As on other occasions inthe past, EU political leaders have been belatedly galvanised into action bythe global media attention focussed on the hundredsof migrants perishing on their southern borders.
Despite several heart-felt pleas by Italy and Malta to their European counterparts over the last year of an imminent humanitarian catastrophe, action to avert it was consistently delayed. On immigration, when it comes to prevarication, hypocritical face-saving rhetoric and playing at political games the EU’s leaders know no match.
It took the deaths of almost 2,000 migrants in the space of a few days for the consciences of European leaders and the Commission to be pricked and their compassion to find its voice. The United Nations’ human rights chief accused the continent of turning its back on the world’s most vulnerable migrants.
At the summit last Thursday, EU leaders came up with “a plan of action”. But it is a plan which is fudged, inadequate, dysfunctional and misconceived. The EU elephant has given birth to a mouse.
May I start by addressing my many compatriots who shamefully regard African migrants as a blight?
The brave people who place themselves in rickety boats, and into the hands of the modern equivalent of the slave trader, in the hope of reaching a European shore, are fleeing conflict, persecution and grinding poverty. These unfortunate souls are victims and we have a humanitarian duty to rescue them.
They are no different from Maltese, who would risk anything to try to keep their families safe and to give them a better life. What the thousands, including women and children, who are risking their lives trying to reach the safety of Europe need right now is life-saving action. We cannot allow thousands of men, women and children to drown as we enjoy our safe haven. Our humanitarian duty is to do whatever it takes to save them.
The actions EU leaders needed to address last week were three-fold. First, improvements to life-saving action: re-starting search and rescue operations on the scale of Mare Nostrum to stop innocent people losing their lives. Secondly, a practical and legal action plan to deter those who embark on these journeys and incentives to discourage others from setting out. And, thirdly, an equitable way of dealing with the refugees already in Europe, and the fair distribution of those still to come to other member states than just Italy, Malta and Greece. The plan must be both tough and tender.
Frontex, the EU’s maritime border patrol force, has had its budget trebled and warships from several states are sailing to the central Mediterranean to lend support, probably doubling the size of naval and air assets. If properly deployed, search-and-rescue efforts should therefore see a vast improvement. This is both welcome and overdue.
However, search-and-rescue operations on their own will not end the crisis. The sailing season still has another nine months to run. The EU leaders have not faced up to the sheer scale of the migration challenge, which could involve perhaps a million Africans risking everything to reach Europe in the warm months ahead.
Libya and Syria are the major problems. Since the fall of Gaddafi – an action achieved by European military intervention – Libya has descended into civil war. It is a failed state. After four years of civil war in Syria, there are four million refugees and tens of thousands have headed to North Africa seeking passage to Europe. They are joining migrants from Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Nigeria, Niger, Ivory Coast, Senegal and Mali in a desperate exodus from Africa and the Middle East. Until Syria and Libya are stabilised, there is only a limited amount the EU can do about immigration.
Mounting a de facto blockade on the edge of Libya’s territorial waters close to traffickers’ bases may offer a deterrent and should be attempted as soon as possible
Secondly, Europe cannot wait for peace in Syria and Libya before taking the tough action that’s needed. There needs to be a long-term solution to address the drivers of migration by intervention to destroy the criminal rackets and people traffickers. But the political, military and international obstacles to such an initiative are hugely complex.
Military force in Libyan waters would require a UN resolution. Treating people smugglers as a military target may satisfy a call for tangible action, but is probably legally and politically unrealistic. Sinking their boats before they set off is fraught with uncertainty. It is also short-sighted. Already it is reported that Syrian refugees are by-passing the traffickers by buying their own boats to escape from the long Libyan coast.
The overpowering desire to escape fratricidal wars, famines, failing states, poverty and chaos will not deter the traffickers, or the desperate refugees who use their services. Mounting a de facto blockade on the edge of Libya’s territorial waters close to traffickers’ bases may offer a deterrent and should be attempted as soon as possible.
Thirdly, EU leaders again shamefully ducked the issue of a fairer distribution of refugees throughout Europe. Attempts to find a solution have repeatedly been thwarted by the inability of member states to find common cause or a common strategy. Until the Union’s leaders stop protecting their own narrow national self-interests, the lack of a coherent immigration policy will continue to hauntthe continent.
Seeking to adopt a shared distribution system on a voluntary basis is simply to reinforce past failure. A proposal at the summit to resettle a token 5,000 refugees from Italy elsewhere in Europe foundered as no government was ready to take them. The northern states (Germany and Sweden excepted) must be shamed into finding a more equitable solution to this EU-wide humanitarian and social problem, which eases the burden on southern states where it is heaviest.
A more enlightened approach by member states should be adopted. It would be sensible to spread the burden by introducing some form of mandatory quota system and, more radically, national ceilings on immigration based on population density and territorial size.
Moreover, it is in the interests of all EU countries to counter the mounting right-wing backlash over immigration by adopting a comprehensive and speedy repatriation programme.
The success of a comprehensive migration strategy rests in the long term on Africa’s own economic development. To stop migrants crossing the Mediterranean, EU leaders need to focus on why migrants are driven by desperation to leave their countries.
Prosperous Europe will have to provide greater assistance to the development and stability of the countries of Africa and the Middle East. The EU should seize this moment to help curb economic migration at its source by actively promoting a new relationship with Sub-Saharan Africa based not on aid but increased incentives for foreign direct investment. The long-term answers on migration lie in Africa and the Middle East. Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco can and should be part of the solution.
Designed to produce a quick and credible response to the tragedies in the central Mediterranean, last week’s summit of EU leaders failed abjectly to address in a realistic manner either the practical immediate difficulties confronting Europe, or the long-term solutions.
Another summit on migration is to be held later this year in Malta with the EU, African Union and other key migration countries present. Malta has been handed a poisoned chalice. The outlook between now and then remains bleak.