Perhaps one of the most charged phrases to emerge from the debate on global migration is “migration is a human right.” The knee-jerk reaction among nationalists is to reject this ideology, but let’s step back a moment and unpack this concept.
No one should argue with the notion that law-abiding people should have the right to leave their country of origin and request residency or citizenship elsewhere in a lawful manner. Otherwise, people would essentially be prisoners in their homeland.
However, no democratic country should be forced, through border invasions or global political pressure, to accept migrants against the will of its sovereign citizens. Countries should have the right change migration policies and practices as needed over time without having to seek approval from foreign nations or global organizations, such as the United Nations, NATO or the E.U.
In September 2016, the United Nations General Assembly convened in New York and unanimously agreed to draft a framework that would help nations worldwide address issues arising from mass migration and refugee crises. General migration and refugees would be addressed separately.
In July 2018, a grossly comprehensive draft on general migration was presented by a U.N. working group and debated. The framework — titled “The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration” (GCM) — is a non-binding treaty of cooperation, but it reads like a to-do list for the implementation of open-borders policies and unrestrained welfare with international monitoring for compliance.
It calls for government (taxpayer)-funded housing, job-placement programs, cultural centers, medical care and basic to higher education. It directs nations to train their media organization in how to report on the positive aspects of migration and to restrain press coverage of the negative aspects. And it contains a pledge that countries worldwide will share the burden of migrant waves, which will be aided by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to ensure safe passage for those seeking better economic opportunities elsewhere.
Some of the compact’s 23 Objectives are positive, such as ensuring all migrants have documentation, the international tracking of migrants and migrant-flow databases, the right for migrants to return home and efforts to eradicate human trafficking. But ultimately, the compact is overly broad and unashamedly and overtly globalist in its political ideology.
For a non-binding agreement, the political turmoil the GCM created was intense. It rocked the leadership of some governments, such as Belgium and Italy. The United States via Donald Trump was first to announce it would not be participating in compact, and he was immediately excoriated by global allies. But in the months that followed, more countries followed suit, including Australia, Austria, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland. They, too, were denounced and shamed. Israel withdrew- but no mentions in the Lugenpresse- as the ire was directed elsewhere.
‘If one or two or three countries leave the United Nations migration pact, then we as the EU can’t stand up for our own interests.’ — Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission
By the time the GCM signing ceremony convened in Morocco in December 2018, dozens of countries announced that they would not be joining the U.N.’s compact. Some countries remain “undecided” to this day, locked in a perpetual nationalist-globalist debate. Some countries, such as Finland and the Netherlands, signed the agreement as a show of cooperative spirit but stated they refuse to change their migrations policies. And some countries, such as Brazil, decided to withdraw support after the ceremonial circus.
As of today, among the U.N.’s 193 member countries, 152 agree to the migration compact and 41 do not. Those that do not should be commended for the courage it took to stand against the tide. Those that do should advertise themselves as a migrant destination.
Oddly, there is no list of participating and non-participating countries. This information looks highly suppressed. For migrants, this information is most useful. It provides current and clear guidance to where they will be welcomed and where they won’t. No migrant should force themselves on a country unwilling to enter the migrant compact, which is in essence a nation’s statement on its current position toward migration.
So, dear migrants, Winter Watch compiled the list for you. The following 152 have pledged to welcome you and provide you with economic resources. Consider the other 41 countries to be no-go zones.
Note: Since compiling this chart about six weeks ago, someone posted on Wikipedia the positions of about 40 of the 193 countries. We have yet to cross check Wikipedia’s information for accuracy, but it should be noted that the position of some countries is difficult to track/follow. Surely, more updates will be needed over time. Hopefully bloggers won’t be the only ones attempting to do this work, especially considering that there are people out there who actually get paid to gather, fact check and disseminate this vital information.
|Antigua and Barbuda||Affirmed|
|Australia||Withdrew||The Prime Minister stated that the agreement could “undermine Australia’s strong border protection laws and practices,” and would not sign the compact.|
|Austria||Withdrew||In October 2018, Austria became the third country to announced it would not be adopting the compact. Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz stated, “We view some points of the migration pact very critically, such as the mixing up of seeking protection with labor migration.” Kurz also expressed fear of “a danger to our national sovereignty,” while Austrian Vice-Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache said that migration “is not and cannot become a human right.”|
|Barbados||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Belgium||Affirmed||The largest party within the Belgian Government, the Flemish nationalist NVA, has demanded that Belgium withdraw from the GCM and launched a campaign against it. N-VA leader Bart De Wever has said that the compact is “unacceptable” to the party. The N-VA has argued that the compact will add to the “illegal migration crisis” in Europe.|
|Bosnia and Herzegovina||Affirmed|
|Brazil||Withdrew||Affirmed support for the document at the Marrakesh conference, but the Jair Bolsonaro government announced that Brazil would withdraw its support for the document, citing “immigration must be treated in accordance with the reality and sovereignty of each country.” Just to be clear about Brazil’s position, he once again confirmed the withdrawal in an ceremony on Jan. 2, 2018.|
|Bulgaria||Withdrew||In November 2018, Bulgaria’s government announced that it would not sign the agreement; its representatives “abstained” a vote on Dec. 5, 2018.|
|Chile||Affirmed||On Dec. 9, 2018, the government announced that it would not sign the agreement but then appeared at the signing ceremony on Dec. 10.|
|Croatia||Affirmed||Croatia was also reported to be pulling out of the compact after President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic said she would not be signing it. However, the Croatian government approved the compact.|
|Czech Republic||Withdrew||In November 2018, Czech Republic announced it would not sign compact and did not participate in conference.|
|North Korea||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Denmark||*Affirmed||On 27 November, the Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen stated that he was supportive of the agreement, but that his government would form a coalition of European countries to create an opt-out.*|
|Dominican Republic||Withdrew||On Dec. 4, 2018, the Dominican government set its position on the Global Migration Pact, stipulating that the Dominican state would agree to the compact, as reported during a press conference by the legal consultant of the Executive Branch, Flavio Darío Espinal. He also spoke about the participation of the country in the Moroccan summit and announced that the President Danilo Medina would not be in the meeting.|
|Equatorial Guinea||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Estonia||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Finland||*Affirmed||The Ministry of the Interior assured that because the pact is fundamentally a political document, it will not necessitate any amendments to the legislation or interfere with the sovereignty of Finland. *Finland, he emphasized, will continue to make decisions on how to monitor its external borders and on who can enter the country and how.|
|Germany||Affirmed||There has been some opposition in the German parliament, led by Alternative for Germany. Merkel’s CDU complained the Compact makes no distinction between economic migrants and refugees. However, the parliament voted 372–153 in favor of the compact on Nov. 29, 2018.|
|Hungary||Withdrew||In July 2018, Hungary became the second country to announce it would pull out of the compact. Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó said that the document was “totally at odds with the country’s security interests” and “in conflict with common sense and also with the intent to restore European security.”|
|Iceland||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Israel||Withdrew||Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu stated that “We have a duty to protect our borders against illegal infiltrators. That’s what we’ve done, and that’s what we will continue to do.”|
|Italy||Undecided||The Italian government decided to not attend the conference in Marrakesh and let the parliament decide whether to adopt the compact.|
|Kiribati||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Kyrgyzstan||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Latvia||Affirmed||On Dec. 6, 2018, the Latvian parliament voted for rejecting the compact, but then affirmed in Morocco.|
|Libya||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Luxembourg||Affirmed||The opposition parties Déi Lénk and the Pirate Party support the pact whereas ADR does not. The Parliament voted on whether supporting the pact or not.|
|Malawi||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Maldives||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Mauritania||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Namibia||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Nauru||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Netherlands||*Affirmed||The cabinet ensured it would add a legal addendum, which would state that the Migration Pact can not be used as a viable juridical document and therefore can not be used be as legal support in asylum claims.|
|New Zealand||Affirmed||The opposition National Party opposed the compact, stating, “We don’t need to be told by the UN what to do” and “the pact that treats illegal and legal migration the same.” But then support was showed at conference in Morocco.|
|Papua New Guinea||Affirmed|
|Poland||Withdrew||On Oct. 9, 2018, Minister of Interior and Administration Joachim Brudziński spoke against the compact, saying that it went against the priorities of Poland, which are security and control over its borders. On Nov. 20, 2018, the government of Poland officially announced that it would not sign the compact.|
|Romania||Affirmed (?)||On Nov. 28, 2018, the Romanian Foreign Minister was authorized by the Romanian president, Klaus Iohannis, to sign the Migration Pact. Sources say that secret negotiations were carried out long before the news broke out.|
|Russia||Affirmed||Russia signed the compact, but issued a statement repudiating certain elements of it: “We reiterate our repudiation of the ‘shared responsibility’ concept that, in its current form, merely implies sharing the burden of hosting forced migrants between the States that frequently have nothing to do with the causes of mass exodus of people. We are not in favor of shifting the burden to others, while the current complicated migration situation is largely a result of irresponsible interference into the internal affairs of sovereign States of Middle East and North Africa. In this context, the countries that were actively involved in such interference should primarily bear the greatest responsibility, including for the migration-related consequences.”|
|Saint Kitts and Nevis||Affirmed|
|Saint Vincent and the Grenadines||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|São Tomé and Príncipe||Affirmed|
|Saudi Arabia||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Seychelles||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Slovakia||Withdrew||After a dispute broke out within the Government of Slovakia on whether to adopt the framework, it was decided that the issue would be moved to parliament for discussion. Following this, the Slovakian Foreign Affairs Minister, Miroslav Lajčák, announced that he would contemplate his resignation if the parliament rejected the compact. On Nov. 29, 2018, after the parliament had voted to refuse the compact, the Foreign Affairs Minister decided to resign, but later withdrew his resignation. On Dec. 5, 2018, following his cabinets approval of the parliamentary resolution, the Prime Minister of Slovakia, Peter Pellegrini, affirmed that Slovakia would not send a representative to the UN meeting nor sign the compact.|
|Switzerland||Undecided||Though Switzerland led compact negotiations, it did not attend the conference for the formal adoption of the framework in December 2018. The decision was made because the parliament demanded a final say on whether the country would approve the compact, which it said would require more time.|
|Tonga||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Trinidad and Tobago||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Ukraine||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|United Arab Emirates||Affirmed|
|United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland||Affirmed|
|United States of America||Withdrew||In December 2017, Trump announced the U.S. would pull out of the compact, which the Obama administration has supported. The U.S. was the first country to pull out, and Trump received scathing criticism for his decision. The U.S. State Dept. told the U.N. the compact contained “numerous provisions that are inconsistent with U.S. immigration policy and the Trump Administration’s immigration principles.”|
|Uzbekistan||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
|Vanuatu||Opt-Out||Did not participate in conference to adopt compact.|
Palestine | Opt-Out | Palestine is curiously missing from the table above of U.N. countries that we copied/pasted from Wikipedia merely for its formatting. (Of course, this allows us to surmise its origin.) Despite the omission, the U.N. does in fact recognize Palestine as a member country. Palestine did not participate in conference to adopt compact.