Keynote Address
By
Stephen C. Lubkemann, PhD
Assistant Professor of Anthropology and International Affairs
George Washington University
2110 G St., NW, Washington DC, 20052
At the
2006 Inaugural Dinner/Ball
Union of Liberian Associations in the Americas (ULAA)
December 9, 2006
GRAND EAST HOST
8660 East Broad Street
Reynoldsburg, Ohio
Mr. President of ULAA,
Past and Present Officers of ULAA,
Distinguished leaders,
Guests and friends of the Liberian Diaspora community.
I am thankful for the opportunity to address you today. Indeed I am humbled by the honor.
Almost a decade ago when I was teaching at Brown University I had occasion to meet a
Liberian community activist --Mr. Saah N'Tow--present here today, who asked me whether I would be willing to assist his compatriots who were seeking to renew their "TPS status". As I recall, my answer at the time was to respond rather ignorantly with my own question: "what is TPS"? Despite many years of research on refugee issues in Africa, I mark that moment as both the beginning of my education about the experience of African immigrants and refugees in America more generally and about the history of Liberia and of the recent experience of Liberians in America more particularly. My education has continued apace from that moment, on one hand motivated by an outrage--still undiminished--at what I came to learn about the unjust consequences that may result if TPS is terminated, and on the other by the deepening friendships with a number of committed Liberian that have come to mean a great deal to me and for which I am extremely grateful.
What was once a possibility--the termination of TPS--is now a certainty. For those Liberian who have who lived for many years under this always tenuous status—and its taxing physical, social, economic, and perhaps above all psychological insecurity---it appears that this is the last Christmas that they will know under this "bureaucratic Sword of Damocles". With the DHS announcement that tenuous rope has been cut and the sword is now falling.
Since the renewal of TPS is no longer an option on the table there are perhaps only two fundamental questions left to consider:
---Will the sword of illegality now indeed fall upon those who have lived so long under TPS status?
---What, if indeed anything, can be done to prevent it from happening?
An important measure of friendship is, I believe, honesty--blunt as that may need to be. As someone who counts himself a friend of the Liberian community and who has individual friends who are themselves TPS holders I will therefore be unwaveringly forthright in my answers--in no small part because I wish to be clear in what I say. Thus I will tell you that the short and blunt answer to the first question I just posed is "yes". For many years some TPS holders have labored under the belief that inevitably their status would somehow be renewed. However, we need only look as far as Sierra Leone --for whom TPS status was terminated with devastating effect three years ago--to realize that renewal was never inevitable. The termination of TPS status itself now assures us that what was once TEMPORARY Protective Status is more accurately now thought of as TERMINAL protective status for all who have benefited from it--and there will be no automatic exception for Liberians, if only because TPS itself will no longer exist.
But let me qualify my answer from a forthright "yes" to a "yes unless". More specifically: "yes …unless--in my view-- truly sacrificial effort, unprecedented unity, visionary innovation, and unprecedented leadership are urgently exercised by the leaders of the Liberian community--WITH the non-partisan backing of every Liberian here today AND of the great majority of those in each of your home communities--whether in Minneapolis, Philadelphia, D.C, Staten Island, Atlanta, Texas, Worcester, Providence--or anyone of the other dozen or so "islands" in this US-based archipelago that constitutes this 16th and diasporic county of Liberia.
Before elaborating any further on possible solutions or strategies I want to briefly reiterate that leadership AND mass community PARTICIPATION will both be needed in order to succeed in any effort to achieve permanent status for current TPS holders. And let me dwell briefly on this point of participation --and again I will be forthright. Those of you in the Liberian community, who have struggled in this fight far longer than have I, can testify to the fact that it has NOT in fact always been easy to mobilize the community behind this issue. There have been many reasons for this some of which undoubtedly are rooted in the politics, partisanship, and problematics of bickering and over-ambitious leadership--none of which should be dismissed or ignored. The new leadership of ULAA must therefore rise above such internal problems that have derailed the TPS effort in the past.
However, it is often easy to simply blame leadership. The fact is that when there has been leadership on this issue the community has failed to demonstrate strong or committed participation. While some Liberians have been lulled into complacency by a long--but now abruptly ending pattern of virtually automatic TPS renewal--I will dare to say that a great many others who may already have permanent status have not taken this issue to heart --perhaps because in their busy and over committed lives they have come to believe that as unfortunate as the loss of TPS may be for other Liberians it will not affect them directly. In the rat race of 21st century America where some struggle with 2 or 3 jobs, with raising children to confront the moral landmines and pitfalls of the American social geography, and with the heavy duties of supporting relatives back in Liberia--this oversight may be as much a result of exhaustion and overextension as of anything else.
Nevertheless I am here to tell you that such oversight is both misplaced and dangerous--and to underscore that the loss of TPS status will likely affect ALL Liberians in America regardless of current status, perhaps in ways that have yet to be fully appreciated or considered. Before moving on to the more hopeful part of this talk which will emphasize possible solutions let me therefore point out what may perhaps be the most deleterious effect of TPS status termination for those of you who do have permanent status or even US citizenship.
Liberians have hitherto enjoyed a certain degree of insularity from the much broader and rising tide of xenophobic sentiment and stigma in the US--and rightly so for TPS holders are not "illegal immigrants" but in fact hold a fully legal status. However, I very much fear and believe that a much publicized loss of TPS status by the minority of Liberians who have it will ultimately end up with the broad US public associating all Liberians with the "illegal immigrant" community. The American public and its officials at many levels (police, county clerks, etc…) unfortunately tend to paint with an overly broad brush that can and often does assume the worst about the status of all and any immigrant groups who have any members with illegal status. Very much deploring this trend I would nevertheless be remiss as a social analyst in not noting it. The potential consequences may thus be dire for all Liberians if the loss of TPS status eventually plants a "seed" of thought in the American public's mind that somehow reframes Liberians as "illegals". If you have any doubt about this sociological prediction I would merely point you to the testimony of activists who have amply testified to this effect in the lives of US citizens of Hispanic descent. In short what I suggest is that TPS termination is likely to affect even those of you who have legal status in ways you should be interested in avoiding. For this reason alone Liberians of all statuses should not merely ask their leaders to do something about TPS, but should all be asking "what can we do to help you address this issue of TPS"? There will be--I predict--no Liberian who is not affected by the loss of status of TPS holders--and in this sense I urge everyone of you to recognize TPS as "your own issue". Push your leaders to lead but be ready and willing to participate--don't expect your leaders to either do it all alone or to pull you reluctantly along! Get up, Stand up!
Let me now turn to what I hope is at least a helpful point of departure for thinking about the second question I initially posed: "What, if anything can be done?" I am well aware of the fact that academics have a reputation for being overly theoretical if not outright impractical in their deliberations. I hope to break with that stereotype for it seems to me that the gravity of this problem in the lives of real people--perhaps the lives of some of you here--deserves some practical cold stone thinking rather than theoretical pontification. I hope to provide some specific ideas that may be useful in crafting new arguments for the granting of permanent status for Liberian TPS holders. These brief remarks are meant above all to serve as a stimulating catalyst for thinking among the true experts on this issue--namely you--the leadership of the Liberian community broadly conceived--office holders in ULAA but not only--also all of you who represent positions of influence across the grand arc of Liberian diasporic civil society--in churches, alumni and county organizations, leaders of business, and so forth-- for in my experience those who have a stake in the issue at hand ultimately are the greatest source of inspiration and creativity when it comes to generating new and effective strategies for coping with their most pressing problems.
To set the stage let me first say what I believe will not work. Most recently the strategy that has been pursued has been one of trying to get the US Congress and Senate to resolve the TPS status issue as part of a broader package of "immigration reforms". This is double edged strategy with both potential and peril. The potential is that the Liberian TPS question can be resolved as a sort of non-contentious footnote of much broader immigration reform. The hope is that it may in a sense pass by somewhat unnoticed or at least unchallenged as part of a bill where much larger and more controversial immigration processes and groups are the focus of attention. This is not altogether a bad component of a broader strategy.
However, I do think that if it is the only strategy that it is a rather perilous one to rely upon for at least two reasons. First--immigration reform has been tied up for years now without resolution--and I am not at all convinced that it is likely it will be resolved before TPS expires. It may therefore be dangerous to place all hopes in a process that has a timetable that is not your own. Second--I believe there is some danger that in becoming incorporated into what is largely an effort to deal with "illegal immigration", the TPS issue may imperceptibly come to be thought of as an aspect of the "illegal immigration" problem--when it is not. Thus, I would argue that while this avenue should not be abandoned, other approaches and framings that explicitly distinguish the Liberian TPS question from the broader illegal immigration debate should also be pursued with new and innovative vigor.
To this I would add that fresh arguments are also needed that frankly extend beyond the well worn emphasis on Liberia's special historic relationship with the U.S. I am not denying the truth or even the moral certitude of this argument. I am simply skeptical that it will gather further support in Congress beyond that which it already has. Thus while this argument and the aforementioned strategies have moved the football down the field I believe that a touchdown will require new plays. In this sense "staying the course" is not necessarily wrong--but I believe it is not enough especially as this very consequential game enters the late 4th quarter.
So what might a new playbook look like? First and foremost I believe that these plays--so to speak--must be ones that are intended that not only reinforce existing friends on capitol Hill but that can win over current skeptics and even those who by reflex would tend to be opposed to most if not all "immigrant-favoring" legislation. You do not need to win over those who are already your friends. You need to win over new friends--and to do so you must speak in their terms and to their concerns.
One way forward--I believe--is to reframe the Liberian TPS issue as something other than first and foremost an "immigration" issue. Here, I suggest, are a few options:
1. Discussing the TPS status issue as a question of "securing the well-being of US citizens": Pilot research that I have conducted in Minneapolis with the indispensable support of the Association of Liberian Ministers in MN--and let me say how grateful I am for the selfless and dedicated work and leadership in that effort of Reverend Wilson who I am so pleased to see here tonight-- indicates that over 1/3 (39%) of all Liberian households have at least one adult member with TPS status. However these households do not generally have only TPS holders. Just under 60% ff those households report having children who are US born and thus US citizens. Just about one third (30%) also report a spouse who had a permanent status (US citizen or green card). In sum over 2/3 of the households with a TPS member (68%) can be described as also having members with a permanent status (US citizen or green card). Even though only preliminary, this research strongly suggests that the loss of legal status and legal employment by TPS holders would have be likely to have significant detrimental effects on US citizens of Liberian descent and on legal Liberian residents (green card holders) which would include:
--significant loss of household income and deterioration of socio-economic status in the 68% of TPS holder households with Liberians with a permanent status
--potential criminalization of permanent residents in those household who abetted family members with now illegal status.
It would be crucial to emphasize that these effects would result from US government policies rather than any illegal action on the part of Liberians --a situation very different from the similar familial dynamics that can result from children being born in the US to migrants here illegally. Lawmakers must be reminded that TPS however has been a legal status sanctioned by the US government. In this sense a strong argument can be made that the US government should take responsibility for the outcomes this status has inadvertently created.
2. A related argument --and a powerful one in my view--is to reframe the TPS issue as a "US Family Values" issue. At least 68% of all TPS households would confront a significant dilemma if TPS was terminated. On one hand they could face either a spousal separation or/and a parental/child separation if the TPS holder returned to Liberia and other household members with permanent status remained in the US. In 58% of all TPS cases, US-born children who are US citizens would confront this possibility. On the other hand if families opted to stay together and return to Liberia with the TPS holders, the children in these households would be emigrating to a country whose economic and political condition is such that the US state Department advises its citizens against travel to that country. Of note: in the latter scenario the US State Department could very well confront a situation in which hundreds and possibly thousands of US citizens would now be in a country it advises them to avoid paradoxically because of a US government policy decision. Again this can be presented as yet another dimension of the "US citizens well-being issue". Senators hostile to immigrants may be in fact very eager to support family values and highly reluctant to push US citizens into harm's way.
3rd- The TPS issue is also one that can be argued as vital to the "well being of the local US communities that host TPS holders". My preliminary research indicates that at least in Minneapolis nearly 1/3 of all TPS holders are employed in the health sector in types of jobs that are difficult to fill in many communities, is at very least suggestive that the loss of those employees (either because of repatriation or because of loss of legal status) could have detrimental local effects on services in those sectors. This is a hypothesis that requires further research into the labor market in relevant local communities with a large Liberian presence. Other negative effects of TPS revocation for these communities can also be hypothesized including the likelihood that the loss of legal status and consequent loss of employment and deterioration of socio-economic status could lead to greater pressure being placed on local social and welfare services. With better data on this in other communities it seems to me that you should be able to gather the support of local officials in Philadelphia, providence and other locations and thus gain important allies in your effort to bring your case to bear in new ways in the halls of Congress.
4th-and perhaps most innovatively the TPS issue should be framed not "merely a domestic immigration issue" but one that is also a "global security and development issue" that is directly relevant to the well-being of post-conflict Liberia and thus to vital US international security and foreign policy interests. How so? Among the most dramatic and potentially consequential effects of TPS revocation would be those suffered by the country of Liberia, and most specifically by those who receive US remittances. Without boring you with the exact details of methodology I can assert that based by making several reasonable assumptions and conservative calculations I have made a preliminary basement (lowest figure) calculation that the direct impact of TPS revocation on remittances from TPS households alone would be a total of between $ 18-20 million USD per annum in remittances and in kind sent back to Liberia per year with the very realistic possibility that this could be much higher, perhaps even more than double. The significance of such a loss for a small war-torn country that is struggling to recover economically and politically should not be underestimated—and is highlighted by the fact that the entire operating budget of the Government of Liberia hovers around 80 million USD per annum (Klein quote at USIP 4/06). To bring these numbers back down to earth our preliminary study showed that 136 households in MN reported sending back an average of around $330,000 per year, and 60% of those who remitted reported that the money they sent supported 11 or more people back in Liberia. There can be no doubt that your remittances matter greatly in a country in which 80% of the housing stock was destroyed and in which employment opportunities are still few and far between. Incidentally let me add that households with TPS members may only comprise 1/3 of all Liberian households but interestingly enough they account for over 1/2 of all remittances sent back to Liberia--therefore the loss of status would be particularly devastating for Liberia--and this not to mention the potential compounding problems that might ensue from the lack of employment opportunities for any who subsequently did return to Liberia because they lost TPS status and/or were deported.
We must remember that TPS was never intended as something other than a short term measure. But extended over years and decades it has generated new sociological realities. Those who have TPS and who hope for permanent status, have like many of their compatriots with permanent status in the US created new lives, social connections, and formulated new life strategies over the many years they have lived here in the US now under this status. Thus like the majority of Liberians who now live in America, many with TPS may wish to remain connected to their homelands and yet they do not want to sever there connection to the USA either. The data to date--preliminary as it may be--indicates what you may verify in your own minds as true or not: that many if not most Liberian in the US are planning to participate back in Liberia and yet maintain homes, family members, financial interests and the like here in the US as well. To be more precise over 80% of those who responded to our survey indicated they would retain a residence here in the US regardless of whether they "returned"--and over 95% of those with some form of legal status in the US had no plans to give it up even if they did go back to Liberia. Liberians with and without TPS increasingly exhibit the characteristics of many other "maturing diasporas" in that your life strategies are ones which seem to indicate an interest in being transnational.
Historically international migrants permanently left behind social attachments and life projects in their societies of origin and replaced these with new ones in the locations in which they arrived. In contrast, trans-nationality implies a sentiment of simultaneous attachment to and active involvement in social, political and economic life in both one’s society of origin and in new countries of resettlement. The possibility of trans-nationality is largely a function of the fairly recent technological development of means of transportation and communication that permit the globe to be transversed in seconds, hours, and days rather than in weeks, months, and years. Yet it is arguably only in the last quarter century that it has become possible for much of the world’s population to be thoroughly and simultaneously involved in social interaction in more than one location when these are separated by distances of continental proportions.
Trans-nationality operates at several interconnected levels. Individual identities and life-projects can now be organized around the notion of participating in more than one society at a time. Families may pursue strategies that disperse different members to different places in order to better ensure the survival of the household. Communities may develop forms of identity that emphasize continued and ongoing involvement in globe-spanning activity—thinking or defining themselves as “diasporic”, rather than emigrant/immigrant. Diasporic members of a society may play a key role in defining social, economic, and political outcomes “back home”.
The image that perhaps captures the traditional model of immigration is that of the boat—packed with those seeking a new land—and sailing in one direction from point A to point B. However, the image that captures the reality of trans-nationality is a different one –that of a bridge that connects point A to point B—and over which there is constant two-way traffic. -Alternatively as expressed to me by one of your compatriots--transnationality is a matter of living in a home with 2 rooms (Liberia and the US).
Ironically enough the very possibility of being involved in your homeland may be for many of you premised on the ability to also remain and work in the USA. I am reminded here of a Liberian gentleman I interviewed in New England who plans to invest in a series of businesses in Liberia, but who can do so only because he has invested in a series of rental properties in the US that will provide him with a steady stream of income he can count upon. His very ability to invest back home depends on being able to maintain economic and social projects running and alive back here. Families, and indeed entire communities back in Liberia depend on the funds sent by those of you earning money here in America. The cell phone and Western Union together make the US arguably make Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Rhode Island, Worcester, DC and a handful of other cities in the US the most important “Liberian economic locations”. In a country with 15 counties, these are arguably the districts of Liberia's 16th county—despite being located outside of its borders.
The vital economic role and importance of diasporic communities is starting—only starting however—to be recognized and factored into the considerations and programs made by policy-makers. The remittances of individual migrants have long been accounted as significant factors in the development of migrant-sending countries. More recently academics and policy makers have also begun to explore the important potential role of diasporic voluntary associations in homeland development. The potential importance of diasporic human capital to homeland development is also beginning to be recognized by major international agencies such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM). The governments of developing countries have also begun to recognize and attempt to harness the economic and political energies of their citizens living abroad. Thus Dominicans and Cape Verdeans abroad have been granted the right to vote, and discussion about this possibility is ongoing in Mexico. In April 2005 the Cape Verdean embassy in Washington DC held a major conference that brought together many hundreds of participants from the Diaspora together to discuss how the Diaspora can contribute to the country’s development.
All of these initiatives reflect a growing acknowledgement that diasporic communities can play a crucial role in economic development in their home societies. It is not, it seems to me a large step, from recognizing the importance of diasporic emigrant economic activity to development, to recognizing that “status” issues of immigrants do not only have domestic implications but can also affect US foreign development policy. If this holds true for countries that are at peace, it seems all the more self-evident in war-torn societies. What better form of support for reconstruction efforts could the US provide than to simply allow hard working immigrants top continue to contribute back home? What kinds of damage could be done if they hamper such efforts? How can empowering Diasporas provide a way for policy makers to re-think costly post-conflict reconstruction assistance in a world in which budgets are already over-extended?
Let’s consider the potential contribution that 20 million dollars represents for Liberia when compared to direct foreign assistance. We should bear in mind that this is money is channeled directly to aid recipients without the ponderous overhead that gobbles up most foreign aid. I recall that in the mid-1990’s Mozambique was the largest foreign aid recipient in the world—yet over 70% of that aid was consumed by foreign technical assistance and overhead, leaving less than 30% for aid recipients. By this loose measure the 20 million that TPS holders may be contributing may well represent the equivalent of some 60=70 million in “typical foreign aid”—at least in terms of direct impact on aid recipients. And incidentally is not only individual level remittances that matter. It is also important to document and note the crucial role of diasporic –US and European based—organizations in providing humanitarian, reconstruction and development relief. There is a whole domain of “indigenous humanitarianism” that remains entirely ignored by the international community—and that is by and large poorly documented. Many of these organizations are making a vital contribution to rebuilding their homelands.
Consequently I believe that there is a new and potentially effective argument to be made to policy-makers who are deliberating status issues which is: that they should consider the foreign policy benefits of granting permanent status to those with TPS. The granting of permanent status to those with DED/TPS would strengthen the ability of the diaspora to contribute to the rebuilding of Liberia itself. It bears noting that those with TPS status are acting in a lawful manner, having thus already demonstrated their commitment to legal means. Moreover, my understanding is most are hardworking taxpayers. Granted permanent status this portion of the community would continue and probably even further contribute to the rebuilding of Liberia through remittances and participation in voluntary initiatives. Ultimately if it is true that being in America and availing itself of the educational and economic opportunities does not imply forsaking Liberia, but in fact it is likely that training and money will eventually be also used and invested by the diaspora in the rebuilding and development of Liberia itself, then the argument can be made that the granting of permanent status should be viewed as one of the smartest and most effective forms of “foreign development aid” --and it can be argued that it should be viewed in these terms even more than it should be viewed as an “domestic immigration issue”. Let me return to the image I invoked earlier: if the arrival of immigrants is no longer the arrival of a ship sailing in one direction, but rather the building of a bridge across which traffic flows in both directions, then there may be opportunities for pointing out to US policy-makers why they should accept, see the usefulness of, and perhaps even help tend this bridge--by welcoming those with TPS into more permanent status.
In conclusion let me add a few more suggestions to this menu of new arguments--which I would add are not a comprehensive list, but rather one that is meant to fire the imagination.
First: In my experience Washington responds to two kinds of arguments--those backed by the compelling story and those backed by hard data--and the argument will always be stronger to the extent that it brings both to bear. My small contribution to this effort to date has been to try to collect some systematic data on the community. It has been a difficult task and one that would have been impossible without the dedicated commitment of several Liberian activists and the Liberian ministers of Minnesota. I strongly encourage this administration and those of you here to seek means by which to produce better and more comprehensive data on your communities. This data should be collected using unbiased and systematic social scientific methods and must be allowed to say whatever it ultimately does about the community--it cannot and should not be distorted to serve any agenda or purpose if it is to be valid. However, I believe based on my own experience so far that such data is more likely than not to substantiate the types of arguments I have made here. I remain available to bring my technical expertise to bear -- however whether using the means I provide or others altogether-- the point is that better data is needed if you wish to strengthen the evidence you present.
Second, I strongly encourage you to think carefully through an integrated strategy that not only assembles these new arguments and repositions the Liberian TPS issue for policy-makers-- as something that is distinctively NOT an "illegal immigration issue"--but that pursues a concerted and comprehensive effort that targets a broad array of lawmakers on the Hill --each with the arguments that fit their particular political profile. This is where I must return--and ultimately conclude with--my earlier point about the essential role of community participation. While it is the duty and challenge of your leadership to raise this issue above the fray of any political bickering or rivalries and seek unprecedented unity there should be no illusion that the leaders or most committed of your activists can take this ball across the finish line on their own. The community will lose if either the majority sits on the sidelines or the leaders become convinced they can somehow do it on their own. This touchdown will not be made with a quarter-back sneak--a true team effort is required. Your leaders may formulate the most thoughtful strategy and join hands in selfless unity and issue the clarion call--but it will only mean and potentially accomplish something if the great majority of those who hear it heed it. This decision is yours.
I conclude again with thanks and appreciation for this great honor you have bestowed upon me and which I have sought to dignify with the honesty and the hope of one who counts himself fortunate to be a friend of Liberia --and most particularly of the citizens of all of you in its "16th county" in Diaspora.
Thank you and good night.
