Author: Oliver De Bono (Page 1 of 2)

Ollie 1000 words

“The way that vulnerable immigrant communities feel about the election is that he has been given license to do whatever he wants to do.” Reverend Juan Carlos Ruiz will not say Donald Trump’s name. Ruiz, the Reverend Pastor of the Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, is known throughout New York in the undocumented migrant community as a champion of undocumented people’s welfare and rights. He came to the US from Mexico in 1986 and was undocumented himself for eight years. “45”, as Ruiz calls the incoming President, is on his mind. Like so many other people and organizations who support undocumented migrants, he knows what is coming, and he is doing his best to prepare.

 

Three weeks have passed since President Donald Trump won the election to become the 47th President of the United States. In his first campaign for the Presidency in 2016, Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric focused on preventing migrants from reaching the US. He famously promised to “build a wall” on the US-Mexico border. This time, Trump has campaigned on deporting immigrants who are already in the US. Back in May, he told a campaign rally in Freeland, Michigan, “On day one, we will begin the largest domestic deportation operation in American history.” Since then, immigrant aid organizations have started planning for how they will oppose Trump’s planned immigration policies. However, the Trump administration is anticipating this battle. In his last presidency, Trump’s immigration policies aimed at ending TPS and DACA were hampered by legal challenges. Stephen Miller, who will be White House deputy chief of staff for policy in the new administration, recently told the New York Times that “Any activists who doubt President Trump’s resolve in the slightest are making a drastic error: Trump will unleash the vast arsenal of federal powers to implement the most spectacular migration crackdown.”

 

The primary immigration policy goal of Trump’s presidency will be mass deportations. Pew Research Center has reported that there are 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. These people are Trump’s first target. However, Trump has referred to different numbers, in excess of 11 million, for his deportation target. In August, incoming Vice President J.D Vance told ABC News’ Jon Karl, “I think it’s interesting that people focus on, well, how do you deport 18 million people? Let’s start with 1 million. That’s where Kamala Harris has failed. And then we can go from there.” There are a range of possible measures the Trump administration could take. Incoming Border Czar Tom Homan has promised to send ICE agents into cities to make arrests and raid workplaces.

 

Trump’s plan has echoes of Operation Wetback, a mass deportation program of Mexican immigrants under President Eisenhower that deported over a million people, including many US citizens. But what Trump is suggesting would go even further than Eisenhower did. The latest indication of how Trump might go about the deportations came on November 8th, when conservative commentator Tom Fitton wrote on Truth Social, “Reports are the incoming @RealDonaldTrump administration prepared to declare a national emergency and will use military assets to reverse the Biden invasion through a mass deportation program.” Trump responded to the comment, “TRUE!!!”. Under normal circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prevents the use of armed forces for law enforcement purposes. However, Stephen Miller has promoted the idea that the government would invoke the Insurrection Act which gets around this legal obstacle. Julia Preston, a former national correspondent for the New York Times, told me, “I don’t think that voters are prepared for the level of disruption that this is going to cause.”

 

[interview material about the economic impact of these raids.]

 

The evolution of the Good Shepherd Lutheran Church under Reverend Ruiz speaks to demographic trends in America. The proportion of Hispanic people in Bay Ridge, a historically white and conservative neighbourhood, has doubled to 20% since the turn of the millennium. Zion (he would not tell me his last name), the caretaker of the building, showed me around the church’s hall, with its wooden floors, tables with bouquets of flowers, and high ceiling. On a lower level, down on the left, is the church. Rows of pews line an aisle, and at the front is a pulpit where Reverend Ruiz preaches during services.

Just like among voters across America, it seems that there is a sense of resistance to new immigrants and the cultural changes they bring with them at Good Shepherd. Zion, who holds a PhD from MIT and worked at Microsoft for 30 years, is an immigrant himself. “I was born in Soviet Azerbaijan. We fled. And my family has been here ever since. I was Bar Mitzvah’d at the synagogue across the street.” He told me that when Ruiz, who was originally ordained as a Catholic priest before converting to Lutheranism, was appointed Reverend of the Church, there were “suddenly a lot of Hispanic immigrants coming, and a bunch of old white people stopped coming”. In a small room filled with children’s toys just to the side of the hall, Zion points out what he is most proud of in the church: Tiffany-stained glass windows of Jesus and saints praying, now mostly covered up by bookshelves filled with children’s books. Before he leaves, he tells me to enjoy my conversation with “Don Ruiz about being Hispanic”.

[insert more transitory paragraph here – maybe interview w migrants here?]

Reverend Ruiz plans to use the lessons he learned during Trump’s first presidency when Trump returns to the White House in January. He told me, “What works is the very hyper-local organizing. So, during the 45th presidency, we had a corridor of sanctuary houses from Atlantic Avenue all the way to Coney Island, in which houses of worship.” When I ask how far he is willing to go to help undocumented migrants, he tells me, “I am more afraid for the people next to me. I think I know enough of the law that I know that I have within the Constitution. I am not doing anything out of bounds.” Tom Homan recently told the New York Post that harbouring illegal aliens is a felony. He warned people, “Don’t cross that line.” When ICE comes knocking, Ruiz explains, “You know, we have a kind of task force, or teams of people from ICE detention. You know that if one of our families is, you know, the ice police is knocking on their doors, we’ll have 50 people right there, you know, as witnesses or as shields, trying to stop them.” But it is unclear if Ruiz’s community organizers would be able to stop an arrest under the new administration.

 

 

[insert back and forth between immigration aid lawyers and Trump policy thinktank people]

 

[include interview with migrants about how they feel]

 

[end with going back to Ruiz and the church]

 

 

 

 

Ollie Week 11 Post

I enjoyed reading the Pulitzer-winning articles for this week’s class. I want to focus on three in particular: An American Education, Fixing Broken Lovelies, and “When can we really rest?”. All three articles used the same structure of a lede comprising a scene. Saslow in particular in his articles, used the formula of an opening moment: the Superintendent at the airport or the psychiatric nurse arriving at the meeting to open his story. Both of these scenes strike me as liminal moments, the moment just before something happens. I think this is a productive type of scene to open with because it immediately creates a sense of expectation and wonder in the reader. In both of his articles, Saslow then has a mini nutgraf that explains a bit more detail, what the underlying problem or need is and then goes back to the scene. After this comes the full nutgraf that contextualizes the issue more holistically and sets up what the rest of the feature to come will deal with. I remember being struck when reading An American Education how far down the article it was that we actually found out the superintendent had hired teachers from the Philippines. I think this careful management of the flow of information was well done because I will still curious to keep reading—if you are going to slightly delay the main point of the article, I think you just have to make sure that what you’re writing is actually interesting enough to get your reader to that point. Nadja Drost’s article about the Darien Gap was interesting to me because it didn’t have a clear nutgraf? The whole first section of the article is describing the groups of Pakistani and Cameroonian migrants arriving at a camp in a clearing. After describing this scene for a while, Drost goes straight into telling the reader the history of the Darien Gap and its significance nowadays. I thought this worked well. It should already be clear to the reader what the article is about, namely, groups of migrants crossing the gap. Drost didn’t want to reveal whether the migrants made it at the start or ask a kitschy question like “will they make it?”.

After their openings, the three articles all seemed to follow a structure of zooming in and out in their presentation of the central characters. A character would experience something and then that would provide an opportunity to talk about a broader issue then the writer would zoom back into the character before moving on from the experience with the character resolving (or not resolving) the experience. However, most of the historical and political context came in the first half of the articles. In the second halves of the articles, all three articles also revealed more information that complicated the way the reader understood what they had read so far. In American Education, it was that the students were experiencing severe social problems; in the Seattle article, it was a recollection of the nurse’s attempted suicide; and in the Darien Gap piece, it was the revelation that the migrants had gotten lucky by not being attacked viciously by bandits. In each case, the revelation kept the article interesting.

I was also interested in the endings: Saslow is clearly a fan of ending with a quote that summarises the dilemma of the article: “Isn’t America supposed to be a model for the world?” and “How am I supposed to fix all of this?”. I did wonder if Drost should have reordered her last sentence so that she could have ended with, “Brother, see you in America!”

 

I have also dug out the questions for Christian from my post from the week he was meant to come:

How are governments responding to OSINT investigations? What counter measures have they employed?

I was also interested in the part of the documentary where Christian shows us how a car bombing in Iraq was staged. He goes on to explain that it took him several days of research to find out what actually happened—time, he explained, that traditional news outlets don’t have. So, what does this mean for journalism? To what extent are we going to rely on citizen journalists being able to prove their claims vs will people continue to trust big news organisations?

My other questions for Christian would be to ask how OSINT is evolving with technology, e.g AI. and I am also interested in how Bellingcat investigators remain transparent whilst also protecting sources / unique investigative practices?

Ollie Lede and Nutgraf

“The way that vulnerable immigrant communities feel about the election is that he has been given license to do whatever he wants to do.” Reverend Juan Carlos Ruiz will not say Donald Trump’s name. The Reverend Pastor of the Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, explains as he cradles a sleeping child, “Whoever is the head sets the tone for the whole body politic.”

Almost two weeks have passed since President Donald Trump won the election to become the 47th President of the United States. In his first campaign for the Presidency in 2016, Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric focused on preventing migrants from reaching the US. He famously promised to “build a wall” on the US-Mexico border. This time, Trump has campaigned on deporting immigrants who are already in the US. Back in May, he told a campaign rally in Freeland, Michigan, “On day one, we will begin the largest domestic deportation operation in American history.” In August, incoming Vice President J.D Vance told ABC News’ Jon Karl, “I think it’s interesting that people focus on, well, how do you deport 18 million people? Let’s start with 1 million. That’s where Kamala Harris has failed. And then we can go from there.” Although Trump’s campaign has not fleshed out exactly how his administration will go about mass deportations, immigration activists, lawyers, and aid organizations across the country are bracing themselves for the coming storm. Memories of Trump’s last term in office run deep. This time, however, there will be no surprises.

Ollie week 10 post

I am really interested in how people think of and understand the border crisis. I think Preston’s piece does a really good job of framing how people misunderstand Trump and Harris’ respective records on the border as well as their plans. Trump only built 85 miles of wall during his presidency despite campaigning on building a wall! I also didn’t realise how many of the issues right now at the border are actually because of Trump: because he torpedoed the bipartisan border security bill and because his regulations shut down asylum courts during his first presidency (this was just mentioned in passing but seems quite significant to the current 5-year delays in asylum hearings). By contrast, Harris and Biden seem to have been more effective in reducing the number of crossings and gesturing towards a perhaps more functional asylum and border system. Yet, somehow, they are still seen as weak on the border. Preston’s piece does a good job of tallying the respective policy records, I think most Americans simply don’t understand the economic necessity of migration. It’s equally possible that many do, and they just don’t care. Obviously the article was written before the election, but I wonder if mainstream media coverage will point to white nationalism as a cause for Trump’s election. That seems like a course of action that may well be true to a large extent but also alienating to readers. I remember at the start of the class we discussed how much of people’s resistance to immigration was rooted in racism. I think I remember our answer being inconclusive. Has our answer to that question changed since the election? Does an explicit white nationalist winning the popular vote change our answer? My thinking is that it lends more weight to the idea that some or even many people were motivated by racism. I think a large part of Trump’s winning comes from people seeing immigration as a zero-sum game. It’s hard to think of a country as anything other than a place with finite resources, even if economic growth and innovation mean the truth is actually more complicated. In that context, thousands of people continuously arriving at the southern border, Preston’s article said 250k arrived in one month when Mexico temporarily stopped patrolling, feels unsustainable and the root of all social and economic issues in a very grounded and common sense way, even if economists are telling you that’s not how it works. I also think about Trump winning in the context of the migrants we met in Brooklyn telling us that settled Latinos had been very unsupportive of them when they arrived. In spite of Trump’s white nationalism, I wonder if settled immigrants also see new arrivals as a threat to their resources. I also wonder if settled immigrants don’t like the fact that new arrivals draw attention to their own foreignness, so that they worry that they, too, will be perceived as non-immigrants in the same way. I think this would have been very hard to do, but I do think a consideration of immigration policy needs to consider what voters are associating with migration. For example, how much of the inflationary crisis was blamed on immigrants in voters’ minds?

The next big question is what is going to happen when Trump comes into power. I agree that the appointments of Tom Homan and Stephen Miller to the head of ICE and white house deputy chief of staff, respectively, indicate Trump intends to follow through on his campaign pledges. So, I suppose the question is how bad will the impact really be and will those impacts change people’s minds about immigration? Almost 50% of farm workers in the US are undocumented migrants, so there could very reasonably be food shortages or at least inflation. Will Trump be able to conjure a new enemy then?

Ollie final project pitch

Donald Trump will be the 47th President of the United States. He won the election on a campaign to crack down on migration. His running mate, JD Vance, has suggested the deportation operation could remove more than a million people a year. NYC has an estimated population of 560,000 undocumented migrants, and Philadelphia has an undocumented population of 170,000. Trump has also promised to end temporary protected status.

How are undocumented migrants and the organizations and advocates that support them in NYC and Philadelphia preparing for the coming Trump presidency?

How will immigration enforcement differ under Trump’s second presidency from immigration enforcement under his first presidency?

I plan to include scenes from the Welcoming Center and The Good Shepherd Church. I might also be able to go and visit New York again. I want to weave in perspectives from people who worked in organizations during the last Trump presidency and then get a sense of what could happen this time. I want to make sure I have a strong legal explanation for what the current situation is and what might change. I also want to include a sufficient account of the anxiety and stress that comes from just worrying about what might happen.

I know I need a more specific angle, but I’m not sure what that should be yet.

Interviews that I have already done / people I have quotes from:

Reverend Juan Carlos Ruiz

Colombian couple who didn’t give me their name at the Lutheran church

Welcoming Center director of community (I lost their name but will find it again)

Welcoming Center woman who is leaving (I lost their name but will find it again)

Migrant at the welcoming center

Giulia at the welcoming center

People I need to contact/am waiting to hear back from:

Julia Preston

Anuj Gupta

Someone from the Legal Aid Society

Someone from The Door

Someone from the New York Immigration Coalition

Ollie week 9 discussion post

I was particularly interested in your article, Professor Amos. First, I was interested in the temporality of the reporting. You had built a relationship with Um Nour from reporting trips in 2008, but much of the article takes place in one night. My first question is what does building and maintaining a relationship with a source over several years involve and look like? In terms of the night itself, how do you pitch the project to your source? Much like in the Hassler article, your focus on prostitutes is interesting for the way that although the migrant prostitutes are on the margins of society, a deep focus on them actually reveals a lot about the wider society on whose margins they live. For example, by following Ahmed around, Hassler is able to momentarily explain Cairo’s tipping culture, which more vividly elucidates the broader nature of society for a non-Egyptian reader. This technique reminds me of a profile of an RUC police detective in Patrick Radden Keefe’s book Say Nothing. Radden Keefe explains and demonstrates in his own choice of interviewee that the RUC would target people in menial roles who were connected to the IRA, for example, Gerry Adams’ driver, rather than trying to get Adams himself. My next question is how you come to make judgments like the following: “One last look? Enough eyeliner? Another pat of powder? Anxiety also filled the room, because of the deals that would have to be concluded later in the evening.” This quotation describes the bathroom in which the women are doing their makeup. Particularly when there is a language barrier, is this the kind of thing you just have to trust your judgment on or was this made more apparent to you in conversation about the scene with Um Noor?

 

With regard to the Ben Taub piece, I read it when it first came out in 2021. I remember being blown away at the time by the level of detail. There are many questions the article raises for me. First, how does one decide to set off investigating this kind of thing and then how does one actually go and do it? Did the story come to him or would he have had an inkling doing other reporting? I’m also curious how he would have built trust with people who inhabit a very murky world.

 

Finally, I was interested in the Goudeau chapter. It’s striking that the US immigration system used to be so explicitly based on race. As Goudeau points out, there were millions of people from around the world in majority non-white countries who could have benefited from coming to the US, but the US was only interested in European immigrants. I was struck by the US sympathy for the student rebels in Hungary and thought the example raised a number of parallels with today. The US is interested in refugees that “deserve” settlement because of some kind of alignment with US foreign policy interests. For example, in recent years both Ukrainians and Afghans have received special access to the US, whereas Syrians have not.

Oliver de Bono Profile Assignment 3

“It seemed vaguely productive”, Zara explains when I asked her why she volunteered with Roots, a humanitarian organization in Grande-Synthe, Dunkirk. “I do study politics, so I write about these things in the abstract, but I thought it could be nice to get involved in that way. There’s only so many summers of uni left.” She pauses. “It’s not the most noble reason ever.”

 

I first met Zara O’Shea, 22, from Northern Ireland, when I visited Roots at the end of July this year. Roots, an environmentally conscious humanitarian organisation, provides aid to migrants hoping to cross the English Channel from France to the UK. According to its website, Roots was founded in 2017 when its founder and current President of the board of Trustees, Thomas Gilbert, started recycling old batteries to make low-cost power packs for migrants. Since then, the organization has hosted over 140 volunteers. Roots provides charging services and humanitarian aid to migrants and maintains free-standing water tanks and showers for migrants to use. Sarah Berry, the Treasurer of Roots, told me when I visited, “It’s really vital work we’re doing here. Nobody else is bothering.”

 

I followed their volunteers and coordinators on a day’s “community hub” aid distribution. We drove out in a convoy of cars and vans to a clearing nestled between a main road and some railway tracks, passing French CRS riot police on the way. Around the clearing are unused fields, bushes and trees that make it impossible to see beyond a few hundred yards in the furthest direction. There, they erected two gazebos weighed down by cinder blocks. They set up a generator connected to improvised wooden boards with dozens of charging ports. A hundred or so migrants from Iraq, Sudan, Eritrea, and a host of other countries were already there waiting—some standing talking in groups, others sitting on pieces of torn-up cardboard boxes. Throughout the day, different groups and people came and went. Migrants would constantly disappear and reappear from the trees and bushes. A local French collective arrived and gave out hot meals. A woman from Belgium showed up in her car and started handing out gloves and socks out of her trunk. A migrant woman set up a shop, a regular fixture apparently, out of a shopping cart, selling snacks and cigarettes. A winding line of male migrants stemmed from each provider and twisted around the clearing: mothers and children waiting on the side for whoever was queuing on their behalf. At one point, an ambulance with a police escort showed up to collect a pregnant Vietnamese woman in a “critical condition”, so a coordinator told me. 

 

My memory of Zara in Dunkirk is of her dressed in a faded hoody, combat pants, and her green Roots high-vis bib. The coordinators told everyone to stay in pairs, to stay in the clearing, and to stick near the gazebo —there had been a shooting in the area the night before. Zara and I watched over the children’s board game area and the charging station together. I was struck that day by Zara’s sense of humour in contrast to the other volunteers and coordinators who were very serious. A student at Utrecht University in the Netherlands, Zara is now studying for a semester at UC Berkeley in California. Reflecting on the day we met, she says, “The stuff you’re seeing in Dunkirk doesn’t fit in with the normal conflicts you normally have and the stuff that’s bothering you in normal life. So you just can’t process it in the minute.” She laughs as she talks for much of our interview, just like when we spoke in Dunkirk. But it is still a laugh that does not seem sure of itself. I sense that Zara is still processing her month with Roots.

 

Dunkirk and Roots had never been Zara’s plan. “I was looking to go somewhere in Greece. It seemed suited more to my skill set. It’s more settled in Greece. There are people setting up schools and community centers there. I was looking for something more community-focused because I don’t have any hard skills. After all, I chose a humanities degree—silly.” She laughs. “I ended up spending my summer lifting cinder blocks.” 

 

Again, I asked her why, of all the things she could have done in the summer, she chose to work with refugees. This time, she goes further, “The focus of my studies is welfare organisations, and I’ve had a lot of involvement with the Free Palestine movement. A lot of that is about how I just don’t believe there should be borders. Obviously, I’m literally just a child so my opinion on this doesn’t matter, but I don’t think there should be borders or nations in an ideal world. I don’t think it’s right or fair in any way that some people are allowed to be born with so much and so much entitlement and others with nothing.” It is a recurring theme in our interview that Zara has pithy remarks for all my questions. Yet, when I press her, the speed of her responses gives me the impression that she has been asking herself the same things.

 

Zara applied to volunteer with a community organization in Greece, but was unsuccessful. She then found Roots on Instagram. “I emailed Sarah my CV, and she said yeah, that’s great.” Sarah Berry is the Treasurer of Roots. “It was all sorted within two hours of emailing her.”

 

Roots is unique among aid organizations in northern France because it provides its volunteers and coordinators with a communal living space. “We were all in this warehouse, and it had been renovated, so it was these little box rooms with two sets of bunks in each”, Zara explains. The Roots warehouse is on an industrial estate comprised of other gated warehouses and scrap heaps. Even in July, I remember it being dark and damp. At the top of a spiral staircase sticking out of one end of the warehouse is a loft. Inside, I found volunteers making cups of tea in a wood-floored kitchen while the coordinators made plans in their office. “On our days off, we all hung out together. And I do think that grated on the four volunteer coordinators because they had to behave in their roles even at home.” The Roots website explains that volunteer coordinators are “experienced and qualified individuals” who are “dedicated to ensuring that the services we deliver at the camp are dignified and sustainable.” Zara explains, “It was the social stuff that made me tweak because you can process the coordinator who you’re exchanging microaggressions with. So that was what I was crying on the phone to my mum about, not all the other stuff.” The Roots website also says, “[the coordinators] are at the camp every day to ensure that volunteers are comfortable, and the displaced individuals have a familiar face to approach with questions.” When I asked her how she felt about the living situation, however, Zara had no regrets. “The accommodation was a massive plus and why I chose to go to Roots—I wouldn’t have been able to afford it if my accommodation hadn’t been covered.”

 

Still, Zara does tell me that a couple of weeks after I visited Roots, there was an “implosion” at Roots. Izzy Redmayne, a 24-year-old English aupair working in France, arrived to volunteer at Roots soon after my visit. “Me and Zara were really… we were basically inseparable. We just shared one brain cell the entire time that we were together. It was really important to me because I felt like everyone hated me”, Izzy explained. The trouble started, Izzy continued, on her first day during a briefing when she was told that she must not speak to any journalists. When Izzy then told them she had started writing articles for a French paper, it was “really, really badly received.” She explains, “The whole reason I didn’t think to mention it before was because I was just like this random girl running around France asking people what they thought of Le Pen… I realized that was a mistake because I knew in myself I wasn’t gonna write anything.” Izzy told me that after this, she was only allowed to work in the warehouse preparing aid packets filled with hygiene products and refilling the water tanks that Roots maintains around the area migrants. “People did talk to me, but, like, only to call me a narc.” Not long after Izzy arrived, the four coordinators resigned. “The coordinators kind of set the tone for let’s all ostracize this girl. So after they left, things got a bit calmer.” When I asked how things improved, Izzy explained, “Zara is such a charmer and so popular. And so I think it really helped me to kind of have that vote of confidence from her. It meant that other people were much more accepting of me because I kind of was attached to Zara. And everyone loved Zara because she’s just amazing.” Zara does not want to discuss the episode beyond relating the facts and connecting me with Izzy, with whom she is still in regular contact.

 

Although she acknowledges she might not have processed them at the time, Zara tells me that there were very challenging moments working with the migrants in the field in addition to the drama going on inside the warehouse. On July 29th, days after I visited Roots, a 17-year-old boy armed with a knife attacked a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport, England. Three girls under the age of 10 were killed. Nine more children and two adults were injured. Following the attack, misinformation about the identity of the attacker spread online. News website “Channel 3 Now” falsely claimed that the attacker was a Muslim, undocumented migrant who had arrived in the UK on a boat from France. In the wake of such misinformation, riots started across the UK. In Rotherham, South Yorkshire, a mob of rioters tried to storm and set fire to the Holiday Inn Express, a hotel housing asylum seekers whose claims were waiting to be heard. A 27-year-old British man has since pleaded guilty to arson with intent to endanger life and has been sentenced to nine years in prison. “During the riots, there was lots of stuff online where the far-right would be threatening to come across on the ferries”, Zara tells me. “We would have a lot of cars circling.” When I asked her what she meant by this, she explained that members of the “far right” would drive on the roads around the distribution site in loops. “Sometimes there would be too many cars circling around the lot, and the coordinators would be, like, this is sort of unsafe”, Zara laughs. “The Red Cross left that day.” 

 

The far right was not the only source of danger to Roots volunteers or migrants, however. “There were also times where there were shots fired, and we had to leave,” Zara says. Izzy echoed what Zara told me about the gunshots, saying it “happened a few times.” She continued, “being right in the middle of camps surrounded by all these people with gunshots really quite close. Like, close to the point where the coordinator was saying, woah. That’s close. Does anyone wanna leave?” Izzy summarised, “It was quite an intense day.” Focus on smuggling gangs has increased since the election of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, whose slogan for combatting illegal migration to the UK is “smash the gangs”. Earlier this year, BBC investigative reporter Sue Mitchell and former aid worker Rob Lawrie released “To Catch a Scorpion” a podcast series in which they tracked the notorious head of a smuggling gang that operates in Dunkirk to Iraq. Following the release of the series, Barzan Majeed was arrested by local police in Iraq. “One of the new girls came and said it was really cute how those South Sudanese guys would walk around with their best friends when actually I don’t know, it was probably the case they were in a gang together. But she was like, it’s so cute that they’re besties. It was really funny at the time.” Back in July, Zara pointed out to me how certain migrants were allowed to skip the line to receive aid, likely because of a smuggling gang connection. When I asked her if her proximity to organised crime and the gunshots scared her, Zara says they did not. “I didn’t find that aspect challenging. There’s a lot of traveller communities where I live and they would have their personal beef, but I had no part in it because I’m not a traveller.” She tells me about two families with “major beef.” She explained, “I could interact with either of them, but I could interact with either of them because I had no skin in the game.” Zara also tells me about another incident she remembers that is harder to place in any specific context. “There was also this guy who was walking around swinging a tent pole, so we had to cancel water distribution one day. He had glued a Gilette razor to the end. Like arts and crafts.”

 

Out of everything that happened in her month with Roots, Zara seems to suggest that what she still thinks about most often is her interactions with a migrant child. “There was this girl who was very clingy, but she wanted to be lifted onto the table and touching any of the kids is a big no-no. One of the coordinators was like you should instil a bit of ‘stranger danger’, but I find it hard to be mean to children; call me evil. I didn’t discourage it. I’m a big softie. I’m a horrible babysitter.” Zara pauses for a while before continuing, “She went missing at a certain point. No, there was a child that went missing, and we don’t know if that child was ever found or if it was her. But I never saw her again, and I never saw her family again. And I worry a lot that the family made the crossing. They had lots of children, and I don’t know what I would do in that situation. I’m not a mother. I don’t know what my mother would do in that situation. The way that it works with the crossing is that you’re given no notice. You’re just told we’re going today and you have to, you know, make moves. I just think about it a lot. If she’d just been left or trafficked somewhere…” The tone of our interview changes when Zara starts talking about the child. There is no hint of mirth in her voice anymore. “I was on water refilling that day, so I left early, and then the volunteers told me a kid was missing. I don’t know it was her, though. There were lots of kids..” She trails off. “In my head because I’m not rational. I just worry that it is her and that it’s my fault. I never saw that family again. I didn’t teach her the stranger enough. I think about that a lot.” 

The plight of migrant children in Northern France has been an ongoing concern of aid organizations since migrants started to gather in increasing numbers on the French coast in 2015. In 2016, after the eviction of the Calais “Jungle” migrant encampment, Reuters reported that roughly one third of the 179 migrant children tracked by aid organizations had gone missing. In 2021, Human Rights Watch released a report on the French Police’s practice of regular evictions of migrant encampments that called on child protection authorities in France “to do more to give [unaccompanied migrant children] as full sense as possible of the range of options available to them” in the context of trafficking being “widely thought to be a concern” in Grande-Synthe. Traffickers aside, the environment itself is hazardous to children in Grande-Synthe. I saw so myself on my visit when one of the Roots coordinators run shouting and waving onto the nearby train tracks to grab a migrant child who had set up a small tent between the rails, oblivious to the oncoming train. Anything could have happened to the child Zara is talking about. 

 

Zara found it hard to leave Roots when her month was up. She had to return home before starting her semester abroad in California. I get the sense from our conversation that there was some guilt tied up in how she felt when it was time to leave. Eventually, she says, “I don’t think it actually matters if it’s morally pure or not. Your outcomes only matter.” She continues, “We can’t all be selfless all the time.” and goes on to say, “I still read the Guardian and follow the topic.” Even though she has now left France, she still finds herself being contacted by migrants. She explains, “It’s very easy to find my instagram. I’ve got a lot of dms from people who’ve made the crossing, and they say, ‘oh I’d love to know someone here,’ and I just haven’t responded to any of them because I feel weird about the whole thing.” There is another long pause after she says this. “My poor friends had to listen to me cry and talk about these things.” Zara starts laughing again. 

Bellingcat Discussion post—Ollie

I found the pieces on OSINT and Bellingcat fascinating. I have been on X for a few years and I have seen a lot of OSINT work in relation to the war in Ukraine, so it was fascinating to see more examples of OSINT work in other contexts. I thought the analogy in the documentary of the present moment in digital space being akin to the time of the invention of the printing press was helpful: there has been a sudden development which is still rapidly evolving, and the consequences of that change and our understanding of it are not yet settled. For example, I was struck by the simplicity of the investigators’ methods for investigating Russian soldiers. They could search the soldiers’ units on VContact and then check the mothers and wives’ forums to see discussions of troop movements. So, my first question for Christian would be: how are governments responding to OSINT investigations? What counter measures have they employed?

 

I was also interested in the part of the documentary where Christian shows us how a car bombing in Iraq was staged. He goes on to explain that it took him several days of research to find out what actually happened—time, he explained, that traditional news outlets don’t have. So, what does this mean for journalism? To what extent are we going to rely on citizen journalists being able to prove their claims vs will people continue to trust big news organisations?

 

I was very interested in the TIME piece on the Ukrainian government’s app. Citizens can use the app to report war crimes and Russian troop movements as well as interact with the government in other ways. The article was particularly interesting in the context of the other readings on OSINT as this seems to be an exampled of state-sponsored engagement with OSINT both for military purposes in the present and for War crimes prosecution purposes in the future. As Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s Minister of Digital Transformation says that “this war has been the most radical shift in warefare since WWII, at least in Europe”. I hear people say this sort of thing about the war in Ukraine in the context of drone warfare, too. I imagine the same will be said once AI is deployed more regularly on the battlefield too. However, the liberal in me is worried about how a government app on your phone could be abused. I spoke to a Russian guy my age I met last year in France and he was telling me about a similar government app in Russia. There, however, Russian men started to receive their draft orders via notification on their phones so they could no longer claim not to have seen them. They could also lose access to their drivers’ license and bank accounts through the app if they did not respond to the draft order. In any case, I think the app will be a huge resource to ICC investigators (the Foreign Affairs piece was super helpful at explaining why prosecuting Putin would be so hard) and historians. My other questions for Christian would be to ask how OSINT is evolving with technology, e.g AI. and I am also interested in how Bellingcat investigators remain transparent whilst also protecting sources / unique investigative practices.

Can the UK Return Migrants at Sea to France?

CALAIS, FRANCE — Three migrants were reported dead on Wednesday by the French Maritime Prefecture. The bodies were recovered as 45 migrants were rescued during a failed attempt to cross the English Channel from France to the UK.

In June, Reform UK released a four-point plan to “stop the boats.” In their plan, they claimed that the UK government could start “picking up illegal migrants at sea and returning them to France.” Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK, repeated the claim on Question Time in June and then again on BBC Radio Kent in September. Richard Tice, member of parliament and former leader of Reform UK, tweeted in September, “Starmer needs to explain why he does not have leadership & courage to use 1982 UN Convention of Law at Sea to pick up & take back”

So, can the UK return migrants at sea to France?

“Not without the consent of the French, ” according to James Turner KC, a barrister at Quadrant Chambers specializing in maritime law. “Article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea does not allow the unloading of migrants in other nations’ territorial waters “contrary to the immigration laws” of that country”.

In January 2018, the British and French governments signed the Sandhurst Treaty. The agreement outlined how the governments would cooperate to reduce illegal migration across the Channel. However, the agreement makes no provision for returning migrants intercepted at sea to France. There is only agreement that “Migrants rescued at sea will be taken to a port of safety in accordance with international maritime law.”

“The channel, and indeed a lot of littoral waters, are divided up into search and rescue zones and different states have responsibility in each of them” explains James Tuner KC. “But just because, say, the UK has responsibility for search and rescue in Zone X it doesn’t stop France coming and helping if they have ships in the area.”

In July, a British Border Force vessel assisted French authorities in a search and rescue operation and returned the rescued migrants to France for the first time.

At the time, a Maritime and Coastguard Agency spokesperson said: “A Border Force vessel was sent to support French vessels in the operation, coordinated by French authorities.”

James Tuner KC said, “If they were picked up in British waters then the appropriate port of safety will be a British one because otherwise you’re crossing an international boundary with [the migrants].”

Felix Thompson, spokesperson for aid collective Calais Appeal, said, “Although we would never encourage migrants to make the crossing, we tell them that if they do and are in distress, they should contact us as well as the emergency services. That way, we can try and get them help too and it’s on the record that the authorities knew a boat was in distress.”

In November 2021, 31 migrants died crossing the channel when their boat capsized in the English Channel. ​​At the time, the UN’s International Organization for Migration (IOM) called the incident the worst single incident of lives lost since it began collecting data in 2014. A French inquiry in the aftermath of the incident found that the migrants on the boat had repeatedly called French and British search and rescue authorities but received no assistance, despite a French coast guard vessel being in the vicinity. The boat had capsized around midnight, but was not attended to until the next afternoon when a fishing vessel saw bodies in the water and raised the alarm. Many of the migrants who died had frozen to death in the water since the boat had capsized. Five French soldiers have since been charged by French police for failing to prevent the loss of life.

Last month, Prime Minister Keir Starmer visited Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni to discuss migration. The Prime Minister told journalists that Italy’s deal with the UN-back Libyan government and the Tunisian government “appears to have had quite a profound effect.” He said, “Preventing people leaving their country in the first place is far better than trying to deal with those that have arrived in any of our countries, so I was very interested in that.” The number of people arriving in Italy from Africa has dropped by 64% this year.

It is unclear what lessons the Prime Minister is hoping to draw from his visit to Italy, however. French police already patrol beaches around Calais and Dunkirk and prevent migrants from leaving French shores where they encounter them.

“The Italians in the past have been very naughty about what they have done with refusing refugees to be landed in their ports. They have also offended against the principle of refoulement,” said James Tuner KC. In 2012, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Italian government had violated international human rights law by returning more than 200 migrants intercepted at sea to Libya, their point of departure.

During the Boris Johnson Conservative government, Home Secretary Priti Patel drew up plans for a “push-back policy” under which border force vessels would forcibly push migrant boats back into French waters. The plans were abandoned, however, in the face of legal challenges. It was also thought that the chance of endangering migrant lives was so great that the policy was unworkable in practice.

“The international legal framework of the Refugee Convention and the Safety of Life at Sea Convention and the Search and Rescue Convention and the Collision Regulations all conspire against doing anything radical to ships at sea” said James Turner KC, who was involved in the legal challenge to Patel’s policy. He added, “I do not think the solution to migrant crossings is a legal one.”

The debate as to how to prevent migrants crossing the channel continues as the IOM has raised the death count for migrants crossing the channel in 2024 to 52, making it the deadliest year of crossings since 2018.

Zoe Sigman, an analyst at the IOM’s Missing Migrant Project, said, “We can never say that we have captured all of the data and in fact we know that we don’t capture all of the data.”

Ollie week 7 post

I thought the articles by Dexter Filkins and Caitlin Dickerson were both excellent. The Filkins article gave a really good overview of the problems from a US policy perspective: congress is in stalemate for partisan reasons, so the President rules through executive orders, which can then be challenged in court. As Filkins illustrates, the US asylum process and changing border policy are very dysfunctional. The fact that asylum seekers can stay for 10 years without having their asylum cases settled is a huge problem because it means that migrants can de facto stay and are likely to slip away and become undocumented at any point in the process. Better the certainty of being undocumented and staying than risking being deported for the sake of being legal. It was also interesting that the US had relied on Title 42, archaic public health legislation,  to turn away migrants at the border within 15 minutes of processing them for so long but cannot anymore. I thought the profiles of the local politicians Lozano and Gonzales were really interesting because they highlighted the gulf between the Washington narrative and the experience of communities close to the border. Both politicians gave the impression they were now totally disillusioned with the federal government’s ability to respond. There was a suggestion at the end of the article that what the US needs to do is invest more in South American economies. I don’t think that will stem the flow of migrants. I remember reading in Patrick Kingsley’s book The New Odyssey that increases in GDP lead to short to medium-term increases in population outflow as more people have the means to leave the country. I was also struck by the many similarities to the migrant crisis in the EU and in the UK: I haven’t read the book that we read the review for, but I did note that the review mentioned how the author didn’t consider US migration policy in a global context. Thinking about the issue in the context of a looming Trump presidency, I am increasingly convinced that the more liberal solutions to the migration crisis are nebulous and uncertain: facilitate assimilation and mutual understanding and increase overseas aid spending etc. On the other hand, the more right-wing suggestions on the right are very concrete: close the border, end the asylum system, have a hard cap on migration. My sense is that these suggestions are increasingly appealing to the median voter in many western democracies. The main obstacle for implementing these policies in Western countries so far has been international law, but how long will it be before a major western country ends its asylum system and which other countries will follow? The UK was the first to try to ship its migrants away and failed, but now the Netherlands and Germany are trying.

I found Dickerson’s piece fascinating and very compelling. It was a topic that I knew nothing about but that I now feel I know a good amount about. It’s crazy to me that a region that was thought of as impassable for centuries had 800 thousand people cross through it last year, with the fastest growing group being under 5s. My overall takeaway from the piece was that deterrence does not work: people have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Elimar’s situation at the end of the piece, living and working in Dallas, with her asylum hearing not for another 5 years shows how you can win big even though you gamble. I thought the story of Bé and Kánh was heartbreaking and allowed the human toll of the criminalisation of migration to cut through. It provides a useful counter example to Elimar’s success. It also points to the  long term traumatisation of even the people who do manage to make it to the US.

« Older posts

The McGraw Center for Teaching and Learning
328 Frist Campus Center, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544
PH: 609-258-2575 | FX: 609-258-1433
mcgrawect@princeton.edu

A unit of the Office of the Dean of the College

© Copyright 2025 The Trustees of Princeton University

Accessiblity | Privacy notice