The Structurally Racist International Migration System: Four Case Studies

The study of racism in international migration has been thus far ignored, as some claim that the letter of the law is now race-neutral, and others that racism should not be looked at because it has no biological foundation. Moreover, one strand of the academic debate has recently argued that racism needs to be looked at not because race has a real foundation, but because it is a label with significant implications. Racism is both socially constructed and hierarchical, and as such, it creates and defines the ranks of human beings.

While empirically false, racism as an ideology has justified colonial exploitation and unjust hierarchical structures in society for centuries. It seems thus crucial to analyze it to be able to act against it. But how exactly are racism and international migration related?

Recently published work by Andrew Rosenberg (Rosenberg 2022) stresses the importance of looking at racial discrimination in international migration because it persists in the system regardless of leaders’ intentions. This does not mean that racism in the international migration system is based on politicians and citizens being old-fashioned racists, but instead that racism persists and worsens, even when attempts at eliminating legal discrimination seem to have succeeded.

Racism in International Migration

Indeed, structural racial inequality persists even if all overt racism is less frequent in today’s world. Many instances of racism are hidden nowadays in plain sight. One example is the uncritical discourse on why some migrants appear threatening, and others do not. Rosenberg cites, for example, the obsession with the “right to border control” not as “[…] inherent feature of sovereign states” but rather as a modern consequence of racism. As Rosenberg goes on to explain, the ‘right [to border control]’ seems to have been adopted by the conventional wisdom of how modern states should operate, as a hidden consequence of racism and White supremacy. (Rosenberg 2022).

Skeletons in the Closet of the European Tradition

Rosenberg is not the first to analyze the nation-state and its borders as constructed means of exclusion of non-Anglo-European migrants. Cole (2000) and Benhabib (2004) contest the closed-societal, state-centric approach of classic liberal thought, and reflect on the inconsistencies of declared freedom of movement for some and not for others, as a consequence of an exclusive universality of Anglo-European thought.

Freedom of movement is, in theory, universal – that is, for all – but in practice, it excludes non-Anglo-Europeans, as a consequence of centuries of exclusion. In addition, Western powers tend to forget that their route to modernity was achieved through slavery and colonialism, made possible by racist ideology and by negating non-Anglo-European people, history, and culture. As a result, this idea of freedom was created in a world that excluded others and continues to do so. This deeply rooted consequence of the European tradition, enabled by racist ideology, created the concept of human dignity, which freedom of movement is part of, while carrying out slavery and colonialism. Moreover, it appears that racist ideology keeps enabling unequal treatment in international migration. Freedom of movement, as conceived by Anglo-European thought, seems to not be meant for all.

Exemplifying Racism in Policies and Practices

This new blog series aims to critically analyze examples of racism in international migration policies and practices, both at the state and supranational levels, to further underline the presence of racism in international migration – that should no longer be ignored. As academics researching migration closely, we have a clear responsibility to highlight instances of racism in the international migration system, analyzing migration policies and practices with an analytical and critical eye. Through the acknowledgment of the presence of racism in international migration, we may begin the process of holding stakeholders accountable and, hopefully, one day, change.

The first blog post of this series, “EU Norms and Values Stopped in Melilla,” focuses on the case study of the events occurring in Melilla on June 24 at the Spanish-Moroccan border, where at least 23 sub-Saharan migrants – potentially more than 70 migrants appear to be still missing – were crushed to death, while attempting to cross from Morocco to the Spanish enclave of Melilla. The article reflects on the migration governance of an EU member state and the EU itself. The second post, “Keep Britain White: Britain’s Inherently Racist Immigration Laws,” will trace the racist roots of immigration policies in the UK established not only to keep foreigners out of Britain, but to weaponize these policies against British-born descendants of migrants.

“Race, Rootedness and the Geographies of Sanctuary During the Pandemic,” explores policies around repatriation and returning “home” during the pandemic, as well as the implicit racialized assumptions around bordering. The last contribution to the series, “Frontex’s Disseminated Ideology: Constructing a Racialized Illegitimate Other,” looks at the EU’s response and action within the framework of its international migration system to show how the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, also known as Frontex, disseminates through its Annual Risk Analysis Reports a particular ideological view on migration and border control.

Anna Marino is a Doctoral researcher at the nccr – on the move, the University of Neuchâtel working on the project “Narratives of Crisis and Their Influence in Shaping Discourses and Policies of Migration and Mobility,” which aims to better understand the role of crisis narratives in the context of human mobility governance.

References:

-Benhabib, S. (2004). The rights of others: Aliens, residents, and citizens (No. 5). Cambridge University Press.
-Cole, P. (2022). Philosophies of exclusion. In Philosophies of Exclusion. Edinburgh University Press.
-Rosenberg, A. S. (2022). Undesirable Immigrants: Why Racism Persists in International Migration (Vol. 200). Princeton University Press.