Selected Consequences of Migration for Social Security of the
Transatlantic Community States
As the World Migration Report 2018 International Organization for
Migration indicates, the number of migrants in 2000 was 172,703,309,
which constituted 2.8% of the world’s population. In 2015 the global
number of migrants was 243,700,236, which constituted 3.3% of the
world’s population. According to Wordometers, the population which
inhabited Earth was 6,302,149,639 in total in 2000, and 7,383,008,820 in
2015. Objectively speaking, the persistently increasing migration trend
is connected with the number of people living on our planet. The first
consequence for the Transatlantic Community states is the
intensification of the phenomenon of migration. The second one is that
in the aspect of social security it constitutes one of the main
reference points for political policy-makers and societies now and in
the future. Taking into consideration the trend indicated above, its
form determined by migrations of communities which are different in
terms of culture and civilization, due to i.a. the quality of
life in their place of residence, social inequalities, demography,
violence and internal conflicts, changes in the character of the natural
environment, culture, religion, work, studies, and many other factors,
we should assume that it is and will be constant. Since 2015 this trend
has implicated both international and internal security of the states of
NATO and the EU, which form the Transatlantic bonds.
Individuals and social groups have always sought in their states
protection against such threats as physical injuries, economic collapse,
loss of rights or social status. In the open societies, which provide an
appropriate organizational culture which allows the members of the
society to be politically equal, this imperative has a fundamental
meaning. When there is a shortage of this equality between the society
and the newly coming migrants, the situation inevitably leads to
undermining the imperative and creation of emotional emptiness filled
with uncertainty, and in consequence, political exclusion. This
situational aspect is indicated by the examples of terrorist attacks in
Brussels, Paris, London, Berlin, Stockholm, whose overview is provided
by the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation EUROPOL in
the European Union Terrorism Situation and Trend Report 2017 . It
is connected with further deepening of social divisions and
strengthening of confrontation conditions. Neglecting social conflicts,
whose manifestation is a division, and whose effect is extremism and
terrorism, means the creation, and at the same time, recreation of
collective identities with the participation of migrants. It encompasses
individual and collective identification, adaptation to democratic,
liberal societies, de facto, common existence of the native
population as well as the incoming population migrating to a given
place. Only a common formula of existence shapes the awareness of both
communities making them a political unity in diversity. It is also
connected with a few elementary issues.
The first one is the demographic changes in the societies of the
Transatlantic Community states which receive groups of migrants
strengthening the already existing communities which mostly come from a
distant area. Being politically equal with the existing members of the
society means answering a few key questions: 1. Have, and if so, how
have the present members of the society who come from diverse
communities, native and immigrating ones, adapted? What formula of
social relationships do they form? To what extent are they integrated,
or why do they isolate one another? 2. How should migrants, who have
appeared in a given state for the first time, become part of the
multicultural open society? What should be the formula of coexistence of
the already residing people and newly coming communities, which respects
the rights and principles of civil liberties? Although the catalogue of
questions is not closed, and each time the answers will significantly
differ, they have one common denominator. It is adaptation and
functioning within the democratic open societies, which have specific
axiological fundamentals of their functioning and projection of
development in time. This formula is and will remain binding for the
Transatlantic Community states constituting a central reference point
for all considerations and actions related to migrations. At the same
time, the common values cannot be challenged in the name of abstract
assumptions of cultural, civilizational, and religious differences, or
any other assumptions which create the areas of axiological exclusion.
The objective existence of the relationship between freedom, equality,
and lack of exclusion determines the form of social acceptance or lack
of such acceptance towards migrants, and also the way they are received
and the care and help provided to them. A trap of axiological exclusion
of migrants is now the most significant threat for the security of the
states which form the Transatlantic Community.
Secondly, only due to honest answers - how, who and when is it possible
to conduct proper internal and international policies as part of NATO,
the EU, and also the UN and its agencies. We address the internal policy
as it constitutes the guarantee of a proper handling of integration and
exclusion, sometimes maybe discrimination determined by the social
attitudes of those who constitute a given community and the newcomers.
Furthermore, it indicates the conditions which may lead or which lead to
radicalization of the specified social groups, and in the perspective of
time, to violence, also in the form of terrorism. It is a truism that in
an international environment, conducting proper policies should
translate into a common approach of the Transatlantic Community states,
their actions taken as part of NATO and as part of other international
organizations, primarily the United Nations and its agencies, and also
the EU. It concerns joint actions on the external borders of the
Transatlantic Community (institutionally also the states of the Schengen
Area), the states located around the European continent, and also in
more distant places of the planet.
Thirdly, a major issue is adaptation of the existing tools or creation
of long-term tools: political, economic, legal ones of internal and
external character, ensuring the security of the Transatlantic Community
states and guaranteeing its projection in time. What is also important
is the interpretation related to them - how to use them to be able to
solve the problems connected with migration more effectively. It is
certain that there are not two identical situations or forms of
migration, each time they are different. Nevertheless, this aspect
should not determine the will to establish the above-mentioned tools,
and also the consensus on using them in practice. In the existing
formula of actions taken by primarily the EU states which are members of
NATO, there is a significant discrepancy between the instruments of
policies, including security, their use, and the accompanying
interpretation. We may seek the causes of this state of affairs in the
mutual lack of understanding and agreement on the idea of a common
interest in this respect, and in consequence, accepted forms and formula
of migration to the states of NATO and the EU. The results are different
interpretations among them, which in this respect can be illustrated
with the approaches of the US and Canada, Western and Eastern European
states. It can be ascribed not only to a lack of political will to act,
but mainly to a lack of understanding what interpretation should be
binding and in what extent, who should it concern, what procedures,
mechanisms, ways of individual and collective action taking should
accompany it. The state of affairs described above results from a lack
of clearly defined rules of political involvement of all Member States.
The above-described scope lacks a common and consistent interpretation
of the national interests contained in the NATO structures. It
constitutes not only a significant weakness in the aspect of shaping the
security environment on and around the European continent, but also it
affects the common approach towards the phenomenon of migration within
the same community. This phenomenon is for the community an element
which shapes not only the social, economic or political sphere, but in
the 21st century, the sphere of national and international security.
Fourthly, the factors of axiological changes should be a central
reference point. It means attaching individual and collective identity
to the influence exerted by NATO or the EU within the network-centric
societies which are subjected to information and disinformation treated
as a tool of political fight (Juhász, Szicherle, 2017, 15-19). As the
conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, and North Africa have indicated, the
ideology and ideas of violence are created around an institutionalized
form of actions. These can be information actions taken by non-state
actors (ISIS, Hamas), and simultaneously by states (Russian Federation,
Iran). As a matter of fact, they constitute a proof of instrumental
treatment of the community of migrants. A combination of the
multilayered techniques of communication with the actions taken to
radicalize social attitudes is now, at the times of peace, one of the
main tools of ideological fight. It happens especially in the case of
the Russian Federation which aims to weaken, and in consequence,
disintegrate the West. A manipulated message makes it possible to arouse
and maintain social anxieties which may be relatively easily radicalized
in time. Thinking and speaking of migrations of people to
highly-developed states of the western civilization circle, we cannot
omit this situational context.
The above-mentioned issues are and will remain crucial, determining
other ones, i.a. the formula of involvement in giving the
phenomenon a specific form and in strengthening the humanitarian
dimension of migration. We should also mention the social order of the
Transatlantic Community states, forms of help provided by these states,
both in the place where migration starts - irrespective of its causes -
and during the journey to the destination state, a Member State of NATO,
usually also of the EU. In this context, there are two main problems.
The first one, having fundamental character in respect of security of
the Transatlantic Community states, is the mutual obligations. The
international regulations, which exist, or which are being made and
drafted, give an answer in this respect, nevertheless, they should be
treated as incomplete and insufficient. They continue to be like that
because now it is only the beginning of the way to regulate the approach
to migration, define its character, and its impact on the Transatlantic
Community states, and finally NATO, as a tool of security policy. There
is no need to persuade anybody that the existing formula has proved
insufficient. The question is how to act to avoid political
disintegration of the West in the future, as it happened in the case of
Great Britain, Brexit caused by i.a. fear of an influx of illegal
migrants (intensified by media reports from the Calais refugee camp),
and protect humanitarian values at the same time. How to configure the
instruments of policies - financial and legal ones, to redefine the
present form of involvement of the European states of NATO and the EU?
In effect, how to create interpretation of political behaviours which
build mutual trust? Furthermore, what modus vivendi should we
find with the states because of which migration occurs and which are its
source. The answers to these questions will determine the conditions in
which migration is and will take place, and also sharing the political,
social and economic costs related to it. It should be underlined that
the Transatlantic Community states have no other alternative but to
adopt a common and consistent interpretation. It is determined by the
TINA (there is no alternative) phenomenon, reinforced by the example of
Great Britain.
The second, not less important problem is the actions taken by the
Community states at the UN and its agencies. On 19th September 2016 the
United Nations General Assembly adopted the New York Declaration
for Refugees and Migrants . It provides for negotiations concerning
global, consistent, safe, organized and regular migration. In this
context, the proper thing, signum temporis , for the Transatlantic
Community states is to develop a common, and most importantly,
consistent approach dedicated to the phenomenon of migration. Following
the provisions of the Declaration, the global package for safe, regular
and organised migration forms a crucial instrument for systematizing
these issues within the Transatlantic Community.
Taking into consideration the projection of security, it is proper to
address the issue of migration at NATO not only in the aspect of
terrorism, but above all, in the aspect of development projection of the
specific mechanisms related to the phenomenon, which determine the form
of security of the Transatlantic Community states (Hamilton, 2016:
39-42). Why NATO? Because it is an organization which gathers the states
touched by migration in its different phases, from the initial one,
providing protection in refugee camps as it happens in Turkey, to final
reception in the other states of the Organization. Expanding the scope
of cooperation of the states of the alliance is necessary. It is not
only about adaptation to new challenges, but also to the new formula of
the environment of international security. The present solutions and
actions in the cooperation of the Transatlantic Community states should
be deemed interim, not comprehensive, directed at shaping their future.
Indicating NATO as a source of institutional changes of the
Transatlantic bonds, we should underline the necessity to take
multilateral effort, directed at strengthening the immunity of
societies. The processes NATO and the EU struggle with in the context of
migration are of a global character. At the same time, their
action-taking has a double form: Transatlantic and regional. The actions
in both these areas should be complementary, and they are not now.
Therefore, we may indicate the stages which should accompany the process
of making a decision on the common and consistent approach of the
Transatlantic Community states.
Stage I. Start and continue international cooperation through dialogue
and initiatives taken in NATO states, whose result is treated as
detailed case studies including i.a. identification of people,
relocation, help in integration, integration of migrants, and also
sending away those of the migrants who are not willing or ready to
accept the standards of the open democratic society. The application of
the multilateral approach of the alliance states and other states and
institutions which cooperate with them (mainly the UN, but also the EU,
and other) will make it possible to create an interpretation of policy
which represents common goals. Moreover, it will allow us to specify
organizational and normative solutions, their application, adaptation to
the common approach or to develop new forms, consistent with the
alliance’s interpretation of security policy.
Stage II. It means continuation of stage I, and also a deepened
cooperation between the states, consultation and exchange of information
on people, communities of migrants, their adaptation to the conditions
of the open society. The signs of radicalisation, extremism, and as a
result, violence leading to terrorism may be treated as elements of
verification of the policies as well as the formula of the stay of
migrants settled in the area of the Transatlantic Community states. They
may include a policy of supporting the states where migrants come from.
A criterion based on the ideology of a free world should constitute a
reference point for the political interpretation of the manners of
handling those who are not ready or willing to be part of the open
society.
Stage III. It concerns the creation of a migration platform which would
be common for all the Transatlantic Community states. The platform
should become an element of the architecture of Transatlantic security,
focusing on relocating people across the international borders and on
managing the related political, social, economic and other processes.
Only a comprehensive approach in this respect may guarantee a proper
approach to the security of the states which are members of NATO, and
also the EU through a synergy of institutional cooperation. The creation
of the migration platform will make it possible not only to break the
patterns established in the 20th century, which in no way fit the 21st
century reality, but also to take comprehensive, multiway form of
actions. They include: firstly, adaptation and creation of mechanisms of
migration management which encompass material principles and norms,
decision taking processes, and forms of implementation and monitoring of
their accompanying political, social, cultural, and economic processes -
primarily those related to security. Secondly, the development of
Transatlantic cooperation with the participation of non-NATO states,
basing on the EU and the UN, and other regional organizations should
make it possible to create new levels and types of transnational
interrelations. Thirdly, we should strengthen and fill the New York
Declaration for Refugees and Migrants with content.
The above-mentioned catalogue of actions may be considered initial, and
each step may be completed with further elements, not indicated above.
The first result of the approach indicated above will be putting into
effect the idea of humanitarian dimension of migration which includesi.a. coordinated humanitarian aid provided to migrants by
international, governmental, and non-governmental organizations, and
states. Its consequence could be a common and consistent approach to
adaptation of the migrants coming to the highly-developed Western
states, and the related legal and organizational conditions. Secondly,
it will result in help provided on the spot, where migrants have found a
temporary refuge. It usually takes place in transit states, like for
example Turkey, and the ones which are close to a conflict as in Syria,
Lebanon, and Jordan. At the same time, this situational aspect indicates
two major related issues. The first one is aid provided to refugees, the
other to migrants. Thirdly, the indicated approach encompasses the
issues of supervision and control over the migration routes from the
areas located around the European continent and on its periphery. It
concerns the migrant ‘gathering’ and ‘transit’ places, and the related
specific forms of ‘handling’ and ‘installing’ the migrant in the target
state. Fourthly, it is about the issues of border security, border
control in respect of identification of the incomers, decisions related
to legal protection, right to reside in a given state. The indicated
conglomerate of issues is contained their broader context attached to
security policy and strategy of states and international organizations,
with the leading role of NATO and the participation of the UN and the
EU.