Friday, June 13, 2008
Article #4 from Volume 1, Issue 2: The Many Places of Immigration
“Botswana Policies in the Context of the Zimbabwe Crisis: Immigration Issues”
Rachel Proefke
Illegal border crossings, fences along the border, the issue of migrant labor, concerns of job market saturation, xenophobia…These words most likely conjure thoughts of the situation of Mexican immigration in America. However, these words also reflect the situation of the immigration debate in Botswana, especially in light of the economic crisis in neighboring Zimbabwe.
Botswana, a small country in Southern Africa, is notable for its economic progress and remarkable political stability since decolonization. After gaining independence from Britain in 1966, Botswana rapidly transitioned from a migrant-sending nation to a migrant-receiving nation. Originally supplying South Africa’s gold and diamond mines with labor, it now attracts both permanent and temporary immigrants from nearby nations who have achieved less political and economic success.
Helped by the discovery of rich diamond veins in the 1970s, and by an aggressive policy of immigrant attraction, Botswana has achieved sustained progress. This success has only further attracted immigrants from South Africa, Namibia, Angola, and Zimbabwe during times of political unrest and economic hardship.
The most recent of these is that of the situation of economic crisis in Zimbabwe. While Botswana has evolved from an under-developed nation of migrant laborers to such steadily increasing prosperity, Zimbabwe has experienced an opposite trajectory.
The southern African nation has devolved from the region’s best bet for development- a veritable economic powerhouse- to a situation of inflation that reaches close to 2,000% per year in a context of approximately 80% unemployment and critical resource shortages. Thus, since the dawn of the crisis around 2000, Zimbabwe’s economic refugees have been pouring into Botswana, by increasingly illegal means.
Botswana’s aim to decrease dependence on immigration by bolstering the national population was once manifested in the policy of gradual immigration reduction. However, the crisis in Zimbabwe, as well as mounting xenophobia in response to the influx, has engendered the increased velocity of this goal. This new isolationist sentiment is exhibited by the construction of a 500-km fence on the border to stem the tide of illegal immigrants.
However, it is not simply illegal border-runners who pose the most difficult situation but rather those who overstay their welcome. Migration between Botswana and Zimbabwe is regulated by the Immigration Act of 1966 which allows unrestricted entry of foreign nationals, who often venture into Botswana for holidays, family visits, shopping trips, trading opportunities, and who are permitted to stay for 90 days with proper documentation.
With figures ranking from 60,000 to 800,000 accounting for the number of those illegally in Botswana, most of those are a result of extended stays courtesy of this loophole. In the context of increasing xenophobia, both explicitly from the national population and implicitly embodied in government policies, the subject of these immigrants is of mounting significance in this immigration debate.
From what can be determined in this context, the issue of immigration into Botswana is not so much a question of whether migrants will enter the country but rather how they will be managed, controlled, documented, and, especially, treated and protected- if at all.
As border controls are heightened and new mechanisms of punishment conceived and implemented- mass and immediate deportation being the predilection, a rapidly exclusionary policy appears the greatest likelihood. Yet of greater consequence than the decisions of the government, and the context in which they are made, is how this will affect those already in Botswana and this legal, and at times quasi-legal, flow of temporary migrants.
Rachel Proefke
Illegal border crossings, fences along the border, the issue of migrant labor, concerns of job market saturation, xenophobia…These words most likely conjure thoughts of the situation of Mexican immigration in America. However, these words also reflect the situation of the immigration debate in Botswana, especially in light of the economic crisis in neighboring Zimbabwe.
Botswana, a small country in Southern Africa, is notable for its economic progress and remarkable political stability since decolonization. After gaining independence from Britain in 1966, Botswana rapidly transitioned from a migrant-sending nation to a migrant-receiving nation. Originally supplying South Africa’s gold and diamond mines with labor, it now attracts both permanent and temporary immigrants from nearby nations who have achieved less political and economic success.
Helped by the discovery of rich diamond veins in the 1970s, and by an aggressive policy of immigrant attraction, Botswana has achieved sustained progress. This success has only further attracted immigrants from South Africa, Namibia, Angola, and Zimbabwe during times of political unrest and economic hardship.
The most recent of these is that of the situation of economic crisis in Zimbabwe. While Botswana has evolved from an under-developed nation of migrant laborers to such steadily increasing prosperity, Zimbabwe has experienced an opposite trajectory.
The southern African nation has devolved from the region’s best bet for development- a veritable economic powerhouse- to a situation of inflation that reaches close to 2,000% per year in a context of approximately 80% unemployment and critical resource shortages. Thus, since the dawn of the crisis around 2000, Zimbabwe’s economic refugees have been pouring into Botswana, by increasingly illegal means.
Botswana’s aim to decrease dependence on immigration by bolstering the national population was once manifested in the policy of gradual immigration reduction. However, the crisis in Zimbabwe, as well as mounting xenophobia in response to the influx, has engendered the increased velocity of this goal. This new isolationist sentiment is exhibited by the construction of a 500-km fence on the border to stem the tide of illegal immigrants.
However, it is not simply illegal border-runners who pose the most difficult situation but rather those who overstay their welcome. Migration between Botswana and Zimbabwe is regulated by the Immigration Act of 1966 which allows unrestricted entry of foreign nationals, who often venture into Botswana for holidays, family visits, shopping trips, trading opportunities, and who are permitted to stay for 90 days with proper documentation.
With figures ranking from 60,000 to 800,000 accounting for the number of those illegally in Botswana, most of those are a result of extended stays courtesy of this loophole. In the context of increasing xenophobia, both explicitly from the national population and implicitly embodied in government policies, the subject of these immigrants is of mounting significance in this immigration debate.
From what can be determined in this context, the issue of immigration into Botswana is not so much a question of whether migrants will enter the country but rather how they will be managed, controlled, documented, and, especially, treated and protected- if at all.
As border controls are heightened and new mechanisms of punishment conceived and implemented- mass and immediate deportation being the predilection, a rapidly exclusionary policy appears the greatest likelihood. Yet of greater consequence than the decisions of the government, and the context in which they are made, is how this will affect those already in Botswana and this legal, and at times quasi-legal, flow of temporary migrants.
Posted by
UWJHR
at
8:33 AM
|
Labels: botswana, crisis, human rights, immigration, newsletter, rachel proefke, university of washington, uwjhr, zimbabwe
Labels: botswana, crisis, human rights, immigration, newsletter, rachel proefke, university of washington, uwjhr, zimbabwe
0 comments:
Post a Comment