After Brexit: UK to Close Doors for Low-Skilled Workers

Boris Johnson will set a visa system to favor the migration of English-speaking, high-skilled workers.

United Kingdom’s Secretary of State for the Home Department Priti Patel informed that Prime Minister Boris Johnson will implement a "point-based model" to limit the migration of “low-skilled” workers.

RELATED: UK Buyers Face Pain Without A Fair Post-Brexit Trade Deal: BRC

After Brexit, the work visa will only be granted to European and non-European applicants who reach a minimum of 70 points on a scale of 100.

In this "Australian-style" model, the applicant to enter the United Kingdom will get 10 or 20 on each item if he or she previously has a job offer with a salary greater than £ 25,000 a year.

The aspirant to migrate to the U.K must also have higher academic degrees such as a master's or doctorate since it will not be enough to have a college degree​​​​​​​.

The person must have knowledge of English and training in activities in which there is a shortage of professionals in the United Kingdom.​​​​​​​​​​​​​

This proposal has been strongly criticized by the political opposition which argues that Johnson's model threatens to discourage immigration altogether.

The Labour Party demands that at least some exceptions be established in strategic sectors such as health care, where nursing roles are largely covered by foreigners. For their part, liberal Democrats accuse Johnson of encouraging xenophobia.​​​​​​​

Instead, British entrepreneurs have praised some aspects of the announced reform but they also expressed that the risk of limiting the recruitment of the workforce does exist.

In her reply to these latest criticisms, the Secretary of State said that British companies will still be able to count on more than 3 million European Union citizens who are currently working in the United Kingdom and will not be affected by the new rules.

Patel also told entrepreneurs that they must "abandon the search for low-cost labor" and invest in the development of "automation technologies."​​​​​​​

  • Published in World

Trump-immigration: His racist and xenophobic ideas

The Associated Press (AP) revealed days ago in Washington Donald Trump’s ideas on how the US society should be.

That news agency states that the current White House government tries to give a turn to immigration so it be “whiter and wealthier”.

The said move aims to change the poem inscribed on the Statue of Liberty:

“Give your poor, your tired. Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”.

That henceforth would be:

“Give me your tired and your poor that can stand on their own feet and will not become a public burden”.

Ken Cuccinelli, acting director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) is responsible for executing such a modification and affirmed that the new text was written for Europeans.

AP considers it is about another challenging step to achieve his strategy of winning votes with an eye on the 2020 elections.

However, the president’s machination could pose the risk of drifting suburban women away and increasing the number of Latinos registered to vote.

Beto O’Rourke, former representative and Democratic presidential hopeful said: “This government has finally admitted what we’ve known all along. They believe the Statue of Liberty only applies to white people”.

According to a study of the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), those ideas would reduce immigration from Mexico and Central America, and would increase the number of migrants from other regions, especially from Europe.

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a policy analyst at the American Immigration Council, said: “United States wants to make it so that it’s a path only for those who have already succeeded”.

AP remarked that for Trump, immigrants are stealing his supporters’ jobs and denying working class whites opportunities for success.

In tune with that the head of state insists on presenting himself as a passionate defender of that kind of member of US society.

As we all know, he has contemptuously spoken about immigrants from black, Hispanic-majority countries and described Mexicans as rappers and criminals during his 2016 presidential campaign.

At the same time that in 2018, he privately referred to Central American and African countries as “shithole” nations.

Phrases like those are welcomed by the same far-right that took Donald Trump to the White House years ago.

And by individuals such as John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Marco Rubio who are part of his most intimate and influential environment together with the Tea Party and the Ku Klux Klan that haven’t hidden their links with the current government of the United States.

Translated by Jorge Mesa Benjamin / CubaSi Translation Staff

Costa Rica Clarifies Immigration Agreement with U.S.

Acting Foreign Minister Lorena Aguilar clarified this Wednesday that the United States has not asked Costa Rica to join the migratory agreements that it negotiates with other Central American countries, and which are rejected here.

After a meeting with the Ambassador of the northern power, Sharon Day, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Worship noted in a press release that Aguilar met with Day 'to discuss' the information recently published.

The participants also analyzed the examination of applications for protection with the Central American countries of the Northern Triangle (Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala), and in this regard the diplomatic representative clarified that her Government 'has not requested that Costa Rica join these agreements.'

The note adds that during the meeting, the U.S. ambassador 'congratulated the government of Costa Rica for all the efforts it is making in addressing the situation in relation to the flow of migrants, and highlighted the positive results of intense bilateral cooperation on security and its desire to strengthen this.'

On Monday, Broad Front (FA) Congressman José María Villalta asked the Costa Rican government not to sign any agreement with the United States that violates the human rights of migrants.

A point of order submitted by the deputy before the Plenary of the Legislative Assembly considers that 'Kevin McAleenan, acting secretary of Homeland Security of the United States, publicly announced that President Donald Trump invited Costa Rica and Panama to sign an immigration agreement like the one he signed on July 26, 2019, with Guatemala.'

It adds that this migration agreement is called 'Cooperation Agreement for the Assessment of Protection Requests' and known as the 'safe third country' agreement.

The point of order also notes that Foreign Minister, Manuel Ventura, has reported that 'there is still no official request from the Government of the United States to sign the migratory agreement.'

Therefore, it is requested that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs 'in the event that this request is formalized, present to the deputies of the Legislative Assembly a copy of the drafts of the eventual migratory agreement with the United States.'

  • Published in World

Migrant caravan faces armed officials and razor wire at US border

More buses of exhausted people in a caravan of Central American asylum seekers reached the U.S. border Thursday as migrants crowded Tijuana streets and looked on as officials fortified the border with razor wire and heavily armed agents stood guard.

With U.S. border inspectors at the main crossing into San Diego processing only about 100 asylum claims a day, it could take weeks if not months to process the thousands in the caravan that departed from San Pedro Sula, Honduras, more than a month ago.

Tijuana's robust network of shelters was already stretched to the limit, having squeezed in double their capacity or more as families slept on the floor on mats and gathered on streets.

Others endured the evening chill to sleep at an oceanfront park with a view of San Diego office towers and heavily armed U.S. Border Patrol agents on the other side of a steel-bollard fence.

Migrants from poor Central American countries -mostly Hondurans- moving towards the United States in hopes of a better life, are seen near the U.S. border in Playas de Tijuana, Mexico, on November 13, 2018Migrants from poor Central American countries -mostly Hondurans- moving towards the United States in hopes of a better life, are seen near the U.S. border in Playas de Tijuana, Mexico, on November 13, 2018 Credit: Guillermo Arias/AFP

To claim asylum in San Diego, migrants enter their names in a tattered notebook held together by duct tape and managed by the migrants in a plaza outside the entry to the main border crossing.

On Thursday, migrants who registered six weeks ago were getting their names called. The waiting list has grown to more than 3,000 names and stands to become much longer with the caravans.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has deployed some 5,800 military troops to border in Texas, Arizona and California.

  • Published in World

Cuba, Canada to Join Forces to Protect Children

The Cuban Ministry of the Interior (MININT) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police( RCMP) have signed today in Havana a cooperation agreement for the protection of children and adolescents.

The main aim of this document is to strengthen collaboration in preventing and combating criminal activities, including the selling of children, child prostitution and pornography, trafficking and other forms of sexual abuse.

Col. Idais Borges, head of the Minors Directorate, and the General Director of the Canadian Police Centre for Missing and Exploited Children, Marie Claude Arsenault, co-signed the text at the headquarters of the International Relations and Collaboration Directorate of MININT.

According to the Cuban side, the initiative formalizes and expands the actions carried out in two decades in terms of information exchange, development of joint investigations and preparation of police forces.

It also includes the exchange of experience between experts and technologies applied to prevent and combat these crimes.

According to the signatories, the adoption of this arrangement reaffirms the willingness of Cuba and Canada to respect the objectives of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and its Optional Protocol.

It also defends the right of children to be protected during their development by family, society and government.

In 1999, Cuba and Canada signed a Memorandum of Understanding on cooperation in the fight against drug trafficking and in 2003 the Agreement on the sharing of confiscated property or its equivalent funds.

  • Published in Cuba

Trump-Mexico: War on Several Fronts, Says Analyst

Mexico, Nov 9 (Prensa Latina) Mexico is expecting a non-military war on several fronts, warned Mexican intellectual Enrique Krauze today in commenting on Donald Trump''s victory in the United States presidential election.

Krauze said that his country will suffer a 'serious earthquake' and will face a commercial, economic, migratory, legal, diplomatic and other frontier war in the coming years.

The writer and historian said that the aftermath is felt by the collapse of the Mexican peso and predicted that manufactures and the national economy will be the collimator of the announced battles.

Given this situation, Mexicans have the obligation to unite, to conclude the disunity that has marked us above all in politics, he said in statements to the Despierta program of Televisa.

He said that the government has to present strategies to deal with this earthquake.

Here is announced an appearance of the governor of the Bank of Mexico, Agustín Cartens, and the Secretary of Finance, Jose Antonio Meade in this regard.

  • Published in World

Clinton camp expects Trump to repackage old policies in big immigration speech

Donald Trump has taken the political world on a rollercoaster ride over the past two weeks on his signature issue of immigration, suggesting last Tuesday he may be “softening” his deport-them-all stance.

He then backtracked on that stance only two days later, saying many would consider his position “hardening.”

In a Wednesday night immigration policy speech in Arizona, Trump could clear up some of this confusion. His remarks are being written by staffer Stephen Miller, a former aide to immigration hardliner Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., according to a Trump adviser.

The Hillary Clinton campaign is not expecting Trump to significantly alter his stance on wanting to deport all undocumented immigrants and is prepared to remind voters of his previous statements if he does. As soon as the speech is over, the Democratic nominee’s team is prepared to deploy numerous surrogates — many on Spanish-language TV and radio — to argue that Trump cannot be trusted and is not “pivoting” on the immigration issue.

A Clinton campaign aide said the fact that Miller is writing the speech, instead of Kellyanne Conway, for example, suggested that Trump would not give much ground on the issue. Conway, Trump’s newly minted campaign manager, has hedged in recent TV interviews on whether Trump still embraces some of his most hard-line proposals. Meanwhile, Miller worked closely with Sessions to block a 2013 comprehensive immigration-reform bill in the Senate. Miller also wrote Trump’s convention speech, in which the GOP nominee darkly warned of a crime-filled America.

Immigration hard-liners agree with the Clinton team’s expectations for Trump’s speech. “Having Stephen Miller working on this immigration speech gives people like us assurance that there’s going to be things in it that we’re going to like,” said Eric Ruark, the director of research for NumbersUSA, a group that advocates for lower legal and illegal immigration levels.

Frank Sharry, the executive director of the pro-immigration reform group America’s Voice, said he believes Trump is likely to stop calling for a “deportation force” or “mass deportations,” since those phrases are unpopular with Republicans and Democrats alike.

But Sharry said he does not think Trump will alter his core position that all of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country should leave. Trump hasn’t called for a deportation force since early in the Republican primary, instead saying he would like to end so-called sanctuary cities, rescind President Obama’s executive order shielding young undocumented immigrants from deportation, and enforce immigration checks in the workforce.

“I have somewhere between a cynical and a skeptical perspective on this,” Sharry said. “At most, it’s going to be a slight rhetorical shift without a meaningful policy pivot.”

Trump’s language has certainly changed. In a town hall meeting with Fox News’ Sean Hannity last week, Trump said he might be open to “softening” his stance on undocumented immigrants and having the government “work” with them, and he asked the spectators what they thought should be done. Facing fire from conservatives like Ann Coulter, Trump later told CNN there is a “good chance” he would stick to his original plan to deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants, after first focusing on immigrants who have committed crimes. Meanwhile, his spokeswoman, Katrina Pierson, said he’s just “changed the words” he’s saying, not the policy.

Clinton’s surrogates plan to make that case after Trump’s speech, whether or not he changes his tone. On a Tuesday call with reporters, Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., said “no matter what Trump happened to say, into the future, no matter how he plays with his words or who he tries to surround himself with, his one consistent proposal throughout this campaign has been his promise to forcibly remove” immigrants. “That’s always been his agenda,” Becerra said.

  • Published in World

Turning the Cradle of Civilization Into its Graveyard

This Monday, September 7, seven Syrian citizens go to court in Paris to pursue their civil suit against French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius. The five men and two women all lost family members and close friends in massacres by armed rebels supported by Fabius in word and deed. They are asking for one euro of symbolic damages.

In the end the suit will almost surely be thrown out. The September 7 hearing is on an appeal against an earlier ruling that the courts cannot judge acts of the government in this case, even if the complaint is founded. And yet this futile lawsuit makes a crucial point that Western politicians and media would much prefer to ignore.

Western leaders share major responsibility for making much of the world unfit for normal human habitation. And so far, they are getting away with it. The massive refugee crisis swamping Europe is just the beginning of the troubles that these unscrupulous leaders have brought on their own countries.

Laurent Fabius can fairly be called a French neoconservative. His alignment with Israeli policies is seen in the fact that he was the most reluctant of the foreign ministers involved in the Iranian nuclear negotiations to agree to the final settlement.

He has been one of the most gung-ho advocates of regime change in Syria, a country long on the neocon hit list for its Arab nationalism and support for the Palestinian cause.

The Syrian plaintiffs note that:

   * On May 29, 2012, Fabius declared that France would intervene against the Syrian regime.

   * On August 17, 2012, Fabius declared that Syrian President Bashar el Assad “did not deserve to be alive on earth”.

   * On December 14, 2012, speaking out against the Obama administration decision to designate the Al Nusra Front as a terrorist group, Fabius objected that the Al Nusra Front was “doing a good job on the ground”.

   * On March 13, 2013, Fabius announced that France and Britain were going to deliver arms to the rebels.

As a group, the plaintiffs maintain that by his declarations, Foreign Minister Fabius stirred up civil war in Syria and encouraged armed rebel attacks against the existing government. Individually, each of the plaintiffs lost family members and close friends in armed attacks and massacres carried out by the al Nusra militia allied rebel groups.

Israel’s Ghastly Twin: the “Islamic State”

Under U.S. leadership and Israeli influence, French political leaders have championed “regime change” in Libya and Syria on the tacit assumption that civil war would be better for the people of those countries than living under a “dictatorship”. In practice, however, most people can get along better without a vote than without a roof over their heads. Or without their heads.

It is hardly surprising that the carefully filmed and diffused videos of “Islamic State” (IS) disciplinary methods have caused panic among people living in their path of conquest.

War causes people to become refugees. Western media pay close attention to refugees only when they like the “story”. Huge attention was paid to Kosovo Albanians fleeing temporarily from the 1999 NATO war against the Serbs, because those refugees could be described as victims of Serbian “ethnic cleansing” and thus as justification of the NATO war itself.

But no such media concern was aroused over the much greater number of refugees who fled from the 2003 United States invasion of Iraq and have never returned. Over a million Iraqi refugees fled into Syria, where they were well received.

The situation in the Middle East is critical. Armed by leftover U.S. military equipment in Iraq, enriched by illicit oil sales, its ranks swollen by young Jihadis from all over the world, the Islamic State threatens the people of Lebanon and Jordan, already struggling to take care of masses of refugees from Palestine, Iraq and now Syria. Fear of the decapitating Islamic fanatics is inciting more and more people to risk everything in order to get to safety in Europe.

The Islamic State is truly the horrible enemy caricature of the “Jewish State”, another political entity based on an exclusive religious identity. Like Israel it has no clearly defined borders, but with a vastly larger potential demographic base.

The only force that can stop the Islamic State from expanding its fanatic rule over all of Mesopotamia and beyond is the Syrian State led by Bashar al Assad. The choice is not between Assad and “Western democracy”. The choice is between Assad and the Islamic State. But Western leaders have still not fully dropped their demented cry: “Assad must go!”

Refugees, Migrants and Terrorists

The results of this madness are washing up on the shores of the Mediterranean. Images and sentiment have replaced thinking about causes and effects. One photo of a drowned toddler causes a media and political uproar. Are people surprised? Didn’t they know that toddlers were being torn to pieces by U.S. bombing of Iraq, by U.S. drones in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen? What about the toddlers obliterated by NATO’s war to “free Libya” from its “dictator”?

The current refugee crisis in Europe is the inevitable, foreseeable, predicted result of Western policy in the Middle East and North Africa. Gaddafi’s Libya was the wall that kept hundreds of thousands of Africans from migrating illegally to Europe, not only by police methods but even more effectively by offering them development at home and decently paid jobs in Libya. Now Libya is the source both of economic migrants and of refugees from Libya itself, as well as from other lands of desperation. In order to weaken Sudan, the United States (and Susan Rice in particular) championed creation of the new country of South Sudan, which is not a country at all but the scene of rival massacres driving more and more fugitives toward unwelcoming countries.

The famous photo of little Aylan drowned in the Mediterranean is used very largely to make Europeans feel guilty. The leaders should indeed feel guilty – and not least the rich egomaniac Bernard-Henri Lévy, who prides himself on having talked the French government of Nicolas Sarkozy into starting war against Libya, where, he claimed, there were no Islamic extremists, but only pro-Westerners yearning for democracy. Thanks to NATO, Islamic extremists have since run roughshod over the whole country.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has agreed to take in eight hundred thousand Syrian refugees. This is admirable on humanitarian grounds. Germany is economically strong and demographically weak; with its gradually shrinking population, middle class Syrians, many of them terrified Christians, may seem to be a welcome addition to the population. But it deepens political divisions within Germany and in Europe.

This is particularly the case in the new EU countries of Eastern Europe. Starting with Hungary, their leaders are making it clear that those countries are above all concerned with their ethnic identity, and don’t want to take in a lot of people who don’t speak their language. Unlike countries of Western Europe, the Eastern European tier of ethnic states have no tradition of taking in immigrants and no ideological attachment to the Western human rights ideology. In Eastern Europe, “human rights” sounded good to use against Russia and the Soviet Union, but stops there.

The Greek crisis already put heavy strains on the unity of the European Union. For the first time, many people are questioning the whole idea. The crisis showed that there is no real sense of solidarity between the peoples of Europe; when it comes to the crunch, Germans are Germans and Greeks are Greeks, and “European” is an abstraction. The refugee crisis is showing new cracks in “European unity”.

Most of Europe today is suffering from massive unemployment, especially the Southern countries where refugees first land: Greece, Italy, Spain. European Union economic policies, already strangling Greece, do not favor job creation for hundreds of thousands of newcomers. Even professionally qualified refugees will find it difficult or impossible to get around rules protecting their professions in host countries. Most jobs they manage to get will probably be low level and illegal, undercutting wages and working conditions in the host countries.

Moreover, it is impossible in the present mass movement of people to distinguish “refugees” from economic “migrants” – that is, from men simply seeking better work opportunities. The EU today has little to offer then, and resentment of this unsought immigration is certain to improve the political fortunes of the nationalist right.

There is another reason that many European citizens feel less than enthusiastic about welcoming hundreds of thousands of unknown foreigners into their communities. The Islamic State has openly boasted of sending terrorists into Europe among the refugees, with the clear intention of committing violent acts to destabilize the West. Of course, the threat of terrorism is being used cynically by governments to enforce police state measures, but that does not mean that the threat of terrorism is unreal. Unfortunately, it exists – thanks very largely to the policies of those very same Western governments.

The refugee crisis should be seen as the warning signal that the United States and its NATO allies – especially Britain and France – are bringing the world to a state of chaos that is going to keep spreading and that is approaching a point of no return.   It is quick and easy to break things. Putting them back together may be impossible. Civilization itself may be more fragile than it seems.

  • Published in Specials
Subscribe to this RSS feed