In recent times, the international community has not been as receptive to the concerns of refugees. The change has been particularly notable in major resettling countries like the United States and Germany. In the United States recent legislation provides for the summary expulsion of asylum seekers who cannot demonstrate a "credible fear" of persecution in their homeland. Arriving with false documentation is considered wrongful, even if this is the only way for some refugees to flee from a repressive regime. Rejected asylum seekers are also expected to be quickly deported in order not to undermine the credibility of the system. In Germany, the constitution’s provision for the open acceptance of refugees has been modified. Bosnian refugees are no longer welcome in Germany. Some Bosnian refugees willingly return to their homeland while others are repatriated by state authorities (e.g. North Rhine-Westfalia). Economic downturns in receiving societies are a major factor in this change of public opinion and public policy. When opportunities for prosperity seem to decline, foreigners are the first to be blamed. Host countries are also concerned about the exploitation of the system by economic refugees who are smuggled into the country by agents and middlemen.

People smugglers have discovered, thanks to the Internet, that Ireland provides a package of benefits to refugees. Ireland used to resettle approximately 100 refugees a year. Reports indicate that now asylum seekers are arriving in Ireland at the rate of 100 a week; by the year’s end, perhaps 6,000 will claim refugee status. Most arrivals apply for refugee status not at the point of entrance, but with the Department in Dublin, claiming that they were locked in a truck without knowing where they would land. Thus, they avoid the possibility of being sent back to a European country which they had passed and where they should have made their claim for asylum.

Increasing migration pressures, created by more restrictive policies and widening economic opportunities, have not been accompanied by concerted policies among countries. Consequently, migrants have tried all possible avenues for a chance to work and live in a more prosperous nation, blurring the distinctions between migrants and refugees. Agents and middlemen have been instrumental in exploiting flaws in the system and receiving nations have reacted by moving toward a more restrictive understanding of the conditions for accepting refugees. In the end, refugees are doubly victimized by the whole situation.

There is hope though. Some Churches in Germany have welcomed refugees, despite threats or attacks from right-wingers. The Vietnamese Village in the Philippines illustrates that if resettlement or repatriation is not an option, local integration can be pursued. These examples show that indeed something can be done to address the refugee problem. The international community must not allow compassion fatigue to take over vigilance. The basic principle of refuge must be protected and honored.

Asian Migrant, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1997

Trafficking persons across borders is not a new phenomenon. It existed for many years in what was and still is the smuggling of women for prostitution. Such business is particularly flourishing from Burma to Thailand while facts are not clear concerning Filipino and Thai women entering Japan to work as entertainers. What is new is the extent to which large numbers of migrants are transported through illegal channels and the spread of this business across the globe. Various individuals and organizations are involved in trafficking migrants, from the legendary "coyotes" at the border between Mexico and the United States to ships from Asia and the Mediterranean Sea and mediators in Moscow. Creativity is not lacking in devising new schemes as the case of Filipinas being transported into Korea shows. At one time, they entered mass marriage ceremonies to gain entry to Korea. After this was forbidden, they are now advised to apply as missionaries.

The whole affair originates at the point of departure, with the decision to go abroad through irregular channels. Since over 80 percent of migrants from Asia leave for a foreign country by airplane, airports are the major hubs of the trafficking business. In the Philippines, the attention of the public was caught when 26 migrants who posed as tourists were stopped from leaving the country toward the end of March. Speculations are rife about connivance of airport officers, booths through which control of requirements is lax and passage is easy, and the whole escort business is marked with fraud. The concern has reached the attention of the President, who has declared an anti-migrant trafficking year. Six government agencies have signed an agreement to cooperate in curbing trafficking. Personal appearance will now be required to obtain a passport and Filipino departing passengers will not be allowed proxy check-in at the airport.

Often migrants who are trafficked are aware of being part of an illegal operation. But in many cases they are duped into it by smugglers aiming at increasing their profits or they are convinced that the illegal and costly operation will land them an honest and profitable job. After going through the motion, the promised jobs are non-existent or they are trapped in some form of enslavement in sweat shops or prostitution rings to repay for the cost of the operation. Some quickly place the whole burden of the horrible consequences of trafficking on the migrants, who "willingly" tread the road of illegality. But one cannot refrain from asking why would migrants venture through the uncertain terrain of illegal entry to a country? Is it because they are adventurous, or criminally oriented, or desperately in need?

The double standard in receiving countries whose economies demand foreign labor and whose policies restrict it has certainly a major role in encouraging people to try the illegal way. Furthermore, the trafficking industry facilitating and profiting from needy migrants cannot be allowed to continue. In this regard, most governments should not look too far. Often, trafficking is possible only because government employees in key sectors do not have an interest in stopping a traffic from which they gain much profit. Migration is becoming more widespread, more complex, and, unfortunately, more dangerous, but only for migrants. It should be rendered unprofitable and risky for unscrupulous agents and traffickers.

Asian Migrant, Vol. 10, N0. 2, 1997

The first significant episode concerns the undocumented children of Chinese from the mainland who are now residing in Hong Kong. The legal way for Chinese children to enter and stay in Hong Kong is through a certificate of entitlement. Children separated from their parents could not wait that long and decided to sneak illegally into the territory. According to the Basic Law (the constitution governing Hong Kong) such children (approximately 1,000) have the right of abode in the territory. However, legislation passed by the Provisional Legislature that substituted the 1995 elected Legislative Council requires them to return to the mainland, join the queue of approximately 66,000 children and obtain a certificate of entitlement before re-entering Hong Kong. The argument is that if anyone entering Hong Kong illegally could then remain this would open the gates to a flood of immigrants from the mainland to Hong Kong.

The second episode relates to the government’s project to make available 85,000 new apartments every year. The construction industry has anticipated that to reach the target there will be a shortage of approximately 10,000 workers and has asked for a revision of the Supplementary Labor Scheme to allow for the importation of as many migrant workers. The employers’ proposal has met the opposition of the unions that argue that there is no labor shortage and employers seem want to maintain salaries low by importing foreign workers. At the same time, instead of the anticipated mass repatriation of foreign domestic workers, particularly from the Philippines, observers are witnessing an increasing demand for foreign domestic helpers.

The two episodes illustrate some of the directions that are under way in Hong Kong. On the one end, a clear message is sent that political change does not entail easy immigration from the mainland. On the other hand, foreign immigrants will be allowed to enter when the economy will require it. In both cases, the prominent consideration seems to be the economic one. Chinese immigrants are, in fact, considered poor brothers who will remain and exact a social cost on Hong Kong society. Foreign immigrants, instead, serve a temporary need and remain disposable. The world is divided into nations usually along ethnic borders. But economic borders also run through nations and form separate communities.

For migrants in Hong Kong life after July 1 is characterized by continuity. But Big Brother has already indicated an interest in labor export to ease the impact of further privatization of government industries. How long continuity will last is anyone’s guess.

Asian Migrant, Vol. 10, N0. 3, 1997

The first to fall was Thailand, which succumbed after an expensive attempt to save the baht, and the currencies of Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines followed suit. Like a typhoon moving north, it did not spare Korea, the eleventh largest economy in the world, exposing problems of major proportions. The IMF and World Bank have prepared rescue packages, with stringent requirements attached, such as reducing the growth rate, which will bring painful consequences to the economies of these countries.

In the short run, currency devaluation can be considered an unexpected gift to migrants and their families. Coming from earnings in foreign currencies which were not devalued, remittances will exchange at 40-60 percent more than was the case a few months ago. However, such an impact will be lost if inflation gets out of hand.

In the long run, the crisis will produce a potentially negative scenario. In sending countries such as the Philippines and Indonesia, the overall consequences of the crisis on the economy will translate in increased unemployment. In addition to the slowdown in the industrial sector, there is also the crisis in agriculture occasioned by the El Niņo phenomenon. All these will create additional emigration pressures. However, since labor-importing countries such as Korea and Malaysia are in a tight fix themselves, would-be migrants have nowhere to go.

In labor-receiving countries, high interest rates and insolvency will cause many firms to fold up. The most vulnerable will be the construction industry, which went on a high gear on the assumption of perennial high growth rates. The construction sector traditionally employs migrants, such as the Burmese in Thailand and Indonesians in Malaysia. A slowdown in construction or the abandonment of huge infrastructure projects is likely to affect the demand for migrant workers in other sectors. A possible exception might be the domestic service sector. However, a prolonged economic crisis will affect the demand for most migrant workers, including domestic workers, as there will be a tendency to prioritize local workers over migrant workers. Lay-offs and consequent repatriation of migrants are likely to follow. Thailand, for one, has already begun to draft plans to repatriate the illegal workers in its midst.

Migrants will be, once again, the expendable item in this crisis. As in the past, when the going gets rough, migrants get an even rougher deal. Migrants get blamed for the loss of jobs, but it must be remembered that migrants did not create the crisis. Migration is part and parcel of the dynamics of integrated economies. To think that dumping migrants in the country of origin will solve the problem of unemployment is a misconception because migrants operate in a different labor market than nationals. In addition, pushing problems over the border is never a solution because in a globalized world, someone’s problem is everyone’s problem.

Asian Migrant, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1998