According to the latest communications released by FRONTEX (European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union), the number of immigrants who reached Europe within the first six months of 2014 is higher than the 2013 total. While waiting to see the final score for 2014, it is nice to see how such an important topic is easily forgotten until we hear of the n-th trawler sinking in the Mediterranean sea.
The migration flow management has always been one of the most discussed problems until the economic crisis crashed several EU countries and, with the recent conflicts rising up in Syria and the military coup perpetrated in Libia by Khalifa Belqasim Haftar a few months ago, we have again the conditions for an emergency situation. FRONTEX data shows how the emergency is becoming more and more critical: immigrants arrivals increased to 143,6% in Greece and 823% in Italy. If a few months ago we were celebrating the fall of the Berlin Wall, maybe we should not forget that Greece built a new one 2 years ago on the Turkish border in order to stop immigrants. Italy, on its side, was no better, deporting immigrants back to Africa with the help of Muhammar Ghedaffi, “one of the greatest human rights’ guardians”. Taking into account all these situations, it is easy to understand that a solution is far from being reached.
How is Europe managing the problem?
Of course to answer this question, we need to proceed through a subjective analysis. Living in Italy, a country that receives the 90% of total immigrants coming to Europe, the discussion is always current. Yes, to Europe, because those people do not want to stop in Italy but, instead, reach the countries that are offering more possibilities: Germany, Switzerland and the UK. The Mediterranean Sea has always been surrounded by great political instability and, for people who escape, is a navigable river. But Italy, and many other countries that should be used to it, are completely unprepared.
Well, they are not really unprepared, but rather they want to be unprepared. Since 1990 EU members signed several agreements (Dublin, Dublin II and Dublin III). According to them, the arrival country of an immigrant is responsible for his reception and treatment, residence permit and lodging. Since the arrival countries are always the same and 70% of these people can request asylum (for war, human rights, persecution reasons etc.), is difficult for a country on the border to keep all of them and the easiest solution is to not control them. Yes, because if an immigrant reaches another country and remains hidden for five months, he can request asylum there!
Now, imagine to host an Agora: every AEGEEan knows that at least 700 sleeping place are needed, but you offer a gym with 100, of course 600 hundred people will look for another accommodation going somewhere else. I gave this example because this is more or less the ratio/place per every immigrant coming to my country if we talk about space in welcoming buildings. The system is probably not working on purpose, so as not to keep all these people in only one country.
The EU member states generally do not collaborate with each other to solve the problem. Apart from the last example there are many others: cuts to FRONTEX program in the most critical moment, member countries bounded to send patrolling vehicles (but not doing it in years), an unclear common strategy and a never equally shared responsibility. Meanwhile there are two new threats on the horizon: criminal management of the migration flow and criticisms on freedom of movement for workers.
Criminal management of the migration flow
In the last days of 2014, Italian police discovered a new criminal conspiracy in Rome. The situation is not completely clear, since investigations just started, but what is sure is that this new conspiracy was collaborating with Mafia in Sicily and ‘Ndrangheta in Calabria to exploit immigration in two ways: the management of immigrants detentions centers (buildings, food, goods and everything else they need) and non identified immigrants trafficking. In the second case it is not publicly yet known how big their connection and movement became. In both cases, what is sure is that organised crime substituted again institutions.
Criticisms on freedom of movement for workers
Meanwhile there is a new challenge for Europe: if in the previous lines we were talking about immigration from non-EU countries, now the problem is coming from inside. Back in November, many pro-European activists were celebrating the negative result of a Swiss referendum on limiting immigrants’ access but, to be honest, it has been a Pyrrhic victory. The last referendum , held on the 30th of November, was presented by a group of ecologists extremists and wanted to limit the access to foreign people for not exploiting Swiss natural reserves by building new houses for immigrants. This referendum has been rejected with 74.1%. The real defeat for pro-EU people happened in February 2014, when there was a true referendum threatening workers freedom of movement imposing a yearly limit to immigrants entrances (European workers included). That motion passed with the 50,3% of the votes in favour, and it can affect not only workers movement, but the whole relation between the European Union and Switzerland.
The Swiss Confederation is not part of the EU, but has bilateral agreements with it and only in 2005 joined the Schengen area: the agreement was very particular for its “guillotine clause”, they accepted a contract package with the EU (free movement of people, air traffic, road traffic, agriculture, public procurement, science and technical trade barriers), where if one of the points is put under discussion, all the others are immediately invalid. So, since last February, Switzerland is freezing its relationship with the EU.
If you think Switzerland is an isolated case, watch out! Cracks in this broken gear are making a lot of noise in another country, this time part of European Community: the United Kingdom. After the EU parliament election of May 2014, British Prime Minister David Cameron, is trying to recover right-wing votes he lost in favour of Nigel Farage leader of Ukip, the EU-skeptic party.
In six months there will be the new election round for UK and which solution could be easier than take some of his claims? That’s why Mr. Cameron, in a desperate attempt of recovering some votes and winning the next elections, is starting a discussing about decreasing by 60% the movement of workers from next year on. The last ones are considered as “welfare tourists”, it means they move to UK only to scrounge services from the state they cannot find in their own countries and Cameron declared that “too many Italians and Spanish are in London” and insiders define him scared by the immigration balance of the last period that showed “an invasion from Romania and Bulgaria”. Cameron wants to start reforms to exclude non-UK people from public housing and dole for the first four years and expel those who are not able to find a job within six months.
The only answer Jean-Claude Juncker, the current President of the European Commission since November 2014, gave him is limitation of workers movement can create less capital movement. A very weak argument if we think about the pressure Cameron has; a very traditional answer since the European Union is talking everyday more and more about economics and less about politics. The risk in this is to find ourselves in a critical situation during the next EU parliament elections and the UK can leave for good. In fact, if Cameron wins the elections he promised to have a in/out EU referendum in 2017. At this very moment the British public opinion is divided with 41% for the withdrawal, 41% to stay in and 18% of undecided voters.
Written by Mattia Abis, AEGEE-Cagliari