I’ve crossed a lot of borders of late: Ghana-Burkina
Faso-Ghana-UK-Turkey-Ghana. In a
touristic (and anthropological) sense, it’s easy to perceive borders as nodes
of red tape. What’s more challenging is
interpreting why these nodes are structured (or unstructured as the case may
be) the way they are and how these nodes are negotiated by social actors. Ghana
has a pretty notorious reputation for being a challenging beaurocratic context
for obtaining and maintaining a visa. I’m
convinced that it’s a system that is intentionally convoluted so that an
informal economy can build around the management of the confusion. In my most recent visa renewal effort I made
the decision to take action like a Ghanaian would take action against red tape;
I called a friend who had a friend who works in the immigration office. And then I did the exact opposite of what the
large poster board at the immigration headquarters messaged--I handed over a
little extra money for the processing of my visa. I used informal formalities to becoming
illegally legal. Perhaps most telling
about the extent to which this is the norm is that my friend kindly enacted,
but slightly smirked at, my request to put the extra money in an envelope so
that it didn’t appear visible. That slight smirk relayed how unnecessary this step
actually was.
I’ve also had experiences that make me inclined to think
that the red tape is not just about the development of an informal economy that
helps underpaid government workers. I
think it’s also about making sure the outsider gets a taste of their own
medicine. It’s retributive. Ghanaians desiring to go to the US must endure
an endless (and in most cases hopeless) process to obtain a visa to the
States. The US embassy in Accra always
has a line of Ghanaians waiting outside the embassy building to have an
opportunity to sit down inside with an embassy official to face questioning on
why they want to go to the States and who will vouch for them. Unless they have a large bank account in
combination with a powerful connection in the States, their request for a visa
will inevitably be denied. Even for Ghanaians who have never attempted to
obtain a visa, the narrative of the experience is one that runs strongly and
structures Ghanaians’ understanding of their position on the world stage.
Posters such as this one are prolific in enticing Ghanaians to part with money for a service that promises to get them a work or student visa to the states. |
This makes me think that the experience I had of being illegally
detained and verbally harassed by a Ghanaian immigration officer was a way to
remind me of my position on the world stage.
I can only interpret this diatribe as a frustrated Ghanaian wanting to
remind me, a US citizen, of my ability to move about the world. I felt profiled by the immigration officer. And it was a pretty wretched feeling. Anthropology prides itself on participant
observation—doing the best you can to live and feel the experience of the
society you are trying to integrate into.
This was participant observation I did not sign up for and the medicine
was pretty bitter. But it is still relevant data for my attempts to understand
the social and economic climate of this country.
Borders don’t simply represent different nations. Borders
represent different political, social and economic opportunities. Our world is one in which historically, and
contemporarily, borders are often physically imposing places that protect one
population’s resources from another population’s resources. Sometimes that protection is warranted
against acts of aggression, as is the case with the remnants of a wall built in
Gwollu in the Upper West Region of Ghana.
This wall was built in the early 19th Century to protect the
inhabitants of Gwollu against slave raiders. Sometimes these physical boundaries are
really more about reactions to a neoliberal age that creates great disparities. These disparities push
populations to seek better opportunities. This is why thousands of Central
American children are waiting for “processing” at the US/Mexico border.
Gwollu wall built to protect against slave raiding |
I think as well of the hundreds of Muslim Ghanaians who legally
traveled to Brazil for the World Cup but have just applied for asylum to escape
what they are calling religious persecution in Ghana. Though they claim that their persecution is
tied to religious differences within the Ghanaian Muslim community, I’m not so
sure this tension even exists, let alone does it serve as the most pressing
factor pushing these Ghanaians out of their home context. Religious persecution
is a much smarter card to play on the international stage than the political
economy card. Ghanaians want to leave
Ghana because of structural violence—an instable economy that includes a
deflating national currency, no job opportunities, and rising fuel, electricity
and water costs that leave the majority of the population struggling to get by. The region of Brazil that these Ghanaians
have applied for asylum is an area known to have plentiful employment
opportunities that have attracted many foreign workers.
These are issues that not only affect the Hondurases and
Ghanas of the world, but also the so called developed nations. In Scotland, where I recently traveled, discourse
is building towards a vote for independence from or ongoing dependence on the
UK. The debate, from what I was able to
gather, is one largely centered around improving Scotland’s socio-economic
indicators that are seen as oppressed by UK leadership. Instead of feeling pushed out of their homes
and across other national borders, Scotland has an opportunity to redefine what
its borders with England mean in terms of political and economic
authority. If contemporary Scotland can
mimic the social protection services of the days of yore (see photo below), Scotland might have a
knack for creating a more equitable and healthy life for all of its citizens
without its citizens having to flee to another place.
The tagline for wooing Scots to vote yes for independence |
No comments:
Post a Comment