The Human Cost of Closed Borders

During the COVID-19 pandemic, national borders became more than lines on a map, or places where goods crossed from one trading partner to another; more than ever before, borders were weaponized during the crisis for political gain, in the name of protecting public health. Border policies enacted during the pandemic laid the groundwork for the hardening of borders we are seeing today.

In their new book from Oxford University Press, “When the World Closed Its Doors: The COVID-19 Tragedy and the Future of Borders,” Laurie Trautman, ’01, B.A., economics/environmental studies, director of Western’s Border Policy Research Institute, and Edward Alden, Western’s Ross Distinguished Professor in the College of Business and Economics and a senior fellow on the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, D.C., take a global view of border-related policies and interactions across the world during the pandemic and the human impacts of those national decisions.

The authors shine a light not just on the dollars that were lost or how closed borders did nothing to improve public health in the United States, but also on the plight of divided families and an end to the “social commerce”— difficult-to-quantify bonuses that good neighbors with open borders enjoy; these bonuses came to a shuddering halt among long-friendly nations around the world, such as the U.S. and Canada.

“Close to home, there were so many stories and people we talked to that spoke to the human price of closed borders,” Alden says. “Couples that were separated for months and even years, families that were divided, all based on weak evidence that long border closures meant better public health outcomes for both sides.”

Trautman said it was far easier—and more popular with their constituents—for governments to posture about how restricted borders made people safer at a time of heightened stress and worry than to actually invest in meaningful domestic health measures. To make matters worse, there has been virtually no retrospective analysis by the United States government about the costs and benefits of closing borders.

“After 9/11, our government dove deep into an analysis of our borders and how the data that was accumulated and the lessons learned could be put to good use to make us safer,” Trautman says. “But post-pandemic, there has been none of the willingness to do that. None of that type of reflection has happened.”

In their book, Alden and Trautman examine not just the U.S.-Canada border but other places around the world that saw borders go from afterthoughts to items of national contention: They went to the Norway-Sweden border, which before the pandemic was one of the most open, friendly borders in the world, but suddenly became almost impassable during the pandemic.

“Norway was in hyper-lockdown, and Sweden was doing herd immunity, so initially their infection rates were higher. There were social and economic impacts, but also a sense of betrayal, especially by Swedes, many of whom worked across the border in Norway,” Alden says.

The entire European project is built on the freedom of movement, codified by the 1985 Schengen agreement, Trautman says. Previous crises, such as large migration flows in 2015 and 2016, resulted in some countries reenacting national border controls, but the pandemic brought restrictions on a previously unheard-of scale.

Also caught in the crossfire of border politics during the pandemic were expatriates, such as a New Zealand journalist working for Al Jazeera in Doha, who found herself pregnant and unmarried, which is against the law in Qatar. Despite the threat to her safety, she was not granted a space in the hotel quarantine facilities in New Zealand, and instead was forced to seek permission from the Taliban to reunite with her partner in Afghanistan, where she had been reporting previously. It was only after her case was publicized that the New Zealand government finally relented.

One of the conclusions they draw from their research is that while border closures enacted to protect public health have questionable benefits, the collateral damage is huge. Furthermore, in the case of the United States, restricting borders and keeping loved ones apart had virtually no public health benefit.

“In the United States, the border measures came too late and had far too many holes. It did little to halt the spread of COVID while harming so many,” Alden says.

While the book focuses on the use of border restrictions during the pandemic, it also addresses current challenges. Many countries, particularly the U.S., are using borders as the “big red button” to respond to crises that have little to do with borders, such as the fentanyl overdose epidemic.

Trautman also pointed to the problematic nature of many of the border restrictions during the pandemic, which divided travelers into categories of “essential,” allowing them to cross, while those considered “non-essential” were prohibited.

“These determinations were completely subjective, and in the case of the U.S., decided by the officer you happened to encounter upon arrival at the border. So many people were turned away who were simply trying to reunite with their loved ones,” she says. “If being with your family and friends during a difficult time isn’t essential, then what is?”