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.