The Closing Doors of Migration: How Trump is Reshaping Global Mobility

"Donald Trump's ‘America First’ agenda didn't merely reshape U.S. immigration—it inspired similar policies worldwide."

Today, as anti-immigration rhetoric spreads, various groups are bearing the brunt of these changes. From Chinese academics retreating from the U.S. to British National Overseas (BNO) passport holders, facing an uncertain future in the UK, the era of open migration is waning.

Donald Trump's second presidency has ripple effects across the globe that affect skilled migrants, refugees, and even long-standing visa programmes. Even innocent tourists are facing the wrath of U.S. immigration agents due to discrepancies in their visa applications. Hauled in chains to detention centres, this treatment does nothing to encourage tourism to the U.S. nor enhance the nation’s soft power.

Meanwhile, thousands of citizens in Kuwait found their resident status revoked overnight without warning. The authorities cite irregularities in the application procedures, affecting approximately 32,000 people. 

Donald Trump's ‘America First’ agenda didn't merely reshape U.S. immigration—it inspired similar policies worldwide. From Europe to Australia, governments have adopted stricter vetting procedures, reduced refugee intake, and made work visas increasingly difficult to obtain except in specific categories. 

Presented as a national security issue, the U.S. government's crackdown has a chilling effect, compelling many Chinese scientists and students to return home rather than risk suspicion. Leading academics in AI, life sciences, and biochemistry have concluded that the environment is far from conducive to advancing their work. 

In response, both Hong Kong and the Mainland have rapidly moved to welcome these experts, making space for them in universities. 

For decades, China's brightest minds flocked to Western universities and tech hubs. However, accusations of spying and visa denials diminished trust in the U.S., making China a more appealing option for academics fearing discrimination. China now benefits from a reverse brain drain.  

The direct financial hit is a loss of fees paid by international students. In the UK, as many colleges depend on fees from international students to maintain their operations, the situation is dire. In effect, international students subsidise the education of home students. Fee increases or closures will become necessary.

Meanwhile, in the UK, British National Overseas (BNO) passport holders from Hong Kong are worried that Prime Minister Keir Starmer's recent anti-migrant rhetoric may complicate and increase the cost of their stay. Media reports suggest that many now regret their hasty decision to migrate.  

In 2020, following the widespread social unrest in Hong Kong and China's imposition of the National Security Law, the UK introduced a BNO visa pathway for Hong Kong residents seeking refuge.

The UK's shift towards anti-immigration policies has been swift and impactful. Despite years of citizen complaints, no mainstream political parties had earnestly sought to restrict legal and illegal migration. Indeed, they appeared incapable of controlling illegal arrivals crossing the channel in small boats.

For sure, simmering discontent amongst the population was a factor in last summer's riots following the Southport killings. Then, last month, in local by-elections, the anti-migrant Reform Party surged to prominence. Many polls put them well ahead of the ruling Labour Party. 

In a panic response, Starmer reversed decades of Labour policy, introducing rigid new rules for migrants that make it harder to secure residency. The residential requirement is effectively pushed to 10 years, on top of a stringent English test. 

Special social care visas, a significant route for post-Brexit migration, will be scrapped. Student visas will be made stricter and shorter, and skilled worker visas will also become more stringent. 

Although the direct impact on the BNOs remains unclear, reports in the SCMP suggest panic is setting in. 

According to figures published by the Office for National Statistics, net migration to the UK has dropped to 431,000. That's nearly a 50% decline from last year's eye-watering 860,000. Yet, it's still twice what it was in the pre-Brexit years when annual figures were around 200,000 to 250,000. Additionally, to put this into context, a net inflow of 430,000 is equivalent to adding a city the size of Liverpool every year.

The BNOs account for only a fraction of this figure. When first announced, pundits incorrectly predicted that millions would accept the BNO offer. It was never going to happen. 

As far as I can tell, around 190,000 people have applied to join the BNO scheme, while the number who accepted the offer is lower, at approximately 150,000. Even before the latest twist in this saga, many who had taken up the offer quietly returned to Hong Kong. Indeed, according to the Hong Kong Immigration Department, over 30,000 British National Overseas (BNO) holders have returned to Hong Kong in the past year alone.

Whether the UK will change the rules to require BNO holders to wait 10 years for a British passport remains uncertain. Either way, the atmosphere has become less welcoming. 

The bitter irony of the BNO scheme is becoming increasingly apparent. Far from finding a new home and prosperity, skilled professionals fall into an economic trap, where spiralling costs meet plummeting opportunities in a nation showing clear signs of decline. 

Those of us with long memories have always been sceptical about the BNO scheme; it bore the taint of a forlorn gesture to assuage a guilty conscience. After all, until the 1981 Nationality Act, most Hong Kongers enjoyed the right of abode in the UK. Margaret Thatcher closed that door just as negotiations concerning Hong Kong's future were gaining momentum. Odd, that.

I know BNO migrants who have struggled to settle in the UK. Not wishing to lose face, very few have spoken openly after their return. Despite being skilled professionals, one couple found their qualifications undervalued, forcing them into lower-paying jobs. Even with a master's degree, the husband could only secure work in a warehouse.

He and his wife endured two British winters, unable to book doctor or dental appointments. The initial excitement of their good-sized detached home soon faded. They both have jobs in Hong Kong now and rarely mention their time in the UK. At least they were honest enough to acknowledge that their worst fears about Hong Kong proved unfounded.

The UK may be suitable for some, especially those with a strong family support network and ample financial resources. Still, the grass isn't always greener, especially given the UK's relentless economic decline. 

My discussions with those who opted for the BNO suggest they acted primarily out of opportunity. Hong Kong has always experienced significant population turnover, and this latest episode is no different from the movements of people in the 1960s and around 1997. Some will settle overseas; others will return, and a few will be 'astronauts' coming back and forth. Thus, attributing all the departures solely to the events of 2019 and the enactment of the NSL is naive. 

Yet, every story is unique and different; therefore, generalising the migration experience is a fool's errand. Some have relocated for economic reasons, while others aim to offer their children opportunities they wouldn't have in Hong Kong. And yes, a few emigrated to escape justice for their involvement in the rioting that occurred in 2019 and 2020.

Naturally, this raw data reveals nothing of the sacrifice, displacement, and struggles that many endured. Friendships, families, and marriages all suffered; the actual human cost remains invisible in any data field.

If all this starts to look dystopian, with a TV game show host in the White House, the Hunger Games would inevitably become a reality: check this out.

As nations continue to tighten their borders, one thing is sure — the golden age of easy migration has ended for now. However, once populations in wealthy nations hit a critical point in their decline, the demand for doctors, caregivers, and manual labourers will increase. At that point, the dynamics will shift again, with leaders facing difficult decisions to sustain their economies.

Lastly, it's also worth recalling that Nazi Germany's blind prejudices pushed many leading scientists to flee. These folks then drove the Manhattan Project to its successful conclusion. Is it possible that Trump is doing huge self-harm to the nation he leads?