Tuesday

23rd May 2017

Opinion

Big changes in EU migration governance

  • Migrant family leaving a checkpoint in Greece. (Photo: Joseph Boyle)

It has been a year since the signing of the EU-Turkey agreement. The flow of asylum seekers and migrants through the Turkey-Greece corridor has been reduced to a trickle.

By contrast, flows from Libya to Italy continue at a sustained pace, a testament to political and economic hardships on the African continent. The increased movement over the last three years has put the EU under pressure, and has often led to drastic political and policy responses.

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.

Public debate tends to focus too much on criticism and forget the important steps taken to strengthen European governance of asylum and migration. Yet, there have still been at least ten notable developments.

First, although it remains premature to speak of the replacement or radical modification of the first safe country principle, the inadequacy of the Dublin Regulation has been proven. Responsibility for asylum-seeking is now shared among member states after first registration, not upon arrival - as was the case in the first safe country principle.

The European Commission has introduced relocation quotas to alleviate pressures on front-line and main destination countries. These are likely to transform from an emergency solution into a more permanent mechanism.

Second, cooperation with origin and transit countries has finally become a top priority, years after the European Agenda on Migration and Mobility.

In principle, such forms of dialogue are correct, but in practice all other issues become conditional and the burden of asylum seeking and migration management is laid on the weakest and poorest of states. It therefore neglects that several origin and transit countries are unable to fulfil what is asked of them.

Migration cannot be the only factor guiding the EU’s foreign policy, and prioritising concerns over migration control may involve sacrificing other priorities, such as human rights protection for both refugees and migrants, development aid, or trade.

Third, the Schengen interruption mechanism is no longer a taboo. It has become acceptable that if an emergency arises at the EU’s external borders, internal border controls may be reintroduced to limit and discourage flows into and across member states, as well as to appease national electorates.

Fourth, exceptional border regimes (see Greece) may be created at the EU’s external borders when large inflows of refugees or migrants are registered. Such regimes come at the expense of asylum-seeking procedures and unfortunately go hand-in-hand with the second point above, regarding cooperation with origin and third countries.

Fifth, there has been a high concern for preventing the loss of human life and combating criminal networks that take advantage of people’s despair. Policies aimed at preventing such losses have been temporary and, in part, contradictory.

Nonetheless, it is certainly a positive development that public awareness of the tragic plight of refugees and migrants has increased.

Sixth, a transnational civil solidarity movement has emerged in Greece and Italy, as well as in transit and final destination countries such as Germany and Austria. This spontaneous movement benefited from substantial state and international aid.

Civil society actors have played an important part in the management of the emergency, initially in search and rescues. Then, as flows diminished, these organisations have assisted in first reception, accommodation and long-term integration.

Seventh, the establishment of the EU Border and Coastguard, a dramatic development in institutional and legal terms, could be seen as an example of solidarity in dealing with a global phenomenon. However, it mainly concerns border management, whereas the management of asylum-seeking remains largely national.

The EASO, the European Asylum Support Office, remains a small and rather marginal agency within the EU institutional and political landscape, despite calls from the European Commission in March 2016 for a proper European Asylum Agency.

Eighth, emphasis on the fight against human smuggling has increased, but more research and policy innovation is needed to effectively combat the phenomenon.

Smuggling is a lucrative business, but one deeply rooted in local communities. Accessing the international protection available in conditions of safety remains a Catch-22 challenge, but the EU needs to address it.

Ninth, the capacity of single migrants/refugees and their families to execute a journey has increased exponentially in the era of smart phones. Single individuals can obtain and exchange information in real time with other actors, negotiate options, seize opportunities and navigate obstacles in dynamic ways.

This phenomenon that ‘exploded’ in recent years has unearthed many questions. Does it simply facilitate movement? Does it create new demands for migration or respond to pre-existing drivers? Does it disempower smugglers and governments? A better understanding of this new phenomenon is crucial.

Last but not least, the refugee emergency has made it clear that hard and fast distinctions between asylum-seekers and labour migrants are difficult to apply. In reality, people have both political and economic motivations to move.

However, individual or family migration cannot be explained solely with political or economic motives. Both factors play a part, though with differing degrees of importance. Policy should reflect the amount of freedom individuals have over their own actions.

A team of scholars, politicians and policy makers will cast light on these developments at the State of the Union in Florence on 4-5 May 2017. Here, and elsewhere, we need to create innovative policies that respond to the complex dynamics of population flows in the 21st century.

Anna Triandafyllidou is a professor at the Global Governance Programme (GGP) of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies (RSCAS), European University Institute in Florence, Italy.

EU leaders discuss Libya migrant plans

A letter by Maltese prime minister Joseph Muscat, which will be discussed at the EU summit, provides an overview of plans to keep migrants in Libya.

EU court delivers blow to asylum seekers

EU court ruled in favour of Belgium against a Syrian family seeking asylum in the country, in what rights defenders called an "absurd impasse".

Refusing refugees would cost EU funds, MEP says

The Swedish liberal MEP Cecilia Wikstroem seeks to introduce a five-year transition period for countries that are not ready to take in asylum seekers under the reformed Dublin system.

Why the EU doesn't get China's Belt and Road

It is not enough for European officials to simply tell the press that they do not understand the Belt and Road – the vision is clear enough, the point is to decide how to engage with it.

Development serving the purpose of migration control

While the EU is sacrificing development aid to serve short-term migration interests, it is important to realise that enhanced border controls will not solve the root causes of forced migration and displacement.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersBecome an Explorer - 'Traces of Nordic' Seeking Storytellers Around the World
  2. Malta EU 2017Closer Cooperation and Reinforced Solidarity to Ensure Security of Gas Supply
  3. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceHigh-Intensity Interval Training Is Therapeutic Option for Type 2 Diabetes
  4. Dialogue Platform"The West Must Help Turkey Return to a Democratic Path" a Call by Fethullah Gulen
  5. ILGA-EuropeRainbow Europe 2017 Is Live - Which Countries Are Leading on LGBTI Equality?
  6. Centre Maurits CoppietersWhen You Invest in a Refugee Woman You Help the Whole Community
  7. Eurogroup for AnimalsECJ Ruling: Member States Given No Say on Wildlife Protection In Trade
  8. European Heart NetworkCall for Urgent Adoption of EU-Wide Nutrient Profiles for Nutrition & Health Claims
  9. Counter BalanceInvestment Plan for Europe More Climate Friendly but European Parliament Shows Little Ambition
  10. Mission of China to the EUPresident Xi: China's Belt and Road Initiative Benefits People Around the World
  11. Malta EU 2017EU Strengthens Control of the Acquisition and Possession of Firearms
  12. International Partnership for Human RightsThe Cost of Speaking Out: Human Rights Violations Committed in Belarus

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. ACCABanishing Bias? Audit, Objectivity and the Value of Professional Scepticism
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNew Oslo Climate Declaration Focuses on Rising Temperatures in the Arctic
  3. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceAbdominal Obesity: A Causal Risk Factor for Cardiometabolic Diseases
  4. EU Green Week 2017Discuss EU Environmental Policies With Industry Experts and Thought Leaders
  5. GEN Summit 2017Join the World's Leading Media Summit for Thought-Provoking Talks and Experiences
  6. International Partnership for Human RightsTogether for Human Rights: A Year in Review
  7. Malta EU 2017EU All Set for Free Roaming Starting 15 June
  8. Nordic Council of MinistersRefugee Unemployment Biggest Drain on Public Purse, Says New Nordic Studies
  9. Dialogue Platform17,000 Women, 515 Babies in Turkish Prisons, a Report Reveals
  10. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceCharlotte Hornets' Nicolas Batum Tells Kids to "Eat Well, Drink Well, Move!"
  11. ECR GroupSyed Kamall: We Need a New, More Honest Relationship With Turkey
  12. Counter BalanceParliament Sends Strong Signal to the EIB: Time to Act on Climate Change