“First I went by truck from Somalia to Libya. Then I went in a boat. It was going to Italy. But the boat was in trouble. We were picked up and brought to Malta. I have been here two months. The military treat us well. My main problem is that I’m separated from my wife,” – confession of a Somali refugee.
"It is time for EU governments to abandon the assumption that it is possible to distinguish between those seen as ‘economically productive’ and those viewed largely as an economic ‘burden’. People are not simply units of labour but come with – or have aspirations for – family and other relationships and a desire to find a meaningful place in the society in which they live" (Crawley 2005, 16).
And what do EU Member States plan to do about it? Is the General Assembly the right place to address the problem of asylum – which is not a problem of receiving states alone, but a part of the issue of forced migrations? We asked our representatives of EU Member States about this. We were very positively surprised as they have put a lot of thought and effort into the interview and provided us with some in-depth answers.
Let's see what they think about the issue of asylum seekers. Many of them are host countries and some of them receive large number of immigrants which seek for asylum every year. They are united in the opinion that this is a global issue and should be dealt as such – in cooperation with other countries. Some have expressed the need for strengthened international cooperation. “France believes that problems regarding asylum seekers should be addressed in the GA. We also strongly support the idea of closer cooperation with third countries, especially countries of origin and transit of refugees, as stronger ties can greatly assist to manage and especially prevent asylum flows”, stated the French representative, H. E. ms. Škrobar. The Spanish delegate, H. E. ms. Eminić agrees: “We need to establish stronger dialogue with countries of origin and transit countries, since this is the problem of us all.” UK also emphasizes the need of states committing themselves to not only providing aid, but also providing technical support, expertise, counselling both during and after crisis situations.
Most say that this problem should be addressed in the GA as it is a global problem although supposedly some members made it increasingly clear that this is an issue that they do not wish to address at this time. Italy indicated this with saying that “issue of asylum seekers could be one of the topics addresses in the GA, but Italy believes it is very important to first reach some solutions inside the EU and bilaterally with countries that most asylum seekers come to EU from.”
It seems that they are all aware of the problem but at the same time feel that their hands are tied. “We understand that the EU is not the most welcoming towards non-citizen migrants, but one must understand that EU is not a single nation country and has its own absorption capacity,” stated the German representative, H.E. mr. Prosen. Spanish delegate, H.E. ms. Eminić expressed a similar opinion: “EU is not unwelcoming; the pressure is just too big. European states have a long tradition of providing a safe haven to the persecuted, since the protection of fundamental human rights is one of our core values. Thus, we try to offer protection for as many refugees as we can, but their numbers are simply too big and too much of a pressure for EU.”
As it was expressed many times, some of them – but certainly not all of them – strongly advocate the policy of burden sharing. They seem determined. “Our strongest aspiration is to redistribute responsibilities among all countries. We are convinced that the biggest net recipient states are the ones that carry most of the burden, and we think this is unfair,” stated the Spanish representative. Germany feels the same way: “The main and only goal of the Federal Republic of Germany, along with other countries, is to achieve a common agreement on a mutual burden-sharing concept.” Italy already has some specific solutions in mind: “We believe that one of the important components, without which functioning of this process is impossible, is financial provision of the UNHCR.”
Some of the Member States are also strong proponents of preventing forced migrations. UK seems pretty strongly committed to that: “We also want to once again re-commit states to protect the environment as a means of preventing forced migration. It goes without saying that we also want states to work together to strengthen democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights globally in order to prevent insecurity and violence,” stated H.E. ms. Petković, representative of UK.
United we stand, divided we fall? Although most of the states look in the same direction and have similar goals, we don’t feel they will advocate a common standpoint and policy on Thursday – not just regarding asylum, but the whole issue of forced migrations. But we might be taken by surprise.
Sources:
Crawley, Heaven. 2005. Introduction: Europe – fortress or refuge? Forced Migrations Review 23: 14-7. Available via: http://www.fmreview.org/en/FMRpdfs/FMR23/FMR23full.pdf (April 20th 2013).
Tamara Kajtazović
___________________________________________
Complete interviews:
1. Although EU is supposed to move away from the old concept of "fortress Europe", it is still very unwelcoming towards non-EU citizens who seek asylum in its member states. On a yearly basis EU still rejects 70-80 % of asylum requests.
a) How do you (your member state) perceive this problem and how are you addressing it?
CZECH REPUBLIC: This isn't just EU problem, it is global. Czech Republic operates the Assisted Voluntary Return Program to facilitate the voluntary and orderly return of irregular migrants and asylum seekers which includes return counseling and information dissemination, pre-departure assistance, transit assistance, assistance upon arrival and reintegration assistance. We're standing for the rights of asylum seekers and we strongly believe that all countries together- including Czech Republic, will find a common solution for this issue.
FRANCE: As France receives the highest number of asylum seekers per annum (52, 762 in 2010 and 57,335 in 2011) in Western Europe and is third among industrialised nations after the United States and Canada, this issue is evidently of great importance for us. Although France has historically been a host country for different types of immigrants who have been gradually integrated into our society, we are now finding this harder and harder to do. Therefore we have strongly engaged ourselves to better prevent the asylum flows. We are closely cooperating with different countries (also those of the origins) to manage this issue with mutual satisfaction and with respect and protecting of human rights of every individual. As far as asylum applications are concern, they have to satisfy the Dublin II Regulation and be examined by our Office of the Protection of Refugees and Stateless People before the seeker is granted the right to reside in France.
GERMANY: We consider the problem of forced migrations as a very serious one. We realize that persons who are migrating against their own will suffer from many problems and are entiteld to receive help from everyone, including Germany. We have largely contributed to the UNHCR, in 2000 for example, we have hosted 11 refugees per 1000 inhabitants on German soil. Germany is one of 15 biggest donors and will continue to support the organisation. However, we do belive that this problem should be delt on the grounds of the origin country and not after the fact. We wish to establish an efficient system of cooperation between nations in order to prevent the events that lead to forced migrations. Yes, we understand that the EU is not the most welcoming towards non-citizen migrants, but one must understand that EU is not a single nation country and has its own absorbtion capacity. We wish to help them, but that does not necessary include hosting them on our soil.
ITALY: Italy believes EU is providing a safe haven to the persecuted for a long time. We should never forget that one of the key elements of EU's core identity is protection of fundamental human rights. EU has therefore adopted many legislative measures, directives and regulations, to harmonize different asylum systems of member states. But since all member states are sovereign entities with different interests and world views , differences among their asylum-seeking policies, approaches to protection, reception conditions, etc. still exist.
SPAIN: This issue is of great importance to Spain and we are taking this problem very seriously. We are one of the EU countries facing biggest refugee pressure. This is due to the fact that Spain is the gateway to Europe for many Africans and Asians. Many of them arrive by boats from Morocco and others enter the Spanish enclaves in Ceuta and Melilla in Morocco. The Spanish government has very important, but also very difficult task protecting European borders against uncontrolled immigration from Africa.
EU is not unwelcoming; the pressure is just too big. European states have a long tradition of providing a safe haven to the persecuted, since the protection of fundamental human rights is one of our core values. Thus, we try to offer protection for as many refugees as we can, but their numbers are simply too big and too much of a pressure for EU.
This is also the case in Spain. We try to grant asylum to as many refugees we can. But there is only so much a country can do. The fact remains, that war and poverty are the root causes of mass migration across Africa and as long as these conditions are not solved Africans and other refugees will continue to seek a better life in Europe. Still, we try to solve this issue as efficiently as we can.
Firstly, we are tackling this issue through asylum laws. In Spain, every foreigner (not citizen of an EU country) can apply for asylum. There are three different forms of protection:
i. Conventional asylum: it is recognized to every person that fulfills the requirements of article 1A of the UN Refugee Convention and its protocol.
ii. Subsidiary protection: It is given to persons that don't fulfill the requirements for a refugee status, but about whom there are sufficient elements to consider that the person is at a real risk of suffering grave damages to his/ her life, personal integrity or grave threats provoked by an armed conflict or generalized violence.
iii. Special protection for humanitarian reasons: For reasons different to those of the two previous situations, the State can authorize the permanence of the person in the country under the general migration regime. This is applied in a very exceptional basis.
Asylum seekers are granted all fundamental human rights and their cases are solved in three to six months.
Thus, asylum laws in Spain in very 'refugee friendly'. But due to a big refugee pressure, it is impossible to grant asylum to all. This has become even more problematic in recent years, since the economy of Spain has been severely affected by the crisis. We believe that solution lies elsewhere, namely in tackling the root causes for these massive migrations.
Spain has a very progressive immigration policy and one of its pillars is cooperation with the countries of origin and transit countries. We are providing those countries help and assistance in order to foster their development. We believe that this is the only way to tackle the migration problem and hence the 'problem' of asylum seekers.
UNITED KINGDOM: Many have criticized the notion of ''fortress Europe'', but in the UK up to 2010 our net migration of EU nationals was significantly lower. Around 27,000 EU citizens chose to move to the UK, while 198,000 came from outside the EU. That is a very large figure and we have decided to control it, particularly now when, because of the economic crisis, our economy and welfare system are particularly vulnerable. We will continue to allow skilled applicants through as they can help boost our economy, but we also want to provide a safe-haven for those who really need it. We grant asylum, in accordance with the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, to genuine refugees, who are fleeing persecution and are unable to return home, but we have to refuse false claims. We are also acting in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights, which does not allow sending back individuals who are at risk of torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. We even grant temporary permission to stay for humanitarian and other reasons. The UK is also a party to the European Union Asylum Qualification Directive, which means that all states must comply with the common criteria for granting asylum. As a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, the UK fully considers all asylum applications submitted in the UK.
b) Did you discuss this issue with other EU members?
CZECH REPUBLIC: Czech Republic cooperates with all EU members. On the initiative of Italy we held the meeting and agreed that our duty is to prevent future forced migration, especially through promotion of human rights which are important for the issue of asylum seekers.
FRANCE: Of course we did! As the free movement of persons is a fundamental right guaranteed to European Union citizens a regulated entry and residence of non-EU nationals, including a common asylum and immigration policy is established and requires constant attention. However asylum flows are not constant nor are they evenly distributed across the EU and their relative importance varies considerably between Member States.
Furthermore some other aspects of migration management that can help consolidate intra-EU solidarity in the field of asylum is also an issue that the Commission will address in a separate Communication this year.
GERMANY: We have discussed this issue with other EU Member States.
ITALY: We have already discussed this problem with other EU member states and will continue with discussions.
SPAIN: This issue is always on the agenda of EU members, since we share borders and thus migrations and asylum seekers are our common challenge. We also share values such as respect for human rights, so it is in the interests of us all, to solve this issue. We do not want to reject asylum seekers; rather, we want to guarantee them an environment, from which they will not need to flee.
UNITED KINGDOM At the EU meeting that was held last week, we did not speak about granting asylum specifically, but a general regime that would protect displaced persons fleeing armed conflict, environmental catastrophes or devastation or gross violations of human rights and political freedoms.
c) Do you believe the issue of asylum seekers should be addressed in the GA, taking into account that EU is not alone in this and has to cooperate with countries of origin and of transit?
CZECH REPUBLIC: Definitely! We are convinced that all countries will recognize the importance of that issue. I can surely say that this issue isn’t just related to EU, but non-EU members too. Czech Republic is a promoter of human rights and democracy, and we hope that, in this significant issue, we will work together and cooperate with both, countries of origin and of transit, for improving the rights of our society.
FRANCE: This issue concerns all the United Nations members as they have engaged themselves to respect human rights and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom. Thus France believes that problems regarding asylum seekers should be address in the GA. We also strongly support the idea of closer cooperation with third countries, especially countries of origin and transit of refugees, as stronger ties can greatly assist to manage and especially prevent asylum flows. France would at this occasion also like to once again appeal to all other states to demonstrate a sense of mutual trust and increase their awareness of responsibility by burden sharing.
GERMANY: That is exactly what we belive. Forced migrants are a global problem and should be delt as such.
ITALY: Issue of asylum seekers could be one of the topics addresses in the GA, but Italy believes it is very important to first reach some solutions inside the EU and bilaterally with countries that most asylum seekers come to EU from.
SPAIN: We need to establish stronger dialogue with countries of origin and transit countries, since this is the problem of us all. There is a strong need for coordinated and collective political action in order to tackle the problem of migrations at its roots, and GA is a great platform to do this. All of countries must realize that this is a common problem, not just the issue that recipient states have to deal with.
UNITED KINGDOM: Perhaps, but it has been made increasingly clear that this is an issue that some Member States do not wish to address at this time and it may hinder the debate and the end result.
2. What would you like to achieve in the upcoming GA session regarding forced migrations in terms of specific goals and policies which would contribute to solving the issue?
CZECH REPUBLIC: Our mission was always to protect our interests and work in the name of our country by improving national goals which are, related to this issue: protection of human rights and displaced persons as such. We agreed with EU countries that sending developmental aid, while keeping in mind contributing factors of displacement, such as climate change is of high importance. We think that adopting policies for the integration of refugees into the local community is crucial, and we have to provide them language tuition. We have to eliminate all forms of illegal migration and other related illegal activities, and contribute to solving forced migration problems at a global level.
FRANCE: In the upcoming GA session we would very much like to establish new mechanisms regarding the financial donations, as we believe they should not continue being voluntarily based but rather set in advance. We will be working in direction to achieve a higher global awareness of responsibility and hopefully designing a policy on burden sharing. As France is a destination country for men, women, and children from Eastern Europe, West Africa, and Asia, as well as the Caribbean and Brazil, subjected to trafficking in persons, specifically forced prostitution and forced labour, one of our top objectives is also trying to resolve the organized crime issue and to possibly establish a an active policy for criminal prosecution that would include concrete measures of prevention.
GERMANY: The main and only goal of the Federal Republic of Germany, along with other countries, is to achieve a common agreement on a mutual burden-sharing concept. The main idea is to redistribute the burden of helping those who are forced to migrate, not only financially but also in other views.
ITALY: In the upcoming GA session regarding forced migrations, Italy's specific goals are:
- prevention of forced migration --> Italy is convinced prevention of forced migration should be an ultimate goal of all UN member states. It should be achieved through promotion of human rights, democracy and rule of law, through institution building, protection of environment, improvement of infrastructure, etc. - drivers of forced migration have to be reduced.
- burden sharing --> Italy believes it's very important that all states cooperate in and contribute to the process of prevention of forced migration and protection of forced migrants. We believe that one of the important components, without which functioning of this process is impossible, is financial provision of the UNHCR. Currently UNHCR is based on voluntary donations, and it is impossible for it to cope with such a wide range of problems regarding refugees, internally displaced persons, asylum-seekers and other categories of vulnerable people who can seek help of UNHCR. Furthermore, we believe burden-sharing is important, because almost all states are involved in process of forced migration and are members of common international community and international organizations, such as UN, and is therefore fair to share the burden of increasing problem of forced migration.
SPAIN: Our strongest aspiration is to redistribute responsibilities among all countries. We are convinced that the biggest net recipient states are the ones that carry most of the burden, and we think this is unfair. Burden sharing should be strengthened and should become a norm for all countries. Issue of migrations consumes a lot of resources and we believe that this should concern all international community.
Secondly, we would like to tackle the prevention of forced migrations more efficiently. We believe that forced migrations will only be reduced when we eliminate the reasons that cause these phenomena. In order to do that, strong cooperation among all countries must be established. The issue of forced migrations can only be solved if we work together.
We would also like to see stronger intergovernmental cooperation regarding protection of migrants in transit. We need to do much more in the prevention of smuggling, trafficking, and exploitation of migrants.
UNITED KINGDOM: Our goals are to promote international cooperation on the issue of 'displaced persons', improve resilience of local communities to negative shocks as a strategy of prevention, divert and strengthen diplomatic efforts and humanitarian assistance for protracted refugee situations.
We also want to once again re-commit states to protect the environment as a means of preventing forced migration. It goes without saying that we also want states to work together to strengthen democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights globally in order to prevent insecurity and violence. These measures should be implemented at the national and local level, but also in cooperation with international governmental and non-governmental organizations.
We are also interested in seeing an international mechanism for detecting pressures of forced migration and to coordinate international, national and local development agents. It would be advantageous to address the post-conflict or post-disaster needs of communities from where people have fled. In order to deal with crisis situations, we would like states to commit themselves to not only providing aid, but also providing technical support, expertise, counselling both during and after crisis situations.
0 comments:
Post a Comment