants

were job seekers18. Europe has become a popular destination for

employment due to its tolerance for multi-ethnicity and high

standard of living (all EU states classified as High Income

Economies)19. Moreover, the EU has emerged as globally

economically competitive entity catering for corporate giants,

constantly developing, which has always demanded human labor and

skills.

Lastly, cultural and social are connected with personal

aspects- such as education, family reunification, and past

relationships with colonial states. Students, mostly graduates

with either the purchasing capacity or scholarships, usually

migrate and study to top universities for future studies. In the

EU, At least 250 Educational Institutions listed in the “Best

Universities of the World which mostly are from United Kingdom20.

Family reunification, as resulted from first generation

migration, has further increased immigration rate in the

previously immigrated countries. Generally for settled immigrants

who have been accustomed to the practices and living of the

immigrated country, they would want to be rejoined with their

17TakingITGlobal. (2012). Migration: Globalization. Retrieved February 18, 2013,from TakingITGlobal: http://issues.tigweb.org/migration

18Eurostat. (2011). Migrants in Europe: A statistical portrait of the first and second generation.European Commission, Eurostat. Luxembourg: Publications Office of theEuropean Union.

19 The World Bank. (2013). Country and Lending Groups. The World Bank.20 U.S. News. (2012, October 23). World's Best Universities: Top 400. RetrievedFebruary 18, 2013, from U.S. News: Education:http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities-rankings/top-400-universities-in-the-world


relatives but in the soil of the foreign land to share the

benefits of living in it21.

V. Towards a Common Perspective

a. Policy Foundation since 1957

The first attempt of EU towards human movement was

recognized by the Treaty of Rome (1957). It introduced the key

provision on the free movement of EU citizens within MS (Third

Country Nationals not yet focused). In the following years, in

pursuance of a Single European Market, this provision would be

consolidated through the Single European Act (1987) and the

Schengen Agreement (1985) (implemented in 1995) which allowed the

free movement of goods, services, capital, and people in the EU,

except for Ireland and United Kingdom, [and the members of the

European Free Trade Association]22.

In the Maastricht Treaty (1992), Third Country Nationals

were acknowledged as a necessary factor for economic development.

It established provisions relating to cooperation with Third

Countries in terms of investments and entry to the EU through

visa. Moreover, migration and asylum policy was entrusted to the

inter-governmental pillar of the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA)

which decides on the basis of unanimity, 2/3 votes (constraining

migration and asylum policy legislation)23.

21 Ormond, M., Malheiros, J., Patrício, M., & Martins, F. (2005). Family Reunification and Immigration in Portugal. Observatório Da Imigração.

22 Baldoni, E. (2003). The free movement of persons in the European Union: A legal-historicoverview (pp. 4-6). Pioneur.


Seven year later, the Amsterdam Treaty reallocated powers on

the migration and asylum policy to the first pillar which

expanded the jurisdiction of the European Commission, European

Parliament, and European Court of Justice. It resolved the

ambiguity provisions, [alongside with the Tampere Program

(1999)], on migration and asylum policy in areas of definition,

regulation, qualifications, procedures, actions, rights and

responsibilities. However, the unanimity decision procedure was

retained and would not be modified to a Qualified Majority Voting

and co-decision until the Nice Treaty in 2004 (made it easier for

laws to be passed)24.

b. Current Migration and Asylum Policy

Further development towards a common migration and asylum

policy was initiated and implemented by the EU through the Lisbon

Treaty (2007). It integrated the migration and asylum policy,

though not in all areas such as admission25, to the context of

the EU, its treaty framework, and its institutions and addressed

the emerging concerns of terrorism, crimes, and illegal

immigration within the EU. Policy process was strengthened in

which the Council of Ministers (Qualified Majority Voting) co-

decided with the European Parliament and the European Court of23 Cihangiroglu, B. (2007). Justice and Home Affairs dimension of the European neighborhood

policy (pp. 4-6). Turkey.24 Boswell, C., & Geddes, A. (2011). Migration and Mobility in the European Union (pp.2-3; 8-9). Great Britain: Palgrave Macmillan.

25 MS still remain autonomous with regards to the inflow of foreignpopulation-migrants and asylees- within their territories. One example ofwhich is the Dublin Regulation of 2008 which entitles the states to determinethe number of immigrants, asylees, to cross their borders (Summaries of EULegislation, 2011).


Justice participating in areas of legality of migration and

asylum policy. The treaty also consolidated regulations,

conditions, and provisions regarding borders, asylum, and

migration as listed in Articles 77-80- subsidiary protection26,

definition of visas and residence permits, free travel of non-EU

citizens with the proper documents in the EU, mobility rights,

asylum procedures, cooperation and solidarity on the distribution

of immigrants within the EU 27.

Complimentary to the treaty, the Stockholm Program was

launched in 2009 to address the plans and concerns regarding

migration and asylum policy in the EU for the next five years.

The Council of Ministers through the Council Directive 2009/50/EC

of 25 May 2009 or the Blue Card Scheme and the Directive

2011/98/EU of 13 December 2011 or the Single Permit Directive

created significant legislative actions. The former is a strategy

aimed at attracting skilled individuals to work in the EU through

the incentive of equal rights comparable to EU citizens- income,

welfare status, family reunification, etc28. While the latter

simplifies migration procedures and establishes set of rights for

legal working migrants which are common with EU citizens29.

26 Subsidiary Protection refers to the temporary protection towards asyleeswho were rejected the status of Asylum (Federal Office for Migration andRefugees, 2011).27 Boswell, C., & Geddes, A. (2011). Migration and Mobility in the European Union (pp.2-3; 8-9). Great Britain: Palgrave Macmillan.28 Summaries of EU legislation. (2009). Entry and residence of highly qualified workers (EUBlue Card). Europa. Europa.29 Pascouau, Y., & McLoughlin, S. (2012, January 24). EU Single PermitDirective:a small step forward in EU migration policy. European Policy Centre .


Contemporary issues- terrorism, crimes, and illegal

immigration- also impelled EU into creating a common policy on

internal security with the purpose of securing borders, levels of

citizens' security, prevention of terrorism and its movement and

international criminal networks. This then led to the

establishment of Frontex (agency for external borders), Eurojust

(agency on judicial cooperation), and Europol (agency for police

cooperation). The first agency is tasked to enforce external

boundary policies, both at national and regional level30 while

the second agency is responsible to improve investigating, and

persecution procedures, though without direct power to

investigate and persecute crimes. The last agency is assigned to

enhance criminal intelligence, though are not entitled to

investigate or apprehend perpetrators.

The steps taken by the EU since the Treaty of Rome has

significantly contributed towards a common policy on migration

and asylum in the EU. However, it still has numerous obstacles

ahead in achieving their goal such as autonomy of states and

limited powers of migration and asylum agencies to enforce law

and convict offenders.

VI. Through an Economic Lens

In order to establish a deeper understanding on the human

mobility in the EU, from this section onwards, the discussion

would be focused through an economic perspective.

30 Carrera, S. (2007). The EU Border Management Strategy: Frontex and the Challenges ofIrregular Immigration in the Canary Islands. Centre for European Policy Studies. Centrefor European Policy Studies.


a. European Debt Crisis of 2008

According to the speech of Spanish Senator Mr Arcadio Diaz

Tejera addressing the effect of the crisis on the migration in

the EU, although it caused significant changes in the EU as a

whole, its impact varies in each MS. At the EU level, in 2006,

there were over two million immigrants. Approaching 2008, it

decreased to 1.5 million in 2007 then dropped to 857, 000 in the

succeeding year. However, juxtaposed with the MS level,

statistics revealed varying net migration31. For example, Spain’s

inflow of foreign population declined to 58,000 in 2009 and

40,000 people emigrated from Ireland. While in Austria, Denmark,

and Portugal, net migration increased by over 40% in the same

year.

Furthermore, Tejera claims that the crisis has destabilize

employment factors toward immigrants. However, again, the

situation differs across MS. In the employment sector of 2008-

2009, Spain’s unemployment rate increased by 10% and 8.6% in

Ireland. While it increased by less than 1% in Belgium, Norway,

and Poland and decreased by 0.5% in Germany.

Another notable effect of the crisis, as stated by Tejera,

is that the numbers of returns of migrants to their country of

origin were not as large as expected despite the arising problems

of unemployment, competition of resources, and overcrowding.

Surprisingly, many of them preferred to remained in their current

31 Net migration refers to the difference of the number of emigrants and thenumber of immigrants in a country.


countries because it would be cheaper to stay than to leave and

that the crisis would only be temporary32.

With respect to the respective governments of MS, there are

a number of states which have agreed to implement barriers33 to

immigrants specially towards non-EU nationals. To cite a few

countries, from November 2008, both Spain and the Czech Republic

offered return incentives for immigrants persuading them to

depart back to their country of origins34.

b. Impacts of Human Mobility in Europe

i. Migration and Labor Economy

Since the merger of the EU in the 1960s, the EU, as a whole,

experienced an unprecedented economic growth specifically driven

by the industrial and manufacturing sector which heavily relied

on human labor. Alongside with the continuing economic success

was the increasing participation of the immigrants in the labor

market, efforts of the intra-migrants in the first few decades

then by the Third-country nationals in the 1990s onwards.

Luxembourg suffered from an economical collapse after the

devastation of World War II. As a solution, the Grand Duke of

Luxembourg encouraged immigrants, attracting Italians and

Portuguese mostly, to augment for the human labor demand in32 Tejera, M. A. (2011). Migration in Europe and the Economic Crisis- Facts and Policies.

33 tightening labour market tests; limiting possibilities to change status andto renew permits; applying supplementary conditions to non-discretionary flows(i.e. family unification and humanitarian flows); and promoting returnmigration. Further, a number of countries have intensified their efforts tocurb irregular migration34 International Labour Office. (2010). Fact-sheet on the impact of the economic crisis onimmigration policies . International Labour Office.


sectors of agriculture and industry that resulted to a

sustainable economic growth even until today.

Following the Economic Crisis of 2008, the EU as a whole

felt a remarkable steady economic growth, though varying between

MS. According to Eurostat, the EU 27 GDP gained +2.5% in 2011

which was slightly higher than the +2.1% GDP of the previous

year. Main drivers of the GDP growth include Northern European

states such as Germany (+4.6%) and Sweden (+6.4%)35. Moreover,

additional economic growth also means increasing labor demands-

the number of job vacancies (+19%), job-finders (+24%), the

number of PES job vacancies (+12%), the demand for temporary

agency work (+6%) and online job vacancies (+28%)36-specifically

in Northern and Western Europe. In filling the increasing labor

gaps in the EU, it has to depend not only on its native citizens

but also on immigrants, whether from inside or outside of the

EU37.

ii. Ageing Population

The EU, in achieving economic growth and competitiveness in

the global arena, is conflicted by an ageing population. For an

entity supporting for (statistics please) and contributing for

50% of global GDP, its supply for human labor resources should

then match its demand.

35 Since 1988, immigration has generated 85,000 jobs and has raised Germany’sGDP by 1.3% (German National Contact Point , 2005, p. 18)36 Job vacancies include engineers, health care, banking and financialservices, administrative and clerical work, construction, catering, transport,and industrial.37 European Vacancy Monitor. (2011). European Vacancy Monitor (pp. 1-3). EuropeanCommission. DG Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion.


Today, Fertility Rates in the EU 27, though increasing at a

slight rate, is much less than 50 years ago. In 2009, only 5.4

million children were born in the EU while there were 7.5 million

live births back in the 1960s38. Moreover, due to the improving

environment and welfare programs in the EU, Mortality Rate is

also observed to be increasing (by 10 years over the past 50

years) while the number of deaths remained fairly stable39.

Considering the population structure of 2010, the young

population (0-19 years old) accounted for 21.3%, the population

aged 20-64 (considered as the population of working age) for 61.3

% and the population aged 65 years and over for 17.4 %40. This

implies that by 20 years or more, the EU would be afflicted by a

young working labor force which would dissatisfy the demands for

labor. Again, the EU, in sustaining its development should search

for additional human labor resources which is outside the EU.

iii. Brain Drain41

The EU has always been a destination of immigrant workers,

both for low-skilled and high-skilled persons, because of its

favorable standard for employees. With the Blue Card Scheme

Directive of 2008, more workers, especially the ones with high

educational attainment coming from Third countries, are even more

attracted to work for the EU. As a result, the origin countries

38 Commission Staff. (2010). Demography Report (p. 26). European Commission,Eurostat. Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion.39 ibid. p. 3140 ibid. p. 6041 Brain Drain refers to the loss of technical and intellectual labor throughimmigration to more advantageous regions or states.


of these immigrants deteriorate in terms of labor supply for its

own economic development. To illustrate, in the context of the

Philippines, brain drain has increased by 148% in more than a

decade (1998-2009) comprising more than half are health

professionals and nurses while a fifth are engineers which meant

a loss for employment in essential sectors such as industry and

health care42.

c. The Situation of Immigrant Workers

Generally, despite the anti-discrimination provision stated

in the Lisbon Treaty of 2007 and the Stockholm Program of 2009,

immigrant workers from Third countries fair poorly compared to

native EU citizens regarding employment and standard of living.

For ages 25-54 in 2008, in terms of labor market participation,

non-EU citizens scored 78% against the 84.5% contribution of EU

citizens 35; for unemployment rate, 12% against 6.5%; for

employment rate 41; for employment rate, 69% against 79.5% 45;

for mismatched skills labor, 36% against 24% 51; for poverty

risk, 35% against 20.5%43.

In most cases, discrimination is directed to ethnic

minorities or to certain stereotypes. For example, Islamic

communities are either feared or despised across Europe because

of their religious radical movements taking the form of

42 Tapang, G. (2011, February 17). The brain drain and the GPH-NDF peace talks. Retrieved February 20, 2013, from AGHAM: http://www.agham.org/cms/content/brain-drain-and-gph-ndf-peace-talks43 Eurostat. (2011). Migrants in Europe: A statistical portrait of the first and second generation(pp. 35, 41, 45, 51, 65). European Commission, Eurostat. Luxembourg:Publications Office of the European Union.


“Terrorism” such as in the London Bombing of 2005; Africans are

limited to low-skilled jobs or likely to be unemployed due to the

perception that blacks are inferior; and Romanians are

untrustworthy since their kind are popularly known in Europe as

criminals and drug and human traffickers44.

However, using these statements as generalizations for the

entire EU and its MS would be unfair as in each EU state, (as

already been stated in this paper) there are different policy for

migration and approaches towards immigrants. It is, therefore,

necessary to observe and analyze perspectives towards the foreign

population in the MS level.

d. A Closer Look

For this section, in order to have a better grasp on the

situation of the human mobility of foreign population in the EU,

this paper would also consider scrutinizing the issue at the MS

level. Two EU states, United Kingdom and Luxembourg which are

mostly affected by migration of foreign population, would be

presented and analyzed in terms of immigrants and migration

policy.

i. United Kingdom

I. Minorities vis-à-vis Immigrant Country

Since the 19th century, the United Kingdom (UK) has been a

popular destination for migrants and has significantly benefitted

from their labor efforts- e.g. the Scottish and the Jews’s

44 TNS Opinion. (2012). Discrimination in the EU in 2012 (pp. 28-33, 49-52). EuropeanCommission. Eurobarometer.


technical and banking expertise fueled the industrial revolution

and the Polish filled the labor demands in low-skilled jobs in

recent years. Migrants have impressively provided the necessary

labor for the UK’s development and the government have always

provided them their needs through welfare programs and equal

working conditions (average hourly salary of £12.95 in 201145).

It is the most lenient and tolerant state MS towards minorities

(11% of UK population or 6.7 million in 200846), catering for the

most multi-cultural society which are concentrated in London.

As revealed in the population trend in 2002-2010,

notwithstanding the Economic crisis of 2008, net migration stands

high at 215,000 persons annually (in 2011)47. Approximately 42%

of the foreign population has declared that job employment were

their reason for immigration which most of them are Polish and to

be followed by the Indians48.

Highest asylum approvals are also perceived to be given by

the UK in recent years (14,355 in 2011)49. Consequently, asylees

presence in the UK is maximized by encouraging them to

participate in the labor economy through granting incentives.

These strong attitudes towards minorities or the foreign

population in the UK could be traced from the past administration

of Tony Blair which drives immigration as front for economic45 Rienzo, C. (2012). Characteristics and outcomes of migrants in the UK labour market. TheMigration Observatory. University of Oxford.46 Whitehead, T. (2009, December 8). The Guardian.47 Office for National Statistics. (2012). Migration statistics quarterly report, November2012 (pp. 1-2). Office for National Statistics. Office for National Statistics.48 ibid. p. 3049 Eurostat. (2012). Asylum statistics . European Commission. Eurostat.


development. Behind the rationale, Blair’s administration devised

this program to compensate for the labor demand caused by UK’s

expanding market and ageing population5051. Moreover, the

government has been successful of this project through

assimilation of both low-skilled workers (Polish who are willing

to take lesser pay) and high-skilled workers (Middle Eastern or

Muslim Asylees skilled in technical jobs)52.

However, though immigrants have substantially increased the

overall economy of UK, creating more jobs and increasing its GDP,

Britons, average persons and skeptics, socially exclude these

minorities and want less of them in the succeeding years.

According to surveys regarding ethnic minorities, Britons feel

that their government has become too lenient on admission of

foreign nationals which have caused overcrowding (most crowded

country with 395 people per sq/km in 200853) and competition for

welfare programs and employment opportunities.

There is also the issue of discrimination. One of the

heavily disfavored minorities is the Muslims which are perceived

as threats by Britons. This goes back to the events of 9/11 in

the United States and London Bombing of 2005 of whom the

perpetrators were Muslims driven by the radical movements of50 Palmer, A. (2009, March 21). All you need to know about immigration inBritain today. The Guardian .51 UK population aged under 16 dropped from 25% in 1971 to 19% in 2010.Meanwhile, the proportion of people aged 65 and over rose from 13% in 1971 to17% on 2010. (The Institute of Grocery Distribution, 2012)52 Julios, C. (2008). Contemporary British identity: English language, migrants, and publicdiscourse. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Unlimited.53 Doughty, S. (2008, September 16). It's official- England is the mostcrowded country in Europe, thanks to immigration. Daily Mail .


Islam and to prevent a democracy disease as imposed by the west

to their countries54.

II. Government’s Role

In a general level, policy on migration in UK appears to be

weak either in implementation or framework in areas such as

admission of foreigners, integration, and in racial

discrimination.

In terms of admission, firstly, the UK opted-out of the

Schengen Area, together with Ireland, but has entered into

selected provisions such as the working rights of EU citizens55.

Ironically, despite having independent borders, UK, over the

years, have been receiving swarming immigrants. Most immigrants

were coming from Eastern Europe, most are Polish56, due to UK’s

admission as one of the three states in which new MS can travel

to. It has also been lenient on its past colonies, enforcing the

“open-door policy” which mostly benefitted Indian migrants57.

With regards to integration, although earlier efforts have

been conducted by the UK government in assimilating minorities to

the general population, there is no clear and coherent policy on

integration. One hurdle to a common integration policy is the

54 Page, B. (2009). British Attitudes to immigration in the 21st century. Migration PolicyInstitute. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.55 According to Tony Blair, UK’s selective entry to the Schengen Area wouldcause the country to be “the best of both worlds”.56 The number of Polish in UK increased from 75,000 to 521,000 in eight years,starting from the accession of Poland to the EU in 2004 (Daily Mail, 2011).57 Costello, C. (2011). UK migration policy and EU law. The Migration Observatory.University of Oxford.


diverse number of ethnic minorities in UK, having at least 10

such as Polish, Australians, Romanians, Indians, and Pakistanis.

Another conflict is the resistance of some groups such as the

Muslim migrants to the traditions and culture of the west. Thus,

rather than creating a common integration policy, the UK

government directed their efforts in balancing the interests of

these minorities juxtaposed with the UK public58.

Moving to the policy area on equality, the 2010 Equality

Act59 is the prime legislative act towards the protection of

immigrants’ rights in the UK. It encapsulated passed initiative

and policies on dealing with inequality placing individual

identities as its utmost concern. Main features include the

freedom from discrimination against religion, gender and sexual

orientation, disability, age, and political status, equal

employment opportunities and access to welfare programs, and

jurisdiction of country courts or sheriffs (in Scotland) in cases

relating to discrimination. Further strengthening this act is the

provision in which racial bigots or racists are treated as

offenders and therefore must be subjected to necessary

sanctions60.

ii. Luxembourg58 Saggar, S., & Somerville, W. (2012). Building a British model of integration in an era ofimmigration: Policy lessons for government. Migration Policy Institute, Washington, DC.59 Codified and Arranged previous laws/ declarations such as the Equal Pay Act1970, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Race Relations Act 1976,the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, 2000 Amended Race Relations Act andthree major statutory instruments protecting discrimination in employment ongrounds of religion or belief, sexual orientation and age. Reflected theprinciples of EU on equality.60 ibid.


I. Minorities vis-à-vis Immigrant Country

Luxembourg (LU) holds the position as one of the highest GDP

per capita in the EU and among the Overseas Economic Cooperation

Development ($88,786.58 in 201261). However, this is not only the

result of the sole effort of native Luxembourgians. In reality,

it was more of the contributions of the foreign population.

In the years after gaining its independence from Netherlands

in 1839, LU was left as a poor agricultural country; thus,

forcing 1/3 of its native population to emigrate to successful

economies then such as France and the United States. As a result,

when it discovered iron mineral deposits in its territory, the

ageing population of LU was not able to sustain the labor demands

for mining industries. To remedy the labor gap, the government

encouraged foreign persons to migrate to LU to augment for the

labor force. This was then heard and answered by citizens from

other EU states such as Germans and Italians62.

Ever since then, due to its ageing population- increasing

number of middle-aged persons, low birth rate (11.7 per 1000

inhabitants in 2012), and a low death rate (8.5 per 1000

inhabitants)- it has been a country wherein its economy depended

on the labor of the foreign population. However, in the past 12

years, net migration rate has declined by 1.06 per 1000

inhabitants. Nevertheless, LU is still the EU’s most populated

country in terms of ratio between the foreign population (43.04%61 Trading Economics. (2012). Luxembourg GDP per capita ppp. Trading Economics.62 Kollwelter, S. (2007, March). Immigration in Luxembourg: New challenges for an oldcountry . Retrieved February 21, 2013, from Migration Information Source:http://www.migrationinformation.org/Profiles/display.cfm?ID=587


of total population in 201163) and the native population. Among

the foreigners, Portuguese nationals ranks first as the most

populous group with 82 363 individuals (16.08% of the total

population64) which is followed by French nationals comprising

6.4% of total population. Moreover, the foreign population is

mostly composed of other EU nationals which means that only 2.89%

of total population are from Third countries65)

With regards to the economic situation of immigrants

compared to native citizens, they stand at a considerably equal

stance in terms of employment, standard of living, and income

(though it is heavily directed only to foreign EU nationals)66 67.

II. Government’s Role

Until the turn of the 21st century, there is no explicit or

common policy on migration in LU (though it already had

restrictions on admissions on non-EU citizens and not reliable

workers). However, as concerns surfaced starting from the 1990s

such as asylees from Yugoslavia conflicts, slowdown in economic

development, and competition for pension68.

63 Statistics Portal. (2012). Population by nationality. Statistics Portal.64 ibid.65 ibid.66 Highest salary in EU (approximately 25,000 purchasing power standard);employment rate of native-born (81%), of EU 27-born (82%), of non-EU 27-born(56%); unemployment rate: 2%, 4%, 22% respectively; overcrowding: 9%, 19%, 40%respectively (Eurostat, 2011).67 Eurostat. (2011). Migrants in Europe: A statistical portrait of the first and second generation(pp. 35, 41, 45, 51, 65). European Commission, Eurostat. Luxembourg:Publications Office of the European Union.68 Levinson, A. (2005). The regularisation of unauthorized migrants: Literature survey andcountry case studies . Centre on Migration, Policy and Society . University ofOxford.


Currently, the main policy framework on migration is

inscribed in the 2008 Law on Immigration and Asylum of Luxembourg

(which would be amended in 2011). Its main features are

approaches to economic opportunities and adherence to the

principles of integration and solidarity of the EU.

In the section under economic opportunities, the policy

focuses on matching skills to job types and to assist job seekers

through the Employment Administration. Through this provision,

unemployment rates are expected to decline while economic growth

would be better achieved by maximizing its human resources. It

also gives premium to quality of workers through the adaptation

of the Blue Card Scheme of the EU which aims to encourage high-

skilled workers to migrate to LU. However, all these provisions

are inclined to foreign EU nationals only and that there are

stricter rules for non-EU citizens. One of many restrictions

include that a non-EU citizen who wishes to work in LU must first

be granted of an employer’s permit which could only be obtained

if that employer could not find a suitable EU or LU citizen.

The other section of the policy framework is the adherence

to the principles of integration and solidarity. Since the rise

of refugee applicants, following the Yugoslavia wars in the

1990s, LU has adapted to a strict asylum decision process in

which the validity of the application and the capability of the

state is determined69. The rationale for the strict provision was

69 ibid.


to prevent any illegal immigration that could destabilize the

labor flow of LU.

Another section on provisions relates to the equality in

terms of fair opportunities to employment and living (non-racial

discrimination). This allowed immigrants to enter into public and

private sectors and a chance to establish their own business, and

equal shares to pensions. Moreover, immigrants were also

integrated into the society by allowing them to participate in

elections (e.g. mayor) and suffrage.

However, again, non-EU nationals are the disadvantage party

when it comes to right to employment, business establishments,

and representation in the government. They are restricted from

jobs in the public sector, numerous areas in the private sector,

and the right to self-employment. In terms of representation,

they may hold mayoral offices but are restricted from taking

municipal posts70 71.

e. Comparative Analysis Between UK and LU

Comparing the two MS in terms of tolerance to migrants, UK

is more lenient in admitting immigrants from various ethnic

backgrounds, opening borders to both EU nationals and non-EU

nationals and even to its past colonies (commonwealth) who are in

search for work, refugee, or better standard of living. From a

historical perspective, it has always been a multi-cultural

70 Migrant Integration Policy Index. (2013). Luxembourg. Migrant IntegrationPolicy Index.71 European Migration Network. (2011). Policy report on migration and asylum (pp. 17-48). Walferdange: University of Luxembourg.


society, with both the native-born and the foreign-born enjoy the

same treatment of the government- equal economic opportunities

and access to welfare subsidies (though native citizens tend to

be discriminating towards specific migrant groups such as Polish

and Muslims).

While in LU, although favoring immigration, stricter border

admission applies to specific migrant groups, non-EU nationals.

Ever since its dependence on immigrants for its labor force, it

preferred to welcome EU nationals (Italians, French, and

Portuguese) (part is due to their geographic location) and only

in some instances, such as desperate need for high-skilled

workers, are non-EU nationals are admitted to LU (which explains

their small population in LU). Moreover, non-EU nationals are

discriminated in terms of their economic and political status-

high unemployment rates, poor salary, little to no access to

welfare programs, and under-represented in the government.

With regards to policy on migration, likewise, UK has a more

accommodating law on the entry of foreign nationals with the

rationale that immigrants would compensate for UKs ageing

population. While in LU, stricter, biased, and more regulated

laws are implemented which limits the entry of non-EU nationals

and even low-skilled workers.

In the matter of impacts of immigrants, both UK and LU’s

economy has greatly benefitted from the labor participation of

the foreign population. These gains, however, differ on the

effect to the social and economic life of the general population.


In UK, although migrants have filled the labor demands, in both

levels of high and low-skilled jobs, the growing number of

migrants has caused competition for economic opportunities and

welfare programs between the native-born and the foreign-born

population.

In LU, restrictive measures of the government have promoted

regulation in the inflow of migrants which in turn stabilized the

rates of employment, income, and equal opportunities for welfare

programs.

VII. Conclusion: Centralize and Regulate

At the macro-level, despite adhering to the purpose of the

Stockholm Program and the Lisbon Treaty, the EU, generally does

not adapt to a common migration and asylum policy. When relating

to external persons, MS, in some areas such as admission, then

still maintain independence in establishing their respective

policy on migration and in regulating inflows and outflows of

persons in their borders. But when relating to internal

migration, each MS adapts to the Schengen Agreement which allows

the unrestricted movement of EU nationals. As a result, there is

no regulation in the movement of persons, either EU nationals or

non-EU nationals, causing disparities in the distribution of

foreign population across the EU.

This, however, is not the problem but rather it is the

proportionality of the distribution of population. If the case

was that the largest portion of immigrants are occupying the MS


which accounts for the highest GDP or most developed economy,

then this situation would be beneficial for the EU and its MS.

However, the reality is the opposite. In most cases, the

more developed economies, notably France and Luxembourg, admit

fewer migrants while the poorer countries, like Spain, receive

more migrants. Spain, for example, already suffering from soaring

unemployment rates, would be situated in a more difficult

position to recover from the recession. Therefore, the EU then is

recommended to conclude a common migration and asylum policy and

a central institution which would address the issue of population

disproportionality and ensure the protection of poorer MS that

are experiencing high migration rates.

Furthermore, since MS have their particular policy on

foreign nationals, there would be different approaches and

attitudes towards them. Although the EU, as a whole, renounces

discrimination, in some cases, such as in LU, migrants in the

society are at unequal status compared to the native population-

higher unemployment rates and issues of mismatched skills which

would waste their capabilities to contribute to the labor market.

Thus, in addition to a policy of a regulated distribution, the EU

should also implement a binding policy to all MS which would

defend foreign nationals from inequalities or discrimination,

whether it be in terms of political status or economic

opportunities.

Furthermore, in terms of internal security, the EU’s powers

on security appear to be inadequate and limited. For instance,


the EuroPol might be the EU’s police force in dealing with

transnational crimes and terrorism but, in reality, it is simply

an agency of limited to communicating investigations and

information between MS’s respective police agencies and has no

capacity to initiate investigation or apprehend offenders.

In the meantime, while the agreement for a common policy

framework for human mobility is in the status of negotiation, it

is the responsibility of MS to determine the flow of migrants

across their borders. Fundamentally, based on the comparative

analysis of UK and LU, migrants in a country can be referred to

as a “double-edged sword”. It is a resource that could contribute

to the overall development of a country if utilized wisely. While

at the same time, it could lead to a detrimental disease

resulting to a competition of the country’s available resources.

To state it clearly, MS should regulate migration in their

respective borders, not too much immigrants and not too less.

Although this may be a difficult factor to determine, it is best

for the MS to allow migration via batches and not by opening

their borders for prolonged period of time and observe internal

economic factors- GDP, employment rate, unemployment rate, income

rate, and welfare services. To further the benefits from

migrants, each MS should have a strict adherence to the Blue Card

Scheme of the EU which meant that priority migrants are those who

have attained both high-level of education and expertise.

Moreover, these MS should also establish equal rights for the

migrants in their society. Through integration, the native


population and the foreign population could co-exist and equally

share the same resources and work to a common goal.

The key is regulation. However, this is just the surface of

the solution. The next challenge for EU in the coming years then

is until to what extent should borders be open to immigrants.


CROSSING THE BORDERS OF THE LEVIATHAN: ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION, POLICIES, AND IMPACTS OF HUMAN...

Documents

Transcript of CROSSING THE BORDERS OF THE LEVIATHAN: ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION, POLICIES, AND IMPACTS OF HUMAN...