Thursday

30th Mar 2017

Opinion

Populism in Brussels? How to solve the Balkan asylum crisis

  • 'For once it is not the Balkan countries which are failing' (Photo: letterlust)

Is the EU edging closer to making a fundamental and strategic mistake by restoring the visa requirement for citizens of the Western Balkans?

At this moment the interior ministers of six EU countries - Germany, Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Sweden - are pushing for a reversal of the most significant decision made in the past decade to further the European integration of the Western Balkans. The issue is also on the agenda of the justice and home affairs council on 25/26 October this week.

Dear EUobserver reader

Subscribe now for unrestricted access to EUobserver.

Sign up for 30 days' free trial, no obligation. Full subscription only 15 € / month or 150 € / year.

  1. Unlimited access on desktop and mobile
  2. All premium articles, analysis, commentary and investigations
  3. EUobserver archives

EUobserver is the only independent news media covering EU affairs in Brussels and all 28 member states.

♡ We value your support.

If you already have an account click here to login.

Such a decision would be a bad blow to the EU’s credibility in southeast Europe. It would also be deeply unfair to the citizens in the countries concerned. Reintroducing visa requirements for citizens of Serbia, Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro or Bosnia would also signal that other countries with roadmaps or visa liberalisation talks - from Kosovo to Turkey to Moldova - stand no real chance of success.

How did the EU get to this point? What would be the implications of such a step for the EU and the region? And how can the EU solve its own legitimate concerns without reintroducing visas?

To answer these questions, one must first understand the nature of the acute crisis that is pushing (some) EU interior ministers to advocate such measures.

After the EU lifted the Schengen visa requirement for Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro in December 2009, thousands of Serbians and Macedonians travelled to the EU to submit asylum claims. Already by 2010, Serbia became the country with the third-largest number of claims - almost 18,000 - in the EU; citizens from small Macedonia alone filed 7,550 claims.

Although only three EU countries were affected - Germany, Sweden and Belgium, with Luxembourg becoming a fourth target in 2011 - almost immediately there were warnings that unless Balkan leaders find ways to “solve” the asylum problem, the EU might have to reverse its decision to allow Balkan citizens visa-free travel.

Since then the situation has deteriorated further. The case of Germany illustrates the dynamic. In 2010, citizens of Serbia and Macedonia made 10,300 asylum requests in Germany. In 2011 the number was 8,500. However, in September 2012 the number of Serbian and Macedonian citizens submitting asylum requests reached 4,000 in one month.

This was a record and the reaction in Germany was predictable. Bild, Germany's largest tabloid, picked up the issue. German interior minister Hans-Peter Friedrich declared: “The massive inflow of Serbian and Macedonian nationals must be stopped without delay.” Friedrich told Bild Zeitung that “We have to send a clear signal to the relevant countries: people who are really persecuted will be accepted, economic refugees won't.”

In the first six months of this year, the recognition rate of claims in Germany was close to zero. Of some 5,000 asylum claims which were examined in this period, only 11 persons received humanitarian protection (which is not political asylum and is granted due to serious medical problems). Yet the number of applications continues to rise.

Why so many applications?

Why are Serbian and Macedonian citizens, who are not persecuted in their countries, applying for asylum in Germany despite the clear sign that they have little chance of getting asylum? The explanation is obvious. In July 2012, the German Constitutional Court ruled that the benefits for all asylum seekers in Germany must be increased.

Usually, asylum seekers in Germany are accommodated in collective centres and receive food and clothes in kind. In the past a family of four also received a stipend of €120 a month.

The July ruling has increased that stipend to at least €420 a month. If the family has to purchase its food and clothing itself, it will now receive more than €1,100 a month. This is many times the average monthly income in Serbia and Macedonia. In Germany, the basic asylum procedure for Balkan nationals takes at least two-and-a-half months. Then a rejected asylum seeker appeals, which means he or she can stay on average another five months.

To understand what Germany would actually need to do to reduce the number of Balkan asylum applications, just look at its neighbours.

Last year in Austria, which is even closer to the Balkans and also has large communities of Balkan people, only 380 Balkan nationals asked for asylum. Austria had put all Western Balkan states on a list of “countries of safe origin.” Today it decides on asylum claims of Balkan citizens in a week.

Germany could also look to the Netherlands.

A few years ago, the Netherlands reformed its asylum system and now resolves most claims, including those from Balkan citizens, in an expedited fashion (eight working days after a preparation period of a few days). If a rejected asylum seeker appeals a negative decision, the court decides within four weeks. The Netherlands registered 430 claims by Balkan citizens in 2011.

If the solution is obvious, it is also in the hands of concerned EU member states. Instead of advocating such solutions, however, which are in line with EU legislation and the UN Refugee Convention, the European Commission has put the blame on the governments of the Western Balkans.

On 15 October this year, the commission’s spokesman for home affairs, Michele Cercone, explained once again that visa liberalisation for the Western Balkans “comes with huge responsibilities. It is more than time now for these countries, their authorities and their citizens, to prove they can handle this huge responsibility."

But what can Serb, Macedonian or Albanian politicians do to “act responsibly”? The commission demands that Balkan governments run “information awareness campaigns,” carry out “exit controls” and “investigation of facilitators."

Information campaigns? The potential asylum seekers know that their chances to receive international protection are minimal, but they also know what the different asylum systems offer. Which information would prevent them from using the generous ones?

Facilitators largely do not exist since there is not much money to be made with cheap bus tickets to Berlin or Luxembourg.

The suggestion of “exit controls” is also insidious. As almost all the asylum seekers are Roma, it is hard to avoid ethnic profiling and open discrimination if this were systematically implemented. In fact one of the conditions for lifting the visa barrier was for the Balkan countries to provide access to travel and identity documents for all citizens including Roma and other minorities.

Safe countries of origin

The best way forward for reforming visa requirements would be for all countries benefiting from visa-free travel following a liberalisation process - which includes a focus on human rights - to be declared “safe countries of origin” at the EU level.

Under EU asylum legislation, claims from citizens originating in safe countries of origin can be prioritised and dealt with under an accelerated procedure, as is the case in Austria today.

In 1997, EU member states negotiated a protocol to the Amsterdam Treaty under which they agreed to treat each other as safe countries of origin.

The asylum procedures directive, which was adopted in late 2005, mentioned Romania and Bulgaria - not yet EU members at the time - as safe countries of origin. The same directive also allowed member states to compose their own lists of safe countries.

As long as the commission continues to advocate pointless measures, and member states refuse to address the underlying issue, which is generous asylum systems that can be abused, this problem cannot be solved. Nor would a suspension of visa-free travel work unless it is permanent. The only viable and effective solution would be for EU member states to reform their own systems.

EU interior ministers need to admit, and the European Commission needs to remind them, that for once it is not the Balkan countries which are failing.

The writers founded and run the European Stability Initiative, a think-tank that has closely followed the visa liberalisation process for the Western Balkans. www.whitelistproject.eu

Analysis

Lukashenka: End of an era?

The political spring in Belarus ended just as the actual season began, but greater changes loom after 23 years of dictatorship.

Column / Brexit Briefing

The Union under threat

The effect of Brexit will be much more profound on Northern Ireland than on Scotland. Some kind of border controls with Ireland seem inevitable.

Birthday wishes to the European Union

With the EU soon to celebrate its 60th birthday, there are still lingering questions about the bloc's future and whether there can be a change in fortune.

Analysis

Lukashenka: End of an era?

The political spring in Belarus ended just as the actual season began, but greater changes loom after 23 years of dictatorship.

News in Brief

  1. UK delivered its Article 50 letter to the EU
  2. Support for Germany's anti-EU party fading
  3. Turkish intelligence not welcome in Germany
  4. US senate approves Montenegro’s Nato bid
  5. Scottish MPs give go ahead to seek referendum
  6. Uber pulls out of Denmark over new taxi-regulation
  7. EU court validates sanctions on Russia's Rosneft
  8. Luxembourg to team up with Ireland in Apple tax appeal

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. The Idealist QuarterlyCan Progressive Stories Survive Our Post-Truth Era? After-Work Discussion on 6 April
  2. ACCAG20 Citizens Want 'Big Picture' Tax Policymaking, According to Global Survey
  3. Belgrade Security ForumCall for Papers: European Union as a Global Crisis Manager - Deadline 30 April
  4. European Gaming & Betting Association60 Years Rome Treaty – 60 Years Building an Internal Market
  5. Malta EU 2017New EU Rules to Prevent Terrorism and Give More Rights to Victims Approved
  6. European Jewish Congress"Extremists Still Have Ability and Motivation to Murder in Europe" Says EJC President
  7. European Gaming & Betting AssociationAudiovisual Media Services Directive to Exclude Minors from Gambling Ads
  8. ILGA-EuropeTime for a Reality Check on International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
  9. UNICEFHuman Cost to Refugee and Migrant Children Mounts Up One Year After EU-Turkey Deal
  10. Malta EU 2017Council Adopts New Rules to Improve Safety of Medical Devices
  11. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Energy Research: How to Reach 100 Percent Renewable Energy
  12. Party of European SocialistsWe Must Renew Europe for All Europeans

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. MEP Tomáš ZdechovskýThe European Commission Has Failed in Its Fight Against Food Waste
  2. ILGA-EuropeEP Recognises Discrimination Faced by Trans & Intersex People
  3. Nordic Council of Ministers25 Nordic Bioeconomy Cases for Sustainable Change
  4. European Free AllianceSupporting Artur Mas: Democracy and Freedom Cannot Be Convicted
  5. UNICEFSyria Conflict 6 Years On: Children's Suffering at Its Worst
  6. International Partnership for Human RightsDomestic Violence in Tajikistan: Time to Right the Wrongs
  7. European Trust SummitCorporate Strategy and Public Affairs in a Low-Trust World - Conference 31 May
  8. Malta EU 2017Agreement Reached to Involve Consumers in Financial Services Policymaking
  9. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Cities Gather Against Violent Extremism & Introduce Nordic Safe Cities
  10. World VisionFears and Dreams of Syria's Children and Their Peers Around the World
  11. Malta EU 2017Maltese Presidency and EP Agree on Visa Liberalisation for Ukraine
  12. Mission of China to the EUEU Window Chinese Government Academic Scholarship 2017/18 - Apply Now