Immigration: A Europe Torn Between Skepticism and the Need for Labor

In recent years, certain countries—such as Morocco, Turkey, and especially Belarus—have organized migration flows to the European Union in order to put pressure on it. However, many of these migrants, who arrived illegally, end up finding work there. Immigration, therefore, follows an economic logic: Europe needs newcomers. Here’s why it should better organize the immigration it needs.

Europe needs workers. The figures from Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union (EU), are quite clear. In 2018 and 2019, there were more deaths than births in the EU. The total fertility rate stands at 1.56 children per woman, whereas a rate of 2.05 would be needed to ensure population replacement. However, the population increased from 512.4 to 513.5 million between those two years, thanks to immigration. In other words—and this has long been known—without migration to Europe, the population of the Old Continent would decline. This is an economically undesirable prospect.

African Cardinal Robert Sarah was invited speaking on Europe 1 late 2021. When asked about the deaths of 27 migrants in the English Channel in November of that year, this man—whom Pope Francis counts among his close associates, and who is therefore, in principle, rather pro-immigration—and who, as a native of Guinea-Conakry, views the situation from the perspective of a country of emigration—denounced a threefold betrayal:

«First, we are taking young people away from Africa—the bright minds and the driving forces that could help develop the country. The second betrayal is that we present Europe to these young people as an Eldorado. […] And the third betrayal is that we are not taking vigorous action against these smugglers who take advantage of young people’s naivety and cause them to perish at sea. I believe we must tackle this problem at its root: present Europe as it truly is, including the challenges it faces, and not tear these young people away from their countries, where they could have been agents of development. […] I have nothing more to say than to insist that we help Africa develop on its own soil.»

The issue of combating human traffickers is likely to be met with unanimous support. It is clear that while Europe needs migrants, it would be in its best interest to better manage their arrival; Europe’s needs do not justify the lies told by traffickers. «»Pickup at the airport and transportation to the hotel”—that was the message the young people taken to Belarus had received on Facebook. The reality? A three-kilometer strip in a freezing forest between the Polish barbed wire and the Belarusian army, which prevented them from turning back.

Despite this proven need, Europeans continue to be skeptical of immigration. A study by Harvard University cited in Quartz by Annalisa Merelli, «What Americans Totally Misunderstand About Immigration, in One Chart,» shows that Westerners systematically overestimate the proportion of foreigners in their populations. In France, the estimated 29% corresponds to an actual figure of 12%; in Germany, 30% corresponds to 15%; in England, 32% corresponds to 14%; and so on. When asked about the origin of migrants, Europeans also tend to exaggerate the proportion of people coming from regions they view as «problematic,» such as the Middle East or Africa.

Read also | Immigration at the heart of the French presidential election: an update by candidate

As for the prelate’s broader view, it ultimately seems to prove us right: if Africa loses out, it is because Europe stands to gain. Immigration is a natural phenomenon that has become a political weapon in the hands of Europe’s opponents. This is largely because Europe has proven incapable of managing migration on its own, due to its population’s distrust of migrants. As is often the case, when one seeks to legally prevent the fulfillment of a real need, that need ends up being met illegally.

Skepticism on the part of Europeans

The fact remains that if the public is skeptical of migrants—or at least some of them—we need to consider why. Some European citizens fear that their continent or their civilization will lose its identity. The reason for this is that people and cultures are often conflated: just because people come from a different culture does not mean they are unwilling to assimilate into that of their host country. Take the example of the Roman Empire: at the beginning of our era, Emperor Augustus was already grappling with the low birth rate among his citizens and had attempted to penalize young Romans who did not have children before the age of 23. Despite a chronic shortage of births, the Empire nevertheless succeeded in passing on its values to the many peoples it welcomed over the course of more than four centuries.

It is the strength of a culture that ensures its survival, more so than the fertility rate of its native population. But what about European culture, which today is often mired in an attitude of deconstructing its past and its very essence? Will it be convincing enough to pass on its values? That is the crux of the matter.

Write to the author: [email protected]

Header image: The situation at the Belarus-Poland border as of December 9, 2020. © Flickr CC/Kancelaria Premiera

You have just read an analysis from our «Immigration» feature», published in our print edition (Le Regard Libre N° 82).