[ad_1]
The mere possibility of immigrants from Afghanistan flooding the shores of Europe has started to tickle the continent’s Achilles heel – fierce disputes over how to deal with asylum seekers have never been resolved.
Six years ago, the EU was embroiled in an internal struggle not to control the influx of asylum seekers fleeing war-torn Syria. 2015 more than a million refugees and migrants crossed the sea to reach Europe.
Officials have promised reforms that will create a system that will process and distribute the number of asylum seekers equally across the continent. Next time they wanted to be ready.
However, no one has been able to create such a system.
Now that the Taliban fighters have almost finally taken control of Afghanistan, this failure has reminded everyone of an old problem and hung over the heads of European leaders. This has prompted officials and diplomats to come up with different ideas on how to deal with the expected increase in the number of Afghan asylum seekers.
Proposals range from building borders or fences in border sections, funding the relocation of refugees to non-EU countries such as Turkey and Pakistan, and offering immediate but temporary EU protection to fleeing Afghans.
In some cases, the parties did not hesitate and moved forward without waiting for the blessing of the union. Greece, for example, has already built a section of about 40 km and has improved surveillance along its border.
Diplomats say EU ambassadors should meet this week to agree on a collective position. On Saturday, EU leaders presented a preliminary presentation of their plan, which included: funding for member states to accept refugees and partnership opportunities with outside countries.
But the bottom line is that the issue of migration is back on the EU agenda. Human rights workers said such a focus on one issue was exaggerated and could harm the bloc itself.
First, migration officials say the majority of Afghans fleeing are likely to stay in neighboring countries rather than go to Europe. Furthermore, NGOs argue that naming the Afghan crisis as a migration problem will give neighboring countries such as Turkey, Belarus and Morocco an advantage, which use illegal immigrants as a lever or blackmail tool in their relations with the EU. It would also benefit far-right parties within the union itself.
An unsolved problem
Since 2015 EU countries have repeatedly tried to establish a system that distributes asylum seekers evenly across the EU, but sadly all these attempts have failed.
The European Commission put forward a new redistribution proposal last year, but few expect it to move any further in the near future.
Instead, the bloc often outsourced the asylum process to countries outside its borders. In 2016, during the influx of Syrian refugees, the EU signed an agreement with Turkey under which Ankara promised to work to prevent migrants traveling to Greece from the Aegean Sea in exchange for EU funding for aid projects of thousands of millions of euros in Turkey.
Rumors about another EU deal with Turkey started on Friday. Although Turkey does not have a direct border with Afghanistan, diplomats discussed the possibility of the country playing an important role in hosting Afghan refugees.
However, the Turkish official denied the rumors: “There is no agreement between Turkey and the EU on Afghan refugees.”
Another EU diplomat told the Politico newspaper that he expected high-level discussions between the two sides in the coming days. The information was confirmed by the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, who wrote on the social network with the President of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, on Twitter on Sunday.
However, Turkey is not the only country expected to play a role. On Friday, the chief commissioner for refugees, Filippo Grandi, predicted that after leaving Afghanistan, most refugees are likely to move closer to their immediate neighbors, including Pakistan, Iran and Tajikistan. He stressed that if the world community wants to keep refugees closer to home, humanitarian aid must first be provided in these places.
“If support and assistance to these countries is not consistent, there is a high risk that the movement will continue to Europe,” the commissioner said.
EU leaders spoke about such partnerships on Saturday in Spain, in a building that houses Afghans working with the EU. Michel called migration a “painful” issue for the European Union and noted the possibility of cooperating with non-EU countries on this issue.
And the president of the commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has promised to put forward a global resettlement program at the next G7 summit.
He also said the EU would increase humanitarian aid to Afghanistan above the current 57 million. which were assigned for 2021. EU leaders stressed that humanitarian aid cannot be channeled through local authorities.
Is it necessary to build a wall?
Despite long-standing resistance from some EU officials, fences have already started to rise in some EU border states and diplomats are debating whether blocking people should become a more common approach to tackling similar problems.
When Hungary in 2015 built a barrier on the border with Serbia and Croatia, this structure soon became a symbol of a populist reference to a multifaceted problem such as migration. Meanwhile, Donald Trump, in his bid for the US presidency, loudly promised to build a border on the Mexican border.
At the time, former European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker chided Hungary’s move, saying “there is no place for borders and fences in an EU member state.”
This resistance appears to have gradually diminished, at least as long as it does not involve EU money.
The Commission did not criticize Lithuania when it announced that it would build a fence on the border with Belarus to prevent its autocrat Aliaksandr Lukashenko from deliberately sending immigrants across the Lithuanian border into EU territory. A spokesman for the commission said at the time that “in a situation facing Lithuania, building such a barrier could be a good idea”, but added that EU money would not fund “fences as such”.
And Greece these days has focused its efforts on building a fence over possible migrant flows from Afghanistan.
On Friday, Greek Civil Protection Minister Michal Chrysochoidis visited the country’s border with Turkey and vowed to keep the dividing line “safe and impassable”. He said Greece would take action without waiting for an EU decision.
“As a European country, we participate in the institutions of the European Union,” he said. “But we cannot wait for the possible consequences.”
Observers mark an important moment in March last year, when the newly appointed Commission President von der Leyen went to Greece and thanked the country for “being our European shield these days.”
Immediate but temporary protection
There are also efforts by some representatives in the European Union to help Afghans get to Europe really quickly and legally.
In recent days, EU Internal Affairs Commissioner Ylva Johansson has called on member states to “increase Afghan resettlement quotas.” Mr von der Leyen reiterated this call on Saturday, describing it as “our duty” to relocate Afghan migrants. He proposed “the necessary budgetary means” for EU countries “to move forward and help relocate refugees.”
The EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, has come up with an even more ambitious idea.
Speaking in the European Parliament on Thursday, Mr Borrell mentioned the possibility of using a never-before-used EU article called the Temporary Protection Directive.
The measure, introduced in 2001 after the refugee crisis in Kosovo, provides urgent protection to people with refugee status and allows EU countries to redistribute such refugees on a voluntary basis. Unlike many EU initiatives, the directive does not require unanimity. The Council, made up of 27 Member States, can apply it by simple majority on a proposal from the Commission.
“It could be an opportunity to use it,” Borrell said Thursday.
But EU officials remain skeptical. They stressed that this directive was enacted during the Arab Spring uprisings ten years ago and did not receive sufficient support from EU member states.
“We should work on that now,” urged one official, saying public opinion could be favorable this time.
Prepared according to Politico inf.
