Skip to content

At times of a pandemic: transnational solidarity not national borders

At the time of Covid-19 global pandemic, citizenship and national borders should not become defining elements of our joint struggle.

At times of a pandemic: transnational solidarity not national borders
Banner in Goettingen, Germany reads: "Corona solidarity must not end at national borders" | Fotostand / Harald Kuhl/DPA/PA Images. All rights reserved
Published:

As the Covid-19 pandemic intensifies around the world, we are witnessing countries make unprecedented decisions to close borders to non-citizen – Canada included. And as days pass, more flights are cancelled. International travel has become extremely uncertain, and even citizens are finding it difficult to return home.

National borders have become more visible and less permeable than ever, and citizenship appears to have resurfaced as the ultimate marker of community, belonging and solidarity. But is this truly the case? Or are we also witnessing the rise of transnational solidarity within and across borders, while citizens within their communities ‘betray the solidarity’ they have with their fellow nationals?

The concern that travelers increase the risk of Covid-19 contagion is legitimate. At the same time, border closures do not keep “everyone” out, only those who are non-citizens (and non-permanent residents in some countries). In other words, states weigh their obligation towards solidarity and protection of citizens above the risk that they may be carrying the virus. Instead, outsiders (temporary residents, visitors) are banned from entry, as are asylum-seekers or irregular migrants. The rationale is the same: it is a balance between risk on one hand, and belonging and solidarity, on the other. Those who do not belong, must stay out. Solidarity to vulnerable people in need of protection weighs less in comparison to solidarity and the obligation to protect public health within our society.