The problem
The politics of immigration have for long dictated unethical and unproved perceptions among citizens especially in developed countries that immigrants cause a rise in crime levels. Beliefs among most Americans for example is that immigrants, especially undocumented immigrants who are referred to as ‘illegal aliens’ are more likely to commit crime compared to natives (Green, 2015). This perception extends to assume that the undocumented immigrants also cause crime in the areas they settle in to increase. However, according to McLeod this is not the case. Immigrants are less likely to commit crime compared to natives because of their uncertainty of accommodation and also because most undocumented immigrants dare not risk crossing with government officials (2020). The opinions surrounding immigration and crime have caused several negative consequences which include the promotion of local ordinances that support criminalization of undocumented people, blurring the lines between immigrants’ detention camps and prisons considering the two groups of people are treated under the same circumstances and political mobilization of groups that generally spread negative attitudes towards immigrants.
This has a result led to contemporary consequences that have been rooted in xenophobic political discourse that support anti-immigrant policies in most developed countries to exclude citizens from specific regions over decades. The United States for example has adopted the general belief that immigrants are more likely to be involved in criminal activities, generally classifying them as criminals. Lacroix notes that the relationship between immigration and crime is very weak and has been largely overstated by the overwhelming public opinion towards (2022). The lack of public opinion data has reduced the ability to acquire full knowledge of the relationship between immigration and criminal activities. Governments lack administrative records specifically indicating the records of criminal activities committed by immigrants with a full consideration of their county of origin and immigration status. Globally, countries have varying immigration policies and despite an increase in international migration since the 20th century, there has been little explanation to the varying levels of foreigner incarceration. The proportion of Foreigner prisoners ranges from 1 percent to 90 percent depending on the region and economic structure. Nations with strong economic structures have been associated with a higher share of incarcerated foreigners. According to (quote) countries with the highest shares of incarcerated migrants have a higher number of European migrants while countries that have a higher proportion of workers as immigrants tend to have very few foreigners among the incarcerated.
The association between crime and immigration as Koslowski, notes is a product of political discourse that have seen an increase in punitive state laws and a rise in deportation cases (2012). This can be seen from the constantly changing role of politics in immigration policies that have been on a rise despite the declining number of illegal entries in most regions. The role of politics in shaping immigration policies that attribute immigration to crime have been understudied hence the spread and adoption of immigration propensity myths that both scholars and members of the public have been led to believe over time. Contrary to empirical evidence, the stereotyping of criminal immigrants has been historically rooted in contemporary politics and attitudes. As a result, these attitudes have shaped immigration policies, welfare policies and criminal justice pertaining the rights and protection of immigrants as well as other groups including ethnicities. In the past five decades Heidrick & Struggles note that immigration policies have widely transformed especially in an era with rising incarceration rates, rapid social changes, post-industrial urban decline and politics of punitive criminalisation policies (2012). The public has been underserved with quantitative data connecting immigration to criminal activities and this had caused them to bear wide-range implications on immigrants. Immigrants have been continuously subjected to becoming targets of antiterrorist and criminal policies as a result of the publicly backed policy changes on immigration. Green notes that presentation of clear evidence to the public about the empirical relationship between immigration and crime is essential in the fight against immigration stereotyping and misinformation that significantly contributes to pervade practices and policies (2015). Researches and policy makers are tasked with collection and dissemination of accurate information on immigrant criminality to help dispel the incorrect assumption and make room for immigration policy changes.
The Solution
Policies, dimensions and typologies organized around the economic or political treatment of immigrants are used by countries which seek to exert strong control over immigration. The admission policies are dependent on the kind of people presumably considering the levels of crime they are attributed to and incorporated migration policies. Global North countries for example shifted immigration trajectory policies by ending guest worker and limiting postcolonial migrations in the 20th century. The resulting expansive policies have for past three decades moved towards more restrictive admissions, contrary to the pre-existing policies on the same. Developing countries are subjected to what Lacroix notes as postmodern idealism where they face unequal visa restrictions consequently subjecting them to inequalities of human rights and freedoms and restricted access to movement (2022). Monopolization of authorities by developed countries has ensured that Nations closely monitor people leaving and entering their borders with much more strictness. Ending immigration stereotyping and disparities begins by development of international laws that provides for the right of people to access foreign spaces. This will significantly contribute to reducing inhumane mistreatment, work exploitation and modern slavery which have all increased as a result of restrictive immigration policies. The international law currently provides for the right of people to cross borders in countries where they are citizens only under the non-binding Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The development of sectorial policies such as the OECD policy introduced to mitigate the entry of undesirables in a system of deterrence and pre-selection visa programs should be controlled to ensure that the laws are universally applicable to all persons.
Global North Nations have stereotyped Global South Nations with unfriendliness and suspicion which Kacarska, notes might also be an indication that they still view these countries as colonies (2012). This stereotyping has spread to the public members in these nations over years, permanently creating the perception that immigrants are prone to violence, terrorism and criminal activities and hence the support for restrictive policies within their borders. In a much-globalised world where rapid technology growth has supported the expansion and effectiveness of transportation means, both short term and long term cross national movements have significantly increased. However, due to racialization of outsiders by citizens and the public, immigration of indigenous groups and members of certain regions, exploitation, manipulation, criminalisation and exclusion have been used to extract value from the evaded people. This largely indicates the presence of social colonialism in the current global society.
Policies
Visa requirements indicate the willingness of countries to regulate, monitor and control access to their spaces. All travellers are required to produce state-issued passports and visas that allow them the right to enter foreign spaces. Depending on the destination they wish to travel to, suspicious persons can be denied entry. The use of visas as security guarantees especially in developed countries has over the past three decades been used as a scapegoat for immigration restrictions. Mau et al, note that western countries have gone steps further to adopt smart border strategies such as use of private transport companies to monitor and deter security functions along borders (2015). This has increased the brutality and inhumane nature by which undocumented immigrants are handled at the entry points. Most undocumented immigrants are survivors of war, harsh climatic conditions and worse living standards who run to seek refuge in better places. Exerting control over territories is very essential for states to ensure security within their borders and for their citizens. However, when the control is directed to a specified group of people, some who are even skilled workers seeking better opportunities are denied migration because of a unconfirmed stereotype, the exchange of services, goods and ideas globally becomes limited. There have been numerous calls for countries to ease visa restrictions for foreign travel in bids to improve international trade and tourism. This has to some extent opened up collaboration between region blocks and groups of countries where passport union and harmonized visa policies have been developed. The same can be applied at a global scale if Global North countries quit clinging to their prerogative entry controls.
Benefits
Evidence
Passports have also come out as objective artifacts that have been used to perpetuate hierarchy in the modern world. For job seekers in developing nations, migrations in search of better opportunities has been subject of modern slavery claims. Arab countries have for example been under attack about work mistreatments and exploitation that has over the years been subjected to African workers who mostly move to the region in search of vocational jobs. This is another indication that developed countries still have a colonial settler society where high ranked nations subdue citizens from developing nations. The immigration laws applied by these countries dehumanise, oppress and racialize citizens from the less affluent regions while easily allowing the movement of Global Nations citizens citing them to be investors and with very low chances of committing crime. Contrary to this believe, citizens from the less affluent countries are rarely connected to international crimes and due to lack of empirical evidence, are subjected to settler colonial framework. Transformative visions of global solidarity in bringing down international borders have been set up against the unjust structures. Such calls have resulted in the revision of migration policies especially in countries that share borders but are yet to have a notable global effect. Former United States President Donald Trump for example proposed the construction of a wall on the US and Mexico border as a solution to the invasion of immigrants. This was an inconsiderate action that should have raised protests among the international community and within the country because it is an act of racialization and division. The many cultures and people who live around the border were forced to separate from their families, denied access to better healthcare and resources in a community which they have existed in for centuries. Governments function to serve the people and, in such cases, the voice of the public is very essential. Calls to bring down borders or develop better ways to control international crimes should be aired by the people government representatives, an action that has been lacking for long especially among citizens in developed countries.
The OCED indicators of Talent Attractiveness are based on the quality of life, skills, environment, prospects and strengths and weaknesses of different countries. This means that highly skilled workers are attracted to top OCED countries whose attractiveness points are higher. Such policies should be revised to recruit workers through an equal structure despite the level of attractiveness of the country they hail from. Developing countries generally have a lower number of skilled workers who are also subjected to segregation when applying for jobs in developed OECD countries. Better monitoring of global movements should be introduced internationally to ensure that the global distribution of talents is fair or at least done in a transparent and globally acceptable manner. Despite being former colonies and product suppliers for developed Global North Nations, African countries have been offered very little mobility rights as the affluent nations continue to impose visa restrictions that generally symbolise suspicion of the citizens from these nations and total unfriendliness. These perceptions and accusations are based on unproved critics are threats to territoriality and national identity.
The Global North Nations and generally all the affluent countries should reciprocate the bilateral visa regimes and broader power asymmetry that is extended to them by Global South Nations. This includes less stringent examination of entry requirements especially for legal migrants with state approved travel documents in order to improve global mobility statistics are well as allow for international equality. Citizens from the less affluent nations do not deserve the second-class treatment they receive on the global stage especially with visa application processes where they are forced to go through complex application processes only for a handful of them to be allowed entry into the affluent nations (Mau et al., 2015). Such restrictions have significantly contributed to the global inequality of freedom, rights and access as developed countries continue to monopolize their authorities with dominative economic, cultural and political systems. Governments and international bodies ought to intervene and ensure that modern day colonization does not become a progressive problem as it has in the past manifested itself in form of the old and new imperialism ages. To end the stereotyping associated with immigrants from the less affluent regions, terms such as Global South and Third World should not be accepted for use. This is because people form the affluent countries continue to view people form less affluent regions as undesirables and people in need of constant monitoring. Global divide brought about by such divisive terminologies are as a result of ignorance of bilateral reciprocity of visa regimes, concealment of other underlying issues and multipolar ties.
References
Green, P. (2015). Mobility regimes in practice: Later-life Westerners and visa runs in South-East Asia. Mobilities, 10(5), 748-763.
Heidrick & Struggles, Chicago. IMD (2017), IMD World Talent Ranking 2017. Institute for Management Development, Lausanne.
Kacarska, S. (2012). Europeanisation through mobility: visa liberalization and citizenship regimes in the Western Balkans.
Koslowski, R. (2011). The international travel regime. In Global mobility regimes (pp. 51-72). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Lacroix, T. (2022). The transnational state and migration: Reach, flows, and Policies. Political Geography, 94, 102571.
Mau, S., Gulzau, F., Laube, L., & Zaun, N. (2015). The global mobility divide: How visa policies have evolved. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(8), 1192-1213.
McLeod, J. (2020). Beginning postcolonialism. In Beginning postcolonialism (second edition). Manchester University Press.
https://thegmetalworks0.wordpress.com/2024/10/12/the-politics-of-immigration-policies-dimensions-and-typologies-organized-around-the-economic-or-political-treatment-of-immigrants/
#Civilization #crimeAndImmigration #crimeLevels #dimensions #Germany #GlobalNorth #immigration #Labor #Policies #politicalTreatment #stereotype #typologies #UK #undocumentedImmigrants #USA #Visa #VisaRequirements