Mediaboss Marketing

We hear that the COVID-19 does not discriminatebut the context in which it spreads does. Pictured: Syrian refugee women in a cash-for-work tailoring program in the Azraq refugee camp in Jordan, October 2018. (UN Women / Christopher Herwig)

As COVID-19 sweeps around the globe, much of the worlds focus is on how leaders of the wealthiest nations are scrambling to respond to the pandemic.

Far less attention is being paid to those with the fewest resources necessary to defend themselves: the worlds 70 million people forcibly displaced by conflict or crisis, more than half of whom are women and girls.

Refugees and internally displaced personsthe latter of whom number more than 41 million worldwideoften face restrictions based on their displacement status, and generally live in countries with weak health systems.

Health services, including mental health care, for refugees and migrants are generally scarce. Sexual and reproductive health servicesdespite constituting lifesaving care for refugee women and girlsis often the first on the chopping block in an emergency, leaving women at risk of increased maternal mortality and morbidity, sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy.

According to one estimate, 9.5 million women could lose access to contraception and safe abortion because of the COVID-19 crisiswhich will lead to women and girls dying from entirely preventable causes.

In addition, the risk of exposure to COVID-19 is particularly acute for refugees. Physical distancing is a privilege that most migrant and refugee women and girls dont enjoy.

In Greece, for example, organizations like the Womens Refugee Commission and Women Refugee Route have long warned of the overcrowded and dangerous conditions in camps, which put people at risk. Without urgent decongestion measures by Greece and other European governments, the camps will be a death trap for the elderly and those with chronic conditions.

Nobody can feel safe in the camps right now, said Maryam Janikhuskh, former representative of the Afghan community in the Moria camp on the Greek island of Lesbos and the first woman to hold this position. There is no basic hygiene, no water, nothing.

Janikhuskh named health and security risks, including rape and other forms of violence, as the main issuesbut said no one is there to help.

Another problem, Janikhuskh said, is food distribution, as people come together three times a day without any protection. She is one of the few helpers remaining; once again, community leaders and grassroots organizations are picking up the pieces when governments shrug off any responsibility.

If past crises have taught us anything, it is that small, community-based organizations led by women, youth or persons with disabilities are often the first responders.

Here atMs., our team is continuing to report throughthis global health crisisdoing what we can to keep you informed andup-to-date on some of the most underreported issues of thispandemic.Weask that you consider supporting our work to bring you substantive, uniquereportingwe cant do it without you. Support our independent reporting and truth-telling for as little as $5 per month.

Whether its disseminating information in the community or providing direct servicesgiven their crucial role in protection and increased calls for localization of aidit is imperative that these organizations be included in decision-making and benefit from COVID-19 emergency funding. They are on the front lines in response, hold trust, and know best what is needed and where.

Organizations like ours were founded based on our experience that responses are most efficient if they are inclusive of those most affected. Ensuring that the humanitarian response to COVID-19 is age, gender and disability sensitiveand takes into account the displacement status of the individual and other diversity factorsis crucial to keeping everyone safe.

Here are four key steps that global leaders and the humanitarian community can take:

Small organizations led by refugee women and LGBTQI individualsincluding organizations providing safe housing, organizations of persons with disabilities or those fighting for racial and climate justicehave suffered from chronic underfunding for decades. Some are at risk of disappearing over the coming weeks.

Now is the time to support them.

This includes those with physical, intellectual, psychosocial and sensory disabilities.

A devastating consequence of lock-downs is the rise of gender-based violence in confined spaces. Womens shelters must be accessible to women and girls with disabilitieswho can experience disproportionately high levels of emotional, physical and sexual abuseand to women and girls without residence permits.

Segregating data by age, gender and disability will make sure no one falls through the cracks.

Women, many of them migrant women, make up 70 percent of health workersyet men dominate the scientific discussion on COVID-19 and emergency task forces assembled by governments. Decision-makers should be as diverse as the populations they serve, and racial and ethnic biaswhich remains pervasive in health care servicesmust be urgently addressed.

Human Rights Watch recently documented the case of a trans woman in Panama, a volunteer health worker, who was detained and fined by police based on gender-based restrictions, alleging that she was male and out on the wrong day. Movement restrictions canalso add to police violence and job insecurity for those already facing racial injustice and xenophobia.

We hear that the COVID-19 does not discriminate, but the context in which it spreads does.

Emergency responses that exclude those most affected risk exacerbating structural inequalities. We can only win this fight against the virus if we truly are all in this together.

The coronavirus pandemic and the response by federal, state and local authorities is fast-moving.During this time,Ms. is keeping a focus on aspects of the crisisespecially as it impacts women and their familiesoften not reported by mainstream media.If you found this article helpful,please consider supporting our independent reporting and truth-telling for as little as $5 per month.

Read more:
We Cannot Abandon Migrant and Refugee Women During the COVID-19 Crisis - Ms. Magazine

The only certainty is uncertainty, Pliny the Elder reportedly said. Though all historicaltimes are full of uncertainties, some seem more so than others. This is one of those times.

A major slowdown of the Indian economy was brewing and completely spilled over when I got toIndia in September 2019 to start my dissertation fieldwork on Indian women construction workers experiences and conceptualizations of Human Security. Wages stagnated. Consumer spending fell. Construction, real estate, and other industries were sent reeling. Construction workers livelihoods were teetering on the brink. Uncertainty became the backbone of their existence.

Then the country was rocked by the central governments continuous assaults on MuslimIndians. After the Citizen Amendment Bill was passed, poor Indians (of any religious background) who often do not have much documentation attesting to their existence could no longer rely on being considered citizens.More than 60 percent of low-income Indians are born at home. So they have no birth certificate. Without proof of citizenship, people could be put in one of the detention centers being built by the Indian government or deported outright.

While the signs were accumulating that India was on the path to coronavirus crisis, construction work still continued. Because construction workers labor in close proximity with one another, social distancing is impossible on work sites. Most construction workers often lack even simple safety gear. They have no masks, no hand washing stations, and no sanitizer.

And then coronavirus hit. The entire country ground to a sudden, complete halt.

The 21-day lockdown was instituted in Mumbai first. Everything, except essential services, ceased. The lockdown happened so quickly, with just four hours warning, that many construction workersmost of whom are migrants from rural parts of Maharashtra or other statesgot stranded in Mumbai. Because virtually all transportation was shut down (both within India, as well as to and from India), and Maharashtra had closed interstate borders, the workers could not get back to their villages.

Right next door to me here in Mumbai, one of the buildings in our compound was being renovated. Yet the work did not cease until the lockdown made it absolutely impossible for workers to continue. Now the workers are stuck here, living in the gutted building. Their employer is paying them enough money to get basic food supplies, but not their wages to which they are entitled by Maharashtra law. Those who support families back in their villages are unable to support them now.

When the nationwide lockdown was announced by Prime Minister Modi, what happened to the men working next door was mirrored across the country. Even worse, a migrant crisis took shape. Thousands upon thousands of migrant workers in other states started fleeing for homeno matter how far away. Since there was almost no transport, many opted to walk hundreds of kilometers to get home. Government officials sent contradictory messages. Some organized buses for migrants. Others told migrant workers to stay in place. The migrants who did get on buses were literally stuffed into them and piled onto roofs.

The government efforts to control the pandemic led to a humanitarian crisis as migrants tried to return home, often by foot. People are getting sick and dying along the way. Some struggle with hunger. Meanwhile the virus is spreading because of the close proximity of the people in this mass exodus. Even if they do reach their villages, they may be turned away or forced to self-quarantine under trees outside the village. This chaos is a result of not only the coronavirus, but also the government response to it. This migrant crisis is an epic failure of governance.

The government seems so haphazard, so surprised by crisis upon crisis. But how is that possible? Some 450 million internal migrants live in India, according to the 2011 census. Most of Indias workforce (92 percent) is informal, including our domestic servants, our construction workers, our vegetable vendors. And many of these informal laborers are internal migrants.

How could the central government be surprised by whats going on with 450 million people? Thats 35 percent of the population. These are not fringe elements of society or some small underground, shadow economy. The informal economy, fueled largely by migrant laborers, is Indias economy.

As the migrants scramble to outrun their own starvation and the coronavirus, state and central governments are scrambling to put in place provisions to rescue them or imprison them. Its mostly the latter. As this Indian Express editorialist writes: Governments converted highways to shelters and issued orders to turn stadia into temporary jails, at a time when other countries are turning them into hospitals.

The government distributed additional rations of rice and pulses, and some cash for a small share of Indias vast population of poor people. This cash hand-out, at 500 INR per month, is low. Let me put this in perspective: Most women construction workers I have interviewed make about 400 INR per day, which equals US$5.27. They still can barely afford basic living expenses. I cant even buy two cups of chai at Chaayos, a popular chain cafe, for the amount these women workers make in one day. And as a commentator in The Hindu newspaper wrote: The rest of the package can be described in many ways, the most polite of which would be to call it disappointingly inadequate.

The prime minister has started a PM-CARES relief fund. As usual, Modi is leaning on individuals to do what the government is supposed to do. It is yet to be seen how effective the fund will be in protecting internal migrants from even more hazards. From this vantage point, it looks grim.

The coronavirus crisis makes extremely uncertain lives in Indias economy even more uncertain. This insecurity is significant, but the construction workers with whom I have been speaking for many months now live with it. How they rise from the rubble of this pandemic is yet to be seen, but if what I have seen of their tenacity thus far is any indication, they will rise in some way.

Chantal Krcmar is a PhD candidate in the Department of Global Governance, Human Security and Conflict Resolution at the University of MassachusettsBoston. She lives in Mumbai, India.

Sources: BBC, Economic Times, India Today, Indian Express, International Labour Organization, LiveMint, The Atlantic, The Hindu, The New Yorker, The Wire.

Photo credit:Sanjoy Karmakar/Shutterstock.com

See the original post here:
Migrant Workers in India: Insecurity in the Time of Coronavirus - New Security Beat

Turkey is shepherding thousands of migrants to its border with Europe, Greece claims, citing satellite photographs showing large numbers of people on the move.

There are thousands of people being moved to the Greek border from within the Turkish interior, a Greek government spokesman has said, just weeks after President Recep Tayyip Erdogans governmentwarned he would be reopening the migration floodgates after the coronavirus pandemic had calmed.

In remarks reported by LondonsThe Times newspaper a cited Greek government source said of the changes within Turkey: We have noticed some suspicious movements As a result we have ordered a heightened alert for the next few days during the Easter holiday.

The same official continued to say that Turkey had been attempting to blackmail Greece and Europe by weaponising mass migration.

Speaking to the Associated Press, Greek governmentspokesman Stelios Petsas said authorities now have seen signs of activity across the border and wouldcontinue to do whatever it takes to defend our sovereign rights and guard the borders of Greece and Europe. The wires service reported Greece was preparing for new migrant movements on the Aegean Sea in the eastern Mediterranean.

Europes maritime and land border with Asia at the Turkish frontier was the main flashpoint of the 2016 migrant crisis, which saw more than a million people enter Europe predominantly from Africa and the Middle East and largely settle in the wealthier, high-welfare northern states like Germany, France, and Sweden.

The region looked likely to host a second crisis in early 2020, when the Turkish government opened its borders, allowing thousands of migrants to again cross into Europe. The borders had originally been closed after the 2016 migrant crisis through a big-money deal where Ankara would promise to regulate and close the migrant flow in return for billions of Euros in cash from the European Union, as well as other giveaways like accelerating Turkeys membership of the Union.

Yet Erdogan repeatedly complained the EU had not kept its side of the bargain, frequently threatening to open the border if demands were not met. Those threats were made good in February when Turkey opened the gates once again, with Erdogan warning Europe to expect millions to cross the border.

As Breitbart London reported in March, while Turkey stopped the flow of migrants a month later, it was with the warning the border would again open when the coronavirus pandemic had ended.

Read the rest here:
Greece: Turkey Again Driving Thousands of Migrants to Border - Breitbart

Bengaluru: With the government extending the nationwide lockdown until May 3, 2020, millions of migrant workers remain in financial, physical and emotional distress. This came through graphically in the chaotic scenes near a railway station in Mumbai on Tuesday, shortly after the Prime Ministers announcement, as thousands of workers gathered, some demanding food, others transport to their villages. Migrant workers in Surat, who have been protesting since the lockdown began, demanding to be sent home, also renewed their protests. As IndiaSpend has reported, the ongoing lockdown to contain COVID-19 has thrown the lives and livelihoods of millions of such workers into disarray.

According to a home ministry statement on April 5, 2020, some 1.25 million inter-state migrants are lodged in 27,661 relief camps and shelters, 87% state-run and the rest operated by NGOs. However, many more are not in camps. Both inter- and intra-state migrants are stranded without work, with rapidly dwindling resources, at their places of work or en route to their homes in rural areas. Those who managed to walk home are confronting both stigma (for fear they may be infected with COVID-19) and joblessness, while the village economy is reeling from the abrupt loss of remittances.

A new report released on April 15, 2020, and based on a survey of more than 11,000 workers by Stranded Workers Action Network, a volunteer group, said that about 50% only had rations left for less than one person, 74% had less than Rs 300 left, and 89% had not been paid by their employers at all during the lockdown. Most of them were daily wage factory/construction workers. The group was formed to attend to distress calls from migrant workers after the lockdown.

India is estimated to have some 120 million rural-to-urban migrant workers. Nearly 92% of the 61 million jobs created over the 22 years post liberalisation in 1991 have been informal. Moreover, joblessness has risen sharply in recent years.

In an interview with IndiaSpend, Benoy Peter, an expert on internal migration and executive director of Centre for Migration and Inclusive Development, a Kerala-based non-profit, says this is the time for India to show that it cares about its migrant workers and to immediately take measures such as ensuring food and decent living conditions, testing for COVID-19, and explaining properly to workers in their own language the intricacies of this virus. He argues that as the lockdown lifts, state governments should try to persuade migrant workers, without coercion, and by understanding their grievances and protecting their livelihoods, to stay back in urban centres so as to help revive both the urban and rural economies, to ensure better medical care for themselves in the event that they are infected with the virus, and to prevent COVID-19 contagion in rural areas.

Urban areas, he says, must show their preparedness to help them stay back and work. Peter also talks about the catastrophic impact of the lockdown on the informal economy, the future challenges it poses for the millions of inter- and intra-state migrants, and the strengths and drawbacks of Keralas response to the migrant worker crisis set off by the lockdown.

Peter, 44, leads a consortium of organisations in India as a contractor to the International Labour Organization for preparing a policy paper on internal labour migration in India. He was a member of a working group on Labour Migration to Kerala formed by the Kerala State Planning Board for the 13th Five-Year Plan (2017-2022). He was also part of an expert panel providing technical support to the fourth administrative reforms commission in refining welfare laws for marginalised populations in Kerala.

Edited excerpts:

The Prime Minister has been blamed for not addressing the migrant crisis in his address to the nation on April 14. There have been protests by migrant workers, and riots, in different parts of the country, including in Mumbai and Surat. Your thoughts?

He may not have directly addressed the issue, but he acknowledged that people have been affected [by the lockdown]. Otherwise he would have to take the blame.

Essentially, we were not prepared for the lockdown, and I do not think that people imagined so many migrants existed in urban centres without any support. The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, which is a rich urban body, reached out to NGOs to provide food. They realised that what happened in Surat could happen in Ahmedabad.

As a policy issue, internal migration is neglected. Now it has become visible and shocking to mainstream India.

Why were migrants overlooked?

They make the city run but are invisible to the system because there is not enough data on them and they are not part of the local political economy. Therefore, local elected representatives do not feel responsible for them. State governments and urban local bodies were not prepared for the situation.

[Even in normal times], most migrants have poor access to social welfare measures or social protection like healthcare or the public distribution system. Their dignity is compromised when they try to avail of government services.

Internal migration is not a policy priority in India. The estimates [of its scale] vary from 10 million to 150 million, which itself shows a lack of clarity. There are migrants who move for work permanently--usually, from educated and more privileged groups--and then there are those on the fringes. The latter migrate temporarily, usually forced to do so by lack of development or agrarian distress. Labour migration corridors from rural areas to centres like Delhi or Mumbai represent coping strategies for the rural poor.

But isn't it the responsibility of states to take care of migrants right now? Are migrants the unwitting casualty in a state-Centre tussle?

No, I do not think this is the case. The [central] home ministry, which is in charge of disaster management, has issued directions to use the state disaster relief fund to help migrant workers. NITI Aayog [the Centres policy think-tank] has written to NGOs that are part of its portal to work with the government. They need NGOs. The government got overwhelmed. The development sector has a role, which was underplayed.

Migrants are not an unwitting casualty. Any government that is serious about the economy knows that migrants play a role in our economy. There are more than 3.5 million people [migrants] in Kerala, and if they go back to their homes, how will the construction sector survive? States may not have enough resources and were not prepared.

What five steps could be taken right now to alleviate the distress migrants are undergoing?

Internal migrant labourers, most of them in the informal sector, contribute to nearly 10% of Indias GDP [gross domestic product]. This is the time to show to them that we care about them.

Until the end of the lockdown, we need to ensure that they have food and shelter, and that their health problems are addressed. We need to decongest their living facilities wherever required. Then, there are vulnerable groups within migrant groups like the elderly, those with disabilities and pregnant women, whose needs must be met.

We need active screening of workers using mobile medical units, and must plan and prepare to isolate workers if they are detected with COVID-19. Finally, we need to inform them about the disease in their own language and ensure that they understand it properly.

Governments or local authorities need to go to migrant workers and understand their grievances, and explain to them what can and cannot be done under the present circumstances.

What steps do you suggest once the lockdown is lifted, albeit gradually? This is the time for migrants to return home for the harvest season, yet contagion is a real worry, and many migrants may be in dire need of employment and money.

We need to mentally prepare them to stay back once the lockdown lifts so that they will be able to get back to work. Only if they work can their families receive money, which then gets circulated in the economy, including the village economy. The impact of this crisis on villages will be reduced if people can stay back and work in urban areas.

This will also help urban economies revive. The migrants will get better health facilities and treatment in cities than in villages, and most importantly, there is a smaller chance of infection travelling from a COVID-19 hotspot to a village. There are several migrants who would want to stay back in cities [and earn] because they owe money to a local money-lender or other local institutions.

At the same time, we need to accept that it is their right to go back and there should be no coercion. Urban areas must show preparedness to help them stay and work.

Had state governments been informed in advance of the March 25 lockdown, would they have been better prepared for a situation of millions of migrants trying to get back home?

A lockdown was inevitable. Our health infrastructure is concentrated in urban centres. If COVID-19 reaches rural India [on a huge scale] it will be catastrophic. The only way of arresting the spread of the pandemic was through prevention and by insulating rural areas.

However, the decision was taken without enough preparation. The four-hour notice may have been strategic, but it also showed how badly prepared we were for the problems that the poor and marginalised are now facing. Timely measures were not taken at the Centre and in the states to accomodate people in shelters and provide them food. The system [of governance] should have been especially sensitive to the needs of the most vulnerable.

Some have commented on how differently migrant workers were treated from NRIs, who were given more time to come home before the lockdown. Has the working class been left to bear the brunt of the pandemic in a country where over 90% of the workforce is in the informal sector?

Migration is a fundamental right for citizens. Indians are allowed to travel, work and reside in any part of the country. [But] there has always been class discrimination. There are international and internal migrants. The latter belong to socially and economically disadvantaged groups like adivasis, dalits or religious minorities.

In every disaster, the marginalised are the most affected, among them migrant workers and refugees. Even within the informal sector, there are several vulnerable groups. If you are native or a local working in the informal sector, there are more resources at your disposal, including support from local governments, than for a rickshaw-puller in Delhi who is from Bihar, or nomadic groups selling wares in the city. A Rohingya refugee [from Myanmar] may be worse off than even a migrant worker.

They [dalits, adivasis, religious minorities] are not just marginalised in the cities, but also in villages. This lockdown has made these historically invisible internal migrants--such as urban workers and seasonal labourers--visible to mainstream India and their plight is out in the open for everyone to see.

How would you compare the lockdown to demonetisation, which also impacted workers in the informal sector, many of whom are migrants?

I fear that the impact of the lockdown will be much worse than that of demonetisation. Demonetisation took away cash and resulted in the stagnation of the economy, thereby affecting livelihoods. Demonetisation led to a drop in total production in the economy. The informal sector was severely affected due to it, but the formal sector was relatively better off.

The lockdown has an immediate and direct impact on livelihoods, and will have long-term impact on everyone, particularly migrant workers. Reduction in remittances [due to the lockdown and lack of employment and wages] will not only impact migrant households, but the entire village economy, because it depends on remittances from migrants, as I said earlier. There could even be acute malnutrition and starvation deaths. Besides, if there is wide-scale transmission of COVID-19 in rural areas, it will have a devastating impact. It could substantially increase rural mortality rates.

For industry, there will be some cushion [from the government], but imagine the impact on those without access to the public distribution system, those without a bank account or insurance, or even those who did not even know what happened [when the lockdown was announced] because they had limited access to information.

How do you look at the massive movements of people in the past few days?

There are three kinds of migrants now, due to the lockdown: those who have reached home, those who are still in the places where they work, and those who are in between, unable to reach their homes. Those stuck in between are in an unfamiliar place, largely without help and resources like money or food. Those who are still in the places where they work, at least know their surroundings and know where to access essentials like food and healthcare, but are not receiving wages. And those who have managed to get home after the lockdown are facing stigma. Being jobless, they may have to borrow from money-lenders at exorbitant interest rates.

China locked down millions in Wuhan. But Sweden and the Netherlands, for example, did not do so, and nor did Singapore initially, though it has done so now. India has enforced the largest and perhaps strictest lockdown in the world. How do you assess these varying approaches to tackling a pandemic?

It is a sum total of human development, not just population. Sweden, Netherlands and Singapore are at a higher level of human development. China and India are the most populous countries in the world, and have among the largest migrant populations living abroad.

India [followed by China] receives the highest foreign remittances, and migration is a way of life. There are even people from Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh who work as labourers abroad.

Any change in migration [of China and India] can be felt in the world, though internal migration [in India] is higher--manifold--than international migration. Given such a large number of migrants, both China and India would have had limited control over the dissemination of infection without a lockdown.

How has Kerala, which is estimated to have nearly 4 million inter-state migrant workers (in 2017), handled the volatile situation after the lockdown was announced, with migrants desperate to go home?

Kerala was probably better prepared for the lockdown compared to other states. There is a much more resilient and decentralised response this time, compared to the states response to the 2018 floods and landslides. Disaster management in Kerala comes under the revenue department, which has a weak system at the grassroots level, and local self-governments (LSGs) had a limited role. This time, the LSGs are leading the interventions.

LSGs are very grounded, with gender-balanced political representation from the locality, and know the area well. Primary health clinics, schools, anganwadis and animal husbandry are all under the LSGs, which helps in coordination. Learning from the floods [in August 2018], the government has understood that mass [relief] interventions must be under LSGs.

Are there any drawbacks?

Even in Kerala, migrant workers are experiencing political exclusion. The sensitivity that exists at the state level (ministers and senior bureaucrats) is not necessarily evident at the grassroots. The LSGs need to be sensitised to a greater degree about the problems of migrant workers so that there is no scope for xenophobia.

In Kerala, there are seven pockets where thousands of migrant workers live together. Different kinds of workers require different treatment. There are workers who are attached to employers and others who are foot-loose. Employers are expected to take care of their workers, but this is not the case with foot-loose workers. They have no one to turn to other than the government. Until recently, food distribution was not adequate, and there was a lack of clarity in instructions from the state government to the LSGs. Some LSGs made house-owners responsible for providing them with food. This is not feasible because it is not possible to feed so many people in a house (which often is the case with migrant workers) three times a day.

The issue in Kottayam [where migrant workers defied the lockdown and demanded food and transport back to their native places] received attention in the media. In responding to it, the government appointed a police officer as a nodal officer though it was not [intrinsically] a law and order problem. It should ideally have been managed by the social justice department, labour department and the LSG department.

Further, some of the assurances given to migrants are creating a negative effect because the locals feel that these workers are being prioritised at a time when everyone is distressed and frustrated due to the lockdown. So resentment is being expressed on social media against migrant workers.

Despite all this, at a policy level, at least on paper, Kerala is sensitive to the requirements of migrant workers. However, by calling them guest workers, the government seems to be reminding them to leave after their work is finished, which is discriminatory. They have the right to be here.

(Paliath is an analyst with IndiaSpend.)

We welcome feedback. Please write to respond@indiaspend.org. We reserve the right to edit responses for language and grammar.

Bengaluru: With the government extending the nationwide lockdown until May 3, 2020, millions of migrant workers remain in financial, physical and emotional distress. This came through graphically in the chaotic scenes near a railway station in Mumbai on Tuesday, shortly after the Prime Ministers announcement, as thousands of workers gathered, some demanding food, others transport to their villages. Migrant workers in Surat, who have been protesting since the lockdown began, demanding to be sent home, also renewed their protests. As IndiaSpend has reported, the ongoing lockdown to contain COVID-19 has thrown the lives and livelihoods of millions of such workers into disarray.

According to a home ministry statement on April 5, 2020, some 1.25 million inter-state migrants are lodged in 27,661 relief camps and shelters, 87% state-run and the rest operated by NGOs. However, many more are not in camps. Both inter- and intra-state migrants are stranded without work, with rapidly dwindling resources, at their places of work or en route to their homes in rural areas. Those who managed to walk home are confronting both stigma (for fear they may be infected with COVID-19) and joblessness, while the village economy is reeling from the abrupt loss of remittances.

A new report released on April 15, 2020, and based on a survey of more than 11,000 workers by Stranded Workers Action Network, a volunteer group, said that about 50% only had rations left for less than one person, 74% had less than Rs 300 left, and 89% had not been paid by their employers at all during the lockdown. Most of them were daily wage factory/construction workers. The group was formed to attend to distress calls from migrant workers after the lockdown.

India is estimated to have some 120 million rural-to-urban migrant workers. Nearly 92% of the 61 million jobs created over the 22 years post liberalisation in 1991 have been informal. Moreover, joblessness has risen sharply in recent years.

In an interview with IndiaSpend, Benoy Peter, an expert on internal migration and executive director of Centre for Migration and Inclusive Development, a Kerala-based non-profit, says this is the time for India to show that it cares about its migrant workers and to immediately take measures such as ensuring food and decent living conditions, testing for COVID-19, and explaining properly to workers in their own language the intricacies of this virus. He argues that as the lockdown lifts, state governments should try to persuade migrant workers, without coercion, and by understanding their grievances and protecting their livelihoods, to stay back in urban centres so as to help revive both the urban and rural economies, to ensure better medical care for themselves in the event that they are infected with the virus, and to prevent COVID-19 contagion in rural areas.

Urban areas, he says, must show their preparedness to help them stay back and work. Peter also talks about the catastrophic impact of the lockdown on the informal economy, the future challenges it poses for the millions of inter- and intra-state migrants, and the strengths and drawbacks of Keralas response to the migrant worker crisis set off by the lockdown.

Peter, 44, leads a consortium of organisations in India as a contractor to the International Labour Organization for preparing a policy paper on internal labour migration in India. He was a member of a working group on Labour Migration to Kerala formed by the Kerala State Planning Board for the 13th Five-Year Plan (2017-2022). He was also part of an expert panel providing technical support to the fourth administrative reforms commission in refining welfare laws for marginalised populations in Kerala.

Edited excerpts:

The Prime Minister has been blamed for not addressing the migrant crisis in his address to the nation on April 14. There have been protests by migrant workers, and riots, in different parts of the country, including in Mumbai and Surat. Your thoughts?

He may not have directly addressed the issue, but he acknowledged that people have been affected [by the lockdown]. Otherwise he would have to take the blame.

Essentially, we were not prepared for the lockdown, and I do not think that people imagined so many migrants existed in urban centres without any support. The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, which is a rich urban body, reached out to NGOs to provide food. They realised that what happened in Surat could happen in Ahmedabad.

As a policy issue, internal migration is neglected. Now it has become visible and shocking to mainstream India.

Why were migrants overlooked?

They make the city run but are invisible to the system because there is not enough data on them and they are not part of the local political economy. Therefore, local elected representatives do not feel responsible for them. State governments and urban local bodies were not prepared for the situation.

[Even in normal times], most migrants have poor access to social welfare measures or social protection like healthcare or the public distribution system. Their dignity is compromised when they try to avail of government services.

Internal migration is not a policy priority in India. The estimates [of its scale] vary from 10 million to 150 million, which itself shows a lack of clarity. There are migrants who move for work permanently--usually, from educated and more privileged groups--and then there are those on the fringes. The latter migrate temporarily, usually forced to do so by lack of development or agrarian distress. Labour migration corridors from rural areas to centres like Delhi or Mumbai represent coping strategies for the rural poor.

But isn't it the responsibility of states to take care of migrants right now? Are migrants the unwitting casualty in a state-Centre tussle?

No, I do not think this is the case. The [central] home ministry, which is in charge of disaster management, has issued directions to use the state disaster relief fund to help migrant workers. NITI Aayog [the Centres policy think-tank] has written to NGOs that are part of its portal to work with the government. They need NGOs. The government got overwhelmed. The development sector has a role, which was underplayed.

Migrants are not an unwitting casualty. Any government that is serious about the economy knows that migrants play a role in our economy. There are more than 3.5 million people [migrants] in Kerala, and if they go back to their homes, how will the construction sector survive? States may not have enough resources and were not prepared.

What five steps could be taken right now to alleviate the distress migrants are undergoing?

Internal migrant labourers, most of them in the informal sector, contribute to nearly 10% of Indias GDP [gross domestic product]. This is the time to show to them that we care about them.

Until the end of the lockdown, we need to ensure that they have food and shelter, and that their health problems are addressed. We need to decongest their living facilities wherever required. Then, there are vulnerable groups within migrant groups like the elderly, those with disabilities and pregnant women, whose needs must be met.

We need active screening of workers using mobile medical units, and must plan and prepare to isolate workers if they are detected with COVID-19. Finally, we need to inform them about the disease in their own language and ensure that they understand it properly.

Governments or local authorities need to go to migrant workers and understand their grievances, and explain to them what can and cannot be done under the present circumstances.

What steps do you suggest once the lockdown is lifted, albeit gradually? This is the time for migrants to return home for the harvest season, yet contagion is a real worry, and many migrants may be in dire need of employment and money.

We need to mentally prepare them to stay back once the lockdown lifts so that they will be able to get back to work. Only if they work can their families receive money, which then gets circulated in the economy, including the village economy. The impact of this crisis on villages will be reduced if people can stay back and work in urban areas.

This will also help urban economies revive. The migrants will get better health facilities and treatment in cities than in villages, and most importantly, there is a smaller chance of infection travelling from a COVID-19 hotspot to a village. There are several migrants who would want to stay back in cities [and earn] because they owe money to a local money-lender or other local institutions.

At the same time, we need to accept that it is their right to go back and there should be no coercion. Urban areas must show preparedness to help them stay and work.

Had state governments been informed in advance of the March 25 lockdown, would they have been better prepared for a situation of millions of migrants trying to get back home?

A lockdown was inevitable. Our health infrastructure is concentrated in urban centres. If COVID-19 reaches rural India [on a huge scale] it will be catastrophic. The only way of arresting the spread of the pandemic was through prevention and by insulating rural areas.

However, the decision was taken without enough preparation. The four-hour notice may have been strategic, but it also showed how badly prepared we were for the problems that the poor and marginalised are now facing. Timely measures were not taken at the Centre and in the states to accomodate people in shelters and provide them food. The system [of governance] should have been especially sensitive to the needs of the most vulnerable.

Some have commented on how differently migrant workers were treated from NRIs, who were given more time to come home before the lockdown. Has the working class been left to bear the brunt of the pandemic in a country where over 90% of the workforce is in the informal sector?

Migration is a fundamental right for citizens. Indians are allowed to travel, work and reside in any part of the country. [But] there has always been class discrimination. There are international and internal migrants. The latter belong to socially and economically disadvantaged groups like adivasis, dalits or religious minorities.

In every disaster, the marginalised are the most affected, among them migrant workers and refugees. Even within the informal sector, there are several vulnerable groups. If you are native or a local working in the informal sector, there are more resources at your disposal, including support from local governments, than for a rickshaw-puller in Delhi who is from Bihar, or nomadic groups selling wares in the city. A Rohingya refugee [from Myanmar] may be worse off than even a migrant worker.

They [dalits, adivasis, religious minorities] are not just marginalised in the cities, but also in villages. This lockdown has made these historically invisible internal migrants--such as urban workers and seasonal labourers--visible to mainstream India and their plight is out in the open for everyone to see.

How would you compare the lockdown to demonetisation, which also impacted workers in the informal sector, many of whom are migrants?

I fear that the impact of the lockdown will be much worse than that of demonetisation. Demonetisation took away cash and resulted in the stagnation of the economy, thereby affecting livelihoods. Demonetisation led to a drop in total production in the economy. The informal sector was severely affected due to it, but the formal sector was relatively better off.

The lockdown has an immediate and direct impact on livelihoods, and will have long-term impact on everyone, particularly migrant workers. Reduction in remittances [due to the lockdown and lack of employment and wages] will not only impact migrant households, but the entire village economy, because it depends on remittances from migrants, as I said earlier. There could even be acute malnutrition and starvation deaths. Besides, if there is wide-scale transmission of COVID-19 in rural areas, it will have a devastating impact. It could substantially increase rural mortality rates.

For industry, there will be some cushion [from the government], but imagine the impact on those without access to the public distribution system, those without a bank account or insurance, or even those who did not even know what happened [when the lockdown was announced] because they had limited access to information.

How do you look at the massive movements of people in the past few days?

There are three kinds of migrants now, due to the lockdown: those who have reached home, those who are still in the places where they work, and those who are in between, unable to reach their homes. Those stuck in between are in an unfamiliar place, largely without help and resources like money or food. Those who are still in the places where they work, at least know their surroundings and know where to access essentials like food and healthcare, but are not receiving wages. And those who have managed to get home after the lockdown are facing stigma. Being jobless, they may have to borrow from money-lenders at exorbitant interest rates.

China locked down millions in Wuhan. But Sweden and the Netherlands, for example, did not do so, and nor did Singapore initially, though it has done so now. India has enforced the largest and perhaps strictest lockdown in the world. How do you assess these varying approaches to tackling a pandemic?

It is a sum total of human development, not just population. Sweden, Netherlands and Singapore are at a higher level of human development. China and India are the most populous countries in the world, and have among the largest migrant populations living abroad.

India [followed by China] receives the highest foreign remittances, and migration is a way of life. There are even people from Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh who work as labourers abroad.

Read the rest here:
'Now Is The Time To Show India Cares About Its Migrants' - IndiaSpend

Coronavirus is currently tearing its way through the Western world. But the loss of life, destruction of the economy and paralysis of infrastructure will be exponentially worse in the developing world - and it could lead to a migrant crisis the likes of which Europe has never seen before.

Worst case scenarios in the UK mention perhaps half a million deaths, if no measure were put in place to stop the spread. This would be a tragedy never before seen in peacetime. This will pale in significance, however, once the disease starts to spread in places like sub-Saharan Africa, to say nothing of conflict zones like Gaza, Yemen or Iraq.

The Gaza Strip already has some of the poorest medical care and health outcomes of anywhere in the world. And the cramped living conditions - where 2 million people live in an area the size of Detroit (which has only a third of the inhabitants) - are the worst circumstances for attempting to contain an epidemic.

Added to this, Gazans are disproportionately young; almost half of them are under 14, and the median age is just 18. This matters because we know that children are the main carriers of the disease, spreading it to older, more vulnerable relatives.

When these crowded conditions are known to increase the likelihood of people transmitting infectious diseases, how are Gazans supposed to practise self-isolation when they are living in such an over-developped territory with only 50 or 60 ventilators available?

But Gaza is not the worst place in the Middle East to contract COVID-19. Yemens war-ravaged population will almost certainly be brought to its knees by the virus without intervention. The five-year war in Yemen has left 10 million people at risk of famine and has decimated the nations healthcare system. Even basic sanitation is often not available.

Access to clean water takes on a whole new dimension in the midst of this global pandemic. The advice in the Western world is to wash your hands regularly with soap and warm water - but this means nothing to the 40% of the world who do not have access to basic hand washing facilities.

The situation is similarly dire in Iraq which, despite quarantines and lockdowns, has a healthcare system that is poorly-equipped at the best of times. Iraqs body count will be exacerbated by the countrys porous border with the regional disease epicentre of Iran (the entire Iran-Iraq border is opened annually to facilitate pilgrimages for Shia Muslims).

Many in Europe and North America are understandably preoccupied with the health emergencies at home. It is only natural to be more concerned about what is happening on our doorstep; the virus, however, is borderless. And so are its most desperate sufferers.

Just as the Syrian conflict led to the largest mass migration since the second world war, the COVID-19 pandemic may lead to one even larger - and potentially more dangerous. Syrian doctors believe the virus has already taken hold in the countrys refugee camps.

As thousands, or perhaps even millions, die, the worlds most desperate people - many of them in sub-Saharan Africa or the Middle East where there are already well-established people smuggling networks - will look for safety.

Whereas the last migrant crisis was driven by the need to avoid terror groups and airstrikes, the next one will be based on the need for basic healthcare. And unlike in the past, the migration bottlenecks of Libya and Turkey are unlikely to cooperate with Europe in holding back the tide - particularly if they themselves are facing their own epidemics.

Just as Europe has begun to flatten the curve of the outbreak, and begins to assess the economic and social fracture caused by the disease, it may be faced by a second wave - not only of the disease, but of the financial and societal strain caused by an influx of migrants.

Just as there have been reports of the super-rich fleeing their homes as the virus spreads, it is only natural that the super-poor will do the same.

The only solution is to support communities in these places before it is too late. International aid has become almost non-existent in this crisis. Even EU solidarity has disappeared, replaced by Chinese assistance which led to Italians chanting grazie Cine! and the Serbian President going so far as kissing the Chinese flag.

PR-driven aid is one thing; providing real opportunities to those most affected is something else. We can all do this by funding and working with aid agencies who are already on the ground to try and halt the outbreak in the Global South before it is too late.

The charity that I run, the Lady Fatemah Trust, uses our Mothernomics model to empower widowed mothers in places like Iraq to be economically productive. That productivity can save lives beyond their own. Recently, many of them have found employment manufacturing face masks to hold back Iraqs epidemic.

If COVID-19 cannot be stopped there, those widowed mothers and their orphaned children may soon be arriving at our doorstep in Europe. And that is something neither our governments nor our societies are prepared for.

____________

Are you a recognised expert in your field? At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at view@euronews.com to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Visit link:
Without continued aid, the next migrant crisis will be people fleeing coronavirus not war View - Euronews