Walking into the corner shop near my house in west London the other day, I found the Kashmiri woman behind the counter absorbed in a book. Its title was "Teach Yourself Polish." Behind her was an array of Polish delicacies -- imported to cater for the newest wave of migrants to arrive in Britain.
The Kashmiris, along with other south Asians, arrived in force in Britain in the 1960s and 1970s. The latest wave of immigration to Britain is from central Europe. The British government estimates that some 600,000 people, the majority of them Polish, have moved to Britain to work since 10 new countries joined the European Union in 2004.
By and large, they are regarded as model immigrants. As a British government adviser puts it with politically incorrect bluntness: "The Poles are great. They all work, they don't want to kill us and their women don't wear bags over their heads."
Even so, a backlash against unlimited immigration from central Europe is growing. Next January, Bulgaria and Romania are almost certain to join the EU. An unlikely coalition of British opinion, ranging from big business to leftist politicians, is now calling for the imposition of temporary restrictions on free movement of labor before Bulgaria and Romania join. Last weekend, British Chancellor of the Exchequor Gordon Brown, presumed to be prime minister-in-waiting, gave an interview in which he endorsed a policy of "British jobs to British workers."
The British debate reflects rising global anxiety about immigration. The German Marshall Fund's annual transatlantic trends survey published last week showed that 79 per cent of Americans and 76 percent of Europeans regarded "large numbers of immigrants coming into their countries as an important threat."
The U.S. Congress has spent much of this pastyear arguing bitterly about a new immigration bill, designed to deal with the fact that the United States currently plays host to some 12 million illegal immigrants, and that about 900,000 new illegals are thought to enter the country every year ?€“ mostly across the Mexican border. In Europe there is a similar sense that immigrants from the third world are massing on the borders. Jose Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, has just called for a coordinated European response to the growing number of illegal immigrants from Africa washing up on Europe's shores. On one recent weekend almost 2,000 Africans landed on the Spanish-owned Canary Islands. There are now thought to be 5 million to 8 million illegal immigrants across the EU.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair argued in a recent speech that "immigration is the toughest political issue in Europe and the USA right now." He thinks that if mass immigration is to remain politically acceptable, "there have to be rules."
But that is the problem. From west London to the Rio Grande to the Canary Islands, people no longer really believe politicians have the ability or the will to make and enforce rules on immigration.
There is plenty of reason for skepticism. In the United States, increased border security has made it more difficult, dangerous and costly to enter the country illegally -- but does not appear to have affected overall numbers much. In 2005, Spain granted amnesty to more than 500,000 illegal immigrants. That appears to have encouraged even more desperate people to strike out for Spanish shores. So now the Spanish are talking about mass deportation.
In Britain, the government estimated that 13,000 new workers per year would come legally to Britain after EU expansion in 2004 -- so the arrival of 600,000 or more since then has come as something of a shock. There is no way to put the genie back into the bottle. Those EU countries that have tried to place temporary restrictions on Polish workers have not found them particularly effective. For all EU citizens are still free to enter other EU countries as tourists -- and then to find their way into the underground labor market.
As Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Washington-based Migration Policy Institute, argues: "Illegal immigration is part of the vital lubricant of our societies. It wouldn't be happening if so many people's interests were not served by the status quo." Businesses benefit because they can employ cheap labor. Middle-class householders benefit because they can afford more help with childcare and cleaning.
The correct response to all this is not to continue hypocritically demanding a crackdown on illegal immigration. It is to create more avenues for legal immigration for workers of all types. Without really meaning to, this is what the EU did with its latest enlargement to take in the countries of central Europe.
The Australian and Canadian points systems, which favor immigration from high-skilled workers, are often cited as models for developed countries to imitate. But the reality is that the rich world also has a huge appetite for cheaper, lower-skilled labor in industries such as hotels, catering and agriculture. It is simply hypocrisy to say that all the people coming across the Rio Grande or the Mediterranean are unwanted immigrants. Somebody wants them or they would not keep coming.
But there are also more attractive emotions than hypocrisy involved in the rich world's confusion about immigration. It is not true that nothing can be done to control the phenomenon. The real problem is that the things that would need to be done are so harsh that people rightly shy away from them.
Does the nited States really want to build an Israeli-style security fence along its border with Mexico? Could Europeans or Americans really stomach the site of millions of illegal immigrants -- and their children -- being rounded up and deported? Do EU countries really want to get rid of one of the most attractive aspects of the European venture -- the right for EU citizens to live and work legally across the continent?
So far the answer is no. The free movement of people, like the free movement of goods, does not always benefit everybody all of the time. But the world is a better place for it all the same.
Gideon Rachman is a columnist for the Financial Times, where this comment was published.
The Kashmiris, along with other south Asians, arrived in force in Britain in the 1960s and 1970s. The latest wave of immigration to Britain is from central Europe. The British government estimates that some 600,000 people, the majority of them Polish, have moved to Britain to work since 10 new countries joined the European Union in 2004.
By and large, they are regarded as model immigrants. As a British government adviser puts it with politically incorrect bluntness: "The Poles are great. They all work, they don't want to kill us and their women don't wear bags over their heads."
Even so, a backlash against unlimited immigration from central Europe is growing. Next January, Bulgaria and Romania are almost certain to join the EU. An unlikely coalition of British opinion, ranging from big business to leftist politicians, is now calling for the imposition of temporary restrictions on free movement of labor before Bulgaria and Romania join. Last weekend, British Chancellor of the Exchequor Gordon Brown, presumed to be prime minister-in-waiting, gave an interview in which he endorsed a policy of "British jobs to British workers."
The British debate reflects rising global anxiety about immigration. The German Marshall Fund's annual transatlantic trends survey published last week showed that 79 per cent of Americans and 76 percent of Europeans regarded "large numbers of immigrants coming into their countries as an important threat."
The U.S. Congress has spent much of this pastyear arguing bitterly about a new immigration bill, designed to deal with the fact that the United States currently plays host to some 12 million illegal immigrants, and that about 900,000 new illegals are thought to enter the country every year ?€“ mostly across the Mexican border. In Europe there is a similar sense that immigrants from the third world are massing on the borders. Jose Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, has just called for a coordinated European response to the growing number of illegal immigrants from Africa washing up on Europe's shores. On one recent weekend almost 2,000 Africans landed on the Spanish-owned Canary Islands. There are now thought to be 5 million to 8 million illegal immigrants across the EU.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair argued in a recent speech that "immigration is the toughest political issue in Europe and the USA right now." He thinks that if mass immigration is to remain politically acceptable, "there have to be rules."
But that is the problem. From west London to the Rio Grande to the Canary Islands, people no longer really believe politicians have the ability or the will to make and enforce rules on immigration.
There is plenty of reason for skepticism. In the United States, increased border security has made it more difficult, dangerous and costly to enter the country illegally -- but does not appear to have affected overall numbers much. In 2005, Spain granted amnesty to more than 500,000 illegal immigrants. That appears to have encouraged even more desperate people to strike out for Spanish shores. So now the Spanish are talking about mass deportation.
In Britain, the government estimated that 13,000 new workers per year would come legally to Britain after EU expansion in 2004 -- so the arrival of 600,000 or more since then has come as something of a shock. There is no way to put the genie back into the bottle. Those EU countries that have tried to place temporary restrictions on Polish workers have not found them particularly effective. For all EU citizens are still free to enter other EU countries as tourists -- and then to find their way into the underground labor market.
As Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Washington-based Migration Policy Institute, argues: "Illegal immigration is part of the vital lubricant of our societies. It wouldn't be happening if so many people's interests were not served by the status quo." Businesses benefit because they can employ cheap labor. Middle-class householders benefit because they can afford more help with childcare and cleaning.
The correct response to all this is not to continue hypocritically demanding a crackdown on illegal immigration. It is to create more avenues for legal immigration for workers of all types. Without really meaning to, this is what the EU did with its latest enlargement to take in the countries of central Europe.
The Australian and Canadian points systems, which favor immigration from high-skilled workers, are often cited as models for developed countries to imitate. But the reality is that the rich world also has a huge appetite for cheaper, lower-skilled labor in industries such as hotels, catering and agriculture. It is simply hypocrisy to say that all the people coming across the Rio Grande or the Mediterranean are unwanted immigrants. Somebody wants them or they would not keep coming.
But there are also more attractive emotions than hypocrisy involved in the rich world's confusion about immigration. It is not true that nothing can be done to control the phenomenon. The real problem is that the things that would need to be done are so harsh that people rightly shy away from them.
Does the nited States really want to build an Israeli-style security fence along its border with Mexico? Could Europeans or Americans really stomach the site of millions of illegal immigrants -- and their children -- being rounded up and deported? Do EU countries really want to get rid of one of the most attractive aspects of the European venture -- the right for EU citizens to live and work legally across the continent?
So far the answer is no. The free movement of people, like the free movement of goods, does not always benefit everybody all of the time. But the world is a better place for it all the same.
Gideon Rachman is a columnist for the Financial Times, where this comment was published.
A Message from The Moscow Times:
Dear readers,
We are facing unprecedented challenges. Russia's Prosecutor General's Office has designated The Moscow Times as an "undesirable" organization, criminalizing our work and putting our staff at risk of prosecution. This follows our earlier unjust labeling as a "foreign agent."
These actions are direct attempts to silence independent journalism in Russia. The authorities claim our work "discredits the decisions of the Russian leadership." We see things differently: we strive to provide accurate, unbiased reporting on Russia.
We, the journalists of The Moscow Times, refuse to be silenced. But to continue our work, we need your help.
Your support, no matter how small, makes a world of difference. If you can, please support us monthly starting from just $2. It's quick to set up, and every contribution makes a significant impact.
By supporting The Moscow Times, you're defending open, independent journalism in the face of repression. Thank you for standing with us.
Not ready to support today?
Remind me later.
Remind me later.
×
Remind me next month
Thank you! Your reminder is set.
We will send you one reminder email a month from now. For details on the personal data we collect and how it is used, please see our Privacy Policy.