Of Push-backs and Pull-effects

Posted On October 13, 2020

By SM

If you haven’t heard of push-backs or pull-effects, these terms can sound like something from a weather forecast or a rugby game. In truth, they are used in migration politics and stand at the center of the inhumane isolationist policy of the EU.

So, let’s start with the “pull-effect“. This term originates from an economic theory of migration that was published in 1966 by Everett S. Lee [1]. In this theory, the factors that motivate people to leave their home are grouped into “push-factors” that displace people from their homes (poverty, unemployment, instability) and “pull-factors” that make places attractive for migrants (jobs, infrastructure, security of supply). Ever since their publication, these terms have gained a huge popularity – and not just in the scientific scene but even more so among politicians and agents that need catchy phrases to justify deterrent and isolationist policies against refugees. Example? In August, in the middle of the Covid pandemic, the German Interior Minister argued against the admission of refugees that were stranded in Greece because that would generate an pull-effect that “should not be underestimated” [2]. Why is this term so dangerous?

First of all: there’s no evidence that a humane migration policy generates a pull-effect. This term is based on a theory and current research shows that migration is an extremely complex phenomenon that can’t be explained by using one term from this theory [3].

Second: it masks the humanitarian crisis behind migration. When a politician says, they don’t want to generate a pull-effect, they’re really saying that they’re okay with people dying who try to emigrate to protect their own privilege. It’s a politically intended re-framing of responsibilities. Instead of justifying why they don’t want to rescue people in the mediterranean, they move the debate into the economic realm and hint at the potential economic disaster that would ensue if they opened the borders, an argumentation that triggers the fears of the lower economic classes and might win their support. And, again, a claim without any evidence. This brings us to the next term…

In contrast to pull-effects, “push-backs” are a bitter reality and the consequence of an inhumane migration policy. During these push-backs, border patrols from EU states such as Greece and Malta damage refugee boats and push them out of European waters [4-6]. This is not just in violation of the legal obligation to rescue a person in distress at sea, but also in direct violation of the European Convention of Human Rights [7]. Push-backs are used to prevent refugees from applying for asylum – a right for every human being according to the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Art. 14 (1) [8].

So, while refugees are violently deterred from seeking their basic human right, European politicians honestly talk about pull-effects and give the killing of people an economic justification. We can’t allow them to be successful in this. We need to call bullshit on their catchy phrases and call them by their name. Everybody who supports the deterrence of refugees supports their murder. Everybody who uses a rhetoric that conceals this fact and who capitalises on the existential fear of people is a demagogue.

Sources:
[1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.2307%2F2060063
[2] https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/migration-berlin-aufnahme-von-fluechtlingen-seehofer-fuerchtet-pull-effekt-dpa.urn-newsml-dpa-com-20090101-200826-99-311193
[3] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/twec.12889
[4] https://www.dw.com/en/greece-refugees-attacked-and-pushed-back-in-the-aegean/a-53977151
[5] https://alarmphone.org/en/2019/05/21/the-mediterranean-border-mass-abductions-push-backs-people-left-to-die/
[6] https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/05/1063592
[7] https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf
[8] https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/