martedì 8 novembre 2016
How should the EU respond to the refugee and migrant challenge?
Description
of the scale of the phenomenon. Estimated number of illegal
immigrants to the EU so far this year, compared with last year and
the recent past.
More
than a million migrants and refugees crossed into Europe in 2015,
sparking a crisis as countries struggle to cope with the influx, and
creating division in the EU over how best to deal with resettling
people. The symbolic milestone was
passed on 21 December,
the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) said, with the
total for land and sea reaching more than 1,006,000. The figure
covers entries via six European Union nations - Greece, Bulgaria,
Italy, Spain, Malta and Cyprus. The vast majority arrived by sea but
about 34,000 made their way over land via Turkey.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911
Excellent summary
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/08/these-4-maps-might-change-how-you-think-about-migration-in-europe/
This
compares with 72,437 illegal immigrants to the EU in 2012, 107,365 in
2013 and 283,532 In 2014. However, 1,000,000 represents only 0.2% of
the EU’s population of 500 million.
In
January and February 2016, over 123,000 migrants landed in Greece,
compared to about 4,600 in the same period of 2015. In March,
following the closing of the Balkan route by Macedonia and the entry
into force of the EU-Turkey deal on 20 March, the number of migrants
arriving in Greece dropped to 26,460, less than half the figure
recorded in February. Syrians, Afghans and Iraqis continued to
account for the largest share of the migrants arriving in Greece.
This downward trend continued in April, when only 2,700 migrants
arrived in Greece, decreasing by 90% compared to the previous month.
Meanwhile,
due to improved weather conditions, the number of mainly African
migrants crosing the sea to Italy doubled between February and March,
reaching nearly 9,600 in March 2016, compared to 2,283 in March 2015.
In April, on the contrary, the number of migrants arriving in Italy
(8,370) dropped by 13% compared to the previous month and by 50%
compared to the same month in 2015; despite this, Italy exceeded the
totals for Greece for the first time since June 2015.On 16 April, a
shipwreck of a large boat between Libya and Italy was reported, in
which as many as 500 people may have died, in one of the worst
disasters since April 2015.
UNHCR
says that 315,928 refugees and migrants have arrived by sea so far in
2016 (to October)
So
there has been a significant rise in migration towards the EU in
recent years, increasing dramatically in the last 2 years. Is this a
temporary phenomenon or a more permanent change? The result of
turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa or something more
fundamental?
Or
course we should remember that illegal immigration happens within a
wider context of legal immigration and both are important in
examining popular reaction inside EU member states. Figures for net
legal immigration to the EU from non-EU countries were 748,026 in
2010, 693,660 in 2011, 598,352 in 2012, 539,059 in 2013, suggesting a
slight decline over that period. However Frontex estimates that there
were 547,335 people illegally
present in the EU in 2014. Many of these were from Syria, Eritrea and
Afghanistan, with citizens from these countries representing one
third of the total.
The
EU 28 received about 626,000 applications for political asylum from
non-EU citizens in 2014 compared with 431,000 in 2013. This number
rose to 942,400
in 2015 (possibly more, 1.3 million, see below).
_asylum_seekers_in_the_EU-28_Member_States,_2013_and_2014_YB15_III.png){kind=link}
http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/08/02/number-of-refugees-to-europe-surges-to-record-1-3-million-in-2015/
EU
Member States (Austria excluded) granted protection to more than
185,000 asylum seekers in 2014
.
The
number of people residing in an EU Member State with citizenship of a
non-member country on 1 January 2015 was 19.8 million,
representing 3.9 % of the EU-28 population (while
the number of people living in the EU-28 who had been born outside of
the EU was 34.3 million).
In addition, there were 15.3 million persons living in one of the EU
Member States on 1 January 2015 with the citizenship of another
EU Member State.
In
absolute terms, the largest numbers of non-nationals living in the EU
Member States on 1 January 2015 were found in Germany (7.5
million persons), the United Kingdom (5.4 million), Italy (5.0
million), Spain (4.5 million) and France (4.4 million). Non-nationals
in these five Member States collectively represented 76 % of the
total number of non-nationals living in all of the EU Member States,
while the same five Member States had a 63 % share of the
EU-28’s population.
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Migration_and_migrant_population_statistics
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/01/15/5-facts-about-the-muslim-population-in-europe/
We
also need to bear in mind both the size and degree of effective
integration of existing immigrant populations.
_YB15.png){kind=link}
Most
of the arrivals between January and October 2015 (perhaps more than
60% according to the EU) were asylum-seekers from countries like
Syria, Afghanistan and Eritrea torn apart by war, oppression and
extremism rather than those simply fleeing poverty.
The
number of refugees coming to the EU is, of course, low if compared
with the numbers of Syrian refugees arriving in Turkey, Lebanon and
Jordan and, poorer countries facing far more serious problems in
dealing with the huge numbers involved - Turkey 2.73 million, Lebanon
1.03 million and Jordam 0.66 million.
There
are also high levels of South-South migration 8legal and illegal) in
many other developing countries.
And
we should not confuse migration by non-EU citizens into the EU with
fully legal internal EU migration, from one member state to residence
in another member state. See again:
Many
EU states have residents from other EU states who form a significant
and often well-integrated proportion of the total migrant population.
The
number of Italian citizens resident in four EU countries, the UK,
France, Germany and Spain totals more than a million.
See
again:
However,
internal EU migration from poorer (e.g. Romania) to richer countries,
has already produced serious frictions that may add to tensions
between migrants of all kinds and native residents. Xenophobic
reactions take various forms. There are accusation that foreigners
steal local jobs at a time of recession and obtain welfare payments
that they have not contributed to in taxes. Statistically, this seems
largely a false impression as foreigners often do jobs that the local
population does not want to do and often fail to claim welfare
benefits to which they are entitled. However, these concerns about
internal EU migration could be dwarfed by non-EU immigration in terms
of scale, duration and the social tensions produced if numbers
continue to rise at current rates.
What
problems is the EU facing as a result of illegal migration?
a)
The humanitarian crisis regarding migrants who are trying to get
here. Human smuggling (and trafficking), massive human rights
violation and the responsibility to respond to this crisis. Deaths at
sea and in container ships.
b)
The rising numbers are beyond the capacity and funding of existing
infrastructure (e.g. reception centres) and personnel (e.g. coast
guard, police, frontier and migration authorities, interviewers
interpreters etc…) and the procedures to deal with the migrants
(identification, interviewing, temporary accommodation, repatriation
if not accepted and more permanent relocation, accommodation and
integration if accepted.
c)
Migrants coming into the EU often cross internal EU borders to move
to their preferred destination (often in Northern Europe). This
creates tensions between EU member states and has led to growing
restrictions by states on free movement within the EU and thus an
erosion of the Schengen rules.
d)
Countries on front-line EU external borders* e.g. Italy, Greece,
Spain, Romania, Bulgaria etc.. have been criticized for not securing
their borders by providing effective controls against illegal
immigration. This criticism has come from destination countries like
Germany, the UK, France, and Scandinavia. These countries, in their
turn, are criticized by the countries on the exposed external EU
borders for failing to provide adequate economic and material
assistance to their partners to help them deal with the problem. For
example, Operazione Mare Nostrum in 2013-14, financed at great
expense (9 million euros a month for 12 months) and almost
exclusively by Italy, was relatively successful compared with the EU
Operation
Triton
(originally called Frontex Plus) and financed at only 3 million euros
a month (although a further 13.7 million euros was made available in
February 2015). Mare Nostrum operated also in international waters,
Triton‘s mission only covers border control and activity within 30
miles off the Italian coast. However, the European
Union Naval Force Mediterranean
also known as Operation Sophia should make the situation more
manageable in international waters.
*
obviously in a certain sense all countries with ports and container
ports are on the front line.
e)
Public opinion in many EU countries. There has been a wave of real
sympathy for the plight of the migrants on their journey, outrage at
their inhuman exploitation by traffickers and horror at their
sometimes gruesome fate. This has been expressed in the generous
reaction of governments, NGOs and the public.
At
the same time there is a growing concern among EU citizens about the
rise in immigrant numbers, increasing opposition to this process,
fears about cultural clashes, growing numbers of acts of violence
against immigrants and refugee centers and a significant rise in
support for xenophobic, or at least more nationalist, political
parties. Criticism of the EU itself, which is often blamed and held
responsible for the rise in migrant numbers, has also increased,
though it is hard to see how leaving the EU would benefit a country
in terms of dealing with illegal non-EU immigration.
e.g.
in the Brexit vote Lord
Ashcroft's mega-poll
of 12,369 voters after
the referendum found that one third of Leave voters chose to back
Brexit as they saw it "offered the best chance for the UK to
regain control over immigration and its own borders." This was
the second biggest motivation for Leave voters, just behind “the
principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK”.
Meanwhile
Hungary decided in July 2016 it would hold
a referendum in October on
whether to comply with the European Union quota system aimed at
solving the migrant crisis, setting the stage for a fresh fight over
power-sharing in the 28-nation bloc . The Hungarian referendum has
worried some in Brussels, who fear that
a series of national votes on specific issues could unfasten key
planks of EU policy and rules. Senior EU officials have worried that
further referendums— above all on a country’s EU membership—could
lead to an eventual unraveling of the bloc.
In
addition to the
June 23 British referendum,
Dutch voters also rejected
a sweeping EU trade and political agreement
with Ukraine in April, potentially forcing the bloc to renegotiate
the accord.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/hungary-sets-date-for-vote-on-settling-migrants-1467707714
f)
With the terrorist attacks in Paris on November 13th
2015 (and further attacks through 2016), there is growing concern
that Arab terrorists may manage to get into Europe by pretending to
be refugees. There is also concern about border security regarding
European citizens who sympathize with IS and go to Syria possibly to
train and try to return to Europe to carry out an attack.
g)
The reaction of the EU is often criticized as slow and lacking
coordination while EU member states are criticized as too preoccupied
with their own national interests. The atmosphere at the EU talks to
agree and introduce the quota system among members to deal with the
ongoing crisis was an example of these problems. So is the debate
about whether or not to suspend the Schengen agreement for 2 years.
agreement:
Schengen
h)
the EU- Turkey deal on refugees and migrants
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/20/eu-refugee-deal-turkey-condemned-council-of-europe
What
are the problems for the future?
a)
Beyond the immediate crisis there is the question of whether the
scale of the phenomenon is temporary, e.g. due to refugees from the
civil war in Syria and the situation in Libya, or part of a growing
trend towards movement from non-EU states to the EU based on hopes
for greater economic well-being and more security and freedom.
b)
The need to quickly and effectively integrate those migrants who are
allowed to stay into our society. Many experts argue that many states
in the EU with aging populations need migrants as a young and
flexible workforce. Others point to the failures in previous
integration policies.
c)There
is a need to support efforts for pacification and peace-building in
the war-torn areas from which the refugees are fleeing. Current
efforts (see below) to form a single effective government in Libya
and enforce the rule of law by reaching an agreement between all
legitimate groups are crucial in any attempt to limit the spread of
ISIS and deal with the humanitarian and refugee crisis in Libya at
its source.
See
also below #
d)
There is also a need to provide more funds to UN agencies and NGOs in
countries like Syria’s neighbors, Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey, which
are trying to deal with the enormous refugee problem.
e)
Whatever public resentment there may be about perceived threats to
jobs, at a time of recession and unemployment, and the nation’s
‘culture’, immigrant numbers remain a limited proportion of the
population. It is only in certain areas with sudden, high immigrant
concentrations (Lampedusa) that a community may feel overwhelmed and
this calls, above all, for better planning and organization in the
redistribution of recently arrived migrants.
f)
Although most of the EU economies are either still in recession or
growing only slowly, the EU’s population generally is aging and
young migrants may play an important and necessary role in the
economy if and when the recovery begins.
g)
The humanitarian crisis is unlikely to go away soon. So the EU and
national governments will have to respond to public concerns about
immigration while at the same time honoring their legal and moral
obligations to deal with the question by providing
better-coordinated, better-funded plans on a long-term basis. So far
this has not happened.
h)
How to deal with asylum seekers who are successful in their
application (where should they reside?) and those who are not. See
below § Dealing with asylum seekers
i)
The idea and effectiveness of using military force against the human
traffickers.
j)
The question of whether or not to suspend the Schengen agreement for
2 years.
k)
the deal with Turkey and questions about human rights and whether it
is legal
and
in the light of the crack-down after the attempted coup
Some
useful background reading and updates
#
Skhirat, Morocco: On the 13 September 2015 the UN special envoy for
Libya, Bernardino Leon, announced that there was consensus on most
of the main issues for an agreement to form a government of national
unity. He hoped to get a deal for national pacification and economic
recovery by the deadline of 20 September.
(The
rising influence of the Islamic State extremist group and Libya's
emergence as a smuggling hub for migrants risking their lives to
cross the Mediterranean had added urgency to the long-running and
often derailed UN talks.)
A
Libyan national unity government was announced by the UN after months
of negotiations on
October 09th 2015
and The Government of National Accord was formed 17 December 2015
Whether
this government is strong enough to achieve real unity, to take back
power from military factions and defeat Islamic State remains
doubtful.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/19/libya-unveils-un-backed-government-but-divisions-remain
also: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/01/libya-unity-government-160119093015333.html
http://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2015/12/175396/inter-libyan-political-agreement-signed-in-morocco/
but:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-35351878
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/africa/23511-can-the-new-un-backed-government-solve-libyas-problems
§ Dealing with Asylum-seekers
See Granting Asylum in:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911
but also this article which explains why a migrant refused asylum is not necessarily sent homehttp://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34190359
also relevant:http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Asylum_quarterly_report
http://www.france24.com/en/20160128-sweden-expel-80000-failed-asylum-seekers-migrants-refugees-europe
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/08/eu-governments-call-for-faster-deportations-of-failed-asylum-seekers
also: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/01/libya-unity-government-160119093015333.html
http://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2015/12/175396/inter-libyan-political-agreement-signed-in-morocco/
but:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-35351878
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/africa/23511-can-the-new-un-backed-government-solve-libyas-problems
§ Dealing with Asylum-seekers
See Granting Asylum in:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911
but also this article which explains why a migrant refused asylum is not necessarily sent homehttp://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34190359
also relevant:http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Asylum_quarterly_report
http://www.france24.com/en/20160128-sweden-expel-80000-failed-asylum-seekers-migrants-refugees-europe
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/08/eu-governments-call-for-faster-deportations-of-failed-asylum-seekers
EU
okays use of force against human traffickers
http://www.politico.eu/article/libya-traffickers-migrants-mogherini-uno/
https://www.occrp.org/en/daily/4402-eu-approves-use-of-force-against-trafficking-boats-in-international-waters-2
Naval
mission will be operative by early October
2015
(ANSA)
- Brussels, September 14, 2015 - The European Union's 28 member
States on Monday gave official approval for the launch of "phase
two" of the EuNavFor Med naval mission, including the use of
force against human traffickers in the Mediterranean if necessary.
The proposal was approved 'without debate' by the General Affairs
Council. The mission is expected to be operative by early October.
The naval mission, launched after calls from Italy for more
assistance from the EU in dealing with the migrant emergency,
features the active hunting down and arrest of human traffickers and
the confiscation or destruction of boats.
See
also:
http://www.marina.difesa.it/cosa-facciamo/operazioni-in-corso/Pagine/EUNAVFORMED.aspx
http://www.difesa.it/OperazioniMilitari/op_intern_corso/eunavfor_med/Pagine/default.aspx
http://eeas.europa.eu/csdp/missions-and-operations/eunavfor-med/index_en.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Navfor_Med
and UN too
UE
pronta alla forza contro gli scafisti
14/09/2015
L’Unione
Europea ha autorizzato l’uso della forza militare nelle missioni
contro gli scafisti nel Mediterraneo: il via libera dovrebbe scattare
a inizio ottobre e permetterà alle navi della forza Ue di fermare,
perquisire e dirottare le imbarcazioni sospettate di trasportare
migranti. I ministri dell’Interno dell’Ue hanno anche raggiunto
l’accordo politico per distribuire 160 mila rifugiati in due anni
(cifra che comprende le due misure proposte da Bruxelles da maggio ad
oggi per distribuire 40 mila e 120 mila persone). Ieri i Ventotto
hanno dato il via libera al primo piano di redistribuzione dei
profughi, i primi 40 mila richiedenti asilo approdati in Italia e
Grecia che andranno negli altri Paesi dell’Unione. La ripartizione
per Paesi degli altri 120 mila si concretizzerà nel Consiglio del
prossimo 8 ottobre. Il programma approvato riguarderà le persone con
chiara necessità di protezione internazionale. I Paesi che
partecipano al meccanismo riceveranno 6 mila euro per ciascuna
persona ricollocata. Si è raggiunto anche l’accordo sugli hotspot,
i centri di identificazione e registrazione. All’Italia si chiede
di realizzare sei centri di registrazione, il primo ad essere
operativo dovrebbe essere a Lampedusa. Il ministro Alfano ha chiesto
che sia l’Unione europea a farsi carico di “svuotare” gli
hotspot: «Il rimpatrio non è una responsabilità solo nazionale, ma
anche europea», e chiede dunque all’Ue di «farsene carico non
solo da un punto di vista economico» ma anche politico: «È
l’Europa che deve firmare gli accordi di rimpatrio con i Paesi
africani».
Controlli
alle frontiere
Di
fronte all’afflusso massiccio di migranti, si moltiplicano i Paesi
che ripristinano controlli temporanei alle frontiere usando la deroga
prevista dagli accordi di Schengen: dopo l’annuncio della Germania,
è stata la volta di Austria e Slovacchia che hanno deciso di tornare
a richiedere i documenti ai valichi di confine. L’Olanda aumenterà
i controlli a campione, la Polonia ha preannunciato che li farà e la
Francia ha preannunciato che è pronta, se necessario, a ripristinare
i controlli con l’Italia. Anche Polonia e Repubblica Ceca hanno
annunciato di star valutando le misure da prendere alla frontiera. La
Germania - che ieri ha aggiornato le stime dicendo di attendersi
nell’anno circa un milione di profughi - intanto ha riaperto il
traffico ferroviario con l’Austria e a sua volta quest’ultima ha
ripreso a far entrare i migranti dall’Ungheria. La quale ha sua
volta completa in queste ore l’ultimo tratto della barriera al
confine serbo, mentre la polizia ungherese ha bloccato il principale
punto di transito dei migranti.
However,
the situation in 2016 remains grim
“The
mission does not, however, in any meaningful way deter the flow of
migrants,
disrupt the smugglers’ networks, or impede the business of people
smuggling on the central Mediterranean route. The arrests that
Operation Sophia has made to date have been of low-level targets,
while the destruction of vessels has simply caused the smugglers to
shift from using wooden boats to rubber dinghies, which are even more
unsafe. There are also significant limits to the intelligence that
can be collected about onshore smuggling networks from the high seas.
There is therefore little prospect of Operation Sophia overturning
the business model of people smuggling.The weakness of the Libyan
state has been a key factor underlying the exceptional rate of
irregular migration on the central Mediterranean route in recent
years. While plans for two further phases would see Operation Sophia
acting in Libyan territorial waters and onshore, we are not confident
that the new Libyan Government of National Accord will be in a
position to work closely with the EU and its Member States any time
soon.In other words, however valuable as a search and rescue mission,
Operation Sophia does not, and we argue, cannot, deliver its mandate.
It responds to symptoms, not causes.”
venerdì 28 ottobre 2016
What is President Obama’s Legacy?
Excellent
article:
Some
research to do:
What
was the ‘legacy’ that Obama inherited from previous
administrations? What were the expectations when he was elected at
home and abroad? What were his policy objectives? Consider:
1)
Obama
as the first African American elected President
2)
the
divisions in US society
3)
the
US economy, short term and long-term, and global cooperation in this
area
4)
reforming
the financial and banking sector
5)
the
war on terror and the US approach to the Arab world / Israel and the
Palestinians
6)
civil
liberties, Guantánamo Bay and human rights
7)
health care reform
8) US
oreign policy and the Pacific
9)
US
foreign policy and Russia
10) US
foreign policy and China
11)
US
foreign policy the EU and NATO
12)
climate
change
More
than seven years later what are the realities regarding these
questions? Were these objectives achieved? If not, why not? What are
the main criticisms coming from those on the right? And on the left?
What
have been the limiting factors and constraints, legal and practical,
on Obama?
What
are the major achievements and failures of the administration and the
man, given all of the above? The Iran nuclear deal / Cuba / climate
change etc…
Some
ideas
A
legacy is something that somebody leaves you in their will
(testamento). A special legacy is often something someone leaves you
that you did not expect to inherit. So metaphorically for a US
President it means, in the short term, the general situation one
President leaves to the next, and in the historic sense, a
President’s outstanding achievements or failures. So for FDR it
usually means the New Deal, victory in World War II and the planning
of the UN.
A
President’s legacy will also depend on one’s political point of
view, on the left or right (particularly now when the spirit and
tradition of of bipartisan politics seems dead in the US and opinions
are so clearly divided on so many issues) and on whether one is
judging as a US citizen or from abroad (and then from which part of
the world e.g. Italy or Libya).
So
what did newly-elected President Obama inherit from the Bush
administration? There was the financial crisis and the effects of
the crisis as it spread to the real economy and went global, leading
to an economic slowdown and the threat of a world recession. Abroad
there was the continuing war against terror and attempts to reduce
and eventually end the US military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan
in the hope of leaving law and order to the local government and its
security forces. There was also the rise of China, the resurgence of
Russia (Georgia 2008) and the beginning of the Arab Spring.
How
is Obama’s legacy seen in the US? The President had an approval
rating of about 51% in March 2016 and 53% in September 2016. The main
factor in opinion polls remains the economy. Unemployment was down
to 5% in March 2016 (4.9% in August) but many jobs are poorly paid
and short-term, and manufacturing is now only 12% to 13% of GDP
compared with 19% in1995. Many of those in manufacturing who lost or
risk losing their jobs and who may have previously voted for Obama,
may now feel abandoned and be planning to support Donald Trump. Many
Americans blame Obama for doing too little to contain immigration
from Mexico and the rest of Latin America (but recently also from
China and India, so that immigration from Asia now equals that from
Latin America) and see this as a force driving wages lower, or at
least keeping them from rising, and increasing competition for jobs.
Some also consider it a cultural threat. New immigrants were 1.7
million in 2015 and immigrants represented 13.3% of the US
population. These are both records in recent history.
Economists
are divided about whether the recession is really over and about how
strong and competitive the US economy is. Obama responded to the
economic crisis with a neo-Keynesian intervention, a stimulus
package, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and a new
framework to regulate the financial sector, the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Critics on the left say
these were not enough, and on the right that the latter is too
restrictive. The US Public Debt rose from 87% of GDP in 2009 to about
100% in 2012 but now seems fairly stable. It was 104.17% in March
2016 (105.05%September 2016). In 2015 the annual deficit was 2.5% and
is forecast to be 3.3% in 2016. GDP growth was 2% in the third
quarter of 2015 and 1.4% in the last quarter and same in the second
quarter of 2016. The trade deficit remains high, at 2.7% in March
2016 (3% in August), but this is much less than the 4.7% level
recorded in 2008. Current interest rates in the US are in the 0.25%
to 0.5% range and it is not clear if the Fed will be able to raise
them much this year or next year, though it would like to. A recovery
in interest rates, stuck at 0.25% from 2008 to December 2015, would
be taken as a measure of recovery and normality for the economy in
general, hence the concerns about the strength and durability of the
current upturn. Assistance programs for subprime mortgage homeowners
who lost their jobs and couldn’t pay their mortgages were judged
largely ineffective.
The
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (often referred to
as Obamacare) massively reduced the number of Americans without
health care insurance. In March 2015, the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention
reported
that the average number of uninsured during the period from January
to September 2014 was 11.4 million fewer than the average in 2010. In
April 2016, Gallup
reported
that the percentage of adults who were uninsured dropped from 18% in
the third quarter of 2013 to 11% in the first quarter of 2016.
However, critics complain that this is not the European-style
universal public health care system many on the left hoped for.
Nevertheless, for the President it is one of his proudest
achievements, so it represents a significant part of what he regards
as his legacy.
Barack
Obama was elected with great hopes and expectations as the first US
African-American President and the African-American community
continues to say that he has opened doors for them. The
administration made efforts to improve educational for minorities and
the percentage of both African American and Hispanic teenagers
completing high school successfully has risen by 4% during his
Presidency. Recognition of the need for greater racial equality has
gained more support among the public according to a Pew Report of
Jan. 2016, but discrimination against African Americans within
society and allegedly by some sections of the police remains a
challenge. Above all, the difference in average incomes between white
Americans and African Americans is higher now than it has been since
1989. So on improving the situation of African Americans President
Obama’s record is at best patchy.
The
administration was initially a supporter of gay rights but not on all
issues, but during his two terms the President gradually moved to
stronger and more open support for Supreme Court rulings that made
same-sex marriage and the adoption of children by same-sex couples
legal nationwide in June 2015. Since September 2011, gays, lesbians,
and bisexuals have been able to serve openly in the US military. The
President announced his own change of position on same-sex marriage
in an interview in May 2012.
The
2009
Nobel Peace Prize
was awarded to President Barack
Obama
for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international
diplomacy and cooperation between people”. This was obviously more
of a hope for the future than a real response to the short period he
had been in office, but generally Obama’s foreign policy can,
indeed, be credited with trying to open and build a dialogue with
traditional US enemies and to strengthen global cooperation to deal
with global challenges. This was a shift from the post-9/11
confrontational style of the Bush administration and the ‘rogue
states’ view of the world. Obama sought and generally achieved an
international response to the global economic crisis based on a
loosely coordinated strategy. He maintained the dialogue with China
but the relationship with the Russian Federation proved more
problematic with confrontation and sanctions over Ukraine and
disagreement over Syria. One of the main initiatives taken by the
Obama administration has been the ‘pivot’ (or rebalancing )
towards the Asia- Pacific area, a shift of focus and resources away
from Europe, considered secure, and any further commitments in the
Middle East (from which the US wanted to withdraw) to the Far East in
support of China’s neighbors now beginning to feel threatened by
China’s expansionism in the South China Sea and North Korea’s
increasingly erratic and aggressive rhetoric and behavior. The US
pushed for its European NATO allies to take more responsibility in
relations with Russia and their neighbors in the Arab world. In the
Libyan operation the Europeans led with US logistical support
(leading from behind). This led to the fall of the Gaddafi regime but
no effective strategy for a follow-up operation to stabilize the
country. Obama himself recently recognized this as one of his
administrations major errors. The desire for change and some
alternative to military intervention in the Muslim world was clearly
stated early on, in Obama’s Cairo University speech in 2009,
calling for a new relationship with the Arab world. However, the lack
of any real progress on negotiations between Israel and Palestinians
was indicative of the administrations inability to put its intentions
into action. The killing of Osama bin Laden in 2011 should have
symbolized the end of the old confrontation with the Muslim world,
and before this the cautious US support for the growing
demonstrations and protests of the Arab Spring in Tunisia and Egypt
and across the Arab world may have simply represented an optimistic
desire to believe that after the democratic changes in Latin America
and Eastern Europe it was finally the turn of the Arab world. As the
Arab Spring turned to Winter the US was forced to take a more
realistic approach, accepting the overthrow of the democratically
elected but Islamist government in Cairo by the Egyptian army in
2013 and drawing a red line on the use of chemical weapons by the
Assad regime in the Syrian civil war (but then backing down from
action when the line was crossed). In responding to this civil war
the US seemed both hesitant and unclear about what strategy it wanted
to follow. The US first backed the rebels against the Syrian
government with aid and money but refused to supply heavy arms
fearing this might lead to a direct commitment of its forces. This
strategy proved ineffective. Later, with the rise of Islamic State in
both Syria and Iraq, it began bombing missions against IS. The
involvement of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Hezbollah, Turkey and Russia in
support of different groups showed just how far the world has moved
away from a unipolar to a multipolar order. Critics of Obama, at home
and abroad, have stressed the uncertainty, reluctance and passiveness
of the administration in responding to events in the Arab world.
Meanwhile
there has been much criticism from human rights NGOs about the
administration’s increasingly extensive use of drone warfare to
target IS and Taliban fighters and terrorists. These attacks involve
no trial and due process and often lead to the death of innocent
civilians. The radical left has denounced this as state-sponsored
terrorism. Similarly the extensive spying system used by the US and
its allies in fighting terrorism has been seen as a breach of privacy
and basic civil rights by civil rights groups in the US and other
countries. The administration has been forced to abandon some forms
of surveillance as a result of losing cases in the courts to civil
rights groups. Nevertheless, the NSA continues to exercise powers
arguably not under real democratic control and to insist that this is
necessary to ensure security and counter and prevent terrorism. The
Manning case (2010) and Snowden case (2013) were presented by the
administration as threats to security requiring harsh punishment, and
by critics as a necessary exposure of human rights abuse and the
extent of the government’s use of both legal and illegal
surveillance programs both at home and abroad. All of this has
seriously damaged Obama’s liberal credentials. Obama was also
elected with the pledge to close down the US detention centre for
suspect terrorists in Guantánamo Bay. However, for legal and
practical reasons this has so far proved impossible and Obama has
preferred to slowly reduce the number of detainees.
Any
assessment of the Obama administration’s record needs to take into
account the legal restraints that the Constitution imposes on the
office of the Presidency and the practical constraints imposed by a
hostile Republican Congress and limited resources. The extensive use
made by Obama of Executive Orders in his second term (for example,
the recent 2016 Executive Order to reduce gun violence) shows both
the practical limits on his choices given the Republican hold on
Congress and his determination to get things done.
Two
key achievements of his legacy may be the nuclear deal with Iran and
the restoration of diplomatic relations with Cuba. These are both
products of Obama’s willingness to engage with old enemies,
maintain a dialogue and commit to negotiating a deal. Whether these
deals lead to lasting settlements will depend on the other party's
reliability and on who wins the White House and Congressional
elections in November. So they will certainly be part of his
immediate legacy.
Another
of Obama’s achievements has been moving the US forward on climate
change and getting to the first-ever universal, legally binding
global agreement at the COP21 in Paris in Dec. 2015, a commitment
that also includes China to keep the rise in global average
temperatures to well below 2% compared with pre-industrial levels.
The deal does not include sanctions and would need to be ratified by
the US Senate at some point to become law. So US participation will
again probably ultimately depend on who wins the White House and
Congressional elections.
In
terms of personality Obama has been praised for his ability to
dialogue and engage with the public and the calm diplomatic skills
he demonstrates when speaking in public. However, he has also been
criticized for his failure to charm, persuade (flatter, threaten,
blackmail!) in order to influence members of Congress (and build
consensus) that were a feature of the Presidential skills of Lyndon
Johnson and Ronald Reagan. Thus, some see him as engaging but
slightly diffident, though not as distant and academic as Woodrow
Wilson.
Many
commentator, in summing up, have stressed the gaps in Obama’s
performance between good intentions and reality. This may simply be
the nature of politics given the constraints that he has to live with
and operate under, a hostile Congress and a multipolar world order in
which the US remains the key player but no longer the only major
player. Moreover, if a week in politics is a long time and given that
Barack Obama has another three months as President, it may be a
little early to be summing things up and talking about his legacy. We
may need to wait until we are a couple of years into his successor's
Presidency to understand what impact he has made.
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)