Towards closure

Until the 1980s, demands for closure were somewhat weak in both Malaysia and Spain. This means, in particular, that the distinction between citizens and foreigners – the legal barriers to entry and membership – were rather blurred. The paths that led to this situation were, however, different. Malaysia had a colonial past in which immigrant workers (from China and India) were perceived as ‘birds of passage’ or sojourners. After independence in 1957, many of these ‘eternal foreigners’ finally obtained Malaysian citizenship. Yet, this did not make them complete insiders since the distinction between bumiputera (literally meaning ‘sons of the soil’, which includes Malay and other indigenous peoples) bumiputera (basically Malaysian citizens of Chinese and Indian origins) continued defining different statuses. This division, along lines of ethnic origin, between some citizens and others, also determined immigration policies (see section 3.3). While entry was restricted for Chinese and Indians (including relatives of Malaysian citizens), Indonesians (insofar as they were ethnically Malay) were not always categorised as foreigners and hence enjoyed free entry to Malaysia and its labour market over a long period of time.

In contrast with Malaysia, Spain was originally a country of emigration and also perceived as such. Accordingly, until the 1980s, policy was essentially geared towards emigration – which is to say, defining, channelling, selecting and keeping track of the numbers of people leaving the country. Meanwhile, immigration policies were notable for their randomness and general irrelevance. Barriers to entry and stay were minimal because the numbers of immigrants coming into Spain to stay were also minimal. This absence of legal obstacles was still more pronounced for citizens of former Spanish colonies. For example, in 1968, when holding a work permit was introduced as the necessary condition for working legally in Spain, foreigners from Latin America and the Philippines were exempted. The citizenship law is another example of how the frontiers were more permeable for some than for others. Unlike other foreigners, South Americans, Filipinos and Sephardic Jews could – and this is still the case – apply for citizenship after two years of legal residence.

In Malaysia, ethnicity closed doors for some and opened them for others. In Spain, cultural or historic proximity facilitated entry and inclusion in a world that was already relatively open.