Indian Council of World Affairs

Ambi:  Good afternoon esteemed guests. Before we proceed, I kindly request you all to switch off your phone or put them on silent mode to avoid any interruptions during the event. On behalf of the Centre for Migration, Mobility and Diaspora Studies, the Migration Vertical of Indian Council of World Affairs, it is my pleasure to welcome you all to today's event, Fraying at the Edges? Rethinking Narratives on International Migration and Mobility in 2025. As we witness an increasingly fragmented geopolitics and a changing world order, it is no surprise that international mobility and migration are being deeply impacted. In the light of this, today's discussion seeks to unpack and critically rethink prevailing migration and mobility narratives in 2025. The order of the event is as follows. We shall begin the program with Additional Secretary ICWA, Ms Nutan Kapoor Mahawar, delivering her welcome remarks. The panel discussion will be chaired by Ambassador Sanjay Bhattacharya, Professor of Diplomatic Practice, Jindal School of International Affairs, O.P. Jindal Global University, and Former Secretary, (CPV and OIA), Ministry of External Affairs, India. Joining us for the discussion today are four distinguished panellists. I welcome Professor Binod Khadria, President of the Global Research Forum on Diaspora and Transnationalism, and Co-convenor of Metropolis Asia-Pacific, who will be joining us virtually; Mr Sanjay Awasthi, Head of Office, International Organization for Migration, India Office; Professor S. Irudaya Rajan, Chair, International Institute of Migration and Development; and Mr Karan Deep Singh, Independent Journalist and former staff reporter at the New York Times. The discussion will be followed by a brief Q&A session moderated by the Chair, and with that, may I now invite Ms Nutan Kapoor Mahawar, Additional Secretary ICWA, to deliver her welcome remarks. Over to you, ma'am. 

Nutan Kapoor Mahawar:  Distinguished experts, students, and friends, let me begin on a somewhat unconventional note by referring to a recent blockbuster Bollywood film, Dunki. That a widely watched film, led by India's most selling actor, Shah Rukh Khan, chose to centre its story on international migration and perils of irregular migration reflects the growing relevance and resonance of this subject in broader public discourse. In one scene, particularly relevant to today's discussion, the hero Shah Rukh Khan is asked by the authorities of the destination country to surrender his Indian passport to apply for asylum on the grounds of persecution back home. Since he's the hero, he refuses, holding firm to his faith in his homeland, while his friends falsely cite persecution back home in the hope of greener pastures. This moment in the movie highlights the layered realities and moral dilemmas in migration decisions. It reminds us that no single narrative can capture the full spectrum of motivations. Dominant narratives, however, often reduce migration to a story of unwanted but essential labour, overlooking the pursuit of cross-cultural interface, tolerance, dignity, and human spirit.  

It is in this context today that today's panel has been curated to unpack the complexity of migration and mobility narratives in 2025 and to reflect on how they are shaped by diplomacy, academia, policy, and media. At ICWA Centre for Migration, Mobility and Diaspora Studies, we felt it was important to explore how structured narratives often frame migrants in binaries, heroes or threats, contributors or burdens. These narratives not only reflect public opinion, they shape it and influence policy choices, international cooperation, and societal perceptions. I wish to outline five key considerations that are central to rethinking migration and mobility narratives today. 

First, we need to draw a distinction between the terms, migration and mobility. Migration typically refers to permanent change in residence or citizenship, while mobility refers to temporary cross-border movement. While promoting outward migration cannot obviously be a conscious policy choice of governments, promoting mobility can surely be for any open society. A distinction between these two terms helps greater clarity in policy formulation for meeting distinct objectives. This distinction, documented for instance through a self-declaration of intent to migrate permanently or to return to one's family in home country at the time of embarking on the journey, can aid more effective governance. Let's make people think for themselves. People planning to move abroad have to be urged to make their intentions clearer, while the authorities at both ends have to be urged to try to better understand their aspirations and/or bonding with families and home country. This distinction also helps reduce the exploitation of those caught in legal and administrative limbo in destination countries, that is, those who are neither returning home nor are fully accepted at destination. 

My second point is, the focus on mobility aligns with the broader idea of global workplace, a vision endorsed by both Prime Minister Modi and External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar. With globalization and increased global connectivity, a global workplace is a new reality. India very much wants to be part of this evolving global workforce through ethical, structured pathways. India's migration and mobility partnership agreements with foreign partners are intended to facilitate temporary circular mobility for students, professionals, and contractual workers, while encouraging skill and talent return to contribute to the objectives of the vision of a developed India by 2047, the centenary of its independence from colonialism or Viksit Bharat at 2047. 

Third, greater attention must be paid to circular mobility as a transformative narrative. It allows individuals to work or study abroad temporarily, return with enhanced skills, transmit the skills to others back home, and re-engage periodically in future cycles. For this model to succeed, international cooperation is key. Destination and origin countries must cooperate through burden sharing in skilling, ethical recruitment, simplification of procedures, and reintegration mechanisms. Contract flexibility, that is the option to change employers, is equally essential. There is scope to reimagine short-term mobility as a system that enables individuals and the national ecosystems to realise their fullest potential. 

Fourth, and most critically, we must place migrant well-being and well-being of the mobile individuals at the heart of our discourse in both home and destination countries. Migrant well-being is not only about employment. It also includes dignified working and living conditions, social protection, and legal safeguards. Yet, prevailing narratives often undermine these goals. Terms like illegal migration in political and media discourse tend to criminalise people and obscure the real drivers of movement. The Global Compact for Migration, which the international community has agreed to, offers an important corrective, advocating for the use of irregular migration as a neutral, structured term that upholds dignity. Constructive narratives fostered by governments, academia, civil society, and media are therefore also essential to shaping policy responses that prioritise well-being and inclusion. 

Fifth, well-being of the internationally mobile individuals must also be viewed in relation to the well-being of their left-behind families back home. Migration and mobility impacts not just individuals, but entire households. Left-behind families often face emotional strain, disrupted caregiving, and social adjustments. Policy must respond through initiatives such as scholarships for children, social protection for elderly parents or dependents, through innovative financial instruments, and community-based support systems. Migration and mobility must be seen not as an isolated act, but as one that reshapes the social fabric of families and communities. 

Friends, India is being currently approached by many countries, demanding skills, labour, and students. Many Indians also wish to pursue livelihoods or studies in foreign lands. Here, we have to make careful assessments. What, after all, is the price of giving up family warmth to go to work or study abroad? What is the price of living on a foreign land as a foreigner and not as a first-rate citizen in your own land? People are any country's most important and most precious asset. People must be the beginning and end of any policy related to migration or mobility, be it in the destination or the country of origin. Obligations and responsibilities of destination countries are as important as the obligation and responsibilities of countries of origin. And cooperation is key. Why we should not, for instance, ask for full assimilation and inclusion of people of Indian origin in the countries of their citizenship? 

Friends, there are lessons to be learned from the recent repatriation of irregular Indian migrants from the US. Prospective migrants, especially in states like Punjab, where a US, UK, or Canadian visa is considered to be akin to a lifeline, have to rethink in light of changing realities and the churn in global migration debate. The ecosystem of fraudulent agents and agents that mislead have to be dealt with as a law and order issue pan India. The signals from the world are loud and clear. It is not business as usual. We have to build an ecosystem that facilitates international worker, talent and student mobility based on cooperation between countries that ensures an individual's acceptance and dignity. Narratives that exaggerate the benefits of migration need to be countered by more objective ones. 

The Global Compact of Migration agreed to in 2018 is a forward-looking document. It is based on “common understanding, shared responsibilities and unity of purpose”. India welcomes and appreciates its role in promoting a human rights-based approach to migration governance. Looking forward, we hope that the ongoing regional reviews of GCM taking place across different regions of the world will lead to more balanced and implementation- oriented ideas enabled through the collective efforts of governments, academia, civil society and media. With these thoughts, I invite Ambassador Sanjay Bhattacharya, Chair of today's panel, to take forward what promises to be an enriching and thought-provoking discussion. Sir. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya:  Thank you, Ambassador Nutan Mahawar. I think you set the stage rather well in terms of your opening remarks in explaining the circumstances that lead to migration, the kind of drivers that keep people going towards destinations and the kind of sentiments that may also apply in destination countries. Thank you very much for this invitation to come back to the Indian Council for World Affairs. I also must compliment you for having picked up this idea. And I think in some ways, the concepts of migration and mobility have been gathering momentum in various policy houses and have now become an instrument of governance. So, to have this discussion and become one of those ideas that you will push forward in terms of research and advocacy at ICWA is most laudable. I must also compliment you for having put together this absolutely fabulous panel. I know most of them, and I've been very much in awe of the kind of research and experience that they possess. So, like you, I also look forward to being amongst their midst. 

Let me put through first a few ideas about the way I see migration, particularly in the 21st century and of course there is a thought that says that migration has happened ever since man was there and there was that spirit of adventure but today I think what we see is that it is more in terms of labour market adjustments, it's more in terms of aspirations, it's more in terms of certain predictive values that people follow and there are these different instruments that lead to migration and they lead to conditions that compel people to move and compel the destination countries to accept migrants as well. And I'm so happy that you also brought about this distinction between migrants, migration and mobility because that is a distinction that is actually emerging in the policy frame today and is leading to very positive outcomes in terms of the way we look at this. At the end of the day it's a policy, public policy, governance structure that we are looking at. With the levels of empowerment rising amongst most countries for their citizens, governance is becoming key and your citizens are at the core of it. 

If you look at some rough data at the end of 2020 around the time when COVID was there, there was an estimate done by IOM which suggested that there were about 280 million migrants globally. In other words, they composed roughly about 3.5 percent of the global population. Now that's not a very high number but of course in certain communities this proportion would have been higher. It's also important to note that the larger chunk of migrants globally are actually in Asia. They have the largest in terms of continents followed by Europe and then by America. These destinations are within Asia, Europe and America. Sometimes there's transit countries as well. What we also find is that the pace at which migration has been increasing has been somewhat steady and it's not a very high rate of growth. But there are certain pathways that have been created which have both regular as well as irregular channels of movement and in which there are, as you referred to, there are the presence of agents and other agent provocators who bring about a certain movement which sometimes kind of is in the borderline of legality. Therefore I think in some sense though there is a certain move towards the irregular migrant being the focus in the GCM and we subscribe to that, there is a certain element of illegality and particularly because of the presence of certain middlemen that sense of illegality perhaps needs to continue because there is a certain legal law and order issue as well. It doesn't apply so much in terms of the motivations of the migrant per se but in terms of the ones who are coming in between. 

So if you look at this particular trend of the 21st century, I see that there are broadly three mores and three lesses. And the three mores are that the migrant is becoming more vulnerable, that there are more forced migrations. And sometimes, this forced and voluntary is a slightly tricky issue to determine. But I think, when you have situations of conflict or you have situations of turmoil or you have situations of environmental degradation which force migrations I think those instances have been growing in the 21st century. And the third more that I see is that protectionist measures and border controls are becoming more. 

At the same time, there are three lesses as well and I think it's important to take note of them. The first less I find is that of dignity of the migrant, and in many ways, the dignity of that individual who's moving transborder is often compromise and, some of the instances that we saw coming about-- in some of the recent instances were quite the case. What we also see is that there is less of integration. When people move overseas, one is expecting that they would get integrated into the communities, whether it is the workplace or society or both. But that is not quite happening in the manner or to the degree of extent that one would have felt desirable. There's also a question about reintegration, when they sometimes come back, but that is probably less of a concern, but this less integration is definitely an issue. 

And the third less that I see is of less rights, and very often, even of human rights if you look at the OECD data post 2016, the number of people who've been granted asylum or refugee status is actually continued to go down. And that is just one indication in an environment where there is more forced migration happening. So, I took note of the very outstanding concept note that was circulated by ICWA and you pointed out five different features in that, and I took note of the five features that you mentioned. And, I think that can be a good starting point for a discussion, and I'm sure my brilliant panellists will contribute on all those ideas as well. The first is about cooperation, I think in some ways, the GCM has been an outstanding achievement of the international community to bring together a certain comprehensive understanding of the issue of migration, which was earlier looked at in slightly different context, somewhat fragmented in terms of labour, in terms of, refugees, and so on. But I think this compact, comprehensive understanding is good. 

What is also useful is that if we can put a conjoint of the GCM with the SDGs, you know, all of us today at the multilateral level are in terms of attainment of the SDGs, and the SDG 2030s have been recently reevaluated midterm, and we have a lot of progress to do. But I think when we look at the two conjointly, we see a better construct that we can particularly when we are looking at it from the policy framework, and the kind of policies that you wish to have and develop. And at the same time, what we do see is that while the trend for migration is on an ascendance, the protectionist trends from the other side are coming back, and therefore, the need for negotiations. The second issue was of welfare and of pathways. What we do see is that this is an area in which we clearly need much more legislation besides a sense of empathy. And I do understand that since most of these ideas come under sovereignty jurisdiction, and therefore, it is extremely difficult to have a certain international law that would apply to everybody or a convention. The GCM provides the broad norms on the basis of which individual countries can proceed, and I'm very happy that a lot of work is actually going on in that particular context, at a regional level, at a bilateral level, the kind of capacity building that is being provided by the UN and its agencies is most useful in this context. 

What we also do see is that when one goes overseas, there is a certain differentiation that happens for the migrant, or even those who are moving for employment on a short term basis. And there are two broad terms on which this differentiation seems to happen. One is if your skill level is higher, the level of acceptance or integration seems to be higher. And therefore, we find that people who are highly skilled professionals in technology, in medicine, in academia, in arts and crafts, they have a better recognition than those who are low skilled, semi-skilled or unskilled. And therefore, the levels of welfare actually depend much more on the kind of skill levels that you possess. The second is in terms of the kind of duration of stay that a migrant actually receives from the destination country. And those who have longer terms of stay tend to have better privileges, Social Security benefits, and so on. And so, in other words, should we move towards a system where these can be more equalised, recognising that both of them are human beings, whether it is the skill factor, or the duration factor. 

The third was about the norms and human rights. And I think this is one in which we need to understand the certain drivers of migration that happened, particularly in the source countries. And once we have a better understanding of these, you referred to the cases looking about, when people go out from certain states of India, there is a certain expectation almost. And in some ways, is it because there is a certain development deficit, and development is not purely just in economic terms, it's also in terms of your social integration in terms of your expectations. And I think that is something that we will need to look at in a much more deliberate manner. And then, of course, at the other end, we'll have to work it out with the destination countries about the human rights that they have. 

The fourth one was about the impact of media and the political rhetoric. And this brings us to this very classic question of people, power and politics. And at the end of the day, most narratives, which seem to be loud chatter at one level, but actually have huge influence in terms of what it does at the grassroots, this needs to be managed. And I think for this, it is not enough just having a good policy, but it's actually the advocacy, the work of NGOs, etc, that would be very, very important. And the last item that had been mentioned in your really good concept note was about how far do we bring in the issue of cultural exchanges, and the rising tendencies of xenophobia. And I think the kind of trends that we see of right wing and conservative factions, they are in a sense, and let us admit it, they are in a sense, confident that they are protecting their communities and they are addressing the needs and aspirations of their communities. But in some ways, they kind of are counter to the globalisation process, which migration essentially seeks to do. 

So, in that broad framework, I actually had three policy formulations that I thought I would leave for my distinguished panel to ponder upon as well. And the first one is, I think where we are falling short is on dialogue. And the dialogue over here that I referred to is with the principal stakeholder, which is the migrant. And I understand that as policymakers, it is often not very convenient or easy to do this with the migrant directly. And therefore, I feel there is much greater need to engage with the NGOs, because they are much closer to the ultimate migrant. The levels of trust that they have for policy and policymakers seems to be shorter than what they have for the NGOs that they interact with, sometimes even the unscrupulous agent that they will fall prey to. 

The second policy feature is about planning, and specifically about contingency planning, I think we often do prepare for black swans. But what we don't often prepare for are the grey rhinos. And these are there right there standing in front of you, whether it is an economic development issue whether it is an environmental challenge, but we don't prepare adequately to it so I think for instance, if you look at the kind of scenarios that were coming up about the movements across continents from some of the states of India. These were actually happening. We did not recognise them, and we did not take adequate measures but we need, we need to recognise and the third is really off that business of international cooperation and there, I think there is a recognition at one point that perhaps in today's disruptive world multilateralism, though that is my preferred option is perhaps not always practical or feasible in the short term, we should definitely have more bilateral and regional understandings that bring this alignment of the GCM and the SDGs, and to bring them in alignment with the domestic policies that you have of migration policies because at the end of the day what you wish to do is have migration policies that are aligned with the national priorities, development priorities and so that's that could be a way forward, but I will depend a lot on what my expert panel has to say, I'm so happy to note that Professor Binod Khadria is coming online. And if I may invite Professor Khadria to come online at this stage. 

Binod Khadria:  Thank you, Ambassador Bhattacharya. It's my privilege to be at this panel discussion. The introductory briefing by Ambassador Nutan Kapoor, and your elaboration of the concept note provides a lot of ground for us to have the brainstorming that is needed. Ambassador Nutan Kapoor started with a reference to the film Dunki. And I had the privilege of watching this, and I was really pleasantly surprised that this was not a commercial film, although it was a commercial genre, but I think it was, it can be placed as a real life documentary. But anecdotes are important and what I would say that today's concept note and the two introductions give me fresh air. It's not the beaten path, not the rhetoric that we have been hearing all the time. It's something new, something desirable, and a lot of it is connected with the vocabulary, with the terminology that we have been using and the shift in the terminology. 

I'm reminded of more than a decade, about a decade and a half, a colloquium I was attending at the University of Omaha in the US and I think that was the time of the US census, new census coming up, and one of the Latino professors, he stood up and in a humorous way, he said one of the questions in the questionnaire for the census is, what's your race? And so, he said, and I wrote human, human race, and then I was inspired to stand up and say you are privileged to say that you are human race, but we and my brothers and sisters in the US are not even entitled to write that. They have to write aliens, right, like they have come from the other planet. So the vocabulary is very important and one can go on immigrant, non-immigrant, permanent residents and so on and so forth. So I think this particular subject, very imaginary subject, Fraying at the Edges? Rethinking Migration, keeping in mind, fraying at the edges, the narrative, that's very important to me because I think the context has already been provided by our ambassadors. 

In terms of referring to the SDGs, 10 years back, we signed the sustainable development goals and prior to that, the millennium development goal at the turn of the century. When the SDGs were signed in 2015, I was giving a plenary lecture in Mexico City and impromptu, I stood up and said first time it's a tragedy, second time it's a farce. Why I said that was because amongst the millennium development goals eight, migration was missing and then we were hoping for 15 years that when the turn comes for SDG, migration will have a coveted place amongst the main objectives. But again, we found that amongst the 17 goals, migration was not there. And then, of course, people stood up and applauded when I said that, that it's a farce. But who would listen to a poor academic? It was the Syrian refugee crisis which made the awakening call. And that's why the call for the GCM started in 2015 to bring it through the back door in the SDGs, and it took three years. 

But let me go back to Kofi Annan's era, Millennium Development Goal. Again, on the UN agenda, you have referred to multilateral system, the multilateral system and sovereignty issues. Human migration is a no-no, trade and commerce and goods and services are fine to cross borders, but not human beings. And Kofi Annan wanted to bring it onto the agenda, and that's why he piggybacked it on the agenda of development. And that's why we've got the terminology migration and development. That's when the GCM was, genesis was brought in. Not many people remember or know that the predecessor of GCM was the GCIM, Global Commission for International Migration. That was for three years in 2002. The report came out in 2005, and then that was the beginning of the GFMD, every year, one year in a developed country, one year in a developing country, once in a destination country, once in origin country. 

But over time, we forgot about these institutional memories, and that's why we are where we are today, and that's why we are debating this Rethinking the narratives of migration and mobility. And I think the five issues that have been reiterated by Ambassador Bhattacharya, the five things that have been mentioned by Ambassador Nutan Kapoor, I think the five number is very important. And that's why I'm thinking that the edifice of multilateral institutions is today crumbling. And that's why I used to think of my paradigm shift. I think we are in an age of paradigm collapse, and that paradigm collapse will have to be addressed by talking about paradigm recovery. That, I think, is the right moment for this particular panel discussion to address. And this is where non-binding character of the GCM is very important. The multilateral system has no teeth, and that, I think, is its internal weakness. No country which has given the commitment to GCM as an accountability of what is the timeline, the duration was mentioned by Ambassador Bhattacharya, that time is the main factor, whether it's short-term, medium-term, long-term, what, is it going to be eternal? I used to say that we go to supermarket and see at the expiry date before we buy any commodity or goods or services, but visa policy has no expiry date. Visa policy, visa regimes keep on changing at the drop of a hat, and the decision, like when Ambassador Bhattacharya mentioned, the decision to invest in education, to the global labour market, mobility, and so on, these are characteristically long-term decisions to shift one's home from one place to another place, and these are non-reversible, whereas visa policies change overnight at the drop of a hat, and I can give you an empty number of names of countries who are just playing with the visa policies, and in the name of sovereignty, do not bring it onto the table. Visas are never discussed in multilateral negotiations. So this is one thing. 

Secondly, I would like to say that in the issue of human rights, I have been watching and I have been interacting with the NGOs and civil society organisations. I think it's a very important combination that academics and NGOs come together. Very rightly pointed out, intellectual thinking plus activism are very two arms. One without the other cannot exist, and that's where I think it's absolutely important that human rights are brought to the forefront, but human rights are moral situations. There is an internal weakness there, and I tend to always argue that that's why the flouting of the human rights takes place all over the world. We have to bring it into the fold of the fundamental rights, because fundamental rights are justiciable. They are guaranteed by the constitutions of the countries, and there is accountability. So we have to change the vocabulary, the narrative. We will still continue to talk about human rights, but in a different way, in a different vocabulary. 

I am reminded of Mahatma Gandhi's non-obedient movement, and since films are being mentioned, the Gandhi film by Richard Attenborough. You see, there was one scene where Gandhi says that we will sit in prayers tomorrow. The entire country will sit in prayers, and Jinnah asked him, what are you saying, Gandhi ji? We are fighting the British Raj, and you are talking of prayers. Gandhi ji says, yes, we will sit in prayers, but the entire country will stop. There will be no work, no machines, no printing, nothing will happen because everything is praying. That's the way. So, we have to change the vocabulary. We have to wrap into-- the human rights have to be wrapped into fundamental rights. I think my time will perhaps be over soon, but I should also mention that the discourse is hijacked by the media. Yes, absolutely. But there is paid news, there is fake news, and all those are there. And in many instances, many countries, this is being propagated by their governments. Yesterday, I was listening to what is happening in Nicaragua, and dictatorship. So we have to learn, bring the lessons to the fore, bring it to the fore and put it before our policymakers. That's there. Temporisation, temporary migration and permanent residence. There is a great deal of tendency that migrants should not be permanent. Why? And I used to call it age, wage, and vintage. Migrants age should be very, very low so that you retire them when they are above 40. You bring in 25-year-olds again, other batch. So your migrant population remains low. Your total population of the destination country is neutralised. And then you have low wages, no perks, no pensions, your cost of production is low, and you become competitive in the global trade. And then we have students, the vintage. The vintage is the student, the latest technology is embodied among the students. And that's why there is a talent war to recruit students. They call it recruitment, whereas it should have been enrolment. 

So we find that there are wheels within wheels which we need to unravel. We need to expose them. And that's very important in policymaking, in changing the narrative is very important. We, academia, we all the time, even for ages together, we have been listening to push-pull factors. Push-pull factors are centralised in the home countries. We have to balance that narrative by what is happening in the destination country, what is happening in the origin country. That's very, very, very important. And dignity, rights-based approach has to be changed to dignity-based approach, because nobody cares about rights, but dignity is very important, very widespread. It is the human civilisation which is based on dignity. That's why this is the centre of the terminology that's very important. And I would like to refer to what is happening around the world, weaponization of migration is mentioned in the concept note. And we have seen this. What happened to the student visas in Canada? I was interviewed live by one of the leading newspapers in India and that is where you find and look what is happening, the turmoil that is happening, the largest destination, one of the largest destination countries after USA is Canada, and most of our students go there, if they don't get admission in US, they go to Canada. Of course, we have to, then H1B visa, what is happening to H1B visas, they are coveted visas for the highly skilled migrants, but they are being diluted. Now, we find what is happening to birth right citizenship. We talk about naturalisation of towards it, but there is a clear division between naturalized citizens and birth right citizenship and so on. These are issues that we need to debate. We do not have the answers all the time. And then reciprocal tariff, what is it doing? It's creating havoc. We are facing not only recession, we are heading towards global war. And that's why I'm saying the benefits that are being projected highly are money, materials, and, remittances that are coming. I tend to say remittances are soaked in the sweat and blood of the migrant that is not even recognised. And then there are reverse remittances also. So we have to set the narrative right, make it balanced, and then we talk about cooperation between developed and developing countries on a balanced scale. 

And I would like to say today here that India is the largest country of origin. India has the largest diaspora. We have to tap the diaspora, ask them not only to contribute money, materials, but also their time. This is important because today there is withdrawal of the not only membership from multilateral organisations like UN, WHO, and Climate Dialogue, but also withdrawal of funding. So there has to be substitute funding, resource mobilisation through the diaspora can play a role. India being the largest one, I think need not sit at the back bench of the United Nations General Assembly and just raise a hand. India should lead from the front and say our migrants are not going until you follow our terms. That, I think, will put the narrative correct. I think we will have a lot of discussion and I would like to listen to my co-panellists as well as to the participants. Sorry if I have taken more time. Thank you very much. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya:  Thank you, Professor Khadria, for your elaboration of the manner in which the debate and discussion has evolved on migration. We now have Mr Sanjay Awasthi, Head of Office of IOM, as our next speaker. 

Sanjay Awasthi:  Thank you, the Indian Council of World Affairs, for bringing us together on this very contemporary and critical topic and the previous speakers starting with Additional Secretary Nutan Mahawarji, Ambassador Bhattacharya and Professor Khadria. You have all set an excellent framework of today's conversations. Since the topic is very contemporary in the current circumstances, I decided to structure my address in three parts. The first one is to share with you the global migration perspective and underlining the fact that migration is a reality. The second part is the role that the migrants play in the global economy and society. And the third one is about certain suggestions which could be taken into account. 

So starting with the context, today more than 280 million people live in countries other than where they were born. That means they are migrants which is up from 84 million in 1970. And why today's conversation becomes even more crucial is as Professor Khadria mentioned, India is a country with the largest immigrant population contributing globally. While this is the reality, it is also important for us to recognise that the world is suffering from a shortage of workers that reached an all-time high in the middle of 2022. And here I would refer to some data that was generated out of a study which was jointly done by IOM and the Boston Consulting Group, BCG, just around two years ago. And the data actually looked at the 30 largest economies globally and it found nearly 30 million open jobs in those economies. And these shortages are not limited to highly educated workers. In advanced economies, for example Germany, only about 20% of job openings require a college level education. In comparison, 60% require vocational skills and another 20% are suitable for workers with no high school education. So you can imagine the level of demand. And across skill types, structural labour shortages are costing the countries in that sample more than $1 trillion a year. So that is more than one third of the cost to economies from all open jobs, which is estimated nearly $3 trillion a year. 

So together, migrants would currently form the world's third largest economy, generating approximately $9 trillion in economic output annually. The entire value of migration is much higher because this figure does not capture migrants' full economic impact as consumers, entrepreneurs, and innovators. And of course, when people migrate from one place to another, they just don't migrate. They create a bridge between the countries of origin and countries of destination. And there have been numerous other studies done by IOM which highlight the fact that the migrants contribute to the countries of origin and countries of destination. 

Now coming back, colleagues, to some of this-- the data and analysis. So by linearly projecting past trends into the future for destination countries, we estimate that migration will rise to 400 million people by 2050. And that will translate into an economic value between $14 trillion and $25 trillion a year. So, on the one hand, the 10 countries most affected by population decline will lose about 345 million working age adults by 2050. On the other hand, the 10 countries with the largest increase in population will see their working age populations grow by more than 770 million workers. And just to give two examples, Apple's iPhone and Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccines, they're just two examples out of many of everyday innovations that improve our lives for the better. But they carry a greater significance as well. Each one was conceived by a small team of path-breaking inventors, and they were able to make a difference in the lives of millions of people. And it was these path-breaking inventors who share something in common. These innovations were driven by immigrant founders, people who had crossed physical borders before advancing the boundaries of what's possible for all of us. Coming to a more focused understanding, say for example on the company level, 45% of all Fortune 500 companies were founded by an immigrant or the child of an immigrant. And 50 out of 91 start-up companies worth more than $1 billion had at least one immigrant founder. And companies that embrace global talent enjoy a substantial performance advantage over those that don't. According to the study, the IOM and BCG study that I was referring to, companies with more immigrants in the leadership report an average 15% higher profitability. And they are also 75% more likely to be world-class innovators. And this is not influenced by other factors, such as company size, age, industry, or headquarters location. 

And these findings, when the figures I was citing from these findings, they aligned with those of another study which we had conducted, BCG had conducted in 2017, which was a study of 700 companies across eight countries and a survey again in 2021, which included 850 business leaders. So recognising that as a reality, Ambassador Bhattacharya, Additional Secretary Mahawar, and Professor Khadria have already referred to the Global Compact on Migration. This is the first intergovernmentally agreed framework, and it touches upon almost all aspects of international migration, ranging from ethical recruitment to diaspora engagement. So, let me briefly touch upon a few important aspects which should need our attention. 

The first and the foremost is the fair and ethical recruitment practices. And the global context is fast changing towards this focus. And unfortunately, in India, we have not really been very well prepared for this framework. And one of the biggest challenges in achieving this is related to one of the primary pillars of ethical recruitment, that is the employer pays principle. And we all know that that unfortunately is not the norm globally. The second one, of course, is the Migration and Mobility Partnership Agreements, which have been focused on, especially by India. In the last few years, there have been nearly 20, mainly with European countries as well as the other regions of the world. And why this becomes important is it brings together the two countries on a common understanding. And agencies like IOM and ILO have been also working on when coming up with frameworks as guidelines for what should a good Migration Mobility Partnership Agreement should look like. And related to that, there's another very important aspect is the role of the private sector. Because when we look at the emerging trends, the real employment opportunities are generated by the private sector, unless they are from the basic services like health. And the private sector needs to play a more proactive role in transferring or translating these agreements into actions. 

The third one is reintegration. And that particularly becomes critical in the context of the migrants, especially the migrants from India who go to the GCC countries, where invariably they reach their peak by 40 or 45 years of age, and they invariably return to their native places. And they require a lot of handholding and support in terms of reintegrating, either to set up their own enterprises or to get a decent employment which suits their qualifications and experience. So that's, I'll stop there. Thank you, Professor Bhattacharya for facilitating this session. And I look forward to hearing from Professor Rajan as well as Karan. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya:  Thank you, Sanjay Awasthi for putting out this context of how migration is really a very critical input into the development process, both in the source countries as well as the destination. We now have the privilege of hearing Professor Rajan. The floor is yours. 

Irudaya Rajan: I'm going to follow the pattern of Ambi and Nutan because I see already people are closing their eyes now. You listen for almost now close to one hour. I think some of you already slept and come back anyway. So, also I don't want to sit near to the chairperson because our friend Binod is sitting somewhere. So he cannot control time. He can speak whatever time he wants. And now he look at me. So I want my right to be at least 10 minutes I should get, because when the session is slowly going down, they will say you are the last speaker, cut time. So, I want to be away from the chairperson so that I can escape to speak whatever I want for at least 10 minutes. So let me start. We heard from Nutan talking about Dunki, but I want to show you a few episodes what I am hearing for the last few days. One is the first batch of 104 migrants came from United States to Punjab. And they said, it's only the first batch. It's only first batch. That mean only the trailer has come, movie will come later. Our first song for the movie. So you have to wait. We can be three hours 40 minutes. We can be two hours 20 minutes we don't know but trial has begun. I think this is something a lesson for all of us look at the migration governance which I would like to pick it up in my presentation. 

The second one is that 47 workers from Jharkhand being stranded in Cameroon. So only we talk about migration corridor but there are new corridors are coming up after COVID-19. Are we looking at only Canada, Australia? There are 180 countries. Why should you worry about Australia or Canada? Leave them. Why should you leave? You can go to several other countries. You can think of mobility with other countries. So I think concentrating on few countries which we do, I think this is also not good idea. Like if you are investing money in the share market. We invest in one company called Jet Airways. Next day morning nothing is there. We invest your human resources which is very great the demographic dividend you put in several countries. Then I think you are getting more benefits. I think we have to talk about diversifying our migration corridor. That's the example I want to say. Africa is welcoming you not just Europe.

And third one we learned from the COVID-19. I think after COVID-19 five years back you look at it there is a changing migration corridor and also migration is coming as some type of politics because now everybody talk migrants who is talking about migration is President Donald Trump not us. It has gone out of our hand and also the journalist who write wrong stories and right stories. Most of them they right wrong stories only. Of course we'll hear from our journalist. And the last one is that I was reading a joke a few minutes back when Sunita Williams arrived in from the space, she was taken to the immigration office because if you are in any country you go to immigration. She was taken there. Then they asked the question when you left who was the president of America. She said ah who is the president now. They asked her yes. You know the migration rule how long you are staying there. She said nine months. No if you are more than six months you are outside our country you have to go back. Then they were searching which country you have come from. They were searching there was no country called space. I have to go back. My God I took so much time to come back now you asked me to go back, sorry. So she was started crying there. And then a lot of discussion going on how to bring her to the country because she is coming after nine months. As per the rule you can't come, only six months. I think this is created by somebody. I thought it was very fascinating. Very fascinating because in which country you are coming from there is no space. Only you have country from India, okay. I think this is something we are leading to some migration politics come to such a way. 

And the Russian war, we had how the students were being stranded, we have seen them. Especially in countries we never heard of. That is where I normally talk about the data management. Something I think we should be very serious about that. Database. But everybody talks India is number one. Are we correct as number one? Are we correct? When I was talking with the chief minister of Andhra Pradesh he said one out of three Americans, one from Andhra or Telugu speaking. I said, how do you know? He said, we know. You are wrong. Maybe all of them from Andhra. There is a possibility. Why only you are saying one fourth? What are you predicting? You are talking without evidence in this country today. You are happy with number one. Are you correct with the number one, 20 million? 25 million? 40 million? We are talking the same million after the big committee brought up the number. So we have no numbers. Even the number which was given to us prior to the Russian war in those countries is almost four times lower than officially reported after the war. We brought them 22,000. Earlier we were talking about only 5,000. And there are new countries, states are coming up. There are emerging states. What we know about them? Uttar Pradesh, Kerala is gone. You have to talk about emerging states. We are not talking. Emerging states are important in our country. There are states almost over. In fact, we need migrants. I am coming from Kerala. We need migrants. We cannot send people, but still Kerala people want to leave. That's why they started leaving from the standard five itself now. Even graduate, they are not there. I said, where are you going? London. Because you can't go because nobody's there. So only children are there, we are sending them now. And of course, Donald Trump did a good thing. You can't have a baby here. Go back and have a baby in your own country. So I think things are getting very strict. 

So we need to understand the migration governance. For that, we need a good database on emerging states. We are very poor on emerging state and also emerging migration corridor. Don't talk about the corridors which are already established like Canada. Forget about Canada. You look at emerging corridor. I think we have to look at emerging states here and emerging corridor. Don't talk same thing about the UK, Australia, no. Think of new places where you can invest your hard-earned money, hard-earned demographic dividend which will be there with you only up to 2047. How do you put them in a proper way, don't allow them to exploit. Our Indian students are being de-skilled in many countries. Our Prime Minister want to make India as a skilled capital. After studying B.Tech. and management, our people are working in the aged care sector in the UK. Every week one Indian student is committing suicide in Canada. We want to send our student after paying 25 lakhs to die there. Why are we looking at, look at the new corridors, new states. I think we know little about both, both emerging corridor and emerging states. We know about Kerala, we know about America, but what about Cameroon? You look at the new maps, look at, I think we should teach our students in the 10th standard about map in the world where you can migrate, not after completing your B.Tech. and M.Tech. I think we should start with the education system. We should start them because they should know where to go. They are showing the only American history. Who want American history now? Study African history. Next thing is very important for us, look at the visas. Visa types, we don't know. I have not seen people looking at visa types. Hundreds of visas are being manipulated. Visas, countries and Binod talked about the overnight changing visas. Visas, we should study about visas. Visas are important, visit visa, this visa, P1, A1, C1. I don't know. Long term visa. In fact, I remember I was talking with the British embassy sometime back. I told them I want 10 year visa to UK. He look at me. Why do you want 10 year visa? I said, I want 10 year visa. I have a right to have 10 year visa because in my passport I have 10 year visa to America. Are you better than America? He told me that we give visa to business people who want to hide. We will give them 10 year visa. I said, no, I can't hide. I'm not a businessman. Then I said, I'm also doing business. He told me what business you are doing, sir? To give you 10 year visa, I said, I'm doing a migration business. He looked at my face. I like your answer. I'll give you 10 year visa. So I have 10 year visa in my passport. Everybody asked me, where did you get? I said, I'm a businessman. The recruitment agent who manipulate, he can get 10 year visa. Industry people who are cheating, they are staying there in UK, you give them 10 year visa. Why can't me? I'm not going to stay for you. I'm not going to be undocumented migrant. Visas to be studied. Very important we have to study visa. 

Then soft power of our diasporas. Because diasporas will be the function of migration. Today somebody is landing in Finland. There'll be nobody there to pick you up from the airport. If you land in Dubai, there'll be 30 people waiting outside the airport to pick you up. You don't know where to go. This is the diasporas and networks. And I was surprised. Somebody called me to Poland. I said, do you have a direct flight to Poland? I said, I have a direct flight from Delhi to Poland. My God, that means Poland is a new destination. You should look at the airplane routes. They are the destination place. No, nobody will come, a new flight will come to a place where there are no people. Nobody is going to fly. The pilot is going alone from Delhi to Poland. Sorry. Flight should be full. Otherwise, they'll stop the flight. From Trivandrum to Delhi, we have only three flights. Trivandrum to Dubai, we have nine flights. Why people going to Dubai? Delhi, who wants to come here? Nothing is there. So automatically, we are more connected to Gulf than Delhi. So we have less flights. I can't complain to the Air India, why you have no flights? No, sir. Sorry, there is nobody there. Even the flight you came, sir, half of the seats are vacant. Whereas Air India Express, oh my God, you have to fly two times there, three times there. You fly at least one time to Delhi. So you should look at this type of thing. Very important is we have to use the soft power. We are not using the soft power of diasporas. Ambassador is sitting here. Soft power, they were being priced during the Indo-nuclear thing, signing agreement. They said, America, our soft power. Where is the soft power during this undocumented migration? Soft power. I think very, very important we should look at the soft power. We are using diasporas only during the crisis. Kerala used them during the floods. Now we ask them, landslides. You should not wait for landslide and floods to ask the diasporas. Diasporas should be a routine basis. Diasporas should be strengthened and they should work closely with the Indian embassies. Indian embassy also needs reform. I will not talk about that because ambassador is sitting here. Because I need reforms. I visited some of the embassies. I asked them, how many people you are holding? One embassy, we have 20 staffs. How many Indians are there? One lakh. Oh, 20 for one lakh. We talk about student-teacher ratio. We talked about bed ratio by nurses. If you put ambassador's office versus the total, you know that, especially in the Gulf, you are understaffed. Of course, you need more staff. So I think we have to re-emphasize that. What you call them? Governance here and governance there. Two more points I will say and then I'll stop there because you are looking at me. Look at the other fellow. Because you look at me, then I cannot speak. So, ECR passports. Oh my God. ECR and ECNR passports. Now what we think, mostly wrongly, many times we think wrongly only. We never think rightly. We think the people who have completed, graduated, they have no problem. They have more problem now. Digital fraud. So what happened, they are exempted from everything. Oh, you are a graduate? Go. Where go? Go to hell. That's all. I think go to hell, no. You have to give them a better pre-departure training. I was talking to the IOM earlier, I was talking with the government earlier, we should talk about pre-departure training. For the people who want to go, please go. But then know something about the country. If you are in trouble in your country, do you have any information? No, sir. My agent knows. Your agent will not be there. He already collected your money. He's not there. And the reforming recruitment agencies, agencies are selling dreams to our Indian students. I met several students in Canada, UK, Australia. Sir, my agent told me if I get a student visa, I am sure of getting PR. But I said, you know there is a person called Donald Trump in the US. Sir, they didn't tell me about Donald Trump. My God, you should tell him about Donald Trump and the politics there. 

So please remember that you have to reform recruitment agents and the undocumented migrants because that is also talks about the migration governance failure, both in the countries of origin and destinations. Many of them go as documented. They are made undocumented at the countries of destination. Where are you? I was in Canada. They told me they were people are coming 40,000 students this year. They got a student visa. They have not gone to the college. They are waiting for the PR. You should tell them, I think we need some better training, not for the students. I was talking about counselling to parents now. I think the ICWA should talk about not talking to the student, their parents. Counselling. That's what my lawyer told me recently. When there is a family, there's a divorce is coming. Don't talk to the husband, wife, husband's father and mother. Call them first. What is happening in your house for your daughter? I think we have to talk to the parents because parents talk about aspirations. I have only one child. I want to send him to America. Sorry, you should not receive him as a dead body coming from Canada to your house. How many dead bodies are coming to all the airport? Do you know the database? It comes to be burial here. Look at those database. What type of data we have? 

And finally, the last point is a link between internal and international migration. We are all forgetting that. Keralites are known as people who went within the country. There were only four trains, Trivandrum- Chennai, Trivandrum-Mumbai, Trivandrum-Bangalore, Trivandrum- Delhi. In 1956, we had a railway timetable. Of course, now you have no timetable. Everything is online. At that time, there was a book you could buy for 20 rupees. These four trains took Malayalees within the country. They started addicted to migration. I call them as addict. Now, they are everywhere. You see people coming from UP, Rajasthan, Jaipur, all of them, next 10 years they will come and land. Somebody coming from Jharkhand, working in Kerala, he is asking me, sir, I want to go to Dubai. I want to go to Jeddah. So the internal migration linked to the international migration should be strengthened. Don't think we are working on international migration. Sorry. You have to look at the link between internal and international migration because internal migration is the function of the international migration. I will stop here because he's not looking at me now. Thank you very much. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya: Thank you for enlightening us on the importance of migration governance, but also for waking up our audience. And with that woken up audience, Karan Deep, it's your time for your presentation. 

Karan Deep Singh:  Thank you, Professor Bhattacharya. Thank you to the Council and Ambi for the opportunity to share my thoughts. I'm the odd one out on this panel, if you haven't noticed. As a journalist, my job is to report from the ground and listen to people. And often I meet people who are making perilous journeys in search of better opportunities. What they're thinking about is not themselves. They're thinking about their children. They're thinking about their children's education, their future, earning enough to make a livelihood, even if that means working as a garbage picker in Canada or as a private security guard. I met one of those migrants recently. Harvinder Singh, he dreamed of a future in America. He had struggled to find a job for many years. He'd appeared as a candidate for the Indian Army, the Punjab Police, the Railway Police, but luck seemed to never be on his side. So he packed a few clothes and left his village in Punjab for a journey that he knew very little to begin with. An agent had arranged for him to be passed around from one country to another, just like cargo, crossing vast oceans, walking through jungles for months. It took about 10 months for him to reach the US. But first he went through China, to Brazil, to Panama, to Mexico. And then, as luck would have it, Harvinder Singh got arrested as soon as he entered the US via the border in Tijuana. He had spent 24 lakhs or roughly $28,000 to end up in a prison for weeks. By then, Donald Trump had become the 47th president of the United States. On the night of February the 2nd, Harvinder Singh was woken up. He was told that he was being sent to another camp. Are they going to grant me asylum there? Will I be able to work? He asked his jailors. But hours later, Harvinder Singh was put on a US military plane to be deported to India. The journey, can you guess how long it took? 40 hours. Mr Singh and about 100 other deportees remained in handcuffs and leg shackles throughout. I felt like a prisoner, a slave, Harvinder told me. 

Every year, 2.5 million Indians migrate to other countries. More than 2,16,000 Indians renounced their Indian citizenship in 2023, according to government data. India is also among the top three origin countries for asylum seekers in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Israel, according to a report on international migration by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. As an Indian, it often makes me wonder, what are we doing? More importantly, where are we? Economically, politically, as a society? As a country, what are we really doing to keep our talent, to keep our people? We all know how bad India's brain drain problem is. We've lost in the millions, top tech talent, engineers, doctors, even nurses and caregivers in a country that is rapidly aging. And I've reported on the aging and the loneliness here. Every time I'm reporting from a rural part of the country, I was in Maharashtra, Punjab last month, I hear about people who have either left their villages or are planning to leave to another country. The problems are quite similar. Young men and women, this is the typical question they ask, where are the jobs? What can we do with our education? How do we see a future here? I do not think migration takes place in a vacuum. People don't decide to leave their homes just like that. It takes years of drudgery, disappointment that makes them take the dunki route that we just talked about. And why do they do that? They've seen their neighbours in Gujarat, in Punjab. They've seen their neighbours sending money back home. But not only that, they've seen money that was also used to build temples, gurudwaras, churches, mosques. So they leave because right from childhood, they've been told, you will fulfil our dreams. You will send money back home because God, we need it. 

So I stand here today to request policymakers, members of the media and all of you to try and do something. We need our people. We need them to live a fulfilling life in their own country. We need opportunities that make them feel wanted. We need them to have a work-life balance because that's another thing that migrants look for. We need them to make enough from farming that they can live on their land. And if they decide to work in a factory, they deserve to be paid enough and also to be respected for their work. So I think in a sense, what I'm trying to say is we, as a society, as a people, we need to change. We need to be kinder to one another. And as a country, we need not only be proud of ourselves, but also acknowledge our problems so we can tackle them together. And not for anyone else, not for the statistics that we love showing off, for us. Remember Harvinder Singh, the migrant I told you about? I spoke to him when the interview was over and I was asking him, like, will you ever go back? He said, never. And I asked him why. He said, I feel lower than I was when I left. And I think what he was trying to refer to was his state of mind. He felt like a slave, a prisoner on that flight coming back. So he told me he would start afresh. He would focus on his little farm and see how he can scrape a living. But I spoke to his wife also, Kuljinder Kaur. Our dreams have been shattered, she said. And then I asked her, but what are the dreams you have? And she said, my dreams, my children, they will fulfil. They will go abroad, she said. I rest my case. Thank you. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya: Thank you, Karan, for a very evocative and powerful statement, and I think that was a beautiful way to finish off the statements from the panellists who focused on very different aspects of the migration story and how we can have a better understanding of the narratives. The floor is now open. We'll take a few questions and then we'll put it to the panellists together. Yes, please. Please identify yourself before. 

Varshita: Good afternoon. My name is Varshita. I am a research intern here in the council. So my question to Ambassador, since India has one of the largest diasporas, what is your opinion about introducing dual citizenship? And to Professor Irudaya Rajan, do you see seasonal migration becoming permanent to places like Northeast India, South India? And also, sir, what do you think about climate migration in India? And my question to the panel is, how much of it do you consider it a state failure for all the illegal migration? 

Sanjay Bhattacharya: Thank you. The question on this side, please. 

Unidentified Speaker:  Yeah, thank you, sir. Few years back, UN Secretary General was here before being taken in charge of UN Secretary General. He said, people from India, Pakistan, Philippines migrate to our countries because I'm the Prime Minister of India. I can't take care of my parents. People from third world countries come and take care of my parents. So he said migration is mandatory. Nobody can live without migration. And our so many students, techies, doctors, engineers are going to USA and Europe. And we should charge them fees that we have prepared these children and we have invested in them. So why not Donald Trump should be asked to pay their investment money on this, our students? 

Sanjay Bhattacharya: That's a good point. Yeah. 

Unidentified Speaker:  Thank you for the discussion. I have two questions, if that's okay. My first question is to Karan Deep. I happened to watch the video that you made, really liked it. But the question I had was that a lot of people you talked about are going because of the economic crunch, and they're not finding jobs. But what's convinced them that once they go to US and Canada, which are also infamous for not having jobs for their own citizens? What's convinced them that once they go there, they'll find jobs as migrants? Is it some kind of deception on the agent's part? Is it some propaganda that we're not aware of? What is that about? 

The second question is open to the panel. A lot of migrants in Gulf countries have talked about how their rights are overlooked in comparison to the workers, the high-skilled workers. A lot of low-skilled workers have complained about that. Ambassador also touched upon it a little bit. What can be done to kind of bridge that gap, and what is currently happening in that space? Thank you. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya:  Good. So there was one more question on that side. Yes, please. 

Amba Pande: Thank you very much. I'm Amba Pande, Jawaharlal Nehru University. I have many comments to make, but I will just stick to one question, which I think very relevant. While talking about undocumented illegal migration, I completely understand the empathy and sympathy and all that. But let us face it, Indians have a particular mindset due to which they are not ready to spend 40 lakhs, 50 lakhs rupees in their own city because that is not socially more acceptable for the parents and for the family, rather than spending that much amount and illegally entering to some OECD country and talking about it in a very high way that my son and my daughter is there. So that is also one problem for which I think educating the parents, the society, addressing them about this whole concept of social status attached to OECD country, instead of actually investing here in India. I mean, if 40 lakhs rupees, think about, even if you SIP it, I mean, that gives a lot of money. But that is one problem that I faced.

The other, I observed. The other is, while when our Prime Minister, Honourable Prime Minister Narendra Modiji was in US, he was asked about this problem that, will you accept the migrants? Of course, they have gone from here. And if they have documents, India has to accept it. But he very briefly mentioned about the countries coming together to solve this problem because this is not one country's problem. And here, we need to understand that why international migration is different from internal migration. Because here, international relations and two and more countries are involved. So that it becomes more complex. So actually, should we not talk more about that idea that the countries are coming together to stop this menace of illegal migration, instead of understanding. Because unless and until we do that, it's very difficult to solve this problem, despite all the problems that these migrants face. In fact, last year, I was traveling to Suriname as a visiting faculty, and I saw a whole lot of them in the flight. And I could recognise that they are the dunkis. So I asked them, what work you will get there? Why are you going to Suriname? And they said, there is a lot of work. I asked, tell me one. So they could not. But, the immigration form, they had to come to me for help to fill it. Look at the level of education. They could not fill an English immigration form, which is given and distributed in the flight. So these are the things that we need to look at. And unless and until we take it at a global level, this menace cannot be stopped. That's what I think. Thank you. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya: We would have loved to have more questions, but I think we are already way behind schedule. So may I ask the panel to have 60 seconds and we'll call it stop at 60. Karan first. 

Karan Deep Singh:  Sure. I'll address the question that you had on, what convinces migrants, whether they can get jobs in places like Canada. I think what convinces them is an ecosystem in villages. It's a lack of education. It's a lack of really understanding even visa policies. So ultimately who they go to is agents. Agents have their own investments to look after. So they're not really advising them in a way that really helps them. I think it's also their own research that's lacking. Their lack of education, lack of comfort with just accessing basic technology is also a challenge. So when they-- when Canada's laws are on the website, right? Like it's not very difficult for you to find, but they assume they talk to their relatives and someone tells them, oh, you come and I'll find you a job, but that's not how it works. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya:  Exactly. I think that's really the story. Professor Rajan, 60 seconds. 

Irudaya Rajan:  Really? Thank you. I think that one point I would like to look at it, this people coming from Northeast to other part of the country. I think most of them, once you leave your place, you want to stay where you go. I think this permanency is coming up. For example, Kerala tell the migrants who are coming to Kerala, they call them guest worker. I said, it is unconstitutional because guest comes to your house, you call them, when are you going back? And they are not going back. They will be in Kerala only. So you have to design policies for the long-term stay in the respective states. And the climate thing, I think we know very little about climate distress migration. We did a study recently for both the FAO and IOM in Odisha, which clearly indicate you are going to have another agricultural distress, along with climate distress migrant we know very little about that. But I still believe they'll come to cities, and then they'll move outside I think that is some link, even you have an Adhaar card you can move in the country there are issues, even moving within the country. We're talking about reservation for the locals. So there are issues coming up, even within the country. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya:  Yeah, thank you, Sanjay would you like to take up one of these issues. 

Sanjay Awasthi:  Yeah, let me focus on two. One of course is… 

Sanjay Bhattacharya:  60 seconds. 

Sanjay Awasthi:  So first one is about what really triggers migration. And there have been innumerable studies by IOM and several other institutions highlighting the fact that migration is primarily aspirational, whether it is within the country or internationally. Of course, there could be other factors but this is the major factor. Now the bigger question is that, how can we enable these prospective migrants to take an informed decision. The second question which I want to answer, I want to touch upon is another aspect which is becoming like coming into picture is what is causing migration, especially with the recent incidents. There's an interesting study by done by a professor recently in the US. He's a person of Indian origin. And very interestingly he highlighted the fact that most of these migrants who follow the irregular routes, they don't come from very poor backgrounds. And you will find, most of them are not from more backward states like up in Bihar, they are from other states where. And of course their economic backgrounds are not so dire. So, which basically highlights that a host of factors, it doesn't--It's not as simple as it appears. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya:  It’s a more complex story. Professor Khadria, would you like to come in I can see you there on the panel for 60 seconds. 

Binod Khadria:  Okay, 60 seconds, not a second more than that. I think when there are more questions than answers that's a very healthy sign. We are making progress, unanswered questions can be answered later. I think this point about India. Why not India capitalising on its migrants to other countries, why not charging. I am reminded of the 1976 Jagdish Bhagwati proposal. Jagdish Bhagwati Partington proposal, which was economist and jurist, and they came out with the proposal that there should be a surcharge on the tax that the migrants the high skilled migrants pay in their destination countries, mainly the US and so on. And a matching contribution by the UN bodies, and that should be repatriated to the countries of origin for development, for education, for health, and so on, that Sanjay Awasthi had mentioned as an exception. Thank you very much. 

Sanjay Bhattacharya:  Thank you, Professor Khadria, let me just touch upon a few of these issues. I think we have found advanced skills improve your income levels tend to go up and therefore skills have become a very important element of the migration cycle so that you can have better upgrade your income potential. The thing that came up about, when Prime Minister said that we'll have our people come back that's been our policy for a very long period of time. We value our citizens and that's why we try and build an ecosystem that they can go out safe and secure to regular routes, but if they're in difficulty, the package itself is also looking at a more welfare oriented system. And of course, if the situation comes to a pass that they need to come back we'll always have them back within their home. 

There was a question regarding dual citizenship somewhere and I think you know that's currently not provided for in the Constitution. There were discussions on this as you know in the past, the OCI, the Overseas Citizen of India, which was done is actually under the Citizenship Act, but it does not really provide dual citizenship and in some ways it led to an anticipation that this was probably on the cards. And I think we are probably not yet at that time for dual citizenship, but I think there will be a time when we will be able to balance the economic and political and security strategic interests overall and re-examine this issue and I'm not saying that we should have or we will have dual citizenship. That's a discussion that will have to follow. I think we've had a very, very useful round of presentations by our panellists who've contributed enormously. Thank you very much. I'm back in your hands, ICWA. 

Ambi: I take this opportunity to once again extend my heartfelt thanks to our esteemed Chair and panellists for accepting our invitation and both joining us in person and online. Thank you so much for your insightful remarks. I know we have run over time, so I'll keep my word of thanks very short. We have all gained immensely from your perspectives. Indeed, we have a laundry list of things to ruminate over. A special thanks today would be to our audience for their active engagement throughout the session. I would also like to express my gratitude to my colleagues at the Council for their continued support and guidance, as well as to the admin team for the invaluable support. To learn more about the research work of ICWA, including the work of CMMDS, please visit our official website and follow us on our social media platforms. With that, I formally and warmly invite you all to join us for a high tea in the foyer. Thank you once again and have a great evening ahead.

*****

List of Participants in the Discussion

1. Nutan Kapoor Mahawar, Additional Secretary, ICWA
2. Ambassador Sanjay Bhattacharya,Professor of Diplomatic Practice, Jindal School of International Affairs, O.P Jindal Global University and Former Secretary, Consular, Passports and Visa (CPV and OIA), Ministry of External Affairs, India; Chair
3. Prof. Binod Khadria(online), President, Global Research Forum on Diaspora and Transnationalism (GRFDT) and Co-convener, Metropolis Asia-Pacific (MAP)
4. Mr. Sanjay Awasthi, Head of Office, International Organization for Migration (IOM) India office, New Delhi 
5. Prof. S. Irudaya Rajan, Chair of the International Institute of Migration and Development (IIMAD), Kerala, India;
6. Mr. Karan Deep Singh, Independent Journalist, and Former Staff Reporter, the New York Times
7. Ms. Ambi, Research Associate, ICWA