Written on 28 November 2015.

   Ende September dieses Jahres schrieb germanpages.de – Deutsche Rundschau in dem Artikel “Geiz & Bilateralismus -- Schwachsinnige Flüchtlingspolitik", dass die Bundesregierung mit ein paar Milliarden Euro für die unterfinanzierten Hilfswerke der Vereinten Nationen und für die Nachbarländer Syriens eine Völkerwanderung jetzigen Umfangs vermeiden konnte, dies aber aus Geiz und Engstirnigkeit unterliess.

   Am 27. November gelangte auch die Süddeutsche Zeitung in einem Kommentar von Heribert Prantl “Knickrigkeit als Fluchtursache” zu der Erkenntnis, “was wirklich hülfe, wird nicht getan: die Flüchtlingslager in den Regionen nahe Syrien so auszustatten, dass Flüchtlinge dort leben können.” (sic)

   Wäre das der SZ ein paar Monate früher eingefallen, so hätte sich vielleicht noch etwas in der übrigen Presse und in Berlin bewegt. Stattdessen: nichts. Deutschland diskutiert zwar erregt die Flüchtlingsfrage, Berlin aber wurstelt weiter mit seiner Flüchtlingspolitik und Kanzlerin Merkel versucht, im starken Gegenwind wenigstens teilweise das Gesicht zu wahren. In den Lagern in der Türkei, im Libanon und in Jordanien herrscht weiter das Elend, wie Prantl zurecht moniert. Noch schlechter geht es denen, die keinen Platz in den Lagern finden und sich auf der Strasse durchschlagen.

   Als man in Berlin die Zahl der Einwanderer für 2015 noch auf 800.000 schätzte, rechnete man mit Gesamtkosten für Bund, Länder und Gemeinden von mindestens 10 Milliarden Euro. Inzwischen erwartet man knapp über eine Million Zuwanderer für 2015, und die offiziell geschätzten Mindestkosten steigen daher linear auf 12,5 Milliarden. Von dieser Zahl wollen aber unabhängige Fachleute nichts wissen; sie kalkulieren – wie beispielsweise der Volkswirt Matthias Lücke vom Institut für Weltwirtschaft in Kiel -- mit bis zu 45 Milliarden Euro pro Jahr der Einwanderung im jetzigen Umfang.

   Vor wenigen Monaten hätte man mit wenigen Milliarden im niedrigen einstelligen Bereich den Flüchtlingen im vertrauten Umfeld nahe der Heimat noch eine menschenwürdige Alternative zur Reise nach Europa bieten können. Doch selbst jetzt scheut Berlin sich vor der nötigen Grosszügigkeit; man will Brüssel zum Zahlmeister für die Türkei machen und lässt die UN-Hilfswerke, die in den Lagern und ausserhalb davon vor Ort wirken können, weiter auf dem Trockenen – ein paar Almosen ausgenommen.

   Was treibt die Bundesregierung an? Kann denn niemand in Berlin Zahlen lesen? Die Selfies mit Merkel haben eine Lawine losgetreten. Nicht Millionen, sondern hunderte Millionen warten jenseits des Mittelmeers auf eine Chance, nach Europa zu kommen und vielleicht sogar ein Selfie mit Merkel zu schiessen. Laut einer Gallup-Umfrage von 2012 in 151 Ländern würden rund 350 Millionen Bewohner von Ländern des Bogens von Bangladesh bis Nigeria nach Europa auswandern, wenn sich die Chance böte. Jeder vierte Afghane, jeder dritte Nigerianer würde ein Smartphone kaufen und den Rollkoffer packen, wenn er oder sie das Geld für die Reise hätte. Eine Million Pioniere hat ja bereits 2015 gezeigt, wie man es macht, wenn man nach Deutschland will.

   Man hofft in Berlin offenbar, dass das Mittelmeer und das fünfstufige Filter der Grenzen von Griechenland bis Oesterreich den Strom so ausdünnen werden, dass Deutschland nur noch die Syrer, Iraker und Afghanen abbekommt, minus der jungen Männer mittleren Alters, die als potentielle Gefährder gelten und draussen bleiben sollen, wenn es nach manchen CDU-Politikern ginge. Man baut keine Mauer – man verlässt sich auf die Mauern der Anderen. Ob das 2016 besser funktioniert als 2015, wird sich zeigen.

Heinrich von Loesch

Written on 17 November 2015.

   Latinos living in the US are poorer, have harsher jobs and less access to education and health services than Whites. But their health is better. So what's behind this "Hispanic paradox" as it is called in the official literature?

   The question itself demonstrates considerable bias. Paradoxical is not the observation that Latinos are healthier than Whites. Remarkable  instead is the fact that non-Hispanic Whites are less healthy than American Hispanics although they are richer, have less harsh jobs, have better access to education and health services than Latinos. So what's behind this “White paradox”?

   Typically, no American institution seems interested in looking at the issue from this angle. The White majority-centered academia undertook considerable research to discover why the disadvantaged Latino minority (15 percent of the total population) outlives the White or Caucasian or “European American” majority.

   Whites have higher mortality rates in seven out of the most important causes of death although they are half as frequently as the Latinos considered poor and are three times as likely to enjoy health insurance. However, Whites are less obese than Hispanics and suffer less frequently from diabetes, cirrhosis and other liver diseases.

   A typical American research result says: A smattering of evidence suggests that many Latino community environments discourage high-risk behaviors, such as excessive smoking, high alcohol consumption and heavy use of mind-altering chemicals that may threaten lifespans.

   Instead, this could be read as:  "Evidence suggests that many White environments encourage high-risk behaviors, such as excessive smoking, high alcohol consumption and heavy use of mind-altering chemicals that might threaten lifespans."

   Add to this suicides, pharmaceutical and hard drugs, unhealthy food, and you get closer to an explanation for the White paradox.

   In fact, there's strong evidence that the second generation Hispanics [the U.S.-born children of foreign-born immigrants] become acculturated and adopt behaviors such as smoking." Their health is more consistent with their education and poverty levels, more similar to non-Hispanic whites and African Americans.

   White women residing in the wealthiest California neighborhoods will live one year less than Latinas living in poor areas. In California, 25-year old White and African American high school dropouts were in 2008 likely to live ten years less than their Hispanic counterpart.

   Foreign-born Hispanics who immigrated to the United States "appear to be particularly healthy," having rates of several major chronic diseases equal to or lower than whites, another study says "Their health advantage is even more pronounced when we controlled for income and education."

This statement. If looked at it from a different angle, would read:: Poor American Whites with little education show particularly poor health if compared to foreign-born Hispanic immigrants.

Conclusion

   Top longevity in the US is attained by Asian Americans with an average of 86.67 years, followed by Hispanics with 82.89 years and Native Americans with 81.17 years. Whites stay way behind with 79.71 years and African Americans with a mere 75.54 years. At state level, the highest life expectancy is recorded for Asian American women in Massachusetts with 91.60 years.

   In international comparison, according to the 2010 United Nations World Population Prospects, the United States ranks 40^th among nations (behind Cuba and Puerto Rico) with a life expectancy at birth of 77.97 years. Even if the US was inhabited only by Whites, it would gain merely 0.26 years and its ranking would not change.

   The White Paradox evidently requires more research to better identify and control the causes of the high mortality of this population group which affords one of the world's costliest health services and enjoys one of the highest per capita income levels. There are basically three possible explanations for the paradox:

1. 1. 1. American medicine increases mortality instead of lowering it

      2. Rising per capita income raises mortality, for instance through lethal accidents

      3. Something is very wrong with the White life style in the US.

re 1: American medicine serves not only Whites but all races, plus numerous foreigners. Evidently successfully. Similar medicine is practiced in many countries with high life expectancy.

re 2: Other high income countries show low mortality. High income among African Americans – the lowest life expectancy group --can be accompanied by low accident rates, as is the case of the District of Columbia. Interestingly, the highest accident-prone state is West Virginia, a predominantly White state.

Surprisingly little public attention is devoted to the consequences of an apparently unhealthy life style. The loss in terms of years of life not lived is enormous, to the tune of five to ten percent of all White American years lived. Similarly huge is the loss for the US economy in terms of education under-exploited, medical treatment wasted, family life disrupted and retirement years reduced.

Heinrich von Loesch

Written on 21 November 2015.

   The current migration crisis in Europe and North America shows two distinct aspects:

• the arrival of refugees and other migrants, and
• the deportation of undesired migrants. 

   The former enjoys high visibility not only in the media but also as new faces continue to appear among the crowds of daily life.

  The deportation is largely invisible. Over night, a foreigner who has been around for some time is missing, an entire family may have disappeared like the Jews in Germany did during Nazi years.

   Deportation or “repatriation”, as the Italians prefer to call it, is the ugly side of migration. “Welcome culture” was offered in Germany to the arriving crowds – but no “disappearance culture” exists for those expelled from their dream land.

   Even less of a welcome is offered to the returnees upon arrival in their country of origin or any in other place where they may have been dumped against their will.  Unless a kind-hearted government or an NGO takes care of the returnee, a deported person is rarely welcomed.

   For several reasons, a deportee is usually unwelcome back home because 

• someone who left the country is often considered a traitor or an enemy of the government;
•  someone who returns reduces the strength of the diaspora on whose remittances the economy depends;
•  a returnee is considered someone who failed to establish himself or herself abroad;
•  of the suspicion to have been expelled for bad behavior or for having committed a felony and done jail time.
•  the returning migrant has not only squandered his or her own savings but in many cases also a credit provided by family and friends to finance the northbound trip.

   Understandably, immigration countries are at present mainly focused on the challenges of accepting and accommodating the migrants assumed to be refugees if they apply for asylum. In Germany, some 40 percent of current arrivals are offered asylum, the rest is expected to return voluntarily to their country of origin or to be deported.

   The potential deportees, however, stay months and sometimes years in the country before they leave – if they ever do. During this period they are kept in suspended animation, can't work, can't send their children to school and are not eligible for language courses. Their cost of accommodation, food and medical treatment are borne by the country of immigration, as well as the cost of deporting them.

   In addition, the country that wants to get rid of them also faces the cost of convincing another country to accept them. Most migrants arrive without papers, many lie about their country of origin, making it extremely difficult to deport them. Consequently, authorities in charge of deportation are usually quite rough in handling people.  Picking them up in the middle of the night, rushing them to the airport before they can call a lawyer, forcing them handcuffed into the plane if it is a commercial flight – scenes which neither passengers nor flight personnel like to watch.

   The United Kingdom, for instance, hired a fleet of 54 private jets to deport almost 3,000 people from January 2014 to June 2015, according to the interior ministry. "Charter flights are used to return illegal immigrants to destinations which have a limited number of scheduled flights or where scheduled flights have an insufficient capacity to meet demand. In general, they are used to remove those with a history of non-compliance or who pose a risk to the public,” the Home Office told the Mirror.

   On arrival back home they are usually penniless, facing grim immigration procedures and possibly persecution.

   In other instances they are not expelled by plane but given a one way train ticket to the country they came from. In Hungary, for instance, arriving through the border fence is considered a crime. The convicted felon is given a train ticket to return to Serbia. Since Serbia refuses to accept any returning  migrants, the poor person ends up in an overcrowded Hungarian jail to wait for doomsday or for Serbia to change tack.

   In the first half of 2015, Italy deported 8,500 illegal immigrants who did not qualify for asylum, who lied on their applications, or whose proposed reason to stay was not justified, according to a report by the interior ministry.  Of the 200,000 illegals expected to arrive in Italy in 2015, 18,068 are considered the least wanted of the unwanted; most of them have already been expelled.

   Weekly charter flights to Cairo and Tunis take illegal Egyptians and Tunisians back home. Algerians are usually put on return flights upon arrival. Moroccans can also be returned because of a bilateral agreement with the government. Similar arrangements are sought with Nigeria, Senegal and The Gambia. Illegal Albanians and other people from the Balkans are forcibly returned by locked train carriage or ferry.

Back in 2012, Europe's human rights court ordered Italy to pay damages to 24 Somali and Eritrean migrants for having deported them to Libya in 2009, saying the government in Rome put the migrants at risk of torture and persecution. In 2015, despite this ruling, 133 Syrians were dropped at the border of Lebanon and Syria, and 221 Afghans were flown to Afghanistan which refuses to accept returning refugees.

   The US government is deporting undocumented immigrants back to Central America to face the imminent threat of violence, with several individuals being murdered just days or months after their return, a Guardian investigation has found.aThe Guardian has confirmed three separate cases of Honduran men who have been gunned down shortly after being deported by the US government. Each was murdered in their hometowns, soon after their return – one just a few days after he was expelled from the US. A forthcoming academic study based on local newspaper reports has identified as many as 83 US deportees who have been murdered on their return to El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras since January 2014.

   Germany is very slow in returning migrants. In 2014, some 200,000 people applied for asylum. Two thirds of them were rejected but only about 10,000 were expelled. The remainder were “tolerated” which means living in suspended animation. In the first half of 2015, only some 8,000 from over 190,000 rejected asylum seekers were returned to where they came from. Of those, 52,000 should leave Germany, the rest is tolerated for medical reasons or because they lack documents and Germany cannot identify their country of origin. As a result of the backlog and the recent and continuing mass immigration, the Bundestag adopted legislation to speed up deportation but chances are that most asylum seekers, except citizen of Balkan countries, will one way or another remain in Germany.

   Switzerland is unpopular among potential asylum seekers because it practices a fast track procedure for candidates from the Balkans,  deciding within 48 hours if the request is accepted. Since Switzerland has concluded bilateral agreements with Balkan countries that permit repatriation, undesirable applicants can be returned quickly. Immigrants from North Africa, Nigeria, Senegal and The Gambia are kept in federal centers maximally 140 days before deportation; other applicants with better chances of success are distributed among the Cantons and will receive the verdict within a maximum of 12 months. All asylum seekers are offered legal assistance which helps to speed up procedures.

Conclusion

   With a time lag of one to several years – depending on the  immigration policy of the country of asylum – the streams of migrants are reversed. For each million of arrivals a few hundred thousand are expected to return to where they came from.

   Some will leave voluntarily with a small cheque in their pocket. Others will be forcibly expelled. Still others will successfully dodge deportation and stay in hiding. Some will commit suicide or die before being deported.

   Although expelling countries are eager to act smoothly and silently, the scandal of forced deportation will gain in visibility as the scale of the operation grows. For every fish trawler full of migrants arriving at Europe's shores, for every train load of potential wetbacks making across the Rio Grande, one or more plane loads of returnees will leave in the opposite direction.

   A costly and basically inhumane operation likely to assume a large scale as asylum policies are tightened and the northbound mass migration from Asia, Africa and Central America continues with no end in sight. 

   Many if not most migrants hail from countries considered safe. Experience shows that most of these countries are unwilling to take back migrants unless they are compensated for the loss in terms of remittances foregone. Deportation thus becomes doubly expensive: to the cost of transport and a possible silver handshake for the voluntary returnee, the dispatching government is forced add the cost of compensating the receiving government for the remittances lost. If this compensation is satisfactory, the latter government might even accept migrants of unknown nationality: an opportunity for the dispatching government to get rid of some of the toughest cases. 

Heinrich von Loesch

Update

According to the Ministry of the Interior, Germany "repatriated" 18,363 persons  who were not granted asylum during the first eleven months of 2015. During the same period, 425,000 newly arriving persons were processed for asylum request. Obviously, numbers of arrivals and numbers of departures are out of sync if deportation is supposed to limit immigration to genuine refugees entitled to asylum.

The deputy chief of the German police union, Jörg Radek, estimated the number of people obliged to leave Germany at 190,000. He criticized the Länder governments for lack of action and urged them to show "much more determination in expelling foreigners who were denied asylum."

Update II

 The Afghan Minister for Refugees Hossein Alemi Balkhi has allegedly encouraged Afghans on social media to leave their country and migrate to Europe. In an interview with Sueddeutsche Zeitung (1/02/16) he considered 31 of 34 provinces "unsafe".  He wants to exclude from repatriation all Afghan refugees except a few "healthy males from safe provinces."

Written on 13 November 2015.