• Israël et ses expatriés : un rapport difficile
    22 septembre 2018 Par La rédaction de Mediapart
    https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/220918/israel-et-ses-expatries-un-rapport-difficile?onglet=full

    Plus de 15 000 Israéliens ont quitté l’État hébreu en 2017. C’est près de 6 300 de plus que d’Israéliens revenant dans le pays. Ce déficit tend certes à s’affaiblir, mais dans un pays qui se veut le refuge des Juifs du monde entier, ces expatriés soulèvent bien des questions en Israël. Le quotidien suisse Neue Zürcher Zeitung publie une enquête sur ce phénomène. Les raisons de partir sont nombreuses : elles peuvent être économiques, liées à la formation ou plus politiques, par rejet de la politique gouvernementale ou par désespoir de voir un jour la paix régner dans la région.

    Beaucoup en Israël estiment que ces départs nuisent à l’image d’un pays qui se veut performant sur le plan économique et à la pointe de la technologie. D’autres critiquent une forme de trahison vis-à-vis du seul État juif, d’autres encore redoutent la fuite des cerveaux. Mais les réactions de la société israélienne face aux expatriés sont complexes et paradoxales. Ainsi, la droite souhaitait accorder le droit de vote aux Israéliens de l’étranger sur leur lieu de résidence, pensant que ces derniers soutiendraient plutôt la politique de Benjamin Netanyahou. La gauche s’y opposait, estimant qu’il était injuste de donner le droit de vote à ceux qui ne subissent pas directement cette politique. Puis, la droite a fait marche arrière devant la crainte de voir les Juifs de gauche étasuniens, par exemple, faire un aliya par correspondance en demandant un passeport sans jamais résider en Israël, et en votant… à gauche.

    En lire plus dans la NZZ : https://www.nzz.ch/international/der-kampf-um-die-abgestiegenen-seelen-ld.1422166

    • nzz.ch, siehe oben

      [...]

      (Die) Bemerkungen lösten in Israel eine riesige Debatte aus. Und starker Tobak ist es fürwahr – auch hippe Israeli in Berlin werden nicht gerne pauschal beschuldigt, ihr Land «wegzuwerfen». Lapid wurde heftig angegriffen, aber in den sozialen Netzwerken ergriffen auch viele Partei für ihn und warfen den Expats Fahnenflucht, mangelnden Patriotismus und Schlimmeres vor. Die Linke schlug zurück und diagnostizierte einen andauernden Exodus, der Ausdruck von Verdruss und Verzweiflung über die dominierende Politik der Rechten sei. Joseph Chamie und Barry Mirkin, zwei amerikanische Wissenschafter, schrieben 2011 in der Zeitschrift «Foreign Policy» einen Artikel mit dem Titel «The Million Missing Israelis» und behaupteten, bis zu eine Million Israeli lebten im Ausland. Das seien rund 13 Prozent, ein für OECD-Länder hoher Wert. 1980 hätten lediglich 270 000 Israeli im Ausland gelebt.

      [...]

      ... das Wesentliche, die Begründung der Auswanderung. Für ... war es nicht nur das, was weglockte, die angeblich bessere Bildung im Ausland, die bessere Lebensqualität, das Einkommen und die tollen Berufschancen. Nein, sie fanden auch Faktoren, die die Menschen wegtrieben. Die Politik der Regierung. Der offene Rassismus in breiten Volksschichten. Die fehlenden Friedensaussichten. Die allgemeine Niedergeschlagenheit. «The question is not why we left, but why it took us so long to do so.» Und ahnungsvoll wurde festgestellt, dass viele Expats bereits Doppelbürger waren oder es werden wollten. Rund 100 000 Israeli hätten bereits den deutschen Pass, in den USA gebe es denselben Trend. Die Israeli im Ausland seien tendenziell gescheiter, gebildeter, wohlhabender, säkularer als der Durchschnitt, hiess es weiter. Angesichts dieses Exodus werde die Lage in Israel langsam schwierig. Die Emigration stärke die Ultraorthodoxen und die Araber. Damit gefährde sie das zionistische Projekt.

      [...]

    • The million missing Israelis | Foreign Policy 2011

      https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/07/05/the-million-missing-israelis

      [...]

      At the lower end is the official estimate of 750,000 Israeli emigrants — 10 percent of the population — issued by the Israeli Ministry of Immigrant Absorption, which is about the same as that for Mexico, Morocco, and Sri Lanka. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government places the current number of Israeli citizens living abroad in the range of 800,000 to 1 million, representing up to 13 percent of the population, which is relatively high among OECD countries. Consistent with this latter figure is the estimated 1 million Israelis in the Diaspora reported at the first-ever global conference of Israelis living abroad, held in this January.

      Current estimates of Israelis living abroad are substantially higher than those for the past. During Israel’s first decade, some 100,000 Jews are believed to have emigrated from Israel. By 1980, Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics estimated some 270,000 Israelis living abroad for more than a year, or 7 percent of the population. Several decades later, the number of Israeli emigrants had swelled to about 550,000 — or almost double the proportion at the end of the 1950s.

      Of the Israelis currently residing abroad, roughly 60 percent are believed to have settled in North America, a quarter in Europe, and 15 percent distributed across the rest of the world. It is estimated that about 45 percent of the adult Israeli expatriates have completed at least a university degree, in contrast to 22 percent of the Israeli population. The Israeli emigrants are deemed to be disproportionately secular, liberal, and cosmopolitan. Furthermore, the emigrants are generally younger than the immigrants to Israel, especially those from the former Soviet Union, hastening the aging of Israel’s population.

      The often-cited reasons for Israeli emigration center on seeking better living and financial conditions, employment and professional opportunities, and higher education, as well as pessimism regarding prospects for peace. Consistent with these motives, one of the most frequently given explanations for leaving Israel is: “The question is not why we left, but why it took us so long to do so.” And recent opinion polls find that almost half of Israeli youth would prefer to live somewhere else if they had the chance. Again, the most often-cited reason to emigrate is because the situation in Israel is viewed as “not good.”

      Another important factor contributing to the outflow of Jewish Israelis is previous emigration experience. As 40 percent of Jewish Israelis are foreign-born, emigration is nothing new for many in the country. Moreover, as Israeli emigrants cannot yet vote from abroad, they are likely to feel marginalized from mainstream Israeli society, further contributing to their decision to remain abroad as well as attracting others to do the same. Whether the Netanyahu government’s effort in the Knesset to approve a bill granting voting rights to Israelis living abroad will slow the trend is uncertain.

      Adding to emigration pressures, many Israelis have already taken preliminary steps to eventually leaving. One survey found close to 60 percent of Israelis had approached or were intending to approach a foreign embassy to ask for citizenship and a passport. An estimated 100,000 Israelis have German passports, while more are applying for passports based on their German ancestry. And a large number of Israelis have dual nationality, including an estimated 500,000 Israelis holding U.S. passports (with close to a quarter-million pending applications).

      [...]


  • Who says the most liveable city is in the west? Culture doesn’t just live in museums | Chibundu Onuzo | The Guardian
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/19/vienna-lagos-economist-intelligence-unit-liveability-index

    Why do studies like this exist anyway? The people who actually live in Harare, Karachi and Algiers are still living there, no matter how “unliveable” the Economist Intelligence Unit judges their cities. In the report summary, the compilers state that their findings will help in “assigning a hardship allowance as part of expatriate relocation packages”. I’d just like to say that Lagos has enough expats. We see them, overpaid and overfed, establishing little colonies, disparaging the local culture, food and customs, and earning three times what they would at home.

    #urban_matter #culture #racisme #expats (perso je placerais Lagos loin devant Vienne ahahah)



  • Why the language we use to talk about refugees matters so much
    –-> cet article date de juin 2015... je le remets sur seenthis car je l’ai lu plus attentivement, et du coup, je mets en évidence certains passages (et mots-clé).

    In an interview with British news station ITV on Thursday, David Cameron told viewers that the French port of Calais was safe and secure, despite a “#swarm” of migrants trying to gain access to Britain. Rival politicians soon rushed to criticize the British prime minister’s language: Even Nigel Farage, leader of the anti-immigration UKIP party, jumped in to say he was not “seeking to use language like that” (though he has in the past).
    Cameron clearly chose his words poorly. As Lisa Doyle, head of advocacy for the Refugee Council puts it, the use of the word swarm was “dehumanizing” – migrants are not insects. It was also badly timed, coming as France deployed riot police to Calais after a Sudanese man became the ninth person in less than two months to die while trying to enter the Channel Tunnel, an underground train line that runs from France to Britain.

    The way we talk about migrants in turn influences the way we deal with them, with sometimes worrying consequences.

    When considering the 60 million or so people currently displaced from their home around the world, certain words rankle experts more than others. “It makes no more sense to call someone an ’illegal migrant’ than an ’illegal person,’” Human Rights Watch’s Bill Frelick wrote last year. The repeated use of the word “boat people” to describe people using boats to migrate over the Mediterranean or across South East Asian waters presents similar issues.
    “We don’t call middle-class Europeans who take regular holidays abroad ’#EasyJet_people,’ or the super-rich of Monaco ’#yacht_people,’” Daniel Trilling, editor of the New Humanist, told me.

    How people are labelled has important implications. Whether people should be called economic migrants or asylum seekers matters a great deal in the country they arrive in, where it could affect their legal status as they try to stay in the country. It also matters in the countries where these people originated from. Eritrea, for example, has repeatedly denied that the thousands of people leaving the country are leaving because of political pressure, instead insisting that they have headed abroad in search of higher wages. Other countries make similar arguments: In May, Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina said that the migrants leaving her country were “fortune-seekers” and “mentally sick.” The message behind such a message was clear: It’s their fault, not ours.

    There are worries that even “migrant,” perhaps the broadest and most neutral term we have, could become politicized.

    Those living in the migrant camps near #Calais, nicknamed “the #jungle,” seem to understand this well themselves. “It’s easier to leave us living like this if you say we are bad people, not human," Adil, a 24-year-old from Sudan, told the Guardian.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/07/30/why-the-language-we-use-to-talk-about-refugees-matters-so-much
    #langage #vocabulaire #terminologie #mots #réfugiés #asile #migrations #essaim #invasion #afflux #déshumanisation #insectes #expatriés #expats #illégal #migrant_illégal #boat_people #migrants_économiques

    cc @sinehebdo

    • The words we use matter—why we shouldn’t use the term ”illegal migrant”

      Words have consequences, especially in situations where strong emotions as well as social and political conflicts are endemic. Raj Bhopal’s rapid response in The BMJ, in which he objected to the use of the phrase “illegal migrant” on the grounds that only actions, not persons, can be deemed “illegal”, merits further reflection and dissection.

      Some people think that those who protest against this phrase are taking sides with migrants in conflict with the law, in a futile attempt to cover up what is going on. On the contrary: the very idea that a person can be illegal is incompatible with the rule of law, which is founded on the idea that everyone has the right to due process and is equal in the eyes of the law. Labelling a person as “illegal” insinuates that their very existence is unlawful. For this reason, bodies including the United Nations General Assembly, International Organization for Migration, Council of Europe, and European Commission have all deemed the phrase unacceptable, recommending instead the terms “irregular” or “undocumented”. It would be more than appropriate for the medical profession, given its social standing and influence, to do the same.

      While people cannot be illegal, actions can: but here too, words have to be chosen carefully. For example, the overwhelming majority of irregular migrants have not entered the country clandestinely; they have either had their asylum application turned down, or have “overstayed” a visa, or breached its conditions. Moreover, it is never correct to label someone’s actions “illegal” before the appropriate legal authority has determined that they are. Until then, the presumption of innocence should apply. Due process must have been followed, including the right to legal advice, representation, and appeal—rights that the UK government, especially where migrants are concerned, has been only too willing to sacrifice on the altar of cost-cutting.

      Even after an official determination that a person is residing unlawfully, we must have confidence in the fairness of the procedures followed before it is safe to assume that the decision was correct. This confidence has been badly shaken by the recent finding that almost half of the UK Home Office’s immigration decisions that go to appeal are overturned. In their zeal to implement the government’s policy of creating a “hostile environment” for people residing unlawfully, some Home Office officials appear to have forgotten that the rule of law still applies in Britain. People who had lived legally in the UK for decades have been suddenly branded as “illegally resident” and denied healthcare because they couldn’t provide four pieces of evidence for each year of residence since they arrived—even when some of the evidence had been destroyed by the Home Office itself. Hundreds of highly skilled migrants including doctors have been denied the right to remain in the UK because minor tax or income discrepancies were taken as evidence of their undesirability under the new Immigration Rules. A recent case in which the Home Office separated a 3-year-old girl from her only available parent, in contravention of its own policies, led to an award for damages of £50,000.

      What of the medical profession’s own involvement? The 2014 Immigration Act links a person’s healthcare entitlement to their residency status. Health professionals in the UK are now required to satisfy themselves that an individual is eligible for NHS care by virtue of being “ordinarily resident in the UK,” the definition of which has been narrowed. In practice, this has meant that people who do not fit certain stereotypes are more likely to be questioned—a potential route to an institutionally racist system. They can instantly be denied not only healthcare, but also the ability to work, hold a bank account or driver’s licence, or rent accommodation. It is unprecedented, and unacceptable, for UK health professionals to be conscripted as agents of state control in this way.

      Given the unrelenting vendetta of sections of the British press against people who may be residing unlawfully, it should also be borne in mind that such migrants cannot “sponge off the welfare state”, since there are virtually no benefits they can claim. They are routinely exposed to exploitation and abuse by employers, while “free choice” has often played a minimal role in creating their situation. (Consider, for example, migrants who lose their right of residence as a result of losing their job, or asylum seekers whose claim has been rejected but cannot return to their country because it is unsafe or refuses to accept them).

      To sum up: abolishing the dehumanising term “illegal migrant” is an important first step, but the responsibility of health professionals goes even further. In the UK they are obliged to collaborate in the implementation of current immigration policy. To be able to do this with a clear conscience, they need to know that rights to residence in the UK are administered justly and humanely. Regrettably, as can be seen from the above examples, this is not always the case.

      https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2018/10/02/the-words-we-use-matter-why-we-shouldnt-use-the-term-illegal-migrant


  • #Africa makes us* look better
    http://africasacountry.com/2016/12/africa-makes-us-look-better

    Africa makes us look better. Just by stepping off a plane we get richer, more interesting and prettier. In most cases our lighter skin and straighter hair earns us a special place in society. We receive a lot of attention, wanted or not, and feel like minor celebrities. When we are invited to sit at […]

    #ESSAYS



  • The World Bank Is Supposed to Help the Poor. So Why Is it Bankrolling Oligarchs? Mother Jones
    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/11/world-bank-ifc-fund-luxury-hotels

    In recent years, [Malaysian billionaire Robert] Kuok has teamed up with a far more respectable business partner to expand his chain of luxury hotels and resorts throughout Asia: the International Finance Corporation. A branch of the World Bank, the IFC finances the private sector in developing countries, via loans and direct investments, to help meet the bank’s goals of ending extreme poverty and “boosting shared prosperity.” In 2009, the IFC invested $50 million in the construction of a 142-villa Shangri-La resort in the Maldives. In 2012, it sank another $50 million into Kuok’s new five-star hotel in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. And in 2014, the IFC signed off on an $80 million investment in Kuok’s Burma properties that backed the construction of the luxury apartment complex and a makeover at the Rangoon hotel he built with Law. It was the IFC’s largest investment in Burma to date.

    [...]

    The IFC is a moneymaker for the rest of the World Bank, handing over hundreds of millions of dollars annually to the bank’s International Development Association fund for the “poorest” countries. But in its pursuit of profits, the IFC has at times partnered with controversial oligarchs and made investments that, while contributing to its balance sheet, are of questionable benefit to the people it is supposed to be lifting out of poverty. And, says the former World Bank staffer, “there are examples of IFC making people worse off.”

    #Banque_mondiale #socialisme_pour_les_riches


  • Migration. Des #expats aux réfugiés : histoires de Syriens en Allemagne

    Deux amis dentistes ont quitté la Syrie pour l’Allemagne à vingt ans d’intervalle. Le premier, arrivé dans les années 1990, est un expat, tandis que son confrère, venu en 2014 pour fuir la guerre, est un réfugié. Ils racontent.

    http://www.courrierinternational.com/article/migration-des-expats-aux-refugies-histoires-de-syriens-en-all
    #expatriés #réfugiés #réfugiés_syriens #asile #migrations #réfugiés


  • Is “Expat” the New White ? - Une heure de peine...
    http://uneheuredepeine.blogspot.fr/2015/06/is-expat-new-white.html

    En Mars dernier, au moins cinq personnes différentes m’ont envoyé un article du Guardian se demandant « pourquoi les Blancs sont des expatriés alors que les autres sont des migrants ? ». Celui-ci a suffisamment retenu l’attention pour faire l’objet de quelques recensions et traductions en français : dans l’Express, dans Courrier International, sur le site Les Mots Sont Importants, sur Slate, sur le site Jeune Afrique. J’en oublie sans doute. La critique du racisme qui se cache derrière la distinction « expatrié/migrant » est un point de passage obligé de toute réflexion sérieuse sur les migrations internationales. Mais appeler, comme le fait l’article, à remplacer « expat » par « migrant » n’est pas une attitude aussi critique que l’on pourrait le croire.

    #migration #vocabulaire #classes_sociales

    • Parmi mes enquêtés « expats », certains se qualifient spontanément de « migrants » ou d’"immigrés". Toujours avec un sourire en coin cependant : ils savent qu’ils ne sont pas comme les autres « immigrés » dont on parle dans les médias, et quand ils me parlent, ils savent que je sais...

      Bien vu. Moi je fais souvent le malin avec ça, je vais arrêter :)

      Pire encore : les « expats » pourraient même trouver appréciable d’être renommés « migrants » (surtout qu’ils resteront quoi qu’il en soit des « migrants qualifiés »). Je ne compte plus le nombre de mes enquêtés qui m’expliquent qu’ils ne sont pas « comme les autres expatriés », que eux ont fait de vrais efforts pour découvrir leur pays d’accueil, pour s’y intégrer, etc.



  • #syria says #France, #germany to bar #expats from voting
    http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/syria-says-france-germany-bar-expats-voting

    The foreign ministry said Monday that France and Germany intend to prevent Syrians living in their countries from voting in Syria’s #presidential_election, expected to return President Bashar al-Assad to power. Germany and France are “preventing Syrians living in their territory from voting,” the foreign ministry said. “France... is carrying out a hostile press campaign” against next month’s election, it said in a statement carried by state news agency SANA. read more

    #Top_News

    • Mais le vote se déroulerait de toute façon à l’intérieur de l’ambassade (et éventuellement autres locaux consulaires), non ? Pour « bloquer » le vote, il faudrait donc que ces pays interdisent physiquement l’entrée des locaux consulaires aux ressortissants de ces pays. Ça me semblerait énorme.

    • Ah oui, flûte c’est vrai. Mais du coup la même question se pose, mais autrement : qu’est-ce qu’il y a à bloquer de la part des français si les locaux consulaires sont de toute façon fermés. Ils pensaient organiser les élections où ?

    • Tiens, j’ai trouvé cette info sur le site du Manar : le président de l’association d’amitié franco syrienne dit que les syriens ne seront pas empéchés de rentrer dans l’ambassade pour voter mais s’il y a des attroupements de pro et d’anti régime, la rue sera fermée.

      ...القصة الحقيقية لدعوة سعود الفيصل وعدم الاستعجال الأميركي
      http://www.almanar.com.lb/adetails.php?eid=842895&cid=51&fromval=1&frid=51&seccatid=171&s1=0

      صاحب  دعوة العشاء رئيس مجموعة الصداقة الفرنسية السورية في البرلمان الفرنسي النائب الإشتراكي ( جيرارد بابت) ، وبناء على سؤالنا اتصل برئيس لجنة العلاقات الخارجية في البرلمان الفرنسي ( فرانسوا لونكل) وسأله عن قرار منع السوريين المقيمين في فرنسا من التصويت في الانتخابات الرئاسية ، وهل سوف يتم منعهم من دخول السفارة السورية ؟ وجاء الجواب أنه لن يتم منع السوري الراغب بدخول السفارة للتصويت من دخول مبنى السفارة، ولكن في حال حصول تجمعات موالية ومعارضة سوف يتم غلق الطريق وتفريق الجموع.

      C’est un peu vague. Mais apparement l’ambassade n’est pas complétement fermée



  • Mobilis in mobili : des vies « en mobilité » au Sud : les « expats » de l’humanitaire au Timor-Leste et en Haïti

    http://eps.revues.org/4098

    un regard sans concession

    par Marie Redon

    « Le séisme du 12 janvier a semé encore plus d’ONG,
    pour le malheur profond d’Haïti. »
    Etudiant de Port-au-Prince, août 2010

    Log-Base, siège de la mission des Nations Unies, Port-au-Prince, le26 août 2010 :
    « Avez-vous de la monnaie s’il vous plaît ?
    Mais qu’est-ce que c’est ?
    Un billet de 500 gourdes, je voudrais des petites coupures si vous avez.
    « Gourdes », mais qu’est-ce que c’est ?
    La monnaie locale.
    Ah ! Il y a une monnaie locale ! Non, désolé, nous n’avons que des dollars ».

    Je me suis demandé d’où provenaient ces gens ignorant la monnaie en vigueur et attablés dans ce restaurant d’Haïti depuis plus de deux heures pour discuter, précisément, de l’avenir de ce pays : venaient-ils tout juste d’arriver et encore sous le coup du décalage horaire ou bien vivaient-ils dans un autre monde ? Et si oui, lequel ?

    je sais pas quel tag mettre...

    • excellent papier sur les #expats #humanitaires

      depuis la Seconde Guerre mondiale et plus encore à partir des années 1980, on voit émerger une nébuleuse internationale, si ce n’est transnationale, composée de représentants des États, des organisations intergouvernementales ou non gouvernementales. Cette toile est tissée de relations d’interdépendances, d’intérêts communs, mais aussi de mobilités qui font se croiser à Dili des personnes qui se sont rencontrées en Haïti. Les articulations de ce réseau sont faites d’individus vivant en mobilité, d’un pays du Sud à l’autre.

      (...) En août 2010, un membre de l’ONU, originaire d’Argentine, déclarait : « Tu sais, je vais bientôt quitter #Haïti …. Je viens de m’acheter une Ferrari et une maison aux Canaries avec vue sur la mer »

      #ong #nations_unies


  • Et si vous installiez votre bureau sur une île déserte ?
    http://www.wedemain.fr/Et-si-vous-installiez-votre-bureau-sur-une-ile-deserte_a339.html


    Le projet #CyberHippieTotalism propose de passer l’hiver dans un lieu de travail collaboratif installé sur une île paradisiaque des Canaries. Une expérience #alternative, mais pas déconnectée, qui préfigure peut-être le travail nomade de #demain.



    Voilà qui pourrait enfin réconcilier travail et vacances. Une « #hackbase  ; » a élu domicile à Lanzarote, sur l’archipel des Canaries. Depuis 2011, hackers, makers et créatifs sont les bienvenus sur cette …