Konferenzbericht (PDF-Dokument, 3 MB) - SID

Wissen wandert
holding camps (literally prisons) where their occupants
are treated as criminals, the perception of a conspiracy
is further reinforced. Granted, some of these countries
have responded in overzealous ways to limit their territo-
ries being used for transit by illegal immigrants, but there
are a number of human rights concerns that can (and
should) be raised about the treatment of those who are
interned in these detention camps. The presence of
these camps on African territory almost certainly con-
tributes to deterioration of political and economic rela-
tionships with (poorer) neighbouring countries, thus
complicating the landscape for eventual policy gains at a
sub-regional and continental level.
Why would the transit countries acquiesce to the con-
struction of these camps on their territory? There is a
perverse, almost cynical logic that accompanies their
cooperation with Europe. First, they gain – they receive
additional grants from Europe for the construction and
maintenance of these camps, but not only. As such, the
irregular migrants become an asset for the transit coun-
tries. Beyond this, their strategic relevance to Europe
enhanced, they are also able to wield greater bargaining
power in their negotiations with Europe with regard to
their own emigrant quotas.
In sum, there is broadly a negative perception of the new
politics of migration. It might have been couched with
concepts such as „remittances and development‟; „mi-
gration and development‟, but when we look at the basic
elements that remain once you strip all of these policy
ideas of their fancy language you are left with the limita-
tion of entry by Africans into European territory. The
migration and immigration policies are to a large extent
confused and confusing. Good intentions have been
largely caught up and negated by the control elements
of the policies that have been promulgated. Even at the
policy level, there is a deep scepticism that all of these
schemes will attain their stated objectives.
38
knowledge migrates
It is a sticky problem with no easy solutions. Europe
clearly has a right to control its borders. But how do you
do this in a manner that does not create negative per-
ceptions and maybe even hostility?
There are a number of elements that are inevitable –
first and foremost that people (Africans in this case) will
continue to move across borders (European ones in-
cluded) in spite of controls that are ever more rigorous.
And a good number of them will succeed. Secondly,
Europe will continue to depend on these immigrants –
whether they are white collar, blue collar or unskilled
workers. At least for the foreseeable future, as long as
there is a demand in the labour markets, there will be a
sup-ply of bodies to meet that demand. There is thus a
symbiotic (if you like) relationship between Europe and
Africa. This link is historical and continues to evolve.
Third, is that repressive measures will fail – eventually.
They might produce short-term results, but in the long-
term may work against Europe‟s own interests. Thus
there is a need to find viable approaches that minimize
barriers – physical and mental.
Can there be a better migration policy designed that
counters these negative perceptions? At one level, there
needs to be greater attention paid to the human rights of
migrants – whether they are transiting clandestinely via
rubber dinghy or are fare-paying passengers on com-
mercial flights. Secondly, the dialogue efforts need to be
deepened in order to ensure that the purpose and objec-
tives of policies are clearly understood and are trans-
lated into relevant and adequate policy tools. Although
the results are still to be seen clearly, the Euro-African
policy dialogue is advancing (in order to develop a joint
common approach on M&D), on the basis of the princi-
ple of a joint political partnership as stated, amongst the
others, in the action plan of Rabat Plan of Action (July
2006) and in the common declaration on M&D, adopted
at EU-Africa summit in Tripoli (November 2006).