Immigration is on everyone’s mind, dominating news coverage with images of refugees walking endless miles to cross into America or being transported on buses across state lines, only to discover new obstacles upon arrival.
In places like Edison, N.J., and the suburbs of Chicago, local officials are threatening to send people who arrive on buses back to the border.
In a new political year with elections upon us, there is no escaping this hot-button issue. As Americans, we are drowning in soundbites from U.S. mayors, governors, members of Congress, migration experts and advocacy organizations about terms like “asylum” and “immigration reform.”
But before we get too far down the reform road, let’s look at what other countries are doing and decide how far we want to go — or not go — in terms of reforming the system when it comes to things like granting asylum to those seeking it.
Take Germany, for example. Its chancellor, Olaf Scholz, announced at the end of the year that his country needed a new system for dealing with people who do not meet asylum criteria. In an interview with the news magazine Der Spiegel, he came out in support of large-scale deportations for rejected asylum applicants.
In the first half of 2023, government data show that close to 8,000 people were deported from Germany. The new “Repatriation Improvement Act” seeks to increase that figure and end the announcing of deportations in advance. In what many of us might say is too heavy-handed an approach, German police will have extended powers to search for people ordered to leave, including access to their property and cell phones.
Granted, Germany is a small country. But if you widen the lens to all of Europe, the immigration system is worth scrutinizing as it goes through a major overhaul, including asylum eligibility.
Anti-migrant sentiment has been increasing in Europe for the last few years as a more conservative-leaning public has pushed for harsher restrictions throughout the 27+ countries.
A new pact will be voted on this year to ensure faster assessments of asylum eligibility through “solidarity mechanisms,” which means that nations that take more asylum seekers get financial compensation — something we might be able to offer states that have so-called “sanctuary” cities. And the European Union is trying to centralize border management and strengthen information-sharing with more funding for agencies that must handle large influxes of people.
That all sounds good. But when you look at the way European countries are tightening up asylum rules, you start to see the downsides of too much reform.
Countries like the United Kingdom are starting to crack down on outsiders getting work or family visas to come to the country. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak says migration levels are “too high” and has proposed a package of measures to reduce the numbers of people who can come to the country to find work. Starting in the spring of 2024, people coming to work in the UK will a need a job offer with a higher salary — an increase of nearly 50 percent from previous salaries.
In France last month, their Senate recommended tougher reforms to the immigration system, in terms of citizenship, benefits for immigrants and family reunification terms. Simply put, it will be harder to prove that you deserve to live or work in France.
Which brings us back to America, where Republicans are arguing for tougher standards for asylum claims. Some of the proposals raise the standard from “credible fear” of persecution in your home country to requiring people to demonstrate their entire asylum case as early as the initial screening, raising the bar unreasonably high and leading to fast-track deportation without cause.
Democrats want a “safety valve” to avoid harsh new standards that could lead to more deportations, mass roundups and other measures that limit people from coming to work in America, where we need the labor and skills immigrants bring.
It was 100 years ago this month that America’s immigration system was shut down for a major re-boot. After decades of welcoming and beckoning foreign-born citizens to its shores, Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1924, restricting the numbers and types of people who could gain access to the United States. Let’s hope we are not moving too far in a direction that deprives America of its diverse labor force and creates a mood of resentment against those who legitimately flee other countries to bring value to ours.
Tara D. Sonenshine is former U.S. undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs and is senior fellow at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Immigration lessons from abroad — the US isn’t the only one tightening its borders
6
6
04.01.2024
Immigration is on everyone’s mind, dominating news coverage with images of refugees walking endless miles to cross into America or being transported on buses across state lines, only to discover new obstacles upon arrival.
In places like Edison, N.J., and the suburbs of Chicago, local officials are threatening to send people who arrive on buses back to the border.
In a new political year with elections upon us, there is no escaping this hot-button issue. As Americans, we are drowning in soundbites from U.S. mayors, governors, members of Congress, migration experts and advocacy organizations about terms like “asylum” and “immigration reform.”
But before we get too far down the reform road, let’s look at what other countries are doing and decide how far we want to go — or not go — in terms of reforming the system when it comes to things like granting asylum to those seeking it.
Take Germany, for example. Its chancellor, Olaf Scholz, announced at the end of the year that his country needed a new system for dealing with people who do not meet asylum criteria. In an interview with the news magazine Der Spiegel, he came out in support of large-scale deportations for........
© The Hill
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Donald Low
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
