Throughout the world people are on the move on a larger scale than ever before. They are driven from their homelands by famine, natural disasters, and war or simply by the desire for self-improvement. Increasingly they have fallen victim to ruthless bands of traffickers from what has been described by as the world's fastest-growing criminal business. With little movement towards solving the problem of Third World debt, richer countries continue to benefit financially from the plight of poorer states. Efforts by churches of almost all denominations, by rock stars and others to highlight this problem have met a cold incompassionate response from those in power in richer countries and international financial organisations. It is not surprising that the gap between rich and poor states is widening. This, as International Business Editor Conor O'Clery reported at the start the current series on human trafficking in this newspaper, is a major factor driving the current international movement of peoples. Another factor is that traffickers are busy not only in moving people for exorbitant sums, but also in creating a market for their own disreputable trade. Many migrants to richer countries arrive furnished with false information as to the benefits they may receive. In a recent case Romanians coming to the UK had been told to expect £800 sterling in benefits when in fact their entitlement ran merely to £36. Unrealistic promises of the wealth awaiting them in the west have lured Chinese migrants into the hands of the notorious "snakehead" gangs in Fujian province.
The International Organisation for Migration has estimated that there may be up to 30 million "irregular" migrants worldwide and the response of many governments has been to act swiftly and decisively against the unfortunates who are being trafficked rather than at the traffickers themselves. There are indications that some states may be prepared to use the bad publicity engendered by the traffickers in order to take stronger action against migrants and thus ingratiate themselves with xenophobic sections of the electorate intractably opposed to immigration. Many shady organisations trafficking migrants, often into prostitution and slavery, are now known to have infrastructural resources far superior to those of the national and international forces which attempt to restrain their activities. The immigrants, in short, are much easier targets than the traffickers.
Politicians who rail against immigration are merely putting off the inevitable day when governments and international organisations will be forced to take on the traffickers who are the true villains of the piece. There are also some inherent contradictions in the anti-immigrant case. In Italy, for example, the centre-right led by the multi-millionaire Mr Silvio Berlusconi and his Northern League partners has called for drastic action on immigration. Mr Berlusconi's fellow entrepreneurs in Northern Italy take a different view. They realise that immigrants are needed to keep industry going; that Italy's future depends to a large extent on non-Italian workers. The same can be said of Ireland where immigrant workers are urgently needed in certain sectors of the economy. Ensuring that enough immigrant workers become available, while adopting a compassionate attitude to "irregular" migrants and actively pursuing traffickers, are tasks that will not be easily accomplished. The issue should be confronted from the viewpoint that immigration, under reasonable controls, can make a positive contribution to society. If western countries close the front door to those hoping for a decent life they can hardly be surprised if the back door is used by unscrupulous operators.