Visa Diplomacy and Migration Impacts on Electoral Democracy

By Thelma Nyarhi*

The idea of looking into state interactions is not new. There is a linkage between domestic politics and international affairs. Domestic politics frequently influences foreign policy and vice versa. In today's world, migration issues remain critical to public policy areas. Like trade, economics, human rights, and climate change, migration is also key to multilateral and bilateral relations.

This has been seen in visa diplomacy – visa denial or issuance to either select individuals or groups hoping to shape another state's policies; bilateral agreements aimed at either increasing or limiting migration flows, and politics of mobility that serve preferential treatment to certain foreign nationals. In all instances, migration has been used to ascertain state power relations and interests.

Some countries have closed their borders, while in some migration, threats to migrant expulsion have been used to win over the voter's approval regarding antimigrant pleas, and in some countries, foreign states have threatened to impose visa bans to countrymen not valuing their interests. The latter shows the instrumental use of the visa in foreign policy and impact on sovereign states. Through the bilateral relationship between the United States (U.S.) and Ghana, we can trace the convoluted effects of their foreign policy and domestic politics.

The context of migration on electoral politics

Party positions on particular issues have become crucial in determining the power played during electoral practices. In other words, how different political parties handle issues is likely to influence voting preferences. Voters typically choose candidates based on their standing on different political issues. This has been particularly true in recent electoral outcomes in and around Africa.

These political issues would include public policy, economic hardship, unemployment, human rights, education etc. Recently, migration politics have sparked controversy amongst political parties. Political manifesto's have documented these issues and served as motivators for issue voting. Issue voting – a theoretical model explaining the common practice seen amongst voters who vote for a candidate depending on their perceptions on various political issues has become common. A party's position on a certain issue could either attract or repel potential voters. Could this influence government policy or government responsiveness to migration? With the resurgence of nationalism in politics, migration influences nationalistic positions of states.

Within the political world, states are being reawakened to nationalistic interests. In the Global North, this has been more visible in the U.S., where the president-elect – Donald Trump, has in both presidential 'campaigns' won based on putting "America first". An analogous wave has swept through the world to countries like Brazil, India and China. In putting their states first, there is a deepened need to ensure any bilateral or multilateral relations serve the country's needs.

Although some African countries try to borrow this strategy, they face the triple challenges of poverty, inequality and unemployment. This unfortunately leaves states vulnerable to fulfilling foreign state policies within their own domestic democracies for the sake of accessing international aid.

While some countries with better economic potential for example South Africa, have used migration as a bargaining chip in electoral campaigns, reinforcing nationalistic ideals and drawing voter support, others have opened their borders to attract foreign investors that could alleviate economic hardships. In some countries, however, migration through visa diplomacy has been used as a tool of control and a means of asserting power.

The case of Ghana

Being the welcoming neighbour, Ghana has often attracted foreign involvement in trade relations through visa-free policy initiatives. With elections set for December 7, 2024, the opposing historical contenders, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and New Patriotic Party (NPP), have highlighted issues of concern through their political manifestos.

NPP's focus is mainly on job security, and commitments sighted have included tax incentives such as flat tax within select private sector investments, 24hr business culture, increased visa-free policies and e-visa interventions all pointing towards foreign investment attractions. NDC on the other hand has highlighted a 'Resetting 'Ghana' agenda focus that aims to put Ghana first in all mandated efforts towards economic growth and sustainability. This comes across as nationalistic.

The party is also for deepening international relations through sovereign-centred decisions that stress Pan-Africanist thought and peaceful multilateral interconnections. While both parties have their strengths, what is notable and questionable is the interests each party is pushing for amidst migration politics. Although neither is against migration, each party looks at it quite differently. While there is consensus that democracies develop a sense of solidarity, the resurgence of nationalism within the political sphere should also be looked at closely.

Adding to this, although each nation's narrative and reasoning behind nationalism is unique, globalization and hyperconnectivity due to migration remain potent forces in policy and political structuring.

Immigration has become increasingly important in policy makers, politicians, and government circles. The major focus has been around security and its socioeconomic impacts. In elections, migration politics have contributed to issue voting contestations amongst political parties. Solidarity based on party identification has become less of a motivator for voting. Job security, economic stability, fiscal sustainability, etc., have become the primary determinants for voter behaviour.

Other mechanisms of voter representation such as class or race have become less of a determining factor for voter behaviour. The U.S. has for example accepted large immigrant flows for years, and often became refuge to most African politicians. This has however, shifted over the years due to policy reform. In the recent U.S. presidential election, Trump's re-election could signal a pivotal shift in American foreign policy.

With nationalistic interests of putting "America first" and intended renegotiated trade deals and uncertainties surrounding global trade and international aid, some African countries such as Ghana that depend on this bilateral relationship could be affected.

U.S.-Ghana relations

Dating back to Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah's Presidential service days to Ghana, the U.S. and Ghana have had a notably long and cordial relationship. The two countries have shared good relations in terms of law enforcement and defence issues.

As Ghana's largest bilateral development partner, the U.S. primarily focuses on economic growth through investments and trade. Additionally, it has prioritised peace, regional security and improved accountability governance. Considering its primary interests in Ghana, this has been essential, but to what extent?

Recently, the U.S. Department of State announced a visa restriction policy targeting any individuals responsible for disrupting the democratic exercise in Ghana. In the context of electoral democracy, the U.S. visa ban restrictions may help curb corruption or political unrest; however, it also raises questions of the country sovereignty and dependency from and on foreign states, respectively. Visa diplomacy in this instance, has played the devil's advocate, exposing Ghana to the perils of foreign policy.

"""If Ghana becomes chaotic, it is not only Ghanaians who suffer but U.S. interests too""" Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa – NDC lawmaker

With spiking tensions ahead of Ghana elections, Samuel O. Ablakwa's analysis and appreciation of U.S. influence in Ghana's democratic activities raises concerns over foreign influence within the continent, particularly on issues of migration. While travel restrictions by the Global North are often imposed on African nationals as seen in the mass deportation talks of 'illegal 'migrants', African nation-states are often very welcoming of foreign citizens from the Global North as opposed to fellow neighbouring African states.

States such as Ghana have even offered citizenships in the hope of future development interventions by those within the diaspora. Although this may be advantageous, being wary of the interests being served is important. Though it may be a convoluted element in politics, migration helps us understand both the sociopolitical and socioeconomic climate within the world. This is essential in mapping out social existence and social injustice.

The visa plays a huge role in controlling mobility flows, communicating government content or discontent with other states, and coercing other states' policies on particular issues. While a gift to those seeking survival hood amidst the triple threats in their domestic countries, it can also serve as a 'weapon' to be used beyond continental division.

As a young and capable continent, we can shape our future potential and should take advantage of our continental offerings. Kwame Nkrumah once argued "that we must find an African solution to our problems, and that this can only be found in African unity. Divided, we are weak; united, Africa could become one of the greatest forces for good in the world".

*Thelma Nyarhi is a PhD candidate at the University of Cape Town and a researcher at the Democracy Development Program (DDP) and writes in her own capacity.