Stratfor
Summary
The European Union is once again struggling to
come up with a coherent asylum strategy for its 28 members. In recent years,
the rising number of asylum seekers entering the European Union through countries
such as Italy and Greece has generated friction among member states, fueled
criticism of the Schengen Agreement and contributed to the growing popularity
of nationalist parties.
However, the European Union will not reform its
asylum policies in any significant way. Member states will provide more
financial assistance to Mediterranean countries, but they will refuse to accept
quotas of immigrants over the coming months and years. Anti-immigration
sentiments will persist across the Continent, putting substantial pressure on
one of the European Union's founding principles: the free movement of people.
Analysis
On April 23, the European Union submitted to
pressure from Italy and Malta and held an emergency summit to address the
immigration crisis in the Mediterranean. Between January and April, more than
1,750 migrants died in shipwrecks at sea, a death toll 30 times higher than
that of the same period in 2014. Over the past year and a half, Italian ships
have rescued more than 200,000 people in the Mediterranean Sea.
After the summit concluded, EU leaders decided
to triple the financial resources for the bloc's operations in the
Mediterranean Sea and to boost cooperation with certain countries like Tunisia,
Egypt, Sudan, Mali and Niger to better control borders and combat human
trafficking. They also asked EU Foreign Affairs Chief Federica Mogherini to
begin preparing for a possible military operation aimed at identifying,
capturing and destroying vessels before traffickers could use them. However, the
bloc's leaders did not reach any agreements on the distribution of asylum
seekers across the Continent. Moreover, many of the goals discussed during the
summit will prove difficult to achieve.
Asylum Crisis Dovetails with Europe's Political
Rifts
Europe's refugee crisis intersects with many of
the European Union's structural problems. First, member states lack a cohesive
view on the issue of asylum. According to existing European norms, asylum
seekers are the responsibility of the country of first entry. In absolute
terms, Germany receives the most asylum seekers, though Sweden receives the
most relative to its own population size.
However, the crises in Libya, Iraq and Syria as
well as the constant violence in sub-Saharan Africa have led to rising waves of
people entering the European Union by sea. Human smugglers are taking advantage
of the political turmoil in Libya to use the country as a launchpad for ocean
crossings. The civil war that followed former Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's
ouster in 2011 left the country without a functioning government, navy or coast
guard, placing a heavy financial burden on the shoulders of Mediterranean
countries to provide shelter and conduct rescue operations at sea.
Italy has spearheaded criticism against the
bloc's response to the asylum issue. In October 2013, after a shipwreck near
the island of Lampedusa left hundreds dead, Rome launched Mare Nostrum, a
maritime mission to rescue immigrants on the Mediterranean Sea. High
operational costs prompted Italy to ask for assistance from the European Union,
which then launched the Triton rescue operation in November 2014. (Triton was a
smaller mission that stayed within 30 miles of the Italian and Maltese
coastlines, compared to Mare Nostrum ships, which patrolled near the Libyan
coast.)
Rome has repeatedly asked the European Union
for greater solidarity in the form of rescue mission funding and a more
balanced distribution of immigrants across member states. Both issues are
extremely controversial, since some governments such as that of the United
Kingdom believe a larger rescue operation would attract asylum seekers, while
other governments in Northern Europe dislike the idea of introducing immigrant
quotas in the European Union.
The immigration crisis is heightening tension
among EU members. Politicians in Austria and Germany have criticized the
Italian government for failing to register all of the asylum seekers that
arrive in the country. If immigrants are not registered at their point of
entry, they can move elsewhere within the European Union and apply for asylum
there. Meanwhile, French and British authorities blame each other for the
immigrants crossing the English Channel from the port at Calais. The
immigration crisis even took a strong political turn when the Greek defense
minister threatened to unleash "a wave of millions of economic
migrants," including jihadists, on Europe unless the eurozone reduces its
demands for austerity measures.
All of these frictions are linked to the
Schengen Agreement, which eliminates border controls within Europe. Once a
person has entered the Schengen area, he or she can move across the Continent
without encountering significant barriers. This agreement is the source of
Northern European countries' concerns about the lack of efficient border
controls in the European Union's periphery. Nationalist parties often criticize
the Schengen Agreement to promote tougher legislation on immigration and, in
some cases, the end of the European Union's principle of the free movement of people.
Political Effects Ripple Across Europe
The political effects of the immigration crisis
have been felt across Europe. The popularity of nationalist parties is rising,
and EU members still cannot reach a consensus on immigration policies. Support
for Italy's Northern League, which criticizes Rome's policies and demands that
Italy stop receiving asylum seekers, has grown steadily in opinion polls over
the past six months. Sweden's anti-immigration Sweden Democrats likewise saw
record-high levels of support in late 2014, after towns with large immigrant
populations rioted.
The rise of nationalist parties is also
affecting the behavior of moderate politicians. Countries such as the United
Kingdom and France have resisted proposals to redistribute immigrants across
the European Union out of fear that such action could strengthen their own
nationalist parties, including UKIP and the National Front. Meanwhile, the
Netherlands' ruling coalition nearly collapsed because of a political dispute
over the country's asylum policy.
Recent terrorist attacks in countries such as
France and Belgium, as well as threats from Islamist groups in places such as
the Vatican, have also reignited fears of a potential connection between
refugees and terrorism. Security forces in Europe are worried that terrorists
disguised as asylum seekers could enter the European Union, a concern that has
also motivated the reactions of local populations. Germany became an example of
this trend with the rise of the Pegida protest group, which rejects Muslim immigrants,
and arson attacks against refugee hostels.
Europe's Options Are Limited
There are a number of reasons that will keep
the European Union from implementing many of the proposals discussed April 23,
especially the one regarding the use of force against smuggling rings in
northern Africa. First, the mission's scope and goals will be difficult to
define, and its success remains dubious. Second, several EU members will oppose
the use of force in Libya at a time when the bloc is pushing for a diplomatic
solution to the country's civil war. Finally, there will likely be disagreement
over who should staff the mission and whether the United Nations should approve
it.
European leaders will also probably fail to
agree on redistribution of asylum seekers. During the emergency summit, British
Prime Minister David Cameron offered to send a British warship to the
Mediterranean to help rescue immigrants, a move that signified a shift from
London's previous position on the issue. However, Cameron stressed that any
asylum seekers rescued by British ships would not qualify for asylum in the
United Kingdom and instead would be sent to Italy. Because the United Kingdom
will hold general elections in mid-May, Cameron will refuse to take any bold
steps that could hurt his electoral prospects.
The Danish government is making similar
calculations. Hours before the EU summit, Danish Prime Minister Helle
Thorning-Schmidt said her country would not contribute to the redistribution of
immigrants. Thorning-Schmidt also said Denmark would support the EU-sponsored
operations, but that Copenhagen would not send ships to the Mediterranean Sea.
Denmark's elections are set for September, and the anti-immigration Danish
People's Party is currently polling around 19 percent — considerably higher
than the 12.3 percent it received in the 2011 general elections. Taking a
somewhat softer tone, Latvian Interior Minister Rihards Kozlovskis said taking
in refugees should be a voluntary decision for EU members.
Given these political considerations, the
European Union will likely keep throwing money at the problem, and a
comprehensive redesign of the bloc's asylum policy seems unlikely. Rescue
operations will probably be enhanced, but EU members will not reform their
asylum policies in any significant way. More important, the bloc will probably
refrain from pursuing military action in Libya, where the political crisis is
far from over. In the meantime, asylum seekers will continue to enter the
European Union, inflaming tensions between member states, strengthening
nationalist parties and eroding popular support for the founding principles of
the European Union.
"Immigration
Drives a Deeper Wedge Between EU States is republished with
permission of Stratfor."
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário
Não publicamos comentários de anônimos/desconhecidos.
Por favor, se optar por "Anônimo", escreva o seu nome no final do comentário.
Não use CAIXA ALTA, (Não grite!), isto é, não escreva tudo em maiúsculas, escreva normalmente. Obrigado pela sua participação!
Volte sempre!
Abraços./-