Page 9 - GHES-1-1

Global Health Econ Sustain Latin American Liberal migration policies

and Australia — shifted from permissive or liberalized These discourses, policies, and laws have been coined
immigration policies to more control-oriented, restrictive as the “liberal tide,” a term akin to the title of a book edited
policies (Vollmer, 1992). The shift was accompanied by by Cantor et al. in 2015. We posit that this definition does
5
political rhetoric that increasingly linked migration to capture the contextual essence, although with problematic
the destabilization of public order and the weakening of nuances, given the same essence of liberalism, built on the
societal homogeneity (Doty, 1996). Since 2000, marked centrality of basic individual rights, private property, and
by the rise of terrorism at the world level, this restrictive representative government, which derives largely from
trend has been reinforced through a shift toward security the classical liberal theories of John Locke and Thomas
issues (Huysmans, 2000). The criminalization of migrants Hobbes (Doyle, 2008). Moreover, the Latin American
has justified the focus on border control, which has been “liberal tide” has been propelled by the leftist governments
placed at the core of political discourses and debates among that were predominant in the region from the late 1990s
politicians both in Europe and the USA. Notable instances until at least 2010 — a period referred to as the “pink tide.”
include Donald Trump’s electoral campaign in 2015 and It is important to note that a considerable proportion of
2016, as well as the persistent challenges associated with these governments were not all “liberal.”
the Mediterranean border for the European Union. The “pink tide” governments can be divided between the
The heated debate surrounding borders, such as the “liberal left” and the “state interventionist” left (Weyland et
Mexico-USA wall and Frontex patrols in the Mediterranean, al., 2010; Levitsky & Roberts, 2012). Both groups expressed
presents a paradox in times of increasing globalization. intense criticism of the dominant economic model known
In fact, Hollifield (2004) speaks of the “liberal paradox” as “neo-liberalism,” which had gained prominence in
between free circulation of ideas, trade, and finance on the the late 1980s and early 1990s. Starting in 1998, most
one hand and limits imposed on the movement of people Latin American countries encountered serious economic
on the other hand: “Migration is (…) at the core of what problems, which provoked a critical view of neoliberalism
James Hollifield (1992) called the ‘liberal paradox’ between among the population and a return to state interventionism
free circulation of ideas, trade, and finance on the one hand (Panizza,2009).
and limits imposed on the movement of people on the other From 2010 onwards, following the resurgence of right-
hand, the right of entry and the right to residency having wing governance, state interventionism was abandoned,
become increasingly restricted in developed countries, through paving the way for the revival of neo-liberal policies of
the introduction of visas and border control systems (Bigo & deregulation and privatization. However, the return of the
Guild, 2005).” Regrettably, viable solutions to this paradox right-leaning leadership did not signify the termination
have yet to materialize on the horizons of either the USA or of the “liberal tide” in migration policies. In the case of
Europe, but in other parts of the world, things look different. Argentina, efforts were undertaken by the government to
introduce restrictive migratory policies, but the attempt
Since 2000, a group of Latin American countries was halted by the judges. Interestingly, even the far-right
has embarked on a markedly different trajectory. The Brazilian government refrained from exploiting the
securitization approach, which dominated during the migration issue, instead welcoming Venezuelan refugees.
military dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s, has given Curiously, it was a left-wing Chilean government in
place to a progressive language based on human rights recent years that introduced certain drastic measures
principles: “a distinctive note of the regional approach — such as expulsions — in the face of a significant flow
to migration in this period is a strong narrative based on of irregular migrants and the mounting concerns of the
human rights principles. The recognition of migration as local populace over rising crime rates. The case of Chile
a human right, political and legal positions on the non- is interesting, underscoring that even a very progressive
criminalization of irregular migration, and among others, migratory law cannot always answer to crisis situations
evidenced that discourse orientation.” (Cernadas, 2018, between migrants and local populations, especially in
p. 4). These principles have been included in the new border areas.
pieces of legislation approved: “Beginning with political and
legal recognition of migration as a human right, during these 5 “Over the past decade, a paradigm shift in migration
years several positive legislative changes have been adopted, and asylum law and policymaking appears to have
taken place in Latin America. Does this apparent
including equal protection of social rights of all migrants, “liberal tide” of new laws and policies suggest a new
non-detention based on migration status, due process approach to the hot topics of migration and refugees
safeguards, and access to justice.” (Cernadas, 2018, p. 3). In in Latin America distinct from the regressive and
fact, certain scholars even suggest a reversal of the “liberal restrictive attitudes on display in other parts of the
paradox” (Arcarazo & Freier, 2015). world?” (Cantor et al., 2015)

Volume 1 Issue 1 (2023) 3 https://doi.org/10.36922/ghes.0861