Border, Exclusion, and Embrace

Abstract

Migration is one of the most salient characteristics of our time. It does not constitute a new phenomenon. Mobility is a fundamental dimension of human activity. People have always migrated all over the world. But today, more people are migrating due to the global interconnectedness of the world. Although people leave their homes for multiple reasons, there is agreement on the fact that the search for a better life is the primary cause. Migration is a complex phenomenon that affects not only people who move but also receiving communities. This complexity is translated into the never-ending debates over human rights, national security, and sovereignty. These ongoing discussions prove how border and migration are intertwined. Today it becomes impossible to address the question of migration without considering the relevance of international borders. In a time characterized by numerous flows of people, borders can be perceived differently. While the receiving countries see them as "institutions" for controlling the profile of entrants into their territories, migrants consider them as barriers prevening them from reaching a better quality of life, which is intrinsically tied to human dignity and rights. This shows that borders can have harmful impacts on people's lives. Hence, the question: What is the moral relevance of a border? Should the border be closed when dire situations threaten people's lives? This thesis attempts to address these questions. Its primary purpose is to propose a non-exclusionary understanding of the border that takes human dignity and rights into account. Its claim is that, from an ethical perspective, the border must not be seen as a marker of separation purely and simply but also as a place that connects people. The thesis is organized into three chapters. The first chapter tries to present different perspectives on the border. It highlights the border's moral relevance in terms of nation-states' sovereignty. It also stresses the inhuman consequences of the border in our epoch, marked by globalization and migration. The second chapter brings to the fore some ethical categories, such as the principle of humanity, imago Dei, compassion, solidarity, and hospitality, for addressing the issue of migration. It will present these categories as the criteria for a non-exclusionary definition of the border. It considers the relationship between Christian cosmopolitanism and national boundaries. Calling on Miroslav Volf's distinction between exclusion and embrace, it will propose a non-exclusionary understanding of the border and make a plea for more porous borders that give the possibility for people to embrace others. The last chapter of the paper will argue that this non-exclusionary conception of the border must influence the American immigration policy toward Haitian migrants. Exploring TPS and Title 42, it will highlight the double (positiive and negative) impact of U.S. immigration policy on Haitian rights. This chapter will argue that the United States has a moral responsibility toward Haitian migrants.