A/72/173 mobility, with a focus on securitization, repression and deterrence policies. Their central objective has been to secure their borders by building fences, using violence to stop undocumented population movements across land and sea borders, using longterm detention as a deterrence tool and carrying out collective expulsions to countries of origin and transit. Moreover, States have moved their border management activities beyond their territorial borders, extending them to the hi gh seas and third countries. 30. Repressive policies and the lack of responses to push and pull factors of migration only serve to create the perfect conditions for underground labour markets and smuggling rings to flourish. States often do not address the reasons why individuals want or need to move from their countries of origin and why employers in destination countries seek to employ them, yet they have created and progressively increased barriers to mobility. The so -called “migration crisis” is driven by policy. Placing restrictions on mobility is part of the problem, not part of the solution. 31. The continued ineffectiveness and paradoxes of border management and the lack of a coherent human rights-based framework for migration have been vividly and visibly exposed by the tragic deaths of migrants in transit, propelling the issue of the human rights of migrants into the spotlight. Suffering is also experienced at all other stages of migration. The repression of undocumented migrants and the externalization of borders do little but increase the suffering of migrants and have the effect of entrenching smuggling rings and exploitative recruiters and employers. Migrants will continue to arrive. The only solution is to adopt well -managed migration policies that facilitate the mobility of migrants and provide States with the border control that they need. C. 2035 agenda: a long-term strategy 32. In order to respond to the complexity of human mobility, States are required to develop a long-term strategic vision of what their mobility policies will look like a generation from now, with precise timelines and accountability benchmarks. Such a long-term vision is similar to the strategic planning of States for policies on energy, environment, trade, food security, public transit, infrastructure and industries in order to determine the investments needed to achieve the objectives. 33. The Special Rapporteur suggests that States should also develop such a vision for migration policies. The timeline for migration policies always seems to be based on “now”, with States focusing on “stopping migration now”, “sending back migrants now” or “bringing in technicians or low-skilled migrant workers now”. The Special Rapporteur proposes a more considered, fact-based response to push and pull factors that includes a 15-year vision for how mobility could be effectively governed, which would allow States to take well-planned action in response to a socalled crisis. 34. The first step in changing the collective mindset is to accept that migrants will move according to push and pull factors, which, on the whole, are not adequately addressed. Facilitating increased mobility and matching skills to labour needs, for example in an accessible, regular, safe and affordable labour mar ket, and using appropriate visa systems and security controls, would ensure that most migrants would use regular mobility channels. 35. Facilitated mobility would have obvious advantages, such as: (a) Significantly reducing the market for smugglers and u nethical recruiters; (b) Enabling all security checks by intelligence agencies to be made in a timely manner and mostly in the destination country; 8/26 17-12223