Wednesday

29th Mar 2023

Opinion

How NGOs took over migrant rescues in the Mediterranean

  • Migrants rescued by the Migrant Offshore Aid Station in the Mediterranean sea. Some NGOs fear their objectives may become victims of their own success. (Photo: MOAS.eu/Jason Florio)

The launch of Operation Triton in 2014 shifted the focus of EU efforts in the Southern Mediterranean from Search and Rescue (SAR) to border control. Several NGOs have since attempted to fill the gap left by the absence of large-scale humanitarian operations.

In late 2014, philanthropists Regina and Christopher Catrambone set up the Migrant Offshore Aid Station (MOAS), equipping a former fishing vessel with two drones and staffing it with former Maltese Navy personnel.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

MOAS offered an example that has been imitated by other NGOs. In 2015, the Brussels and Barcelona branches of MSF developed their own SAR capabilities using their own vessels, the Bourbon Argos and Dignity I.

German NGO Sea-Watch also purchased a vessel to search for migrant boats in distress in 2015. In February 2016, SOS Mediterranee chartered a 77 metre ship to conduct operations in partnership with the Amsterdam branch of MSF.

The non-for-profit spin-off of the Spanish lifeguard company Pro-Activa and two other German NGOs – Sea-Eye and Jugend Rettet – also started rescuing migrants in the Central Mediterranean a few months later. The Dutch charity Refugee Boat Foundation and Save the Children are set to start SAR operations soon.

All these organisations usually conduct rescues between 20km and 50km off the coast of Libya upon authorisation of the Italian Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre (MRCC).

Two different operating models can be found. Organisations with larger vessels, such as MOAS, MSF, and SOS-Mediterranee, conduct fully fledged SAR operations, rescuing migrants and dropping them off in Italian ports.

Smaller NGOs such as Sea-Watch and Pro-Activa focus exclusively on rescuing, distributing life jackets and emergency medical care while awaiting for a larger ship to shuttle migrants into an Italian port.

Devoted to rescue

As the Central Mediterranean corridor is frequently crossed by merchant and military vessels alike – all obliged to conduct rescue missions based on the legal duty to assist people in distress at sea, enshrined in Article 98 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) – one may consider the contribution of a few NGO vessels negligible.

Among all the assets presently deployed in the Mediterranean, however, only NGO vessels have SAR as their primary mission.

Triton only operates within 30 miles from the Italian coast, and has proven tragically ill-suited for SAR.

EUNAVFOR Med and Italian Navy Operation Mare Sicuro mandates focus on countering smuggling and other illegal activities.

Commercial shippers have financial disincentives to conduct SAR, and sometimes deliberately avoid migrants’ transit areas.

Even the Italian Coast Guard, which has conducted large numbers of SAR operations, is an organisation focused on policing Italian coasts, and its capacity to rescue migrants is reduced by the need to preserve its readiness for unexpected contingencies on national waters.

Hence, while the capabilities of NGOs are relatively small, the fact that their assets are exclusively dedicated to SAR makes their contribution to rescuing migrants invaluable.

Buffeted by politics

The non-governmental provision of SAR, however, is an endeavour fraught with challenges and trade-offs.

On 17 August, MSF Brussels’ Bourbon Argos suffered an armed attack from a Libyan speedboat. As a result, MSF Brussels and several other NGOs temporarily withdrew from the SAR zone.

While the attack calls into question the safety of non-governmental SAR, MSF and other NGOs alike have discarded the possibility of conducting their activities under a military escort, which could undermine the perceived impartiality, neutrality, and independence of their actions.

Moreover, most SAR organisations are small NGOs funded primarily through small donations. The combination of declining funding and a growing number of organisations involved may jeopardise the financial viability of non-governmental SAR in the future.

Also, the feasibility of non-governmental SAR in the Central Mediterranean is contingent on Italian government’s willingness to allow for the disembarkation of migrants rescued in the Maltese and Libyan SAR zones.

As SAR NGOs are firmly against disembarking migrants in Libya or Tunisia, an electoral victory of the Italian parties demanding a tougher stance of migrations may render their activities impossible, depriving NGOs of a place of safety to send migrants and exposing NGOs to the risk of prosecution for aiding illegal immigration.

Lastly, some NGOs fear their objectives may become victims of their own success.

Forcing the EU to act against the loss of life at sea is, for instance, one of Sea-Watch’s primarily objectives.

Several other NGOs, who campaign for migrants’ safe passage into Europe, fear being co-opted into a migration management system they regard as morally bankrupt. They suspect that their operations may allow European states to offload responsibility to conduct SAR on civil society, ultimately making the launching of a large scale, EU-led SAR mission based on the Mare Nostrum model more unlikely.

The recent decision to create a European Border and Coast Guard is likely to strengthen the EU's ability to respond to mass migrations.

Whether this force will be focused primarily on border management like Frontex or will embrace SAR as one of its core missions remain to be seen.

Until then, NGOs will remain crucial to mitigate the loss of life at sea. Without more successful efforts to stabilise the EU Southern Neighbourhood and a revision of EU migration management system, however, non-governmental SAR will be nothing but a sticking plaster, akin to emptying the Mediterranean with a spoon.

Eugenio Cusumano is an assistant professor in International Relations and EU Studies at Leiden University.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Column

What does China really want? Perhaps we could try asking

Perhaps even more surprising to the West was the fact that the Iran-Saudi Arabia deal was not brokered by the United States, or the European Union, but by the People's Republic of China. Since when was China mediating peace agreements?

Dear EU, the science is clear: burning wood for energy is bad

The EU and the bioenergy industry claim trees cut for energy will regrow, eventually removing extra CO2 from the atmosphere. But regrowth is not certain, and takes time, decades or longer. In the meantime, burning wood makes climate change worse.

Biden's 'democracy summit' poses questions for EU identity

From the perspective of international relations, the EU is a rare bird indeed. Theoretically speaking it cannot even exist. The charter of the United Nations, which underlies the current system of global governance, distinguishes between states and organisations of states.

Column

What does China really want? Perhaps we could try asking

Perhaps even more surprising to the West was the fact that the Iran-Saudi Arabia deal was not brokered by the United States, or the European Union, but by the People's Republic of China. Since when was China mediating peace agreements?

Biden's 'democracy summit' poses questions for EU identity

From the perspective of international relations, the EU is a rare bird indeed. Theoretically speaking it cannot even exist. The charter of the United Nations, which underlies the current system of global governance, distinguishes between states and organisations of states.

Latest News

  1. EU approves 2035 phaseout of polluting cars and vans
  2. New measures to shield the EU against money laundering
  3. What does China really want? Perhaps we could try asking
  4. Dear EU, the science is clear: burning wood for energy is bad
  5. Biden's 'democracy summit' poses questions for EU identity
  6. Finnish elections and Hungary's Nato vote in focus This WEEK
  7. EU's new critical raw materials act could be a recipe for conflict
  8. Okay, alright, AI might be useful after all

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. EFBWWEFBWW and FIEC do not agree to any exemptions to mandatory prior notifications in construction
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic and Baltic ways to prevent gender-based violence
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersCSW67: Economic gender equality now! Nordic ways to close the pension gap
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersCSW67: Pushing back the push-back - Nordic solutions to online gender-based violence
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersCSW67: The Nordics are ready to push for gender equality
  6. Promote UkraineInvitation to the National Demonstration in solidarity with Ukraine on 25.02.2023

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Azerbaijan Embassy9th Southern Gas Corridor Advisory Council Ministerial Meeting and 1st Green Energy Advisory Council Ministerial Meeting
  2. EFBWWEU Social Dialogue review – publication of the European Commission package and joint statement of ETUFs
  3. Oxfam InternationalPan Africa Program Progress Report 2022 - Post Covid and Beyond
  4. WWFWWF Living Planet Report
  5. Europan Patent OfficeHydrogen patents for a clean energy future: A global trend analysis of innovation along hydrogen value chains

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us