Sunday

10th Dec 2017

Opinion

Will Nato become a transatlantic Frontex?

  • Given the US' influence in Nato, the Trump administration’s priorities may come to dominate the alliance's agenda. (Photo: DVIDSHUB)

Donald Trump’s recent speech at the Nato headquarters during the alliance’s gathering of heads of state and government received much attention and criticism.

The primary causes of consternation were Trump’s calls for higher defence spending and his refusal to reaffirm the principle of collective defence. However, one sentence went largely unnoticed.

Thank you for reading EUobserver!

Subscribe now for a 30 day free trial.

  1. €150 per year
  2. or €15 per month
  3. Cancel anytime

EUobserver is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that publishes daily news reports, analysis, and investigations from Brussels and the EU member states. We are an indispensable news source for anyone who wants to know what is going on in the EU.

We are mainly funded by advertising and subscription revenues. As advertising revenues are falling fast, we depend on subscription revenues to support our journalism.

For group, corporate or student subscriptions, please contact us. See also our full Terms of Use.

If you already have an account click here to login.

  • Trump said "the Nato of the future must include a great focus on terrorism and immigration" (Photo: Holger Vaga)

During his speech, Trump commented that "the Nato of the future must include a great focus on terrorism and immigration".

He said this after talking about how thousands of people are "pouring into" Nato countries without being properly identified.

The statement came in the context of a hard-line domestic narrative on migration in the US, and can hardly be seen as an isolated remark.

It was not the first time Nato has been called on to conduct migration-related activities – for instance, Nato ships were deployed to the Aegean Sea in February 2016 following a request by Germany, Greece and Turkey.

Nevertheless, this mission is limited in scope, with a mandate only to support Frontex (the EU border control agency) and the Greek and Turkish Coast Guards by conducting reconnaissance, monitoring, and surveillance of irregular migration routes.

Trump's statement called for much greater engagement, and perhaps even a central role for the alliance in countering irregular migration to Europe and North America.

By establishing a clear link between terrorism and migration in his speech, Trump qualified migration as a major security threat that requires joint military action in order to be mitigated.

Many European governments, which are keen to reduce migratory flows to the EU, may quietly welcome such an approach, as they themselves have not only agreed to Nato's operation in the Aegean Sea, but also deployed an EU-led counter-smuggling mission in the Central Mediterranean (EUnavfor Med Operation Sophia).

Quiet acceptance

However, more Nato involvement in such maritime activities would come with caveats.

Trump’s insistence on allies to “pay their fair share” may lead to uncomfortable deals in which the US makes its support for migration-related efforts conditional upon the receipt of some sort of compensation.

It would also give the US a strong voice in how the operations are conducted, and what objectives they seek to address.

Given Trump’s blurry distinction between migrants and terrorists, the US’ primary concern in the Mediterranean is the use of migratory routes by terrorists pretending to be refugees. In fact, this was already an issue of concern for the Obama administration, though not a prominent one.

Trump’s call for a refocused transatlantic alliance may thus result in diplomatic pressure for a Nato mission to intercept and screen asylum seekers before granting them entry.

This would represent a clear break with the current practices – not only in terms of the actors concerned but also the procedure.

The involvement of non-EU military personnel in determining the admissibility of asylum seekers would raise several legal questions, not least regarding the principle of non-refoulement enshrined in the 1951 Refugee Convention. This provision forbids the forcible expulsion or return of an asylum seeker to a territory in which their life or freedom are in danger.

Of course, Nato member states would need to agree on any joint migration-related action. But given the disproportionate weight that the US holds in Nato, the Trump administration’s priorities would likely dominate the agenda.

US dominance

If Nato does take on a larger role in policing migratory routes, the US would have a much greater influence on EU migration policy, which would complicate an already deeply divided political map on this issue.

Member states seeking more solidarity-based solutions would be even more isolated than is already the case.

The G7 summit in Taormina, Italy, that immediately followed Trump’s Nato debut, provided a stark example of how the Trump administration’s priorities can affect multilateral discussions.

Italy attempted to draw attention to the high number of irregular arrivals it receives by symbolically hosting the gathering in Sicily, and tried to convince attending leaders to open more legal channels for migration such as refugee resettlement. Yet these efforts fell flat.

The G7 leaders’ statement focused mainly on border control and returns, without even mentioning resettlement.

Nato support for EU border security operations can be valuable, for example when it comes to the exchange of background information for the purpose of security screening asylum seekers.

Nevertheless, European policymakers should be wary of any shift in Nato’s focus towards collective border control.

Although migration is a challenge that can partially be addressed with the support of military assets, it is not a battle than can be “won” with military might.

Further securitisation of migration management will lead to more fragmentation and the criminalisation of migrant flows, and more human suffering as a result.

Only long-term approaches to the root causes of migration and smart legal channels that acknowledge the inevitability of human mobility will succeed in reducing irregular flows.

Marco Funk is a policy analyst at the European Policy Centre (EPC) in Brussels. The views expressed in this article are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of the EPC.

Nato needs a European 2%

Europe needs to take care of its on security, but not on Trump's terms, with the 2 percent of GDP mantra flawed as a model.

Nato head defends 'blunt' US leader

Nato chief Stoltenberg defended Trump’s behaviour at Thursday’s summit. The prime minister of Montenegro also apologised for him.

Trump lukewarm on Nato joint defence

Trump voiced half-hearted support for Nato and reprimanded allies over what he called unpaid debts on his maiden trip to Europe.

Nato to join Trump's anti-IS coalition

Nato will join a US-led coalition against Islamic State and will continue to deter "Russian aggression" its secretary general has said.

Fighting the terrorist virus on the internet

EU home affairs commissioner Dimitris Avramopolous congratulates some media platforms on their efforts to take down jihadist terrorist content at the EU Internet Forum - but warns it is 'not enough to turn tide'.

News in Brief

  1. Greece to move migrants from islands to mainland, says NGO
  2. EU and Japan finalise trade deal
  3. Tusk: During transition period, UK will follow EU law
  4. SPD and CDU/CSU meet next week on 'Grand Coalition'
  5. Erdogan demands treaty update in historic Greece visit
  6. UK will contribute to 2019-2020 EU budget
  7. UK and EU agree: no hard border on Irish island
  8. Citizens' rights will be 'enshrined in UK law'

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. European Jewish CongressWelcomes Recognition of Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel and Calls on EU States to Follow Suit
  2. Mission of China to the EUChina and EU Boost Innovation Cooperation Under Horizon 2020
  3. European Gaming & Betting AssociationJuncker’s "Political" Commission Leaves Gambling Reforms to the Court
  4. AJC Transatlantic InstituteAJC Applauds U.S. Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital City
  5. EU2017EEEU Telecom Ministers Reached an Agreement on the 5G Roadmap
  6. European Friends of ArmeniaEU-Armenia Relations in the CEPA Era: What's Next?
  7. Mission of China to the EU16+1 Cooperation Injects New Vigour Into China-EU Ties
  8. EPSUEU Blacklist of Tax Havens Is a Sham
  9. EU2017EERole of Culture in Building Cohesive Societies in Europe
  10. ILGA EuropeCongratulations to Austria - Court Overturns Barriers to Equal Marriage
  11. Centre Maurits CoppietersCelebrating Diversity, Citizenship and the European Project With Fundació Josep Irla
  12. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceUnderstanding the Social Consequences of Obesity

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Union for the MediterraneanMediterranean Countries Commit to Strengthening Women's Role in Region
  2. Bio-Based IndustriesRegistration for BBI JU Stakeholder Forum about to close. Last chance to register!
  3. European Heart NetworkThe Time Is Ripe for Simplified Front-Of-Pack Nutrition Labelling
  4. Counter BalanceNew EU External Investment Plan Risks Sidelining Development Objectives
  5. EU2017EEEAS Calls for Eastern Partnership Countries to Enter EU Market Through Estonia
  6. Dialogue PlatformThe Turkey I No Longer Know
  7. World Vision7 Million Children at Risk in the DRC: Donor Meeting to Focus on Saving More Lives
  8. EPSU-Eurelectric-IndustriAllElectricity European Social Partners Stand up for Just Energy Transition
  9. European Friends of ArmeniaSignature of CEPA Marks a Fresh Start for EU-Armenia Relations
  10. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Energy Ministers Pledge to Work More Closely at Nordic and EU Level
  11. European Friends of ArmeniaPresident Sargsyan Joined EuFoA Honorary Council Inaugural Meeting
  12. International Partnership for Human RightsEU Leaders Should Press Azerbaijan President to End the Detention of Critics