IX International Scientific and Practical Forum: Migration Bridges in Eurasia: Models for the Effective

Management of Migration in the Context of the Development of the Eurasian Integration Project. ISBN
978-5-7425-0187-9. Publishing House Economic Education. Moscow. Volume 1, pp. 90-95.

MERCOSUR. Immigrants from Neighboring Countries in Argentina:

Integration or Exclusion?
(The study was conducted with the support from the University of Buenos
Aires grant, Project 20020130100147BA)
Cynthia Pizarro, Professor at the School of Agriculture of the
University of Buenos Aires, Argentina. Researcher at the National Council
of Scientific and Technological Research. PhD in Anthropology,
University of Buenos Aires. E-mail: pizarro.cynthia@gmail.com

Abstract. We refer to the way in which the MERCOSUR State

Parties have addressed immigrants’ cultural integration and socio-economic
inclusion. We analyze the two approaches to integration: adaptation and
multiculturalism, and the integration policies in Argentina. We remark that
the spirit of the Migration Law 2004, that guarantees immigrants’ human
rights and recognizes the importance of those coming from the
MERCOSUR countries, has substantially turned into a xenophobic and
restrictive perspective, observable in recent amendments.
Keywords: international migration - integration – inclusion –
migration policies - MERCOSUR - Argentina

Migrations within the MERCOSUR and to Argentina

Migrations in Latin America are mainly intra-regional, and the
United States of America are the predominant destination outside the
region. Political factors have historically influenced these population
movements. For instance, dictatorships and political

1
violence used to expel many refugees. This kind of migration has mostly
come to an end since political conditions are more stable, enabling several
people to return.
During the 1980’s, a new migration phase began in many Latin
American countries as a result of the socioeconomic crisis [1], stimulating
vast amounts of people to emigrate within the region and, mostly, to the
United States and Europe [2]. Economic factors, such as trade liberalization
and the unsteady increase of economic inequalities between countries in the
region, are nowadays the main causes of population movements.
In the late 1990s, the State Parties of the Southern Common Market
(MERCOSUR) became concerned about the advantages and disadvantages
of migrations from and within the region. This agreement includes several
countries1 that share common geographic and cultural features but, at the
same time, have big social and economic differences. Despite the economic
integration that the MERCOSUR entails, these inequalities have increased
because of the impact of neoliberal policies. This lead to certain changes in
the labor markets which are related to migration processes such as the
emergence of new kinds of part-time or homebase jobs and the increase of
informal work [3].
Even though the State Parties agreed upon free trade of goods,
services and means of production, a common external tariff, and the co-
ordination of macroeconomic and sectoral policies, the social dimension of
the integration was not part of the treaty signed in 1991. Moreover, the
search for social justice described in the preamble of the document was not
reflected in explicit actions aimed to protect the most vulnerable social
groups within the globalization process [3].

1
The agreement was signed in 1991 between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. Bolivia and
Venezuela joined later as member countries. Nowadays, Chile, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Guyana and
Surinam are associated countries.

2
 These topics were discussed in subsequent meetings. On the one
hand, the MERCOSUR State Parties posed that northern receiving
countries should develop more inclusive immigrant integration policies [4].
On the other hand, they attempted to ameliorate what was (and still is)
considered a migration governability crisis within the region. In December
2002, the presidents of these States announced that they would allow free
mobility of people within the region. Therefore, some considered that their
countries’ migration policies should be looked over. Nevertheless, the only
state that did make substantial changes was Argentina, enacting a new
National Migration Law in 2004 which guarantees immigrants’ rights, and
recognizes the importance of migrants coming from the State Parties of the
MERCOSUR [5].
During the 1990s, the increase of migrants moving within the
Southern Cone of South America brought about changes in the proportions
of migratory flows in several countries. In 2010, Argentina ranked third in
the world as a host country receiving Latin American immigrants. Most of
them, about 75%, came from the State Parties of the MERCOSUR.
Longstanding Bolivian and Paraguayan immigration flows significantly
increased during the last decades of the 20th Century. Foreign population
represented 4.50% of the total of Argentina and immigrants from
neighboring countries represented 3% of that population and 69% of the
total foreign one. Paraguayans ranked first, followed by Bolivians,
Peruvians, Chileans, Uruguayans, and Brazilians.
These immigrants usually come from impoverished social contexts
and tend to integrate into marginal segmented labor markets, taking up jobs
which are not accepted by natives because payment is very low and
working conditions are extremely precarious. They generally insert in the
construction industry, domestic service, apparel production and informal
trade in urban areas, and agriculture and bricks production in peri-urban

3
and rural ones. The informal nature of their labor agreements leads to lack
of access to social security and healthcare services, as well as to fewer
possibilities of education for children and young people.

Immigrants’ cultural integration or social inclusion?

Immigration has emerged as a hot issue in many states. In 1984, the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development recognized that
migration was not “conjunctural”, that is, temporary and related to
economic circumstances, but actually “structural”, a permanent
phenomenon which had to be taken into account [6]. Nowadays, global
migration governance is a topic of the political agenda at national and
regional levels, inspiring debates about what is defined as “the problem of
migration” [7].
One of the concerns refers to immigrants’ adaptation or integration.
Politics and common sense about this topic differ according to which of
these terms is privileged [8]. When adaptation is the focus, immigrants are
expected to melt in the host society, incorporating its culture and identity.
In these sense, in Argentina, natives usually think that their nation has
always welcome migrants, since its very foundation. It is a common place
to hear that Argentines descend “from the ships” instead of referring to
native ancestry. This is because it is thought that most Argentine
population descends from the European migrants that arrived by ship
during the late 19th Century and the first mid-20th Century.
While Europeans are looked up to because they are thought to be
modern and white, indigenous people are looked down on because they are
supposed to be un-civilized. It is thought that Argentina was so kind to
receive so many migrants that it is nowadays a melting pot. But it must be
remarked that those migrants were digested in their way to assimilation
since they were expected to acquire Argentine national identity. This

4
acculturation process took place in various ways, for instance, at school and
at the military service.
When the stress goes on integration and multiculturalism, instead of
adaptation, it is desired that both migrants and natives accept each other,
respecting and tolerating cultural diversity. In this way, according to the
integration approach, they should not be imposed the culture of the host
country, nor be subsumed in its national identity that, besides, is the result
of historical processes.
The advocacy of cultural pluralism and tolerance arouse in
opposition to eurocentrism. Social movements around the world denounced
ethnic discrimination and segregation, and claimed for cultural integration.
But even when multiculturalism promotes the tolerance of minority groups,
it does not ensure complete integration and participation in the global
society. Moreover, tolerance might be just a politically correct make up,
resulting in a society with less institutionalized discrimination but probably
atomized in several collectivities whose cultures are frequently considered
a picturesque folkloric manifestation. Thus, intercultural aesthetics is just a
folklorization of cultural differences [9].
Even when the multi-culturalist discourse is manifestly tolerant and
respectful of difference, it hides a certain perversity: it refers to cultural
differences but it does not notice the politic and economic ones that are
associated to them. For instance, in Argentina, immigrants’ socio-economic
exclusion is explained in cultural terms, thus naturalizing and justifying
inequality [10].
Immigrants from neighboring countries frequently live and work in
very bad conditions. Low incomes, temporal and insecure jobs and
informal labor agreements usually coincide with spatial segregation and
public stigma. Nevertheless, it is frequently ignored that their social
practices do not only enact their cultural heritage but are also traversed by

5
their socio-economic backgrounds both of their host society and of the
places where they come from [11].
Thus, residential segregation is usually explained on the grounds of
their cultural preference of living together. Exclusion from the labor market
is thought to be due to their mentality. Bad health and reluctance to be
assisted by the hegemonic medical system, especially in immigrant women,
are explained with reference to cultural peculiarities.

Integration policies for immigrants in Argentina

Integration policies show the Argentina´s wish to smooth the unequal
and contested relationships between hegemonic social agents and certain
minorities such as immigrants. During the 20 th Century the Argentine state
sought immigrants' naturalization by means of education, military service
and compulsory voting. It was not only a matter of legal interest but
cultural assimilation was an important goal as well. Public schools were
thought to be a crucial scenario where Argentine identity could be
incorporated by immigrants and their descendants.
In contrast, during the 1990s immigrants from neighboring countries
were stereotyped as criminals and were thought to be a threat to Argentines'
access to work, health and education, and a security problem. Various
restrictive and repressive strategies against regional immigrants were part
of their everyday life. The State labelled those who had an irregular
immigratory status as illegal, instead of making it easier for them to
regularize their papers. At that time, policies regarding sociocultural
diversity oscillated between considering immigrants' uses as a
"disadvantage", on one side, and remarking their "cultural wealth", on the
other [12].
The first idea focuses on cultural difference as a deficit, and
considers that intercultural education is a strategy of educational equity.

6
Thus, policies in Argentina were focalized and compensatory, and aimed to
achieve the inclusion of disadvantaged groups such as indigenous people
and immigrants, but did not aim to change the socioeconomic inequalities
or to go against the interests of the hegemonic groups.
The idea that highlights the importance of minority groups’ culture is
a leit motive of a different stream among policies that were also promoted
in the 1990s in Argentine which at the same time defined the country as a
multicultural, pluriethnic and multilingual State. In this sense, immigrants'
cultures were exalted and policies focused on the importance of
immigrants' cultural practices and considered them as a remarkable rich
folklore. In the same direction, immigrants felt proud and were very eager
to participate in various multicultural performances showing their typical
dances, music and food.
This essentialist multiculturalism, which promotes respecting and
tolerating diversity and difference, does not encourage emancipatory
practices and is not an alternative model to that of assimilationist
integration. On the contrary, it hides segregation and discrimination
processes.
In 2004 Argentina passed the Migration Law 25.827. This enactment
brought about a substantial change in the immigration policy since the law
recognizes the right to migrate, and it fosters the equality of treatment of
the immigrants and their access to information. It guarantees the non-
discriminatory admission of citizens of the MERCOSUR and their access
to social services, public benefits, health assistance, education, justice,
work, employment and social security. It specifies that the irregular
situation of a foreigner does not prevent him or her from being admitted as
a student in educational institutions or from accessing to health, social or
sanitary assistance.

7
 When this was launched, the common-sense preconceptions that
pose that immigrants are threat and that their entry to the country should be
restricted seemed to weaken and it was thought that they would eventually
disappear. The spirit of this Law is remarkably open-minded since it
formally recognizes the basic Human Rights to every migrant in Argentina.
It also suppresses all the restrictive clauses of the previous Law, such as the
one that obliged civil servants to denounce irregular migrants, who would
therefore, be deported. Nevertheless, it took 10 years to regulate the
application of this Law and discriminatory practices in every institution and
in everyday life did not cease.
A special mention should be made to its multi/intercultural approach
regarding cultural integration which highlights the richness of cultural
difference. One of the objectives of the Law is to promote the integration to
the Argentine society of those immigrants who had been admitted as
permanent residents. It also says that the State will stimulate actions
seeking to integrate immigrants, especially those aiming to put into value
the cultural, social, economic and religious expressions of the immigrants.
It recommended as well the organization of training courses leading to the
development of respectful multicultural relations and the prevention of
discriminatory behaviors. Nevertheless, the Law presents a significant
contradiction since it says that immigrants should respect the Argentine
cultural identity. That is to say, it considers that Argentineans are the
hegemonic cultural group in which immigrants should fit in [13].
In this sense, cultural integration is more about an unequal
relationship between a hegemonic Argentine "us" and a minority immigrant
"them", than an equal relationship between diverse groups of human beings
who have been born in different countries. In brief, the Argentine
Migratory Law recognizes the importance of immigrants' cultural
contribution and appraises their coexistence with native citizens, but it does

8
not refer to the importance of their socio-economic inclusion under equal
conditions with native citizens.

Going back to a restrictive migration governance

In December 2015, a new governmental administration began in
Argentina. As it is happening in many countries, a neoliberal and
conservative order is spreading very quickly. At mid-2016, the Government
announced that a Center of Detention of Irregular Immigrants was being
built. This decision was astonishing because of it was taken so quick after
the beginning of the administration and because it had an outstanding
xenophobic orientation. Nevertheless, many government officials
supported it, recreating the latent discrimination discourses of the 90´s,
similar to the global anti-immigration criminalizing stigmas that have
spread around the world.
Although this jail has not been put to work yet, public opinion was
not unfavorable to this decision at all, not even when the President
launched an Act which amended the Migratory Law of 2004 at the
beginning of 2017. This amendment establishes a series of strategies that
make it easier to deport those immigrants condemned as criminals and even
those who have only been processed. Besides, immigrants are more than
frequent arrested for behaviors for which native people would be not.
Even though this amendment did not modify those statements
regarding immigrants’ social rights, the common-sense discourse that
highlights Argentina´s generosity towards immigrants and remarks that
they are eager to take advantage of the free access to public social services
such as hospitals and schools. This discriminatory statements focus
especially in those immigrants coming from neighboring countries. At the
same time, the access of immigrants to several state services is being cut
(e.g. technic assistance to agriculture entrepreneurs, pensions, health

9
assistance), and the police is increasingly arresting pedlars who sell items
such as food, sport clothes, glasses and the so in the streets.
The Migration Law that preceded the 2004 one was criticized
because it was extremely restrictive. Similar critics should be done to
nowadays policies, which seem to be turning even more excluding, and, for
the moment, immigrants’ integration seems to be the least important topic
regarding what is thought to be the “problem of migration”.

Final remarks
“The problem of integration” is usually explained on the ground of
stereotyped culture(s) instead of social inequalities [14]. Therefore, the
belief that the root of the problem is cultural affects the direction of
“integration policies”. On the contrary, it must be remarked that “the
immigrant problem” is primarily a problem of social exclusion. Social and
residential segregation, discrimination, stigmatization and marginalization
are equally or more important than cultural confinement. Social exclusion
can create subcultures, which give a feeling of identity and a sense of
belonging in a harsh world. But, at the same time, they generate a feeling of
being subordinate outsiders. A feeling of not belonging to the nation can
create bitterness and conflicts. It may lead to disputes not only between
immigrants and natives, but also between the weak, for example, working
class native children on working class immigrant children.
Multiple forms of social exclusion arise in a world in which the
search for roots has become widespread [14]. The uniting discursive core
of different exclusionary practices is often a cultural rationalization of
social tensions regulated and controlled through definitions of normality.
For instance, people ascribe immigrants certain backward traditions that
differ from a stipulated normality. Thus, the social inequalities of a
multiethnic society tend to be understood in simplistic culture-related

10
terms. Cultural differences are cultivated and polarized. For instance, in
Argentina, there is an increasingly common political and popular discourse
that ponders if certain groups of refugees and immigrants are suitable or
unsuitable to be accepted in “our” society. Therefore, a complex and
dynamic perspective on culture and identity is unavoidable, if we are to
render visible the fundamental social conflicts associated with the cultural
integration [14].

References and sources

1. Massey, D. et al. Worlds in Motion. Understanding International
Migration at the End of the Millennium. Clarendon Press, 2005.
2. Cerrutti, M. Gender and Intra-Regional Migration in South
America // Human Development Research Paper, 2009.
3. Patarra, N. Economic integration, the job market and international
migration: the case of MERCOSUR // Regional Seminar
Globalization and International Migration in Latin America and
the Caribbean: Trends and Prospects for the 21st Century, Santiago
de Chile: UNESCO, 1999. P. 13-15.
4. Stuhldreher, A. Cambio de ciclo en las relaciones birregionales
entre la Unión Europea y América Latina y el Caribe: Discurso,
teorías y políticas en torno al issue migratorio // FLACSO-ISA
Conference, 2014.
5. Novick, S. Migración y políticas en Argentina: tres leyes para un
país extenso (1876-2004) // In S. Novick (Ed.) Las migraciones
en América Latina. Políticas, culturas y estrategias, Buenos Aires:
Catálogos/CLACSO, 2008.
6. Rey-von Allmen, M. Towards an Intercultural Education // In M.
Mesic (Ed.) Perspectives of Multiculturalism – Western and

11
 Transitional Countries. Zagreb: Croatian Comission for UNESCO,
2004. P. 103-113.
7. Pizarro, C. and Gunchenk, G. Migration, Integration and
Multiculturalism // Стратегия развития индустрии сервиса,
туризма и дизайна: новые вызовы и практика инноваций,
Северо-Кавказского федерального университета, 2015. N° 2, P.
247-253.
8. May Grosser, S. La importancia de incluir las competencias
interculturales en las relaciones con población refugiada // WIMB
LU, 2015. Vol. 10, N° 1. P. 57-66.
9. Mármora, L. La inclusión social del migrante // Revista
migraciones internacionales. Reflexiones desde Argentina, 2017.
N° 1. P. 7-18.
10. Pizarro, C. Clasificar a los otros migrantes: las políticas de
migración argentinas como productoras de etnicidad y desigualdad
// Revista Métis, Historia & Cultura, 2012. Vol. 11, Nº 22. P. 219-
240.
11. Pizarro, C. El racismo en los discursos de los patrones argentinos
sobre inmigrantes laborales bolivianos. Estudio de caso en un
lugar de trabajo en Córdoba, Argentina // Convergencia Revista de
Ciencias Sociales, 2012. N° 60. P. 255-285.
12. Domenech, E. Políticas migratorias y estrategias de integración en
Argentina: nuevas respuestas a viejos interrogantes // XXV
IUSSP International Population Conference, 2005.
13. Pérez, E. “Acá somos todos iguales”: migración y escuela //
Congreso Internacional de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades,
Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, 2013.
14. Alund, A. Pathways of Social Exclusion; Youth in Multicultural
Sweden // In M. Mesic (Ed.) Perspectives of Multiculturalism –

12
Western and Transitional Countries. Zagreb: Croatian Comission
for UNESCO, 2004. P. 131-151.

13