C Explanatory memorandum,
by Mr Tadeusz IwińskiNote
1 Introduction
1. In the course of the preparation of this report,
the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Population has held several
meetings in the Eurasian region: in Kazakhstan on the occasion of
the first Euro-Asian Parliamentary Forum on Migration in Almaty
(September 2005),
Note in Krasnoyarsk Kray in Russia
in September 2006, in Antalya in Turkey in October 2007,
Note and
in Saint Petersburg on the occasion of the International Parliamentary
Conference on Globalisation of Migration Processes and Problems
of Legal Regulation, which was jointly organised by the Interparliamentary
Assembly of Member Nations of the Commonwealth of Independent States
(IPA CIS) and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
in April 2008.
Note The rapporteur has also undertaken
a fact-finding visit to the Asian part of the Russian Federation
(Irkutsk and Khabarovsk regions) in August 2008.
2. Throughout centuries, migration movements and human mobility
have played an important role in the common history and socioeconomic
and cultural development of both Europe and Asia. In historical
and contemporary terms, Russia and Turkey stand as eastern gates
of Europe, connecting Europe to the Middle East, central Asia and
Far East Asia.
3. Emigration from Turkey to western Europe has been extensively
covered by the report of the Parliamentary Assembly on the Turkish
presence in Europe (
Doc.
11083) and its
Recommendation 1774 (2006). This report therefore focuses on migration and mobility
in Russia and the area of the Commonwealth of Independent States
(CIS).
Note
4. Since the expansion of the Russian Empire in the 17th and
18th centuries from Poland in the west to the Pacific Ocean in the
east, Russia has been by far the world’s largest country in physical
terms with the world’s longest external land border spanning between
Europe and Asia. Representing almost a continent in itself, Russia
in its different historical periods attracted many and very diverse
migration flows.
5. Throughout most of the 20th century, the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics (USSR) until its dissolution in 1991 contained 15 constituent
republics which are today independent states (CIS). Open to the
rest of the world, the post-Soviet space remains nevertheless closely
interrelated in the economic and social context. Visa-free population
movements between the majority of former Soviet republics is a “natural”
and humane migration regime for a space where state borders have
separated families, relatives, countrymen, and compatriots. After
seventeen years of sovereign development, the post-Soviet states
are today pragmatically seeking the most appropriate ways to benefit
from the globalisation they are drawn into.
6. Freedom of population movements is an important resource of
economic development in the Eurasian region and the countries of
the region are increasingly aware of this fact. These countries
have considerable disparities in terms of economic development rates,
GDP per capita, poverty rates, and economic opportunities for their
citizens. These factors add up to the demographic imbalance between
the CIS countries and other countries of the region, where rapid
population decline in Russia and Ukraine contrasts to relatively
high population growth rates in the central Asian states, in Transcaucasia
and in the Middle East. These factors result in numerous migration
flows. In this context, the CIS common labour market could be a
reasonable economic instrument to provide most effective employment
of the region’s labour force, balance labour market deficits with
labour surpluses, give an impulse to less developed economies, and
serve regional integration for mutual benefit. The Middle East has
a very different, and today more difficult political situation,
where the principle of an open common labour market is currently
seriously undermined by regional instability.
7. Today, labour migration in the Eurasian region takes place
primarily in irregular forms, first of all due to administrative
barriers and over-bureaucratic procedures of getting permissions
in the major receiving country – Russia. Irregular migration and
illegal employment of migrant workers is a matter of concern for
both receiving and sending countries as it is associated with deformation
of the labour market, growth of shadow sectors, corruption, criminalisation
of migrants, their falling out of the legitimate field, spread of
exploitation practices, and disregard of migrants’ human rights.
The above concerns have been also highlighted by the Director of
the Russian Federal Migration Service, Mr Romodanovskiy, during
the 8th Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for
Migration Affairs (Kyiv, 4-5 September 2008).
8. Recently, Russia has revised its migration policy towards
labour migrants from CIS states, which enjoy a visa-free entry regime
with Russia.
Note The new regulation which was
put in force in January 2007 is more liberal with regard to CIS
citizens; it widens legal migration channels by simplifying procedures
to obtain temporary residence permissions and labour permits and
paves the way to orderly labour migration through the introduction
of annual labour import quotas. The new policy is promising to be
an effective alternative to irregular migration in the CIS region.
During the first six months since the new regulation has been in
force, over 1 500 000 work permissions were issued in Russia compared
to 702 000 during the entire year of 2006.
2 From survival strategy
to development strategy
9. The international migration process offers many benefits
and gains for participating actors – migrants, employers, receiving
states and sending states. However, its benefits are closely related
to the individual strategies of migrants, types and forms of migration,
and economic patterns in sending and receiving countries. Until
recently, cross-border migration was a survival strategy in the
Eurasian region. Lack of economic opportunities pushed people from
smaller CIS countries to seek jobs elsewhere. The surveys on spending remittances
in migrants’ households in central Asian republics demonstrate that
money earned abroad is spent mainly on consumption: food, clothing
and other daily living needs.
10. However, the structure of spending in households of migrants
is correlated to both the length of stay of migrants in a destination
country (or number of short-term stays for seasonal workers) and
to the economic situation in the country of origin where the migrant’s
family lives. For example, migrants from Tajikistan who have been
working in Russia for several years (70% of Tajik migrants surveyed
in 2005 have been international labour migrants for over five years)
invest more money into health and education that improves human
capital. They sometimes manage to accumulate initial capital to
start up their own small business upon their return to Tajikistan.
The survey conducted in 2004 in Kyrgyzstan
Note proves
that the pattern of spending of migrant remittances does include
an “investment segment”: 111 small-scale companies owned by former
labour migrants who have earned initial capital during their trips
to Russia have created workplaces for other Kyrgyz people, about
4 000 in all. A similar pattern can also be found in Armenia.
11. International migration can become a development strategy
rather than a survival strategy when the economy of sending countries
is developing to provide breeding ground for private sector initiative,
which in turn could create additional resources for development.
Growth of income in the agricultural sector can be, for example,
sustained by migration – by sending a family member to work abroad
a household can provide finance for the farm’s development.
12. The role of governments is to enhance the development potential
of migration: to encourage migrants to remit money home through
official channels and to invest it in development projects. The
financial and economic institutions of Moldova, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan,
Armenia, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan have shown an interest in learning
from the experience of other sending countries such as India, China
and Turkey, which have recognised the potential role of migrants
remittances for economic development and have elaborated practical instruments
to attract these remittances for the purposes of development (by
tax reduction, preferential terms of investments, credit, etc.)
3 Shifts in migration trends
within the post-Soviet territory
13. The member countries of the CIS are interconnected
by numerous migration flows and can be regarded as a one whole international
migration system. The Eurasian migration system is characterised
by the following factors:
- historical
ties;
- geographical proximity, “transparent” borders (visa-free
movements);
- common transport infrastructure;
- psychological easiness to move (language, former common
territory);
- demographic complementarity;
- mutual interest towards common labour market;
- large-scale irregular migration;
- regional co-operation aimed at co-ordinated migration
management.
14. The scale of international migration within the frames of
the Eurasian migration system characterises it as one of the world’s
biggest migration systems. The UN estimate (2005) ranks Russia –
the major destination country in the region – the second in the
list of the countries with the largest numbers of immigrants after
the United States, followed by Ukraine and Germany (United States
– 38.9 million immigrants; Russia – 12.1 million; Germany – 10.1
million; and Ukraine – 6.8 million).
15. During the last fifteen years, the nature of migration flows
in the CIS region has shifted from primarily forced migrations –
as a result of strong political and economic push factors, such
as military conflicts, social outbursts, discrimination of ethnic
minorities and economic crises – to voluntary economic migrations.
Already since the mid-1990s ethnic and political factors of migration
were supplemented and then replaced by economic ones, both push
and pull factors. Socioeconomic differences among the newly sovereign
states stimulated important waves of labour migrants. Migration
flows were directed primarily towards Russia, which was doing comparatively
better in its transition to a market economy and stabilisation of
the socioeconomic situation in comparison to most of the other CIS
states. People migrate in quest of jobs, to improve their economic
and social position and to gain stability.
Table 1. CIS: differences in
standards of living
|
CIS
country
|
GDP
per capita, US$*
|
Average
monthly salaries,
US$**
|
Poverty
rate
(population
living
below
poverty line) %**
|
Percentage
of population living
on less than US$2 per day, %***
|
|
Armenia
|
1 234
|
98.4
|
…
|
49
|
|
Azerbaijan
|
2 585.9
|
78.7
|
68
|
9
|
|
Belarus
|
3 316.2
|
161.8
|
22
|
2
|
|
Georgia
|
1 765.8
|
58.5
|
11
|
16
|
|
Kazakhstan
|
4 386.1
|
207.3
|
35
|
25
|
|
Kyrgyzstan
|
507.7
|
51.7
|
40
|
25
|
|
Moldova
|
917.4
|
89.5
|
23
|
64
|
|
Russian Federation
|
6 330.8
|
237
|
31
|
8
|
|
Tajikistan
|
411.5
|
21.5
|
…
|
43
|
|
Turkmenistan
|
3 888.6
|
…
|
…
|
44
|
|
Ukraine
|
2 020.6
|
110.8
|
32
|
46
|
|
Uzbekistan
|
498.6
|
35.8a
|
…
|
72
|
Sources: * IMF, World
Economic Outlook Database, April 2006.
** “Population and Standards of Living in the CIS Countries”,
statistical bulletin, CIS Inter-state Statistical Committee, Moscow,
2005.
*** UN, Population Reference Bureau, World Population Data
Sheet, 2005.
aData for 1995.
16. It is worth noting that the development of the private
sector in Russia in the 1990s and its growing need for labour, as
well as migration flows from labour excessive states, were taking
place largely spontaneously, without noticeable management by the
governments in the region. The channels for regular labour migration were
not sufficient, official migration infrastructure (public and private
employment agencies, labour demand and supply databases, information
and consultation services for migrants, etc.) was not developed.
The result was an emerging widespread irregular regional labour
market. The situation was aggravated by activities of international
networks of criminal organisations specialising in human trafficking
across the post-Soviet territory. Human traffickers effectively
benefit from gaps in national legislation on migration, lack of
official migration infrastructure, over-bureaucratic procedures
for getting job permissions and the growing demand for migrant labour
in Russia.
17. The number of irregular migrants in the CIS region is estimated
at between 5 and 15 million (most of them in Russia; up to 1 million
seasonal workers in Kazakhstan; and about 0.2 million irregular
transit migrants in Ukraine).
Table 2. CIS: migrant workers
abroad (estimates (thousands)), early 2000s
|
CIS
country
|
Migrant
workers abroad
|
Migrant
workers in Russia
|
|
Armenia
|
800-900
|
650
|
|
Azerbaijan
|
600-700
|
550-650
|
|
Georgia
|
250-300
|
200
|
|
Kyrgyzstan
|
400-450
|
350-400
|
|
Moldova
|
500
|
250
|
|
Tajikistan
|
600-700
|
600-700
|
|
Ukraine
|
2 000-2 500
|
1 000-1 500
|
|
Uzbekistan
|
600-700
|
550-600
|
|
Russian Federation
|
2 000-3 000
|
–
|
Based on: national estimates of origin countries.
Source: “Overview of
the CIS Migration Systems”, ICMPD, Vienna, 2006.
18. Estimates presented in Table 2 include migrant workers
from CIS countries working in other countries, both legally and
illegally. For central Asian states and the Caucasus republics,
Russia is the major destination country, attracting 70% to 90% of
their labour migrants. As for Moldova and Ukraine, only about half
of migrants from these countries come to Russia while the other
half tends to move westward, to Europe, primarily to the southern
European countries, where during the last fifteen years numerous
migrant networks of Moldovans and Ukrainians have been established
and today facilitate migration and provide support to their newly
arrived compatriots.
19. While Russia is the major receiving country in the region,
it is at the same time an important sending country. Migrants from
Russia move primarily towards more developed western countries in
Europe, South and North America, and Asia.
20. Along with Russia, Kazakhstan has become a receiving country
in recent years, hosting seasonal labour migrants from Kyrgyzstan,
Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Having lost 20% of its population due
to mass emigration of Slavic people, Germans and Jews in the 1990s,
Kazakhstan faces a labour deficit, as economic recovery advances
with growing wages. Skilled labour migrants come from Russia and
countries from outside the CIS region, primarily to work in the
oil, transport and construction industries. Similarly to Russia,
labour migration to Kazakhstan is overwhelmingly irregular. According
to estimations, Kazakhstan hosts up to 1 million irregular labour
migrants.
Note In the
2000s, the nature of economic migration in the CIS region is obviously
shifting from commercial circular trips to hired employment, both
regular and irregular. Employers in countries of destination are
both legal entities and physical persons, both nationals and representatives
of diasporas. For example, Armenian construction companies and Azerbaijani
wholesale and retail trade companies in Russia commonly hire newly
arrived compatriots.
21. Surveys of irregular migrants in Russia
Note reveal socio-demographic
characteristics of migrants. For example, temporary labour migrants,
both regular and irregular, are primarily males of working age (average age
is 32-33 years, 80% males), married (over 60%) and having children
(40-45%), leaving their families behind. Less than a half have secondary
and higher education and only one out of four have professional
skills needed for their work in Russia. Irregular migrants generally
come from rural areas. Kyrgyz and Uzbek migrants often arrive in
groups originating from one village. Irregular male migrants concentrate
in the construction sector (low-skilled or casual workers), in trade
and services (market trade, car repair shops, street cleaning, etc.)
and agriculture, while female migrants find jobs in agriculture
and – more commonly – in the services sector (house cleaners, dishwashers,
waiters, call-girls, sex-services).
4 Transit migration
22. Migrants from Asian and even African countries wending
their way to more developed countries of the European Union use
the post-Soviet territory as a transit route. According to estimates,
over 300 000 transit migrants from Afghanistan, China, Angola, Pakistan,
India, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Ethiopia and other countries have been
stranded in Russia and Ukraine after running into an obstacle of
tight control at the EU border. They stay in Russia for months and
even years (usually without any regular status) in order to raise
funds for the onward smuggling fee or purchase of falsified travel
documents and visas. They earn money in the shadow sector of the
economy or by criminal activities.
23. Numerous irregular migrants in transit from remote Asian and
African countries carry epidemiological risks. When staying in Russia,
Ukraine or other Eurasian transit states they do not have proper
access to the health care system.
24. Once in abusive situations, lack of papers and fear of arrest
or deportation often prevent transit migrants from seeking help
from authorities. The alternative protection framework comes from
informal ethnic solidarity or criminal organisations. Therefore,
transit migrants in irregular situations can be easily recruited
for crime.
25. Migrants in transit will not integrate with the local society.
They feel forced to stay in a country that they regard as no more
than a staging post on their way to more prosperous states in terms
of economic opportunities and the welfare system.
26. Meanwhile, transit countries where these migrants get stuck
suffer from a growing shadow labour market, epidemiological risks,
ethnic-based conflicts, and a growing criminal sector of smugglers’
and traffickers’ services as a result of poorly controlled flows
of transit migrants.
5 Chinese migration
27. Chinese migration flows to Russia and other Eurasian
states have been steadily growing over the last decade. It is due
to the encouragement of labour exports and shuttle trade (“people
trade”, as defined by Chinese authorities) by the Chinese Government
and the obvious interest of China in natural resources in the former
Soviet republics and widespread illegal employment practices. Chinese
citizens come primarily as small-scale traders or labour migrants
in construction, trade-related business, catering or manufacturing. Chinese
teams of construction workers are employed by Chinese companies
contracted (or sub-contracted) for construction projects in Russia,
Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and other CIS states, in a similar fashion
to a Turkish construction company’s model of labour migration.
28. For Russia, migration from China is a contradictory process
having many benefits and challenges. From the positive perspective,
Chinese migrants are hard working, concessive and disciplined, and
are therefore a valuable labour resource that covers labour shortages
in many territories and industries. In 2006, 228 800 Chinese migrant
workers were employed in the Russian Federation. Among them, 50%
in the central European part of Russia, 23% in the Far East Region
and 19% in Southern Siberia. Today, Chinese migrant workers make
up 13.3% of the total amount of the foreign labour force in Russia;
they are the third biggest group of registered foreign workers.
In some territories (for example, Far East Russia) Chinese migrant
workers make up over 50% of the total number of foreign workers.
29. However, there is a negative perspective as well. In many
cases, the activities of Chinese migrants in Russia do not correspond
to its national interests. Market trade with cheap Chinese consumer
goods undermines the Russian light industries in the territories
where “Chinese markets” are located. The key interest of Chinese
business in Russia is to import raw materials, which often turns
into predation of timber and metals through shadow schemes in co-operation
with Russian criminal business groups. In a number of Russian cities, Chinese
ethnic communities represent strong, independent economic and social
structures, like enclaves in Russia’s economy. Having at their disposal
the community’s independent press, financial system, various legal,
semi-legal and illegal companies, hotels, hostels, warehouses, etc.,
the Chinese ethnic communities have become the co-ordinating centres
for Chinese migrants’ business activities. A major concern is also related
to the geopolitical interest of China in the territory of the Russian
Far East provinces, referring to the “lost territories” concept
that dates back one hundred and fifty years. This issue is particularly
sensitive for the Russian Far East, where the local population is
shrinking due to ageing and population decrease and due to the outflow
of inhabitants to the western regions of Russia. The population
of the Russian Far East decreased from 7 to 6 million between 1994
and 2005. In comparison, the population of the three north-east
provinces of China neighbouring Russia is 105 million, and increasing
further.
30. The total number of Chinese migrants who live in Russia more
or less permanently is estimated to be close to one million. However,
surveys of Chinese migrants in Russia prove that over half of them
have no intention to stay in Russia for a long time but to return
to China or move to other, mainly European, countries after having
accumulated money or graduated from Russian high school institutions.
Therefore, the Chinese migration potential is growing not only in
China itself but also in Russia and other countries where economic and
political conditions are suitable for business but not for permanent
stay.
31. Therefore, in contrast to migration exchange within the CIS
region where labour migration “works” as a facilitator of regional
integration, Chinese migration to Russia contributes to additional
friction between the two countries. Temporary labour migration between
Russia and China is regulated by two intergovernmental agreements
signed in 1992 and 2000. Presently, a new agreement between the
Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the People’s
Republic of China on counteracting irregular migration and illegal
employment of Chinese migrants in the territory of Russia is under
consideration. It is focused on suppressing the illegal activities
of Chinese citizens in the territory of the Russian Federation.
6 Turkish migration
32. Another sample of “external” migration to the CIS
region is migration of Turkish workers. In contrast to Chinese migrants,
they are considered as the most orderly, transparent and manageable
group of foreign workers. Turkish migrant workers come primarily
as project workers hired by Turkish construction companies. They
are closely “tied” to their Turkish employers and do not participate
in the national labour markets of the CIS countries independently.
So, they do not compete with national workers. For this reason,
they are welcomed by national governments. Table 3 shows the numbers
of Turkish migrant workers in CIS countries registered by the Turkish
Employment Office. They concentrate mainly in more developed countries
(Russia, Kazakhstan) and in central Asian states and Azerbaijan,
which are closer to Turkey in terms of religion, culture and language.
Table 3. Numbers of Turkish migrant
workers in CIS countries (cases registered by the Turkish Employment Office),
1998-2003
|
CIS
country
|
1998
|
1999
|
2000
|
2001
|
2002
|
2003
|
|
Azerbaijan
|
276
|
152
|
214
|
267
|
668
|
1 049
|
|
Georgia
|
194
|
150
|
157
|
65
|
375
|
357
|
|
Kazakhstan
|
3 145
|
1 524
|
1 790
|
1 290
|
1 102
|
1 532
|
|
Kyrgyzstan
|
8
|
88
|
177
|
34
|
95
|
34
|
|
Moldova
|
102
|
119
|
20
|
2
|
132
|
0
|
|
Russian Federation
|
7 426
|
2 215
|
2 199
|
4 190
|
10 137
|
10 816
|
|
Tajikistan
|
…
|
…
|
0
|
…
|
0
|
245
|
|
Turkmenistan
|
563
|
1 576
|
2 184
|
1 327
|
1 068
|
1 603
|
|
Ukraine
|
124
|
93
|
222
|
90
|
151
|
89
|
|
Uzbekistan
|
1 326
|
872
|
176
|
455
|
423
|
773
|
Sources: TC Çalişma
ve Sosyal Güvenlik Bakanliği, DIYIH (Diş İlişkiler ve Yurt Dişi
İşçi Hizmetleri) Genel Müdürlüğü Bultenleri (1998-2004), Raporlari
(1999-2003), Ankara, and according to data from Turkiye Is Kurumu
(Employment Office).
33. Data from sources in countries of origin provide
even higher numbers. For example, in Russia Turkish migrant workers
were already one of the largest groups in the foreign labour force
in the mid-1990s. The 1998 financial crisis resulted in a decline
of the absolute number of Turkish migrants but by the mid-2000s
their number had multiplied. In 2005, Turkey was ranked third after
China and Ukraine in the list of top countries of origin of migrant
workers officially employed in Russia. They concentrate in the boom
areas (Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Krasnodarsky Krai, Yamalo-Nenetskiy
AO, Tatarstan). Besides project workers, Turkish migrants include
the highly skilled personnel of Turkish companies (financial, commercial),
teachers in Muslim republics, and small-scale traders of Turkish
consumer goods.
Table 4. Turkish migrant workers
in Russia, 1994-2007
|
Years
|
Numbers
(thousands)
|
Percentage
of the total
|
|
1994
|
12.1
|
9.4
|
|
1995
|
36.2
|
12.9
|
|
1996
|
39
|
13.4
|
|
1997
|
33.2
|
13.7
|
|
1998
|
35.7
|
14.7
|
|
1999
|
26.7
|
12.6
|
|
2000
|
17.8
|
8.4
|
|
2001
|
20.9
|
7.4
|
|
2002
|
15.4
|
4.3
|
|
2003
|
37.9
|
10
|
|
2004
|
48
|
10.4
|
|
2005
|
73.7
|
10.5
|
|
2006
|
101.4
|
10
|
|
2007
|
131.2
|
7.7
|
Source: Data from the
Russian Statistical Committee (ROSSTAT).
34. In the central Asian states and Azerbaijan, which
are mostly countries of origin, Turkish migrants are a major group
of foreign workers engaged in construction and infrastructure projects,
the banking sector, education and commerce. As regards Azerbaijan,
over 20 000 Turkish workers were employed in the country in 2004.
In Kazakhstan, there are 15 700 workers from Turkey. In Uzbekistan,
there are 6 300 Turkish migrants.
35. Equally, there are migration flows from the CIS to Turkey.
Students from the central Asian states, Azerbaijan, and Muslim republics
in the Russian Federation go to Turkey for higher education, training,
and for work. During the tourist season tens of thousands of labour
migrants from post-Soviet states seek jobs in the tourist areas
where there is a high demand for Russian-speaking guides, administrators,
waiters, etc. The problem arises from the fact that most of them
come to Turkey with a tourist visa, which gives no right to paid employment.
7 Human trafficking and labour
exploitation
36. Widespread human trafficking practices are serious
and growing problems, and are common to both countries of origin
and destination countries in the Eurasian region. Men, women and
children from low-wage CIS countries are trafficked for labour and
sex exploitation, sometimes by deceit, sometimes by consent. Pushed
by despair and poverty, people agree to over-exploitation, degrading
treatment and irregular situations in order to provide economic
support for their families. Hundreds of thousands of Tajik, Kyrgyz,
Moldovan or Uzbek migrants are taken to Russia for seasonal work
in construction and agriculture, and their seasonal earnings provide
income to their families left behind. They “pay” for that with their
human rights being violated, with oppression and health risks.
37. The governments in the countries of origin are not indifferent
to this situation. The Government of Russia also realises that widespread
human trafficking practices in the sphere of irregular labour migration
damages the national labour market, causes the shadow sector of
the economy to grow, gives rise to corruption, and provokes criminality
and social tension. So, both sending and receiving countries have
a strong interest in counteracting human trafficking in the region.
It can be effective only with the combined efforts of the governments,
within the framework of inter-ministerial co-operation, exchanges
of information, joint counter-trafficking operations, etc.
38. The human dimension of migration requires the particular attention
of government bodies responsible for migration management. Development
of legal channels of migration, access of potential migrants to information
about migration possibilities, migrants’ rights, and threats of
illegal employment, specialised juridical and consultation services
for migrants, and severe penalties for unscrupulous employers hiring migrants
illegally can all contribute to reduce the sphere of human trafficking
and to increase the security of migrants.
39. More efforts are necessary at national level and by NGOs to
help cultivate zero tolerance within society towards exploitation,
violence and forced labour.
8 Brain drains/gains
40. The Eurasian region, especially Russia, Ukraine,
and Kazakhstan, have suffered serious losses due to an outflow of
highly skilled professionals in the 1990s. For Russia, the UNDP
estimates annual losses resulting from brain drain amounting to
US$25 billion (data from 2004).
41. Many researchers from former Soviet republics are today working
in European and American universities and research centres. They
were pushed to leave their own country due to low wages in the R&D sector
and reduced prestige of intellectual labour. Some of them have emigrated
forever, while others keep contacts with their homeland and inspire
international projects, training courses, etc., for the mutual benefit
of researchers from the CIS and other countries.
42. The nature of contemporary science is shifting. It is becoming
more internationalised. In many fields of science, like space investigation,
energy technologies, high energy physics, molecular biology, etc., development
in the framework of only one country is hardly possible today. Projects
of the highest priority in these fields need considerable resources
– human and financial. In addition, co-operation between researchers
from different scientific schools gives more effective results,
and “brain exchange” is an important instrument of scientific progress
and mutual enrichment of scholars. So, nowadays development of fundamental
science needs global management. This means that new forms of organisation
and mobilisation of intellectual resources at the global level are
to be found. Another side of this new approach is to make national
economies able to apply and integrate the results of globally produced
advanced technologies.
43. Gradually, the most advanced Eurasian states are coming to
a new understanding that in order to participate in a newly organised
scientific research process most effectively they should not only
give their brains but also be ready to absorb the consequent innovations
in their own economy. For this reason, Russia, for example, is focusing
on speeding up the development of advanced technologies sectors.
The IT sector in Russia demonstrates the highest annual growth rate
of 15%. With a view to reduce brain drain damage and to stimulate
application of advanced technologies, Russia concentrates on: (1)
reorganisation of the R&D sector with priorities given to forward-looking
studies, scientific schools and talented young researchers; (2) restructuring
of the economy with special emphasis on the IT sector; (3) encouragement
of private investments in R&D; and (4) development of interstate
co-operation in the R&D sector, etc. On the other hand, growing foreign
investments in the CIS states are often followed by human inflow
of “international staff” employed by transnational corporations:
highly skilled workers, managers, financial experts, etc. They provide
the benefits of “brain circulation” that partially compensate for
the brain drain losses in the countries of origin. Highly skilled migrants
bring new knowledge with them and assist local workers to advance
professionally.
9 Migrant remittances
44. Improvements in living standards of migrants’ households
are the most obvious positive effect of labour migration. Money
earned in other countries is sent to the families that are left
behind and used by migrants’ households to purchase consumer goods,
houses, and to make investments in human capital and business.
45. In the 2000s, the scale of remittances in the post-Soviet
space considerably increased. The major receiving country, Russia,
is the main source of remittances. According to the Central Bank
of Russia, the total amount of remittances sent from Russia to other
CIS states increased 12 fold between 1999 and 2005: from US$0.5
billion to US$6 billion. According to the National Bank of Kazakhstan,
since 2000 the remittances by residents and non-residents sent by
official channels were growing 150-200% annually, and by 2005 exceeded US$1
billion. However, a considerable proportion of migrants’ money is
delivered to their countries of origin not by official channels
(bank transfer, postal order, other money remittance systems) but
rather non-officially – through friends, relatives, or carried personally
as cash. According to the Federal Migration Service of the Russian
Federation, migrants take away up to US$10 billion from Russia annually.
46. In many smaller CIS countries migrant remittances play a more
important role in stabilising economic development than foreign
direct investments (FDI) or official development aid (ODA) (Table
5). Along with official IMF data, the table includes estimates of
total remittances.
Table 5. Comparative role of
remittances in the smaller CIS states, 2006
|
Country
|
Migrant
transfers
BOP
|
FDI
|
ODA
and
official
aid
|
Exports
of goods
and services
|
|
in millions of US$
|
|
Armenia
|
1 175
|
543
|
213
|
1 408
|
|
Azerbaijan
|
812
|
- 584
|
206
|
13 862
|
|
Georgia
|
485
|
1 060
|
361
|
2 554
|
|
Kyrgyzstan
|
739
|
182
|
311
|
1 099
|
|
Moldova
|
1 182
|
242
|
228
|
1 546
|
|
Tajikistan
|
1 019
|
339
|
240
|
646
|
|
Uzbekistan
|
…
|
164
|
149
|
6 528
|
|
as a share of GDP (%)
|
|
Armenia
|
18.3
|
8.5
|
3.3
|
22
|
|
Azerbaijan
|
6
|
- 2.9
|
1.1
|
70
|
|
Georgia
|
6.4
|
13.8
|
4.7
|
33
|
|
Kyrgyzstan
|
27.8
|
6.5
|
11.1
|
39
|
|
Moldova
|
36.2
|
7.3
|
6.9
|
46
|
|
Tajikistan
|
36.2
|
12
|
8.6
|
23
|
|
Uzbekistan
|
…
|
1
|
0.9
|
38
|
BOP – balance of payments, IMF data.
FDI – foreign direct investments, World Bank data.
ODA – official development aid, World Bank data.
GDP – gross domestic product.
Source: IMF balance
of payments statistics, August 2007; and World Bank, world development
indicators database, April 2008.
47. The major concern of both sending and receiving countries
in the CIS region is to widen official channels for migrant remittances
and to develop incentives for labour migrants to transfer money
legally. Central banks of the countries of the region co-ordinate
their activities to provide information to migrant workers on how
to transfer remittances officially. National banks of both sending
and receiving countries expand services for migrants in co-operation
with Western Union, MoneyGram, TWML, Contact, and other money remittance systems.
10 Towards the CIS common labour
market
48. Disparities in the demographic and economic potential
of CIS countries “naturally” lead to inter-regional migration, which
could be an instrument to promote co-development based on mutually
complementary resources. Properly managed, international migration
in the region can balance labour supply in different countries and
industries. Similarities in educational systems, including professional
training and secondary education, can further facilitate inter-regional
migration of skilled labour.
49. Multimillion flows of irregular migrants across the CIS territory
prove the enormous potential of labour migration in the region.
In fact, migrants “vote by their feet” for a single migration space
and a common labour market. Migration and freedom of movement was
always likely to remain the strongest link between the former Soviet
republics, despite many contradicting interests and lack of understanding
among states over the last fifteen years of post-Soviet development.
50. The new approach to regional migration came in the 2000s when
relative economic stability was achieved and the benefits of labour
migration were understood at the high state level. Presently, facilitating
the orderly movement of labour, guaranteeing the social and labour
rights of migrant workers is on the agenda of regional organisations
and is part of bilateral agreements. The new impulse to interstate
co-operation in the field was made by revision of the Russian migration
regulation in 2007; it stimulated elaboration of expedient bilateral
agreements on labour migration between Russia and Tajikistan, Uzbekistan,
Azerbaijan and development of guest worker programmes in the form
of direct arrangements between sending countries and the Russian
enterprises with labour shortages.
11 New Russian migration strategy
51. International migration policy in Russia is presently
at a turning point. Negative demographic trends (absolute population
decline of about 1 million a year due to dramatic differences in
the numbers of births and deaths; starting from 2006 an absolute
decline in labour age-groups, up to 700 000 from 2010 onwards; and population
ageing and growth of the dependency ratio) and economic recovery
that needs additional labour resources (stabilisation of the economic
growth rate, expansion of the private sector, particularly in the
services and construction industries that are labour consuming)
incited the Russian authorities to adopt a new outlook to migration.
This shift in policy was a consequence of the rather restrictive
migration regulation of the 1990s, which resulted in a dramatic
decline in regular migration inflows to Russia from other CIS states:
from over 900 000 in 1994 to less than 50 000 in the early 2000s.
52. At the same time, irregular labour migration has boomed. This
phenomenon clearly indicates a high migration potential within the
post-Soviet space and the need for a new strategy on migration management
in Russia, which should address pragmatic economic and demographic
interests. While irregular migration remains a major security concern
in Russia, national security has shifted from being seen exclusively
in terms of the state to a wider approach balancing economic, social,
demographic, cultural, ethnic and the human security of the nation.
Correspondingly, the general purpose of tackling irregular migration
is likely to be achieved through a combination of policing instruments
(proper border management, exposure of human traffickers, immigration
control, secure identification documents, etc.) together with more
humane measures such as regularisation of irregular migrants and
development of legal channels for permanent and temporary migration
as an alternative for irregular migration and human trafficking.
53. Following the implementation of the new immigration law in
January 2007, 1 717 137 labour migrants obtained regular work permits
in Russia in 2007. According to the figures of the Russian Federal
Migration Service, the number of labour migrants with regular status
coming from CIS countries has significantly increased from 537 700
in 2006 to 1.15 million in 2007. The number of regular labour migrants
from other countries has increased from 476 300 in 2006 to 564 300
in 2007. Table 6 illustrates the breakdown of figures (in percentages)
according to countries of origin.
Table 6. Migrant workers in Russia,
2007
|
Country
of origin
|
Migrant
workers in Russia
|
|
Uzbekistan
|
20.1%
|
|
Tajikistan
|
14.6%
|
|
China
|
13.3%
|
|
Ukraine
|
12.2%
|
|
Turkey
|
7.6%
|
|
Kyrgyzstan
|
6.4%
|
|
Moldova
|
5.5%
|
|
Vietnam
|
4.6%
|
|
Others
|
15.7%
|
Source:Russian Federal
Migration Service, 2007.
54. Currently, Russia’s migration policy is shifting
from a primarily restrictive to a more flexible approach that widens
the legal space for migration and removes cumbersome bureaucratic
barriers for migrants. The authorities came to the conclusion that
the existing model of migration management in Russia is inefficient. Such
a model does not correspond to national economic and demographic
interests; it pushes migrants into the shadow sector; creates obstacles
for development of the national labour market; leaves millions of
people in Russia without any legal protection; gives rise to corruption;
and provokes growth of criminality among migrants. These were the
reasons for revising the migration management strategy.
55. The following recent legal documents in the field of migration
management illustrate a radical about-turn in Russia’s migration
strategy:
55.1 The 2006-12 state
programme on providing support for voluntary resettlement of compatriots
to Russia (adopted by presidential decree, 22 June 2006);
55.2 The 2005 concept of regularisation of irregular labour
migrants from the CIS states that have a visa-free entry regime
with Russia;
55.3 The Federal Law on Registry of Foreign Citizens and Persons
without Citizenship in the Russian Federation (in force since 15
January 2007);
55.4 Amendments to the Federal Law on the Legal Status of Foreign
Citizens in the Russian Federation (in force since 15 January 2007);
55.5 The new concept of the state migration policy (considered
at the sessions of the Gosudarstvennaya Duma in 2006).
56. These legal documents were prepared in consultation with experts,
employers’ associations, private labour recruitment agencies and
NGOs, in parallel with active public debates in the media and with
the participation of senior officials from the Ministry of the Interior,
Federal Migration Service, Ministry of Economic Development and
Federal Employment Service.
57. The “keywords” for the new migration policy are selectivity
and regularisation. The policy envisages mechanisms to facilitate
regular status and legal employment for migrants coming to Russia
from other former Soviet states for permanent residence or for temporary
work.
58. Russia therefore encourages regular migration and regional
co-operation in the field, giving migrants from smaller CIS states
an opportunity to work, earn money and send it home to support their
families and national economies. Moreover, labour migration in the
CIS region – inspired by historical and cultural ties and knowledge
of the Russian language – effectively works as a factor of stabilisation
and integration among the countries for their mutual benefit and
development. Destination countries, namely Russia and Kazakhstan,
and origin countries – Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova,
Ukraine and Armenia – all emphasise their interest in developing
the CIS common labour market.
12 Regional co-operation in the
field of migration management
59. Co-ordination of migration management in Eurasia
has been a concern of several regional organisations such as: the
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS); the Eurasian Economic
Community (EAEC) involving Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia
and Tajikistan; and GUAM involving Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan
and Moldova. There are also numerous bilateral agreements.
12.1 Major multilateral agreements:
- agreement between the
CIS states on co-operation in labour migration and social guaranties
for migrant workers (1994);
- agreement between the CIS states on co-operation in preventing
irregular migration (1998);
- the EAEC agreement on visa-free journeys: Belarus, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan (2005);
- participation in the Budapest Process (since 2004);
- Issyk-Kul Dialogue of the International Conference on
Migration Policies in Central Asian States, Caucasus States and
Neighbouring Countries;
- International Agreement on Migration Management between
Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan (2000).
12.2 Bilateral agreements on labour
migration:
- Russia-Belarus (in the
framework of the Agreement on the Union between Russia and Belarus);
- Russia-Tajikistan (inter-governmental, inter-ministerial,
and Representation Office of the Ministry of Labour of Tajikistan
in Russia);
- Russia-Kyrgyzstan (inter-governmental, between ministries
of the interior, and attaché dealing with migration issues);
- Kazakhstan-Kyrgyzstan (inter-governmental on agricultural
workers in border regions);
- Tajikistan-Kyrgyzstan (inter-governmental);
- Russia-Ukraine (inter-governmental and inter-ministerial);
- Russia-Armenia (inter-governmental);
- Ukraine-Moldova;
- Ukraine-Armenia;
- Ukraine-Slovakia;
- Uzbekistan-Turkmenistan (on a simplified border-crossing
regime for inhabitants of frontier areas);
- Uzbekistan-South Korea (labour quotas);
- Tajikistan-Turkey (between ministries of labour).
12.3 Ongoing projects:
- elaboration of the CIS
Convention on the Legal Status of Migrant Workers in the framework
of the Eurasian Economic Community (EAEC) and elaboration of the
agreement on temporary employment of citizens of member states of
the EAEC on the territories of other member states;
- Common Economic Space of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and
Ukraine, aiming to facilitate free movement of capital, goods and
labour.
12.4 Non-governmental activities:
- direct agreements on
labour exports (organised recruiting) between Russian enterprises
and migration services in labour source countries;
- establishment of “migration bridges” between central Asian
states and the Russian provinces (NGOs: information, consultations
and training);
- co-operation between private recruitment agencies (International
Association of Labour Migration).
60. Co-ordination of activities at non-governmental level
is a new and very promising alternative to irregular migration,
illegal employment and human trafficking. For example, in 2003 the
International Association of Labour Migration (IALM) was established
as a regional professional association of private labour agencies
from Russia, Ukraine, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. The main purpose
of the IALM is to promote legal temporary employment options by
means of wide information campaigns for employers and potential
labour migrants, co-operation between labour agencies of sending
and receiving countries, creation of the CIS regional labour demand
and supply databases, etc. Working in partnership with national
state bodies engaged in migration management and international organisations,
IALM is a structural element of a newly shaping international migration
infrastructure in the Eurasian region, and a good example of a combination
of interests between states and the business community.
13 Conclusion
61. Migration in the Eurasian region is growing and has
become a more diverse and complex phenomenon over the last fifteen
years. It is strongly stimulated by the globalisation process and
it is often a response to disparities in development and demographic
growth. The significance of labour migration is growing in the region.
Governments, interstate organisations and the public are increasingly
faced with issues such as irregular migration, transnational organised
crime and trafficking in human beings. Therefore, the Eurasian region
displays a full range of advantages and disadvantages resulting
from international migration. While there are many benefits from
labour movements including transfer of migrants’ remittances, negative implications
of irregular migration represent a threat to national and human
security. CIS states have therefore a common interest to focus on
proper management of migration flows, both at national and international
level.
62. In order to maximise benefits related to development of poorer
countries of origin and to minimise negative effects, the Eurasian
states are coming to a common understanding of the following necessary
steps:
13.1. In the sphere of
labour migration management:
62.1.1 to
reduce the scale of irregular migration and illegal employment by
tackling the shadow sector of the economy in receiving countries,
labour market regulation, and development of official channels of labour
migration through the combined efforts of state and private labour
agencies in both sending and receiving countries.
13.2. In the sphere of transit migration:
62.2.1 to respond to the challenges
of “asymmetric borders” through improvement of border control facilities
and co-operation among the transit CIS states in immigration control;
and to use international instruments to reduce the risks of “extended
transit” and thousands of migrants getting stuck in transit countries.
13.3. In the sphere of brain drain:
62.3.1 to encourage the R&D sector and interstate co-operation
in the field of research in order to develop a knowledge-based economy
and to stimulate the return of intellectuals; and to initiate new forms
of managing fundamental science at a supra-national level, which
would attract the necessary human and financial resources and elaborate
fair access to innovative technologies in different countries.
13.4. In the sphere of migrant remittances:
62.4.1 to encourage migrants to send
their remittances via official channels, to lower the costs of remittance
transfers, offer incentives for migrants to invest the earned money
in business, human capital, local infrastructure and development
projects.
63. The CIS migration strategy is at a turning point. Both sending
and receiving countries of the region are coming to a better understanding
of the benefits of international migration for regional development.
Countries of the region have already established co-operation at
the government level and there are many joint efforts of non-governmental
organisations, academics and the media, which aim to turn migration
into an effective instrument for mutual development of national
economies and the region as a whole. Establishing permanent parliamentary
dialogue is therefore of particular importance.
64. As a platform for a political discussion on migration issues,
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe could effectively
promote common understanding of migration-related benefits and risks,
as well as the potential of inter-state co-operation in the Eurasian
region, which would enable combined efforts to manage migration
more effectively. Members of parliaments from Eurasian states could
contribute more actively to achieve orderly and safe migration by
developing frameworks for migration policies, by co-ordinating national legislation
on migration, by initiating or strengthening inter-state data-sharing
mechanisms related to migration, and by improving national and international
migration infrastructures. In a wider context, proper migration management
and inter-state co-operation could make migration an important resource
of sustainable economic development of both sending and receiving
countries in the region.
14 The fact-finding visit of the
rapporteur to Russia
65. In August 2008, the rapporteur undertook a fact-finding
mission to the Asian part of the Russian Federation: the Irkutsk
Region, the Khabarovsk Region and the Autonomous Jewish Region (oblast). The purpose of the visit
was to gather information on recent migration trends and policy
responses in two significant border regions, focusing particularly
on Chinese migration to Russia.
66. In the course of his visit, the rapporteur met with the Deputy
Presidential Plenipotentiary Envoy to the Far Eastern Federal District,
with the Deputy Head of the Government of the Khabarovsk Region,
with the Governor of the Autonomous Jewish Region (oblast) in Birobidjan, representatives
of regional authorities in Irkutsk, with staff of regional labour
departments in Khabarovsk and Irkutsk, and regionally deployed staff
of the Federal Migration Service. The rapporteur has also met with
researchers of the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of
Sciences, of the state regional legal research institute and the
Centre for Independent Social Research in Irkutsk. At the end of
his visit, the rapporteur had a discussion with the Deputy Director
of the Federal Migration Service in Moscow.
67. Currently, at the regional level in Russia there are no specific
legal norms on migration, as this falls under the federal competence
since 2002. In 2002 there was a radical shift in federal migration
policy, establishing the Federal Migration Service with regional
branches and introducing a number of legal norms to streamline and
optimise migration flows in Russia.
68. The rapporteur observed that the federal policy objectives
to create incentives for CIS migrant workers and to restrict non-CIS
immigration do not always meet regional needs. The situation is
of course very diverse across Russian regions depending on their
geographical situation, on the number of urban centres and specific labour
demands in different sectors of the economy. Border regions, regions
with large industrial agglomerations, and regions extracting and
exporting raw materials and natural resources (petrol, gas, mining, timber,
etc.) have a greater need for foreign labour. The Irkutsk Region
and the Russian Far East (Khabarovsk Region, Autonomous Jewish Region
(oblast), Amur Region and
Primorsky kraj), due to their
geographical proximity to China, have more difficulty in attracting
migrant workers from the CIS region than from the neighbouring provinces
of China.
69. The statistics provided by the Federal Migration Service show
that in 2007 the overall federal quota for non-CIS workers was limited
to 318 752 work permits compared to the figure of 6 million that
was available to CIS workers. However, in actual terms the non-CIS
quota was exceeded while only 30% of the CIS quota was fulfilled
for that year. For example, districts in the Russian Far East have
only reached 16% of the CIS quota.
70. Moreover, the rapporteur observes that annual work permits
issued under the quota system are not directly linked with employment
contracts. This often causes a mismatch of the skills that are needed
in certain sectors (for example, in construction or the timber industry).
Therefore, it seems necessary to promote the use of private recruitment
agencies to assist regional labour departments and employers to
recruit migrant workers with the necessary skills and to avoid migrants
falling into an irregular situation.
71. There are no reliable statistics regarding irregular migration,
only estimates. The Federal Migration Service estimated the number
of irregular migrants at between 7 and 15 million in 2006. That
figure has been significantly reduced following the implementation
of the new federal law; the number of irregular migrants in Russia
is now estimated to be between 3 and 6 million. Since the 2007 migration
legislation reform came into force, regional authorities in co-operation
with the Federal Migration Service proceed more severely with expulsion
and they apply a five-year re-entry ban. Employers are also financially
sanctioned.
72. In both Irkutsk and Khabarovsk regions, like in many other
industrialised regions of Siberia and the Russian Far East, the
major problem is depopulation and loss of labour due to ageing of
the population and outflow of skilled workers who migrate internally
to the European part of Russia or abroad. Foreign skilled workers,
particularly from the CIS region, are rather difficult to attract
to eastern parts of Russia due to very difficult climatic conditions
and the high costs of housing. A federal budget of 40 million roubles
has been allocated for the period 2007-12 to create incentives to
attract skilled workers from the CIS countries. However, the number
of skilled migrants involved in the federal programme is still very
low compared to the estimated needs.
73. For example, the Irkutsk Region has a population of 2.5 million
with an annual loss of 12 000 people (due to both emigration and
mortality). The region has lost 100 000 people over the last ten
years. Migrant workers are therefore crucial for the economic development
of the region. The non-CIS immigration quota for 2008 was fixed
at 11 000 by the federal authorities. By August 2008, 10 000 work
permits had already been issued mainly to Chinese, and to some extent
Mongolian and Korean, migrant workers. According to regional statistics,
there are an additional 20 000 migrant workers with a regular status
coming from the central Asian republics (Uzbekistan, Tajikistan
and Kyrgyzstan) and only 10% from Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus and
Serbia.
74. In comparison, the Russian Far East (greater region) has a
population 6.3 million, a population loss of 2 million over the
last two decades. The example of the Autonomous Jewish Region (oblast) shows, at a regional scale,
the massive migration outflows of the Jewish population in the course
of the early 1990s. It is estimated that approximately 1.6 million
Jews left Russia, mainly to Israel (75-80%), United States of America,
Canada and Germany. The integration experiences of most of these
migrants were generally more difficult than those of their predecessors
in the 1970s, especially in Israel, where the number of migrants
was so overwhelming that one can speak of a great Russian Aliayah. Today, due to the economic
recovery of the Far East, this trend is reversed and many Jewish
emigrants regularly come back to maintain family links and make
local investments.
75. Due to population losses and past emigration, the Russian
Far East today hosts 98 000 non-CIS workers and 49 000 workers from
the CIS. The most represented are migrant workers from China, the
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea and
the Philippines.
76. In the Khabarovsk Region, migrant workers currently represent
3-4% of the working age population. According to the regional development
strategy (covering the period until 2025), the forecast for future
migrant labour needs amounts to 10%. Currently, there are 10 000
Chinese workers with regular status and it is estimated that an
additional 10% are working with irregular status. Different rules
apply to Chinese entrepreneurs who employ Chinese workers.
77. In the Russian Federation, Chinese migrants are mostly involved
in trade (43.5%), construction (27.8%), agriculture and the timber
industry (15.9%). In the Autonomous Jewish Region (oblast), for example, Chinese farmers
lease agricultural land. Regional and district authorities are,
however, concerned about excessive use of pesticides and the quality
of agricultural goods. Currently, there is a policy shift in the
Khabarovsk Region to attract Tajik farmers and to provide subsidies
to local farmers to improve farming technologies.
78. Chinese migration to eastern parts of Russian causes the most
controversy. There are diverging views between federal and regional
authorities, as well as between officials who apply a restrictive
migration policy and researchers who argue that restrictive migration
policy can only curb regular migration flows but not irregular ones.
79. The rapporteur also draws on interesting observations by Vilya
Gelbras, senior research fellow at the Institute of the World Economy
and International Relations at the Russian Academy of Sciences and
Professor at Moscow State University.
80. According to Professor Gelbras, the nature of Chinese migration
to Russia has in many respects changed over the last years. The
frequency of trips to Russia has sharply increased, indicating “pendulum migration”.
A specific form of manpower has emerged that facilitates the flow
of goods. In other words, the Chinese authorities are stimulating
cross-border movement of people and goods. Migrants have seemingly become
a integral part of China’s commercial and production strategies.
At a first glance, the cross-border flows resemble a pendulum migration,
but actually they reflect a specific mechanism of cross-border delivery of
goods, which makes it possible to minimise financial expenses (non-payment
of duties and taxes) or to bypass official procedures restricting
the flow of goods.
81. A common pattern of Chinese cross-border activity in Russia
seems to be the following. A company registers itself simultaneously
in China and Russia. One of its subsidiaries is registered in Russia
by a Russian citizen who has no authority for financial signature.
This subsidiary engages in wholesale and retail trade. The other
company is registered in China by a Chinese citizen and it engages
in wholesale operations. Goods are supplied in small shipments from
a storehouse in China to Russia. The revenues from sales are sent
back to China. This form of trade accounts for 40-60% of Chinese
exports to Russia.
82. In addition, the accumulated revenues of trade companies that
are allocated for turnover and development are used (by means of
Russian companies) to store up, purchase and send back to China
scarce goods and raw materials such as timber and non-ferrous metals.
For example, about 1.5 million cubic metres of wood is cut down
illegally in Primorsky kraj (Maritime
Territory) every year. In China these goods are sold and the revenues
are divided among all those who took part in the transactions at
different stages.
83. In order to curb such practice and to safeguard its economy
and natural resources, Russia needs an immigration policy that would
take into account the specific features of its different regions.
The differences between the European part of Russia, Siberia and
the Far East are immense. China and eastern parts of Russia – and
particularly the Russian Far East – are economically interdependent.
84. The rapporteur draws on some conclusions and recommendations
that were made in the course of his discussions with different interlocutors
during his visit:
84.1 The federal
migration policy and labour migration quota system in particular
need more flexibility to take into account specific regional economic
and labour needs;
84.2 Migration policy has to be an integral part of a regional
socioeconomic development strategy (forecasts of labour needs according
to economic sectors);
84.3 Migration policies have to be defined in consultations
between federal authorities, regional authorities, employers, representatives
of migrant workers and trade unions;
84.4 There is a need to harmonise wages to guarantee equal
treatment and welfare protection for migrant workers (labour code)
in order to avoid discrimination and imbalances in local economies;
84.5 There is a need to accompany migration policies with appropriate
infrastructure to implement such policies (more trained staff for
border controls, custom controls, in labour inspectorates, but equally in
labour centres, welfare infrastructure and legal protection services
to assist migrant workers and to facilitate their integration);
84.6 Public or private recruitment agencies ought to be involved
in the immigration process to assist regional labour services and
employers in recruitment of migrant workers with the required skills.
85. The rapporteur concludes that, given the wealth of natural
resources in the Russian Far East, on the one hand, and extremely
low population density and lack of infrastructure, on the other
hand, flexible migration policies ought to be used in the future
as a positive element to enhance regional economic development.
________
Reporting committee: Committee on Migration, Refugees and
Population.
Reference to committee: Doc.
10719, and Reference No. 3198 of 17 March 2006 (expired 17
March 2008) – reference extended until 31 December 2008 (Bureau’s
authorisation of 21 January 2008).
Draft resolution and draft recommendation unanimously adopted
by the committee on 29 September 2008.
Members of the committee: Mrs Corien W.A. Jonker (Chairperson), Mr Doug Henderson (1st Vice-Chairperson),
Mr Pedro Agramunt (2nd Vice-Chairperson),
Mr Alessandro Rossi (3rd Vice-Chairperson), Mrs Tina Acketoft, Mr Francis Agius, Mr Ioannis Banias, Ms Donka
Banović, Mr Jean-Guy Branger, Mr Márton
Braun, Mr André Bugnon, Mr Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu,
Mr Sergej Chelemendik, Mr Vannino Chiti, Mr Christopher Chope (alternate:
Mr Bill Etherington), Mr
Boriss Cilevičs, Mrs Minodora Cliveti, Mr Telmo Correia, Mrs
Claire Curtis-Thomas (alternate: Baroness Anita Gale), Mr Ivica Dačić, Mr Taulant
Dedja, Mr Nikolaos Dendias, Mr Arcadio Díaz Tejera (alternate: Mr
Jordi XuclàiCosta),
Mr Mitko Dimitrov, Mr Karl Donabauer, Mr Tuur Elzinga, Mr Valeriy Fedorov, Mr Oleksandr Feldman,
Mme Doris Fiala, Mr Paul
Giacobbi (alternate: Mr Denis Jacquat),
Mrs Gunn Karin Gjul, Mrs
Angelika Graf, Mr John Greenway, Mr Tony Gregory (alternate:
Mr Peter Kelly), Mr Andrzej
Grzyb, Mr Michael Hagberg, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mr Davit Harutyunyan,
Mr Jürgen Herrmann, Mr Bernd Heynemann, Mr Jean Huss, Mr Ilie Ilaşcu, Mr Tadeusz Iwiński, Mr Mustafa Jemiliev (alternate:
Mrs Oksana Bilozir), Mr Tomáš Jirsa, Mr Reijo Kallio, Mr Hakki Keskin, Mr Egidijus Klumbys, Mr
Ruslan Kondratov (alternate: Mr Ivan Savvidi),
Mr Dimitrij Kovačič, Mr Andros Kyprianou, Mr Geert Lambert, Mr Younal Loutfi, Mr Andrija
Mandić, Mr Jean-Pierre Masseret (alternate: Mr Jean-Pierre Kucheida), Mr Slavko Matić, Mrs
Ana Catarina Mendonça, Mr Gebhard Negele,
Mr Hryhoriy Omelchenko, Mr
Morten Østergaard, Mr Alexey
Ostrovsky (alternate: Mr Oleg Panteleev),
Mr Grigore Petrenco, Mr Cezar Florin Preda, Mr Milorad Pupovac (alternate:
Mr Mario Zubović), Mrs Mailis Reps, Mr Gonzalo Robles Orozco,
Mr Giacomo Santini, Mrs Michaela
Sburny, Mr André Schneider,
Mr Samad Seyidov, Mr Steingrímur J. Sigfússon, Mrs Miet Smet, Mr
Giacomo Stucchi, Mr Vilmos
Szabó, Mr Tuğrul Türkeş,
Mrs Özlem Türköne, Mr Michał
Wojtczak, Mr Marco Zacchera (alternate: Mr Pasquale Nessa), Mr Yury Zelenskiy (alternate:
Mr Arsen Fadzaev), Mr Andrej Zernovski, Mr Lasha Zhvania (alternate: Mr Guiorgui Kandelaki), Mr Jiří Zlatuška.
NB: The names of those members present at the meeting are
printed in bold.
Secretariat of the committee:Mr
Lervik, Mr Neville, Mrs Odrats
