INTRODUCTION
 

This is the fourth item on our agenda - the three first topics being : "Employment and the Global Economy", "Labour Market Policies", and "Anti-Poverty Strategies".

Population and migration raise complex issues which are most topical. I shall attempt to link them up bearing in mind the overall purpose of our meeting and its preoccupation with the future orientations of ILO's Programmes. I found the background documents, which were sent to us prior to our arrival, most helpful for our debate even if one may disagree with some of the formulations therein.

In any discussion concerning the future, we ought to bear in mind the fact that the world is moving from a "society of production" to a "society of knowledge". This has vast implications for our standard and classical concepts of "economics", "labour", "employment", "population", "migration"... To put it in a nutshell the "process" is becoming more important than the "product". With innovation and added value the same process can produce different products and demultiply the benefits.

Population and migration can not be discussed in a vacuum. On the eve of the 21st Century, we are witnessing an acceleration of history, a fast development of knowledge and an explosion of information. There are over 2.000.000 scientific articles published every year in 60.000 scientific magazines - that is 5,500 per day or 4 articles per minute ! The scientific vocabulary is annually enriched by around 40.000 new words. We have computers such as the "touchstone delta" which can make about 10 billion operations per second. In less than ten years the documentation of the entire Library of Congress (Washington)  could be stored on a 8 inch disk and transmitted to any part of the World in about 10 minutes.

These figures about knowledge "production" explain partially why some scientists estimate that the total knowledge of mankind (that of the last 10.000 years) is likely to double within the next ten years ! What is important is the free circulation of this knowledge as well as of people who either disseminate it or are seeking it. The "free flow of persons and ideas" is a fundamental human right. The history of mankind is essentially a consequence and a record of the free (or non-free) circulation of persons and ideas.

The new fashionable talk about the "globalization" of the economy is so far essentially limited to the exchange of goods and the "liberation" of trade - the human person is practically absent or, as in the case of migration, is considered as an obstacle. Maybe we ought to "globalize" humankind before we globalize the economy which is supposed to serve their interests.

We must recognize that contemporary civilization is confronted with a serious conceptual dilemma - its incapacity to digest and apply with rational relevance the fruits of this knowledge revolution to the improvement of the quality of live of humanity as a whole. This dilemma raises philosophical and ethical issues which are vital, in the long term, to the very survival of humanity. The longer the delay in dealing with them, the higher will be the social cost to be paid.

For about the last 15 years I have been writing and repeating, over and over again, that the West had three major obsessions : demography, non-judeo-christian value systems, and Japan. These fears can not be put aside when trying to understand the political, cultural and social behaviour of the "developed" world.

In fact, since the 1976 SID (Society for International Development) North-South Round Table, held in Rome, I have been insisting on the fact that the major cause of the failure of the North-South Dialogue was due first and foremost to an absence of "cultural communication". The breakdown in cultural communication has now been amplified by the unipolar international system which is presently governing the world.

This is clearly felt by the generations under 25 years of age in the Third World whose systems of values are quite different from the ones of their parents who lived the so-called "decolonization" era - an era of "neocolonialism" - which has paved the way for the "post-colonial" age we have entered into since the beginning of the present decade.

I beg to disagree with some of the affirmations in the ILO documentation which was distributed to us and which assumes that the World has entered into a new period of peace, democracy and respect for human rights. An era in which international collaboration will be strengthened and in which a "triumphant" economy would improve social justice (see pages 8-12 of the Director General's Report 1994).

This idealized image is a symphony dedicated to the "New International (dis)Order" and to a "globalized economy". On the contrary the number of conflicts in the world has increased since 1991.

The Gulf War and the continuation of the embargo against Iraq has contributed to a genocide with a loss of over 400.000 lives since the 17th of January 1991. The Serbo-Croat war against Bosnia with the tacit support of other European countries has led to another genocide with more than 300.000 deaths. Not to speak of the continuous killing of innocent Palestinians and the sacrifice of thousands of lives in a semi-colonial war led by the United Nations against Somalia.

The number of displaced persons and refugees has reached records unknown in times of "world peace" (see below) . Poverty, misery, illiteracy, and social injustice disease are gaining ground day after day.

The passages under question from the Report of the Director general also contains a slight degree of "paternalism" :

" Our mission is to help them to grow into States genuinely governed by the rule of law and able to guarantee basic human rights, and the rights of workers in particular."

Who is "us" (our) and who is "them" ? Is this a new white man's burden assumed by the Secretariat with the help of a few "enlightened" member States to lead the Third World to "democracy" and respect for "human rights". Every one knows where some of the hard obstacles lie, in this new "postcolonial" era, to fundamental change in the developing world - a change which can not come about with the present Governments. It is these very governments which are actively supported by those who outwardly plead for change !

The United Nations System has shown its inadequacies in coping with these developments. It has also lost a fair amount of its neutrality and its credibility in a new unilateral world order directed by only Power with the agreement of acolytes which still go on using the qualification of "major" Powers. The regional international organizations, including European ones have never been as absent or as weak as they have during the last three years for the very same reasons.

What is there to be "triumphant" about ? The real fact is that the vast majority of the Third world is exasperated and will not support for much longer the simultaneous effects of (1) the domination of local corrupt governments backed by the West, (2) the unfairness of an international "market economy" which entertains and increases inequalities, and (3) the new hegemonism of transnational corporations whose total economic weight already exceeds that of governments and are being more and more dispensed of minimal national and international regulatory mechanisms.

It is against this background that I shall make a few comments about the problems of "population" and "migration".
 

(I) POPULATION
 

The facts concerning the World population and its growth rates are well known but there is no harm in recalling the most essential ones.

The total population of the World has increased from 2,5 billions in 1950 to 5,3 billions in 1990 and is expected to reach 6.3 billions by the year 2000 and 8,5 billions by 2025 according to the UNFPA. The share of the countries of the "South" which amounted to 67% in 1950 will move up to 84% by 2025. The most recent estimates foresee that the world population will continue to increase by about 100 millions per year between 1995 and the year 2000. These figures raise a series of questions :

1. Are the industrialized countries - which represent 22% of the total world population and which will account for less than 16% in the year 2025 (30 years from now) - likely to continue to consume 70% of the world energy, 75% of its metals, 85% of its wood and about two-thirds of its food products ? How much "elasticity" will the international system allow in face of such inequities. What profound changes are to be thought of as of today even as mere scenarios.

2. In the "globalized" economy and the age of the "liberation" of trade will the share of Africa in world trade remain at 1,5% and that of Latin America and the Carribean at 3,3% ?

3. Will the North continue to account for 96% of the world expenditures in R&D, over 80% of the world expenditures on education, scientific and technical personnel, and 80% of the computers of the world ?

4. The above-mentioned inequalities represent have been on the increase instead of the decrease during the last few decades. The gaps between the rich and the poor, within countries and between countries, have been going up instead of down since 1960. The indications are that these inequalities will continue to increase during the present decade. The rate of demographic growth is subject to at least 3 variables : demographic cycles, the level of education and the level of income. The rate of the demographic growth of France during the second half of the nineteenth century was higher than the one of many african countries today.

Poverty remains the key determinant in the increases of population in the third world. Where is social justice when 20% of the richest persons on earth earn 150 times more than the poorest 20% ? Almost 1,500 million people live in a state of absolute or near absolute poverty, are illiterate or have fallen back into illiteracy, do not dispose of any sanitation facility nor drinkable water, and have infant mortality rates above 100/1000.

For poor people in the third world 5 to 6 children is a minimum if a person is to find a son or a daughter to look after him or her when they retire. Considering infant mortality which is high, the fact that 1 of every 5 children will die before the age of 5, that one or two will immigrate ... Children are thus an informal form of social security.

The population question can not be examined solely from a quantitative approach. The increasing demographic gap between the North and the South in terms of manpower becomes even more relevant when we look at the pyramids of age and note how the "Northern" population is aging (a positive consequence of better health services). Estimates about the aging of population undertaken by FUTURIBLES (See "Les enjeux du vieillessement demographique de l'Europe a l'horizon 2025", Paris) and other institutions show that, in the OECD countries the persons of over 75 years of age which represented 4% of the total population in 1984 will represent 5,4% in the year 2000 and 7,2% in 2025.

The "active labour force" (15-64 years), in the North, amounted to 780 million people in 1989; it will increase to 836 millions by the year 2005 - an increase of 7% over a total of 16 years. The comparable figures for the South are 2,156 millions in 1989 and 3010 in 2005; thus an increase of 40 % over the same period of time.

The unquestionable fact is that most projections and forecasts concerning labour in Europe show that it will inevitably have to bring in immigrants in order to fill vacant jobs but also to readjust the age distribution of the population.

In conclusion, with respect to population growth I believe that any international effort in the field of family planning must, if it is to bring about any marked result, be accompanied by measures to eradicate illiteracy and poverty. This in turn can not be achieved without a minimal peaceful redistribution of resources and wealth within the international system as a whole. In essence. the problem is one of ethics as well as of social justice - social justice as an indispensable prerequisite for peace. This is at the heart of ILO's raison d'etre according to its Constitution, that is to contribute to universal and lasting peace through the promotion and development of social justice.

The policies of the International Monetary Fund and of the World Bank have had, on the whole, a negative impact on the economies and especially the social sector of the third world. Between 1982 and 1990 the total transfer of capital from the North to the South amounted to $ 927 billions dollars whereas the payments by the South to the North of interests and parts of the loans represented & 1.345 billion dollars !

In the light of the above, I have some difficulties in understanding the following passage which appears on page 91 of the Director general's Report from 1994 although I respect its honesty,

"The liberalization of international trade and capital movements certainly offers reasonable possibilities of worldwide growth, employment creation and poverty alleviation. But there is no guarantee that greater social justice will automatically result from it."

II . MIGRATION
 

I think that the free circulation of people is an essential human rights. This being said I am also convinced that the greatest capital any country has is its human resources. Underdevelopment is the incapacity to train and use rationally competent human resources. I therefore do not favour the exportation of human beings, like goods, so that they may send back hard currency to their country of origin.

The migrants of today no longer represent just unskilled workers. The phenomenon of "brain drain" is gaining ground everyday. It is well known that the main reasons for which these "brains" leave their country is not just that of a higher salary but are much more related to the amount of freedom (or absence of that freedom) which they enjoy in expressing and publishing their views, as will as well a minimal environment of work (laboratories, books, periodicals and other forms of documentation).

The number of scholars from just three of the Maghreb (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia) with a training equivalent to that of Ph.D who are working in the French CNRS (National Research Center) is over 1.200 people. Each one of them has cost around 50.000 dollars to the taxpayer of his country.

Brain drain figures are more impressive in the United States which does not need to train more than two-thirds of the medical doctors it requires because the other third comes from third world countries. Over one million highly qualified persons moved into the United States between 1960 and 1990. According to the UNDP Human Development Report for 1992, in 1985, 45% of the assistant professors in schools of engineering in the USA were foreigners (p.63). The law passed in the United States in 1990 concerning immigration has raised the level of training required from the immigrants (in 1966, 46% of the immigrants were "qualified workers", this percentage went up to 75% in 1986).

Countries of the North have been developing stricter and stricter laws concerning the admission of immigrants. Some have even set up a special police for the control of licit and illicit migrant workers. The EEC has worked for years on the Schengen Convention the application has been delayed for the second time last week.

The countries of the South do not have unfortunately any real policy concerning migration. The migrants are seen essentially as a source of revenue - in some countries the funds send by expatriates represent the first or second source of national income. This is why they consider the stopping or strict limitation of immigration as measures of "protectionism" at a moment when all the talk is about "liberalization".

We ought to have a brief look at the quantitative dimension of the question of immigration to understand what is at stake and how it links up with the issue of population.

According to the latest report of the UNHCR published on 25 january 1994, the number of refugees which amounted to 2.5 million people represents today 18.2 millions. There are also 24 million "displaced" persons and the estimate of the total number of immigrants throughout the world is of the order of 100 millions. We are thus dealing with a grand total of about 140 million people or less than 2.5% of the world population.

The 1992 UNDP Report on Human Development informs us that, during the last three decades less than 35 million inhabitants of developing countries have moved to the North - of which 6 millions entered illegally. There are also about 20 million workers employed with a specific time period.

With respect to the refugees the heaviest weight is supported by countries from the South : 7 millions in Asia, 5 millions in Africa and only 4 millions in Europe (most of whom are of European origin). The UNHCR has calculated that the heaviest load of refugees as compared to the population of the country is as follows : Malawi, Armenia, Guinea, Iran, ex-Yugoslavia, Burundi, Pakistan ... only 5 countries from the North (Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg, Switzerland and Canada). The High Commissioner of the UNHCR has made an appeal aking that the principle of non-denial of access ("refoulement") must be reaffirmed in rich as well as poor countries.

The point where demographic policies and immigration policies meet is in mid-term and long-term planning. The North in general and Europe in particular will need additional people within the next 10 to 15 years. Immigration may be limited with the new strict laws elaborated in the North. But the movement of people is something that will go on as it has done so since pre-historic times. What was colonization but a mass movement of populations seeking jobs and wealth. The conquest of America cost the lives of 26 million indians according to the latest statistics elaborated by the University of California in 1992.

Even France which seems to have the strictest attitude against immigration accepted an increase of 1.8 million people between 1921 and 1936 and attained thereby an over total population increase of 2.7 millions (See, Jacques Lesourne, L'immigration, une dimension majeure du XXIe siecle europeen, Paris, 1985).

The figures concerning international migrations during the last three decades show that 21% of the population of Australia is made of foreign residents the figure is 16% for Canada, 8% for the USA and 4% for Europe. An even more meaningful fact is that between 1960 and 1990 the increase of foreign residents in the USA amounted to 106% whereas the equivalent figure for Europe was only 4% for the same period. Up to 1960 about 80% of the migrants were from developed countries.This proportion is now down to 18% for the North and 82% from the South. (Source : UNDP Human Development Report 1992).

In conclusion, I sincerely believe that the combined problematique of "population" and "immigration", in addition to its political, economic and social facets is mostly governed consciously or unconsciously by the cultural factor and the fear of the "other". Sartre has written "l'autre c'est moi" (the other is me) but he has also added "les autres c'est l'enfer" (the others are hell). This is where cultural communication and the fight against simplified stereotypes which are propagated daily in the media can make a sizeable difference - it a problem of education and of the transformation of mental structures.

I have maintained for many years that "culture" would be in the future the main cause of conflict (SID, Rome 1976), (NHK, Tokyo, 1988), ("La Premiere Guerre Civilisationnelle", Ed. Ouyoun, Casablanca 1991). This is why I accord the highest priority to anything which can improve North-South cultural communication. I have even set up a "North-South Cultural Communication Prize" which is given annually since 1992 and which is financed from the royalties of my publications.

Only a few months ago, in the Summer 1993 number of "Foreign Affairs" (Washington D.C.), Samuel P. Huntington, in an article entitled "The Clash of Civilizations", wrote,

"It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future."(p.22)

(Samuel Huntington is the Eaton Professor of the Science of Government and Director of the John M. Olin Institute for Strategic Studies at Harvard University. The quoted article is the product of the Olin Institute's project on "The Changing

Security Environment and American National Interests"). Among the subheadings of this article one can read "The West versus the Rest", "The Confucian-Islamic Connection" ... In this section Huntington tells us that "A confucian-Islamic connection has emerged to challenge Western interests, values and power".

The number of books and articles written against non-western (or non-judeo-christian) values is impressive. Never has intolerance reached the degree it has now attained in the West. This is a danger for world peace and this what links up very closely today, population, migration and peace. Maybe it is a mere coincidence if Huntington has chosen Islam and Confucianism. But the demographic facts tell us that Moslems represent about 1,3 billion people and the number of those with a confucian culture is about the same level. Both add up to about half of humanity !

J.B. Pichat, the great french demographer, who died recently has given projections concerning the evolution of spiritual currents in a book entitled "Les Scientifiques Parlent", Hachette, Paris.

These projections are as follows : The percentage of judeo-christians which stood at 31% of the population in 1980 will go down to 25% by the year 2025 and to 15% by the year 2125. The comparative figures for Islam are 18% in 1980, 31% in 2025 and 43% in 2125. If we go by the projections of J.B. Pichat it is true that the combination of Islam and Confucianism will represent the majority of mankind for quite a long time.

Japan and other countries in Asia are showing the world that the Western model and its values are not the only route to modernity. The younger generations in the South are convinced of this principle. Furthermore the Western-trained elite of the colonial period is gradually leaving the posts of command and replaced by a new generation that has no cultural complex with respect to western values and has quite a self-confidence in its own culture and values and their capacity to evolve to confront the challenges of the 21st Century.

The lessons of the last 30 years has shown that the transposition of the Western development model to third world countries has only contributed to make them poorer. The same applies to the illusion of the transfer of technology. Technology can not be bought or sold like a gadget. It has to be desegregated, mastered and must also benefit from local innovation and added values.

These questions concern very directly the problems of population and immigration. The last point I would like to raise is the danger and the damage done by foreign aid. Self-reliance, regional economic integration, and innovative systems of international cooperation based not on charity but on social justice and a fair redistribution are the only ways, in my view, to overcome under-development, alleviate poverty, attenuate demographic problems and to transform migration into a positive input for cultural communication and world peace.

Mahdi Elmandjra
Geneva, 1st February 1994