Latin America was once considered to be a major hotspot for immigrants, with some of its largest companies founded by foreign newcomers. Countless African slaves were shipped to Brazil and the Caribbean rim, with Spaniards, Germans, Italians, east Europeans, Jews, and Syrio-Lebanese, Japanese, and Chinese flowing in as well. By the mid-20th century, however, global migration began to diminish, but hundreds of thousands ended up gradually moving into once successful Venezuela from other Andean countries in the mid 1900’s. Based on Venezuela’s great influx of immigrants at the time, one would have never suspected that they would undergo a sudden exodus just decades later.
Since 2014, approximately 2.3 million have fled the country, with about 5000 residents abandoning the country daily. Nearly half of the fleeing Venezuelans have fled to Colombia, with Peru, Ecuador, Chile, Brazil, and Argentina receiving the rest. Some fear political persecution by their president, Nicolas Maduro’s dictatorship, while many others have grown weary of hyperinflation, crime and collapsed public services. Although a vast majority of venezuelan refugees have been warmly welcomed by neighboring countries, some have been major targets of xenophobia, for Latin America does not take nationalism lightheartedly. In August, locals at the Brazil and Venezuela border attacked a migrant camp, expelling a total of 1,200 refugees. Costa Ricans ended up staging an anti-refugee demonstration at their national capital, San Jose, along with a candidate for a mayor of Lima stating that he will defend his citizens and their jobs from incoming Venezuelans.
The reason to be concerned with this brewing issue: Latin America has very poor incomes ($17,000 per person) compared to some of their European counterparts ($46,000), who have been leading the world in immigrant migration since 2014. With a struggling economy, Latin America does not have the financial stability to support a great influx of immigrants, nor will the immigrants make enough money to finance themselves, as they will have to compete for unskilled jobs and depressing wages.
Despite all this, the remainder of the globe is doing its best to provide aid for the Venezuelan migrant crisis. It is understood that it will cost Colombia a whopping $1.6 billion annually to provide services for the newcomers. The US has offered $100 million in emergency aid, with the bipartisan bill in the Senate possibly adding to that amount. The UN has also been paying its contributions by appointing a special representative to try and solve the issue, with the EU promising $40 million. Besides simply donating money and aid to the Latin American migrant crisis, many believe that money should also be recovered by seizing assets stolen by those in power in Venezuela.
Understanding that Venezuela is corrupt politically, economically, and socially, I believe that it makes perfect sense for its inhabitants strong desire to flee. From a realist perspective, however, one might think that other global countries shouldn’t waste their finances on supporting the migrant crisis, but on something that benefits them directly. They also might believe that Latin American countries should refuse the influx of Venezuelans, for it could potentially disrupt their economy and stir up social tensions. From a liberalist perspective, however, Latin America, the US, UN, and EU might focus on how helping Venezuela could be beneficial in the long run, rather than make their own self-interests a priority. For example, refusing to provide aid and prohibiting Venezuelan immigrants to come in could be seen as selfish by other countries and earn them a bad reputation.