3071-The political economy of new slavery

48 Migration and Security
about it. Yet, asylum seekers from that country recount how they fairly
easily came into touch with smugglers; for example in the local bazaar.
This begs the question whether the Iraqi government was involved
in the smuggling out of the country of its own citizens; thus getting
rid of potential or actual dissidents and making money in the process.
Obviously, the long-term consequences of the emigration of large parts
of the country’s middle classes were disastrous but of little concern to
those who prefered personal short-term financial gain.
First concluding remarks
The words migration and security threat can only be justifiably used
together in the context of the threat to the well-being and basic human
rights of the migrants concerned. This is not to deny that many liberal
democratic states have a problem with the management of immigration
flows. However, these states are all too happy to enjoy the other benefits
of a globalized world; indeed, these problems are largely home-made.
This is easily understood if we think of the process of globalization
as increasing mobility, in terms of speed and volume, of information,
goods, capital and people. Attempts to contain one, relatively small,
element in this giant exchange scheme, can only end in frustration.
Yet, both literally and in frustration, it is what Ghosh (1998) calls the
‘huddled masses’ who pay the price. Since all Western states subscribe
to the human rights instruments of the United Nations, are parties to
the Geneva Convention and seek to create and maintain within their
borders areas of freedom, prosperity and security (as is the official
aim of the European Union), they are, furthermore, under a moral
obligation to address this particular ‘security’ threat more than any
other. Globalization has made Asia and Africa into direct neighbours of
Western Europe and Northern America.
Policy implications
From the above sketch of the current state of affairs in the field of
irregular migration it should have become abundantly clear, first, that
receiving states have, as Sassen (1996b) put it, lost control when it comes
to the management of immigration processes and, second, that their
stubborn denial of this fact has serious implications for the well-being
of large numbers of migrants. The question then arises whether alternatives
for the present immigration regimes can be found. Alternatives
should take account of the declining ability of states to control the