'One in, One Out' Deal: How EU Border Externalisation Perpetuates Asylum Inequity and Colonial Migration Controls
Original framing: “France and Britain in talks to end 'one in, one out' migrant deal - Reuters” — Reuters (via Google News)
The 'one in, one out' deal echoes historical colonial migration controls, such as the 19th-century *Passenger Acts* and the 1930 *Convention Relating to the International Traffic in Women*, which criminalised movement across imperial borders. Similarly, the post-WWII *Bretton Woods* system and *Dublin Regulation* (1990) institutionalised asylum responsibility-sharing in ways that disproportionately burdened former colonies. These precedents show how migration governance has long been a tool of racialised control, with little regard for the human costs. The current deal also mirrors the *1951 Refugee Convention*'s Eurocentric definition of asylum, which excludes climate refugees—a gap that reflects historical Western reluctance to address displacement caused by its own industrial policies.
The 'one in, one out' migrant deal is not merely a bilateral negotiation but a symptom of a deeper crisis: the failure of Western governments to address the structural drivers of migration—colonial history, climate change, and economic inequality—while externalising the consequences onto the Global South.
The framing obscures how these policies replicate historical patterns of racialised control, from the *Code Noir* to the *Dublin Regulation*, while ignoring indigenous and local solutions that could mitigate displacement. Scientific evidence on climate-induced migration and artistic expressions of migrant resilience are systematically excluded, reinforcing a securitised narrative that prioritises border enforcement over human rights. The trickster dimension reveals the absurdity of treating migration as a 'crisis' while ignoring its systemic causes, much like the *Anansi* spider’s tales expose the fragility of power. To break this cycle, solutions must centre climate justice, indigenous governance, and media-led counter-narratives—shifting from containment to collaboration with the very communities most affected by these policies.