Deterring Migration Through Media

When immigration opposers have done their part on home soil, they can take their fight to the source. Posting anti-immigration media in foreign countries can be an effective deterrent for would-be asylum seekers. With promises of punishment and hardship it would make those seeking a life abroad second guess their decision. In “An International Analysis of Governmental Media Campaigns to Deter Asylum Seekers” we learn of the many deterrent campaigns led by Norway, USA, and Australia. Mainly targeting asylum-seekers in Central America, the Middle East and even on the internet. The videos “Why risk your life?” and “You risk being returned” were posted by Norway to dissuade a growing number of seekers from coming, and highlighted the smugglers as being a main enemy. Norway was the only European country to use social media as a platform to send word that illegal crossings would not be allowed.

After viewing the videos “No Way” and “Stricter Asylum Regulations in Norway” it is clear that both countries are using visual media to dissuade illegal crossings by sea. Norway states that since 2014 over 10,000 lives have been lost trying to cross the Mediterranean; so why risk your savings and more importantly your life by trying to cross the sea into Norway? Norway makes it stance clear that those seeking jobs will not be permitted by illegal crossing, so why risk it? Australia uses similar language in “No Way” when referring to sea vessels arriving on Australian waters. They must defend their seas and no matter who you are, adults, children, skilled or un-skilled workers, you will not cross into Australia illegally and make it your home. The United States “Know the facts” video makes it clear that the border is overwhelmed with migrants. They try to dissuade additional migrants from South America by sending those who were detained back to their homes, which leads to oral messaging of “I’ve spent thousands of dollars to cross into America but I’m back where I am”. This is probably the greatest method of demotivation in my opinion.

It is clear that this is not a Presidential, nor solely an American issue. Other countries are facing the same human rights issues and can not keep up with, or care for all the asylum seekers they receive. Sarah Bishop cleverly references the fact that “Australia, Norway, and the United States all voted in favor of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Article 14 of the Declaration grants that “everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.” The three nations are also all signatories on the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, which extended protections originally established in the 1951 Refugee Convention by stipulating that nations should not penalize forced migrants for illegal entry or stay, regardless of where and when the migrants were forcibly displaced. Although the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 1967 Protocol are clear in this regard, the omission of information regarding the right to seek asylum in the Australian and U.S. deterrence campaigns obscures the reality that both nations approve and grant status to thousands of asylum seekers each year. Instead, they imply that this right does not exist.” This does a great job at picking apart their recent stance on illegal migrants.

Questions:

• • Seeing as these videos and instances from the US were pre-Trump, can we expect any changes for the better if the administration changes after the next election?
  • Is there really a solution here?

4/5