Migration management is often seen as beginning and ending with border control, with the fear of migration countered with a promise to end it. But can this be achieved?
Migration is threatening the European project, because populist parties are capitalising on citizens’ insecurities. Locally, it is a discussion that cannot be swept under the carpet as many Maltese feel threatened, and therefore, uncomfortable with a situation to which no end seems in sight.
But if Europe aspires to control migration from Libya, comprehensive win-win solutions must be sought to address the interests of Europe and Libya alike.
The only viable option is to dissuade economic migrants from heading to Europe. However, any proposals contemplated must be humane and protect the rights of asylum seekers.
One may question whether this is this really possible. I contend that it is, but only if Europe learns from its counter-piracy experience in Somalia.
Political hype
Europe continues to be faced with the same dilemma of nearly two decades ago, when it had interpreted border control as a means to process the flow of migrants into Europe, in a safe and organised manner, as repatriation remains challenging.
This, to my mind, has not changed. Europe is still struggling to cope with the migration phenomenon, the issue not being one of numbers, which fluctuate yearly, but of policy. Distribution within the EU remains unregulated and repatriation very limited.
Until these aspects have been rectified, the EU will find it difficult to foster public confidence, faith in the Brussels institutions will diminish, and the far right will continue to gain the upper hand. Effective repatriation and distribution of refugees is the only solution.
EU Libya strategy
Libya has been in turmoil ever since NATO’s campaign to overthrow Gaddafi ended in 2011, after which Libya was almost abandoned. Had the EU been in the lead, I believe Libya would have recovered much faster. Instead, political instability prevails and migration continues to challenge the European project to precarious levels.
One factor that has impeded progress in Libya is that the EU is an international organisation composed of a conglomerate of institutions and agencies. These are steered by 28 Member States that frequently act in an egocentric manner, given opposing national interests, primarily related to oil and gas, further compounding the delicate stability in Libya.
Moreover, migration generally appears on the European agenda only once the good weather arrives in May (when crossings begin) and lasts until the end of July, when the EU and its governments shut down for their summer recess. By the time European officials return to their offices in September, migration out of Libya becomes an insignificant dribble and the subject moves to the back burner. This has happened for 17 consecutive years.
Having more border guards will not offer any deterrence as their prime roles are now that of rescuers or processing agents who register arrivals in Europe. In contrast, human traffickers will continue to profit from the desperation of those aspiring to reach the continent, by finding new routes.
Disembarkation in Libya
It is Libya’s responsibility to patrol its maritime borders, which it does to the best of its ability. Migrants who manage to escape detection and proceed beyond Libya’s grasp are (hopefully) intercepted or rescued by EU maritime forces or NGO vessels.
The expectation for the EU to block migration at sea is not legally feasible because Europe is bound to ensure that refugees eligible for international protection are indeed protected. The EU is, consequently, unable to disembark refugees in Libya as the country has still not signed the Geneva refugee convention (recognising the principle of non-refoulement).
Effective repatriation and distribution of refugees is the only solution
Europeans favouring the ‘blocking’ option should also consider two unquestionable ramifications.
Firstly, migrants deserving of international protection and asylum in Libya are sandwiched between a rock and a hard place, probably having to endure more inhumane treatment and arduous working conditions, possibly even slavery.
Secondly, tensions in Libyan detention centres could escalate to uncontrollable levels, and this will inevitably lead to human traffickers organising outbound waves of migrants to Europe, as we have possibly seen this summer.
Europe cannot afford to stand by any longer. If we aspire towards the survival of the European project, solutions must be negotiated with Libya before the next migration season begins.
Europe’s options
From the Libyan perspective, the country is challenged by its desert borders and its vast coastline from which its rescue zone extends northwards up to over 100 miles, the zone in which Libya is obliged to respond to distress calls at sea. Blocking migration at Libya’s desert borders is not humanely possible, so Libya can only hope to reduce migration flows through the country with EU support.
Europe needs to devise and implement bolder and more united strategies, resorting to out-of-the-box solutions with a stronger foreign policy vision. If not, we will simply continue plugging holes in a severely rusted ship, with no end in sight.
This being the case, it is perhaps time that the EU develops a consolidated migration strategy for Libya. One person, an empowered and very senior diplomat, must lead the charge, with all the tools at his disposition, to negotiate holistic solutions as the EU did in Somalia, applying diplomatic, development and security resources in tandem. Libya should not be seen as the problem but as part of the solution. And let’s not forget that it is because Europe is luring migrants that Libya is challenged.
The EU certainly has the political clout, funding, assets and resources to strategise a Libya plan if it makes this a priority. I would implement a strategy along three integrated lines of action:
Establish EU asylum processing centres, possibly even at sea: Migrants rescued at sea should have their asylum applications processed in EU asylum processing centres in Libya, under the lead of the European Asylum Support Office, with the support of the UN’s International Organisation for Migration and UNHCR, and under Libyan oversight. If land-based facilities are deemed unsafe, the EU should consider processing asylum applications aboard decommissioned cruise liners in coastal waters. Migrants warranting possible asylum would be transferred to Europe for further filtering and relocation in a fair and equitable manner.
Repatriate economic migrants rescued to countries of origin: Economic migrants rescued at sea and failing the asylum process should be encouraged to return home in an amicable manner. This could be accomplished by offering financial incentives upon return to their countries.
Enable Libyan maritime agencies to conduct effective maritime operations: The EU would continue to assist the Libyan government conduct effective border control, and search and rescue operations by supporting Libyan maritime agencies with capacities and capabilities; and alerting Libyan authorities of migrant movements (as is probably happening already).
NGO involvement
I have mixed feelings about NGOs rendering humanitarian assistance to migrants in Africa.
On the one hand there is the indisputable fact that NGO vessels are fulfilling the most noble of tasks and saving lives, bringing those refugees who warrant protection to Europe. And the logical thing to do for any NGO vessel is to lie off Libya and switch on its location transponder, making their vessel’s position visible to migrant smugglers ashore, even on smart phones.
This implies that smugglers now need to make migrant boats safe enough to travel 24 miles, rather than cross the Mediterranean, and is probably why we sometimes see cadavers washed ashore on Libyan beaches.
The million-dollar question is this: Are NGO vessels also acting as a pull factor, luring more sub-Saharan African migrants to Europe, and risking more migrant lives in the process? It is only Frontex and governments who can answer this question because they have access to the interview reports of rescued migrants.
Concluding thoughts
Europe is witnessing the increase of far-right movements throughout Member States, but particularly frontier States, and politics have escalated to policies.
Meanwhile, migration out of Africa can be expected to increase as our climate deteriorates and the African population multiplies. Calamities at seas will cause more public outcry from liberal societies in Europe to which governments will undoubtedly subdue (Lampedusa 2013), and far-right movements will then counter, and so the cycle will repeat itself endlessly until Europe gets its act together... or fails, while migrants continue to drown.
The solutions proposed in this article could serve as a ‘stop gap’ until the EU’s long-term interventions in sub-Saharan Africa gain momentum and begin working. In the meantime, Europe needs to decide whether it is politically safe to continue tolerating mounting pressures, because come May, once migrant crossings resume, the EU will be holding its parliamentary elections – and facts will be twisted, and dangerously convincing far-right statements made…
Lt Col (Ret’d) Martin Cauchi Inglott is a retired senior Armed Forces of Malta officer who served as Commander of the AFM’s Maritime Squadron, FRONTEX Mission Commander and board member, and colonel with the EU military staff in Brussels. He is now a consultant with the United Nations and secretary general of Partit Demokratiku.
This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece