The Courier

Babacar Niang, installation, Embouteillages urbains, 2005. ‘Afrique Europe: rêves croisés’.

© European Commission and artist

Or, to take the meeting’s line, it’s a question of “good governance of the phenomenon of migration”. There is general agreement that the type of good governance that should be at stake is not just about migrants’ countries of origin, but all actors including host countries and international organisations. There’s a coming together, too, of the fact that the phenomenon is on the rise in part because of globalisation, and that despite a downside, it does enrich host countries and develop regions from where migrants originate.

One issue causing heated debate was the role of migrants’ countries of origin with official or private bodies who often benefit from illegal immigration. Another was the reported hypocrisy of host countries who lessen the contribution of migrants and home in on law and order issues. This, in turn, provokes the segregation of migrants.

The missing link

Ndioro Ndiaye, Deputy Director General of IOM (International Organisation for Migration, www.iom.int) says that despite all the hullabaloo about migration, the proportion of migrants in the world remains stable: 3% of the world’s population, of whom the big majority are legal. What seems to have shocked people in Europe is the growth in the number of black African migrants spoken about in all the media – 2,700 in 2005 compared with 120,000 in 2006 – many heading for what has now become a symbolic destination: the Canary Islands. Of particular concern is African immigration, not least voiced by African countries themselves. This is because migration has led to ‘growth’ without development.

In a single year, 20,000 African health professionals left the continent. Ndiaye is outraged: “How is it possible to pay someone to study for seven years and offer them a mere US$200 per month salary, forcing them to go elsewhere?” This question was put not only to countries of origin, but also to international donors who fund education in the countries concerned.

Development projects should take into account the added value of migrants’ skills, how they fill the demands of local businesses and the contribution of diasporas to their countries of origin and funds they transfer there. These financial resources should be used to stem migration. Instead of taking advantage of such opportunities, host countries keep migration issues within the walls of the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Home Affairs and Justice, as is the case in France, without any input from development bodies. “Here’s the missing link”, analysed Ndiaye. The migration forum to be held in Europe in July 2007 will be an opportunity for European governments to adopt a well-rounded approach to the phenomenon.

As for Africa, “it has not been absolved”. It should, according to Ndiaye, equip itself to dialogue on an equal footing with Europe, acquiring knowledge and skills in fields such as security issues relating to official papers and the running of transit terminals. Africa should assemble a body of academic experts to address such issues. The crime of ignorance or incompetence was just as reprehensible as that of indifference or demagogy.

The global world, a second colonial system

Rita Sussmuth from the GCIM (Global Commission on International Migration, www.gcim.org), an independent organisation set up by the Secretary General of the United Nations and several countries to draw up a blueprint for a global approach to international migration, underlines the contrast between the open-mindedness of the EU, particularly the Commission, on the one hand, and EU Member States, who tersely defend their respective interests. This jeopardises any harmonisation. They are, she says, too busy defending their patch to share sovereignty and seek a win-win solution for both host countries and migrants’ countries of origin.

Migrants from Africa, of whom roughly 50% are women, are the driving force for the continent’s development. These women are pillars of their nations’ economies. A second colonial system seems to be sanctioned in the global world; a ‘brain drain’, in addition to the pillage of natural resources. Good governance of international institutions should not be confined to managing internal affairs, but carve real cooperation for a globalised world.
Rita Sussmuth is just as scathing of African countries which, in her opinion, allegedly have various ways of making money out of their migrants.

A market of predators

Aminata Traoré, former Minister of Culture in Mali and an international expert and figurehead of the alternative globalisation movement, questions the appropriateness of the focus of the symposium’s main focus, ‘development’, and encourages Europe to “recognise that there are no more bad governance issues in Africa than elsewhere”. At the same time, she underlines that when the continent is severely criticised, it’s usually black Africa that takes the flak. In her view, “the mirror of corruption is held up to us whilst upstream; only market rules count. The smugglers are a part of the system”. In the opinion of this activist for a different way forward, Europe’s problem is its guilt and its refusal to recognise that its development policy is on the wrong footing. China should not be the scapegoat, because “China was not the one that started the pillaging”.

In the same vein, Aminata Traoré criticises the perversion of the G8 reducing debts which “trap African countries into agreements harmful to their development”, she said sums paid to leaders of countries of origin to offset them are akin to political corruption. The good governance of developed countries trying to control the civil society of poor countries should be questioned. Aminata Traoré also criticised the guarantees that are said to have been given to multinationals by multilateral financing organisations in their assistance programmes for developing countries. The international market has become “a market of predators”.

Finally, the disproportionate media coverage of African immigration to Spain was underlined and likened to racism, whereas the number of African migrants in this country is tiny compared to those from Latin America or Eastern Europe.
The African Diaspora, the biggest donor to Africa by a long way
Remittances: the jargon for financial assistance from migrants given to their country of origin. Theses sums of money are significant. Gibril Faal, Chairman of the Board of AFFORD (African Foundation for Development, www.afford-uk.org) advocates ‘Remit Aid’ –   tax refunds on ‘aid’ sent by migrants to their countries; which is a scheme similar to refunds given by EU governments to those donating to charity organisations. Faal reminded symposium-goers of World Bank statistics for 2003 and 2005, respectively US$200 billion and US$250 billion going to Africa.

As far as African development cooperation goes, the African diaspora is far and away the leading donor, and not just any old donor. It is the most generous, least demanding and the most consistent donor. Remittances are growing and flow no matter what; when the economy is strong and when times are hard. Without any conditionality tied to good governance or commercial consideration, the diaspora sends its share to Africa. Depending on the country, such aid is 2 to 4 times bigger than all official development aid, and with a value 5 times higher than that of direct foreign investment.

Further, it is aid solely for beneficiaries, whereas a large proportion of State-to-State development aid stays in donor hands. And there is no need for government mediation or other intermediaries tapping into it. This is an example of good governance.

Over 90% of remittances are spent on consumer goods. 40% to 60% in a country like Ghana typically goes to the construction sector. Gibril Faal’s conclusion: this type of aid is as of much importance as development aid. There were questions where no consensus was reached during the heated discussions rounding off the speakers’ presentations, such as restrictions on freedom of movement, acknowledged as tighter in Europe for those coming from Black Africa, and the need to provide developing countries with the expertise of their migrants on a temporary or long-term basis, even if tapping international government aid to do so.

Jonathan Faull, from the European Commission, is opposed to more freedom of movement around EU countries for migrants. Such rights do not exist anywhere in the world since borders are still realities. He is also against the idea of placing Europe on trial for anti-black Africa racism. Only recently has attention been drawn to the grants from the continent. Before, those most affected had been Mediterranean populations and those from Eastern Europe.

The speeches and discussions barely dealt with home security issues for EU States and the frequently raised related problem of trouble hotspots in communities of foreign origin. Nor did they come to grips with the tensions between the ‘homogenous’ and non-native populations in areas where the number of migrants are especially high. Isn’t the domestic security preoccupation of host countries a matter of not being able to see the wood for the trees?