LONDON – We have entered the age of migration. If all the people who live outside the country of their birth united to form their own – a republic of the rootless – it would be the fifth-largest country in the world, with a population of more than 240 million people.
Though much has been written about how a world on the move is changing national politics, there has been little consideration of its geopolitical effects. But the mass movement of people is already creating three types of migration superpowers: new colonialists, integrators, and go-betweens.
The new colonialists call to mind the settlers from Europe who spread across the world in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, benefiting not just themselves, but also their homelands. Similarly, the most mobile populations of the twenty-first century are helping their countries of origin obtain access to markets, technology, and a political voice in the world.
The American journalist Howard W. French describes how Africa has become “China’s second continent,” as more than a million new Chinese settlers remake Sub-Saharan Africa. With more Chinese citizens living outside mainland China than there are French people living in France, a similar story is playing out on almost every continent. When those migrants return to China, their capabilities are expertly harvested. Known in China as “sea turtles,” they dominate their country’s technology industry.
India, too, has a large diaspora of an estimated 20 million citizens who are super-successful and hyper-connected. Indian-born entrepreneurs are responsible for setting up one in ten companies in Silicon Valley. Microsoft’s chief executive is of Indian origin, as is the inventor of the Intel Pentium processor, the former chief technology officer at Motorola, and the CEO of Google.
How does this benefit India? For starters, India receives more than $70 billion in remittances every year, the largest sum worldwide, amounting to nearly 4% of its GDP, which is more than it spends on education. And while it may not be possible to prove a causal connection, the influx of Indians into America has coincided with a shift in both countries’ geopolitical orientations, as evidenced by the historic 2008 nuclear deal by which the US abandoned its policy of equidistance between India and Pakistan.
With so many people on the move, it is even possible to become a settler superpower without being recognized as a state. The estimated 35 million Kurds – who regard themselves as a nation without a country – are becoming one of the most politically active migrant populations in Europe. It is likely no coincidence that the governments of Sweden and Germany, with their large populations of Kurdish origin, are providing militarily support to the Kurdish Peshmerga in their fight against the Islamic State (ISIS).
The second type of superpower is the integrator. Libraries could be filled with books about how the United States has benefited from its ability to transform people from around the world into American citizens. Similarly, Angola and Brazil have reversed the brain drain and are receiving large flows of immigrants from their former colonial ruler, Portugal. But the two most eye-catching experiments in integration today are Israel and ISIS.
Immigration from the diaspora is essential to Israel, which is reflected in the Hebrew word for it: aliyah, derived from the verb “to ascend.” Indeed, the government provides “aliyah consultants,” as well as free one-way flights, language classes, and practical support. As a result, Israel’s population has risen ninefold since the country’s founding in 1948.
In Start-up Nation: The Story of Israel's Economic Miracle, co-authored with Saul Singer, the American writer and political adviser Dan Senor poses a fundamental question. “How is it,” he asks, “that Israel – a country of 7.1 million people, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies, in a constant state of war since its founding, with no natural resources – produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the United Kingdom?” The answer, of course, is immigration.
ISIS’s leaders would not be happy with the comparison, but their group’s rapid emergence on the map has drawn some lessons from Israel. The so-called Islamic State may not be officially recognized by anyone, but it is being built on the basis of immigration. According to the Soufan Group, roughly 30,000 people from 86 countries have traveled to ISIS-held territory in Syria and Iraq.
The third type of immigration superpowers are go-betweens, which use their geography to extract concessions from migration-phobic neighbors. The most notable example is Turkey; once forced to beg to be considered for European Union membership, it now dictates the terms of its relationship with Brussels. A leaked transcript of a recent summit with European leaders revealed how President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan threatened to bus refugees to Greece and Bulgaria if his demands were not met.
Niger is another go-between. As a major transit hub through which 90% of all West African migrants pass on their way to Italy, Niger succeeded in securing €600 million ($680 million) in the last EU aid budget. In doing so, it followed the example of Libya’s Muammar el-Qaddafi, who famously warned that Europe would “turn black” if it did not pay him to hold back migrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean.
If the established powers that first benefited from the globalization of trade are known as the G-7, the countries, regions, and organizations that are benefiting from migration – China, India, Kurdistan, Israel, ISIS, Turkey, and Niger – could be called the M-7. As control over population flows become a currency of power, states that follow the M-7’s lead will have the opportunity to boost their geopolitical heft.
For the West, the biggest challenge will be to reconcile domestic pressure for closed borders with the geopolitical advantages of embracing migration. For now, at least, it seems that the G-7 – for which an easily affordable influx of refugees has somehow become a “crisis” – will continue to aid the M-7’s rise.
Comments
Hide CommentsRead Comments (13)Please log in or register to leave a comment.
Comment Commented Lawrence Michael
The idea of the sea-turtles give forth two scenarios. Each divergent and specific to states. While China effectively harvests it's diaspora, the Indians present the same conflicts it's internal population does including a hilarity for Indian nationalists emerge as a joke here. Given their strident anti-modernism qua abti-West that emerges as their largely peasant populace at home - over a Hindu supremacist worldview - the fringe radicals are a dysfunctional lot even in India. So how do they explain their diasporic presence including the remittances? China's absences of such fringe radical groups holding sway as the Hindus do. Or even the Islamic pan-national movements & networks do indicate the obvious - in favour of China that does not encourage a radical religious fringe outlook as it's mainstay that the Hindu Indians or the Moslems do. Second becomes the schism this presents within such religious groups over values - unless they already imagine themselves at a war against the res of the world. The Hindus even have the concept of Sam, Danda & Bheda as their Kautilian incursions into other states or groups. Something that is clearly on a distinctly different footing than ordinary diasporic movement calling into questions of integration & fidelity. Two basic markers any host group would look out for when assimilating or accepting guests or visitors that stay over a long period. Which is different than & from traditional economic migrants for whom the two issues are their instruments of incursions - unlike the Kautilian concept of infiltration. Now we come across a word that is menacing. The Indians would seem to easily fall under this with their divergent & antagonistic internal socialisation patterns clearly against the former colonial powers. Than China that seeks modernization to augment it's own modernization drives within China. The Islamics present the same fear of infiltration. Guess that remittances aren't purely an economic activity even if it is for the individual remitter. There are clear differences between organized groups & unaffiliated individual except where the question arises: citizen of? Read more
Comment Commented Petey Bee
Since the present issue is the wave of people coming from middle east and north africa in response to disasters there, why don't we just call them "displaced persons".
Would it make sense to talk about "displaced person superpowers"? Does something about that sound misguided? Would anyone ask if our attention should, just maybe, be on the source of the displacement? Let's try that. Read more
Comment Commented Petey Bee
Thanks for the link, I will take a look! Read more
Comment Commented Florian Pantazi
@Petey Bee: Mark Leonard heads a London-based think tank which tries to emulate the much more successful American model headed by Richard Haas, the Council on Foreign Relations, whose influence is real indeed. Mr Leonard is also familiar with my blog, "Spotlight on Geopolitics" hosted by the Brussels-based Blogactiv platform.
As a Toulouse-trained specialist in IR & geopolitics, I have arrived at the conclusion that what we are currently witnessing is the end of the era of globalization:
"virtually all of today’s armed conflicts – in Ukraine, Libya, Syria, Iraq or Yemen – have geopolitics as a common denominator. Even ISIS has a clearcut geopolitical agenda of sorts, namely that of establishing an “Islamic caliphate” in territories snatched from war-torn Syria and Iraq. Taken together, these tensions and conflicts among ethnic, religious or military blocs have brought to an untimely end the era of globalization and ushered in the Age of Geopolitics."("EU in the Age of Geopolitics", Jan 4,2016, http://florianpantazi.blogactiv.eu)
In my view, given the current pressure on his shoulders, M. Leonard was trying to come up with what the French call "une grille de lecture" that could be instrumental in interpreting current developments, of which Syrian or Afghan migrations are but a small part. Naturally, in reality such migrations are the effects and not the cause of the crisis. As such, the thesis proposed by Leonard is unscientific. His "migration superpowers" do not in fact exist.
The Chinese and the Indian diasporas, for example, might appear large but as a percentage of their total populations, they are not. During the modern era, the most successful and accomplished "migration superpowers" have been Portugal and Spain, as well as Great Britain and France. Taken together, these European nations are responsible for sending immigrants in their millions and colonizing entire continents in the New World or in North Africa. As a percentage of the home countries' populations, the migrants represented a much more consequential movement of people around the world than anything we are witnessing today. Still, to my knowledge, no historian in his right mind would have labeled that period in world history "the age of migration", but refer to it instead as the period of European world-wide expansionism. To date, I haven't heard of the Chinese, the Indians, the Kurds, the Syrians and what-have-you leaving their habitat to create new countries or settle deserted areas of the world :)
Read more
Comment Commented Florian Pantazi
Mr Leonard's "age of migration" thesis is, unfortunately, a total fiasco. To substantiate it, he mixes vastly different types of population movements around the world: Chinese expats working on Chinese-financed projects in Africa and elsewhere, India's economic migrants in search of opportunity, Kurds fleeing political opression in Turkey and finally, refugees from war-torn areas of the world affected by geopolitical-type conflicts (ethnic and/or religious groups fighting each other for the control of a given territory like in Syria or Libya).
For a global population of some 7 billion, the 240 million people of various nationalities living or working outside their country of origin represents roughly 3,4 percent. In other words, although global movements of people might seem impressive, the overwhelming majority of the world's population continues to live and work in their home countries.
Furthermore, by throwing Israel and ISIS into the mix, the author succeeds in muddling the issue of global migration completely. In short, I have seldom seen on Project Syndicate a more unscientific approach to analyzing a global trend, one that makes a mockery of the readers' intelligence. Consequently, the so-called "age of migration" thesis is plainly a wrong interpretation of today's developments. Read more
Comment Commented Petey Bee
+1 Read more
Comment Commented Steve Hurst
The food sector is notorious for covering a dish in mayonnaise to obscure what is being served up. In this case with the dish Mr Leonard is providing for our delectation when the mayonnaise is scrapped away there is only more mayonnaise and the dish should be returned to the kitchen forthwith. Seldom have I been asked to consume anything more vacuous. The idea Mr Leonard is in any policy position other than mayonnaise production is alarming Read more
Comment Commented Florian Pantazi
P.S.- I would kindly like to remind Project Syndicate readers that, in world history, there was only one "Age of Migration" - between the 5th and the 11th centuries. After the fall of the Roman Empire, ethnic groups *in their entirety* (from the Avars and Visigoths to the Huns, Hungarians, and so on) moved from Asia to Europe, where they mixed with local populations and gave rise to today's European nations. It is highly doubtful that an event of a similar magnitude is currently underway or that it will happen again in the foreseeable future. I do wonder, however, who Mr. Leonard's high school history teacher was :) Read more
Comment Commented Jose araujo
What a collection of common prejudices...
Migrations are has good for the countries of origin like catastrophes are good for a Malthusian. Read more
Comment Commented Krishnananda Kini
It could be passible that future migrants consist of Critical Mass of Fanatics who wanted to convert whole Globe into theocratic state of their choice and tarnish the image of rest of the sincere immigrants. It appears that host country may not have proper system to deal with this new trend. Read more
Comment Commented Steve Hurst
What a surprise - somebody from the European Council on Foreign Relations listing nothing but positive outcomes from migration
As the US is listed as nothing but a positive outcome, can the author detail how this benefited the original indigenous residents, likewise South America and Australia
Shallow isnt the word Read more
Comment Commented Petey Bee
+1 Read more
Comment Commented Jose araujo
The more we read from people with Directors or Presidents of something European on the title, the best I realize how did we end up in such a state.
What a collection of idiots and ignorants we have in our institutions... Read more
Featured
A British Bridge for a Divided Europe
Robert Skidelsky believes that the UK is ideally placed to prevent a messy EU breakup.
A Progressive Logic of Trade
Dani Rodrik rebuts the argument that existing trade agreements are essential to reducing global poverty.
What’s Wrong With Negative Rates?
Joseph E. Stiglitz argues that major central banks' latest round of monetary stimulus reflects a flawed model.