Introduction
Between 25th March and 1st April 2011, I participated in a Training Course (TC) co-financed by the Youth in Action programme, in the city of Stip, Macedonia.
This TC was an intensive week working on the thematic of Migration, Immigration and Emigration in a general point of view on one side, and on the other side focusing on the different countries which were represented there.
This article focuses on some of the aspects that have been drawn by this TC and is not exclusively focusing on the Balkan case. Instead, it is a small gathering of ideas containing some comparisons that I find interesting to treat here, be it about Balkan countries or other countries from Eastern and Central Europe, Western Europe and Caucasus region, which were represented during the TC.
Background
One of the most interesting things I can say about this training was the diversity of participants coming from different countries and therefore being familiar with different migration realities. We can consider that 5 different regions were present: Western Europe with Portugal, UK, Italy and Sweden, the Baltic area with Lithuania, the Balkans with Macedonia, Kosovo and Serbia, the Caucasus with Armenia, Georgia and Turkey and Central and Eastern Europe with Czech Republic, Poland, Moldova and Hungary.
Although many differences can be identified between regions (in this way we would say the Western European region has a different reality than the Balkans, considering that all the countries from each of these two regions have a common migration history), I found out that these differences are more important between national states, each country having very specific types of migration. In other terms, when we talk about migration, immigration and emigration, we shouldn't think of this as a homogeneous phenomena equally shaped (even if there are undeniable influences and links between countries), but on the contrary we should take conscience of each country's specificities and of the cultural and historical puzzle we face in Europe.
Besides, we can also clearly observe tight links between different countries situated in the same region. The differences and similarities cannot be exclusively confined to the regional or to the national level. The question of migration, immigration and emigration is very complex and even inside one state there can be interesting variations in terms of the origins of its inhabitants, the main reasons which impulse people to migrate, the countries which send and receive migrants, etc.
The interesting thing about this diversity of countries is that, for historical reasons and current world's events (Arabic Revolutions, war in Lybia, growing flows of migrants from Tunisia and other third-countries, financial and social crisis in many countries, etc), all the countries have known different waves of migration, welcoming different nationalities, ethnies or groups in their countries, having or not emigrated from their countries, having or not important minority groups and immigrated population. In other words, every country has been directly or indirectly influenced by migration waves.
Europe is at least a complex puzzle where the degree of difficulty to solve problems of discrimination, racism, xenophobia, stereotypes, territorial management, employment issues, cultural and religious shocks, is very high. The cultural, social, political and economic panorama of Europe has changed many times through centuries and is still changing provoking new waves of migrations motivated by the present economic, demographic and social conjuncture.
Some of the Western European countries presented in the TC have an important emigration tradition (i.e Portugal, Italy) while other countries receive more immigrants (i.e UK or Sweden). On their turn, Balkan countries, for example, have very important ethnic minorities settled down in the region. The migration panel in the Balkan States is absolutely different from the one existing in Western European countries. The historical events are different, the peoples are different, the cultures are different. For example, Portugal and France have important black African or North African (France) minorities while in Serbia or Macedonia for example, the presence of people from these regions is insignificant or even inexistent.
Let's now focus on specific examples of migration in Europe:
If emigration has been strong in the Portuguese history, especially during XX century, due to the unfavorable economic and political situation in the country (during the dictature - 1926-1974- and after), and to the colonial policy imposed by Salazar and a posteriori by Marcelo Caetano, we have to mention that Portugal has also been an important country of destination. Until the 90's the immigrants were mostly coming from Portuguese-speaking countries but from this period until the first years of the 21st century an interesting immigration "boom" from Eastern European countries like Ukraine, Romania, Moldova and Russia occurred.
Nowadays, the financial and political crisis which Portugal is going through gives again impulse for Portuguese citizens to leave the country and find jobs in other countries with more employment opportunities, especially in European Union states. This time - contradictory to the emigration which occurred during the dictature and after the Revolution of 1974, characterized by a less-educated part of the population which represented low workforce costs for the employers in France, Germany and the other countries of destination - this time, we are assisting to a modern phenomena called "brain-drain" where the groups leaving the country are for the majority of them highly educated young people with University degrees in various fields of studies.
As regards internal migration, Portugal, as many other countries has been suffering from internal migration especially in terms of rural migration and "East-West moving" (from isolated and less developed interior or Eastern locations to the economically more developed Littoral coast).
Interesting debates and questions
The debates initiated during this training were often very heated, especially when talking about immigration and whether we accept it as a whole or only under conditions. Interesting contrasting opinions were raised, such as the consideration of assimilation rather than integration processes. Even if most of the people are more likely to accept the integration policy as being the most appropriate one when it comes to deal with immigrants, some people didn't feel the same way and felt that too much advantages were offered to some immigrants or minorities deploring the fact that they usually don't bring anything positive to the country.
In this respect, a very interesting simulation exercise was given to the participants where they would have to divide themselves in different groups - asylum seekers with different specific situations, the Council of Immigration (State Body in charge of awarding the status of asylum seeker and therefore the permission of residing in the country), external observers and one human rights organisation from the civil society.
I was in the Council group and I remember we had very intense discussion on who we would have to "save" and therefore accept in the country (only 2 people out of around 7 could be accepted and we had to make a choice after consensus). The main issue that we were trying to solve inside this diverse opinion group was whether we should better consider the degree of gravity of the situation of the asylum seeker's life or instead to focus more on the benefits they would bring to the country.
We finally came to the conclusion that asylum seekers are mainly people who are seeking for protection of another State for being persecuted, living in extreme poverty, economical reasons, etc... and that we cannot ignore a person living under an extremely difficult situation (sickness, poverty, loneliness of elderly people...) for providing him or her with the permission to live in another State just because this person will not economically or in another way benefit to the welcoming country.
But the interesting fact was this opposition of opinions and the search of a consensus when we had to decide inside a group. We were often confronting each other and even taking some of the discussions as threats and personal offenses when the opinions were diverging.
If you wish to have more information about the organised activities, the outcomes and results of the decisions we finally made as regards this simulation, don't hesitate to contact me or just leave a comment. I will reply with pleasure!
Between 25th March and 1st April 2011, I participated in a Training Course (TC) co-financed by the Youth in Action programme, in the city of Stip, Macedonia.
This TC was an intensive week working on the thematic of Migration, Immigration and Emigration in a general point of view on one side, and on the other side focusing on the different countries which were represented there.
This article focuses on some of the aspects that have been drawn by this TC and is not exclusively focusing on the Balkan case. Instead, it is a small gathering of ideas containing some comparisons that I find interesting to treat here, be it about Balkan countries or other countries from Eastern and Central Europe, Western Europe and Caucasus region, which were represented during the TC.
Background
One of the most interesting things I can say about this training was the diversity of participants coming from different countries and therefore being familiar with different migration realities. We can consider that 5 different regions were present: Western Europe with Portugal, UK, Italy and Sweden, the Baltic area with Lithuania, the Balkans with Macedonia, Kosovo and Serbia, the Caucasus with Armenia, Georgia and Turkey and Central and Eastern Europe with Czech Republic, Poland, Moldova and Hungary.
Although many differences can be identified between regions (in this way we would say the Western European region has a different reality than the Balkans, considering that all the countries from each of these two regions have a common migration history), I found out that these differences are more important between national states, each country having very specific types of migration. In other terms, when we talk about migration, immigration and emigration, we shouldn't think of this as a homogeneous phenomena equally shaped (even if there are undeniable influences and links between countries), but on the contrary we should take conscience of each country's specificities and of the cultural and historical puzzle we face in Europe.
Besides, we can also clearly observe tight links between different countries situated in the same region. The differences and similarities cannot be exclusively confined to the regional or to the national level. The question of migration, immigration and emigration is very complex and even inside one state there can be interesting variations in terms of the origins of its inhabitants, the main reasons which impulse people to migrate, the countries which send and receive migrants, etc.
The interesting thing about this diversity of countries is that, for historical reasons and current world's events (Arabic Revolutions, war in Lybia, growing flows of migrants from Tunisia and other third-countries, financial and social crisis in many countries, etc), all the countries have known different waves of migration, welcoming different nationalities, ethnies or groups in their countries, having or not emigrated from their countries, having or not important minority groups and immigrated population. In other words, every country has been directly or indirectly influenced by migration waves.
Europe is at least a complex puzzle where the degree of difficulty to solve problems of discrimination, racism, xenophobia, stereotypes, territorial management, employment issues, cultural and religious shocks, is very high. The cultural, social, political and economic panorama of Europe has changed many times through centuries and is still changing provoking new waves of migrations motivated by the present economic, demographic and social conjuncture.
Some of the Western European countries presented in the TC have an important emigration tradition (i.e Portugal, Italy) while other countries receive more immigrants (i.e UK or Sweden). On their turn, Balkan countries, for example, have very important ethnic minorities settled down in the region. The migration panel in the Balkan States is absolutely different from the one existing in Western European countries. The historical events are different, the peoples are different, the cultures are different. For example, Portugal and France have important black African or North African (France) minorities while in Serbia or Macedonia for example, the presence of people from these regions is insignificant or even inexistent.
Let's now focus on specific examples of migration in Europe:
Example 1: Portuguese case of emigration and immigration
As regards the Portuguese people, they have been moving to other countries from XV century with the maritime expansion, the discoveries and mining to Brazil in XVIII century. More recently, in the first half of XXth century Portuguese have emigrated to the other side of the Atlantic to countries such as Canada, USA, Argentina, Venezuela, Brazil and Uruguai, and to ex-colonies. In the second half of the century, after II World War, people have been moving primarily to European richer States such as France, Germany, Belgium, UK, Switzerland, and Australia as well, especially for economic reasons, in search for better life conditions. According to the census made in 1990 a total amount of 798 837 Portuguese were living in France. Among this number, 195 151 people were born in France. The others emigrated.
In Europe, France is by far the most attractive and welcoming country for the Portuguese immigrants, taking the lead over Germany, Belgium or the UK with a much smaller number (around 170 000 for Germany, 80 000 for the UK and only 35 000 for Belgium). These numbers have been found on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, General Direction of consular matters and Portuguese Community.
If emigration has been strong in the Portuguese history, especially during XX century, due to the unfavorable economic and political situation in the country (during the dictature - 1926-1974- and after), and to the colonial policy imposed by Salazar and a posteriori by Marcelo Caetano, we have to mention that Portugal has also been an important country of destination. Until the 90's the immigrants were mostly coming from Portuguese-speaking countries but from this period until the first years of the 21st century an interesting immigration "boom" from Eastern European countries like Ukraine, Romania, Moldova and Russia occurred.
Nowadays, the financial and political crisis which Portugal is going through gives again impulse for Portuguese citizens to leave the country and find jobs in other countries with more employment opportunities, especially in European Union states. This time - contradictory to the emigration which occurred during the dictature and after the Revolution of 1974, characterized by a less-educated part of the population which represented low workforce costs for the employers in France, Germany and the other countries of destination - this time, we are assisting to a modern phenomena called "brain-drain" where the groups leaving the country are for the majority of them highly educated young people with University degrees in various fields of studies.
As regards internal migration, Portugal, as many other countries has been suffering from internal migration especially in terms of rural migration and "East-West moving" (from isolated and less developed interior or Eastern locations to the economically more developed Littoral coast).
Example 2: Serbia
As regards the Serbian case about migration, emigration and immigration, we enter here in another reality which is not comparable to the Portuguese case in terms of nationalities and minorities entering or leaving the country.
In a general point of view, it is difficult to assess the number of immigrants and emigrants in Serbia, especially due to a lack of viable statistics. Nonetheless, what is clear is that migration and more especially minorities are issues of primary importance for Serbia. Migratory movements have been caused by political, social, economic and demographic factors. Serbia has been and continues to be a country of emigration even if immigration has been moderately increasing during the last years.
According to a study report from 2008 made by IOM (International Organisation for Migration) "After Second World War migration flows occurred mainly in response to labour demand in the host countries, mostly for skilled and low-skilled workers which in turn absorbed the labour force surplus in Serbia. The next movement of emigrants from Serbia was directed towards certain overseas countries, such as the USA and Australia during the 1960's and 1970's. Political crisis, ethnic conflicts, and disintegration of the country during the 1990's resulted in forced migrations within the former Yugoslav republics, as well as a new wave of external migrations. In recent years, emigration from the Balkans has taken a more economic character and is frequently conducted through the use of irregular channels".
Besides, a specificity of Serbian migration (which can be applied to the Balkans in general) is the existence in the territory of minorities which have been gaining more and more political powers and representations, and an important number of Internally Displaced People and refugees (from Kosovo and Croatia). Among the minorities existing in the country are Roma and Albanians are the most problematic groups in terms of discrimination and racism.
As regards the origins of the immigrants the top 5 countries of origin, according to IOM report are China, Romania, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Slovakia.
As for the countries of destination are Germany, Austria, Switzerland, United-States, Turkey, Croatia, Sweden, Italy, Canada and Australia.
Besides, a specificity of Serbian migration (which can be applied to the Balkans in general) is the existence in the territory of minorities which have been gaining more and more political powers and representations, and an important number of Internally Displaced People and refugees (from Kosovo and Croatia). Among the minorities existing in the country are Roma and Albanians are the most problematic groups in terms of discrimination and racism.
As regards the origins of the immigrants the top 5 countries of origin, according to IOM report are China, Romania, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Slovakia.
As for the countries of destination are Germany, Austria, Switzerland, United-States, Turkey, Croatia, Sweden, Italy, Canada and Australia.
Other examples: Central and Eastern European countries
According to a regional report supported by the European Union, UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees), Swedish Migration Board and IOM (International Organisation for Migration), called "The situation of migrants from Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine on the labour markets of Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland and the Slovak Republic", Since the beginning of the 1990's these last mentioned countries have attracted migrants from Western Newly Independent States (WNIS). Traditional incentives for migration such as higher income, geographical proximity and relatively low administrative barriers were enhanced by additional factors at the time when the Baltic and Central European states joined the EU. Lithuania and Poland were traditional destinations for seasonal workers from Belarus and Ukraine who largely occupied the casual employment sector of the economy. Slovakia and Hungary are the destination for seasonal laborers Ukrainians and have recently become transit roads for increasing irregular migration especially in the case of migrant workers from Moldova.
An interesting point to highlight is the fact that with the entrance in the EU of those countries, the procedures for employing people from Ukraine, Moldova or Belarus are more and more complex, which encourages the employers to more easily employ people from other EU states or at least to use "black market" measures. Among the procedures for employing a worker from these countries in the recently new members of the EU, are "the proof of the actual need for foreign labour and an analysis of its impact on the domestic labour market (Labour Market Test). This becomes further complicated by the need to obtain local work and residence permit".
Moreover, irregular migrants are exposed with the risk of being deported which often results on the abuse from their employers.
While talking to a Ukrainian participant in the training I asked her what was the motivation for Ukrainians to emigrate to Portugal which is economically not the best country at all (very high unemployment rate, relatively low salaries, current economical crisis which is not new at all and could have been perceived for more than 10 years ago in my point of view and contrary to what some politicians tend to defend)
She answered me that the people have the image of a sunny, quite, peaceful country where the adaptation to Portuguese culture and manners is thought to be easier than with other countries. Moreover, even if they have for the majority higher education diplomas, when they arrive to Portugal they mainly find manual labour jobs; but the fact is that even with low salaries they manage to live better under these conditions than they would live in Ukraine by exercising they profession.
An interesting point to highlight is the fact that with the entrance in the EU of those countries, the procedures for employing people from Ukraine, Moldova or Belarus are more and more complex, which encourages the employers to more easily employ people from other EU states or at least to use "black market" measures. Among the procedures for employing a worker from these countries in the recently new members of the EU, are "the proof of the actual need for foreign labour and an analysis of its impact on the domestic labour market (Labour Market Test). This becomes further complicated by the need to obtain local work and residence permit".
Moreover, irregular migrants are exposed with the risk of being deported which often results on the abuse from their employers.
While talking to a Ukrainian participant in the training I asked her what was the motivation for Ukrainians to emigrate to Portugal which is economically not the best country at all (very high unemployment rate, relatively low salaries, current economical crisis which is not new at all and could have been perceived for more than 10 years ago in my point of view and contrary to what some politicians tend to defend)
She answered me that the people have the image of a sunny, quite, peaceful country where the adaptation to Portuguese culture and manners is thought to be easier than with other countries. Moreover, even if they have for the majority higher education diplomas, when they arrive to Portugal they mainly find manual labour jobs; but the fact is that even with low salaries they manage to live better under these conditions than they would live in Ukraine by exercising they profession.
The debates initiated during this training were often very heated, especially when talking about immigration and whether we accept it as a whole or only under conditions. Interesting contrasting opinions were raised, such as the consideration of assimilation rather than integration processes. Even if most of the people are more likely to accept the integration policy as being the most appropriate one when it comes to deal with immigrants, some people didn't feel the same way and felt that too much advantages were offered to some immigrants or minorities deploring the fact that they usually don't bring anything positive to the country.
In this respect, a very interesting simulation exercise was given to the participants where they would have to divide themselves in different groups - asylum seekers with different specific situations, the Council of Immigration (State Body in charge of awarding the status of asylum seeker and therefore the permission of residing in the country), external observers and one human rights organisation from the civil society.
I was in the Council group and I remember we had very intense discussion on who we would have to "save" and therefore accept in the country (only 2 people out of around 7 could be accepted and we had to make a choice after consensus). The main issue that we were trying to solve inside this diverse opinion group was whether we should better consider the degree of gravity of the situation of the asylum seeker's life or instead to focus more on the benefits they would bring to the country.
We finally came to the conclusion that asylum seekers are mainly people who are seeking for protection of another State for being persecuted, living in extreme poverty, economical reasons, etc... and that we cannot ignore a person living under an extremely difficult situation (sickness, poverty, loneliness of elderly people...) for providing him or her with the permission to live in another State just because this person will not economically or in another way benefit to the welcoming country.
But the interesting fact was this opposition of opinions and the search of a consensus when we had to decide inside a group. We were often confronting each other and even taking some of the discussions as threats and personal offenses when the opinions were diverging.
If you wish to have more information about the organised activities, the outcomes and results of the decisions we finally made as regards this simulation, don't hesitate to contact me or just leave a comment. I will reply with pleasure!
+de+IMG_6357.JPG)