|
INTERNATIONAL EMIGRATION: PROS AND CONS
United Nations presents report
BY ALBERTO D. PEREZ —Special
for Granma International—
A report published by the UN on the issue of
international emigration confirms that the exodus of
millions of individuals from their countries of
origin, principally for economic reasons, has a
positive impact in the receiving nations not only on
account of resolving problems of unskilled worker
shortages, but also, increasingly, by supplying
highly educated migrants.
Migrants, as a general rule, take on jobs that
are low paid and that natives of the receptor
countries consider less appealing. This is the case
in the U.S. agricultural sector where millions of
emigrants from Mexico, Central and South America,
and the Caribbean come for work.
Likewise, developing countries in Asia –including
the giants such as India, Indonesia and the
Philippines—contribute migrants to nations with
strong economies, as much on account of their
industrial development – Republic of Korea and
Singapore – as their oil exports – Saudi Arabia and
United Arab Emirates.
With data from the UN Population Division, the
report maintains that 191 million individuals were
classified as migrants last year. Nearly 60%, 115
million, left their country of origin for
industrialized nations, but 75 million emigrated to
other developing nations wealthier than their own.
It is worth noting that South-South migration has
increased in importance as barriers imposed by the
countries of the North have become more insuperable.
Germany and Spain, with four million each,
received more immigrants than any other European
country while the United States gained 15 million
immigrants. In terms of gender, nearly half of all
immigrants are women, who are more concentrated in
industrialized countries. In these countries, female
immigrants are frequently obliged to work in
degrading jobs. By continent, Europe shelters 34% of
all migrants; U.S. and Canada, 23 %, and Asia, 28%.
Only 9% are living in Africa, 3% in Latin America
and the Caribbean and the remaining 3% in Oceania.
In the United States and Europe agricultural work
is the principal source of employment for immigrants,
although the countries of the North are obtaining a
growing number of highly qualified migrants.
This group has continually increased its presence
among immigrants. In 1960, the developed countries
of Eastern Europe hosted 12 million immigrants with
university degrees; this figure rose to 20 million
by 1990.
The developing countries are contributing to this
intellectual, scientific and technical brain drain
to the detriment of their own aspirations of
progress.
To have an idea of the magnitude of this
phenomenon, suffice it to say that between 33 and 55
% of all highly-educated individuals from Angola,
Burundi, Ghana, Kenya, the Mauritius Islands,
Mozambique, Sierra Leona, Uganda and Tanzania have
left their countries to live in developed European
nations.
But the proportion is even higher in other
developing nations: no less than 60% of highly
educated persons from Jamaica, Haiti, Trinidad and
Tobago, Guyana and Fiji have left their homelands.
Emigration also has a devastating effect on
families in the emitting nations. Many families,
especially in poorer countries, lose their male
family heads to the search for work.
Illegal emigration is the tragic aspect of this
movement, fed by the desperation of millions of
individuals who lack employment and means of
sustaining themselves and their families in their
country of origin. The Mexico-U.S. border – now in
the processes of fortification on the U.S. side –
has been the scene of many fatal incidents: the
border patrol has fired on – sometimes killing –
alleged violators of the perimeter. Many migrants
have also drowned trying to cross the Río Grande.
In a unique case, designed to encourage
politically motivated immigration, the U.S.
government offers residency to Cuban citizens who
succeed in entering U.S. territory, no matter the
method used, which is usually illegal: this policy
is known as "dry foot" (the migrant stays in the
United States); "wet foot" (the migrant is returned
to the island.)
This policy has inspired clandestine exits from
Cuba by means of paid pirates in speedboats as well
as non-professional ones aboard precarious craft. On
many occasions, both ways have cost human lives.
Although they do not enjoy the same privilege as
Cubans, a large number of Haitians have drowned in
attempts to reach the United States or Puerto Rico
in totally unseaworthy, makeshift vessels, driven by
the desperation of abject poverty.
There is a similar situation in the Mediterranean
and the Atlantic with small vessels loaded with
African migrants trying to reach southern Europe and
the Canary Islands. Seldom does a week pass without
the European press publishing the tragic news of the
death of would-be immigrants at sea.
But international emigration also has an aspect
that some consider positive: family remittances,
which in 2005 totaled $232 billion ($102 billion in
1995). Of all these transfers, $167 billion (72%)
went to developing countries. Although many families
count on those remittances to survive, this
habitually distorts national economies and make them
even more dependent.
One third of this sum was destined for only four
countries: India, China, Mexico and France. At the
same time, remittances make up the main part of the
gross domestic product of the Philippines, Serbia
and Montenegro.
Obviously, international emigration is a complex
problem wrought with pros and cons, although,
unfortunately, the latter would seem to outweigh the
former.
|