The EU’s approach to managing migration flows is essentially based on outsourcing border control to 3rd countries, especially within the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Many far-right politicians enthusiastically support this policy: 19 countries recently signed the letter calling for going “beyond the EU Migration Pact” and further externalizing migration controls.
In theory, it is a two-pronged approach: the EU sends money to MENA governments to forestall and improve living conditions inside their very own borders, thereby discouraging people from leaving in the primary place.
However, many of the money is transferred as an alternative in brutaleven deadly, anti-migration measures applied outside EU jurisdiction. These outsourced human rights violations are contrary to EU values freedom, justice and dignity and threaten its influence as a values-based power.
This short-sighted, costly and inappropriate strategy ultimately undermines the EU’s credibility and effectiveness on the international stage, damaging the bloc’s regional and international standing and highlighting its entrenched hypocrisy. It has also failed to cut back illegal arrivals or address the foundation causes of the issue – as an alternative, it has endangered, ruined and ended tens of hundreds of lives.
The death toll is staggering: in keeping with 2023 study commissioned by the EU itselfbetween January and June 2022, five migrants per day died crossing the Mediterranean Sea, and Since 2014, 29,734 people have been reported missing.
A costly and ineffective strategy
The origins of external border control in Europe date back to the early twenty first century, but gained real momentum through the 2015 migration crisis. Since then, huge sums have been sent to neighboring countries under the guise of “migration management”. This applies above all Asylum, Migration and Integration Fundrepresenting an amount of EUR 9.9 billion for the period 2021-2027, a big increase in comparison with the EUR 3.137 billion allocated for the period 2014-2020.
Specific agreements and partnerships have also been concluded. Belong to them 2016 EU-Türkiye Agreement, a €6 billion deal that goals to limit migration but effectively increase Turkey’s influence over the EU. AND A package value EUR 210 million also paid to Mauritania to encourage it to cut back migration, 7.4 billion euros were paid to Egypt in financing until 2027, and Financial assistance of EUR 1 billion was promised to Lebanon for the period 2024–2027.
Despite these financial commitments, the variety of illegal entries into the EU continues to extend. As of November 2023, the International Organization for Migration recorded a complete 264,000 illegal entrieswhich suggests a transparent increase in comparison with 2022 (190 thousand) and 2021 (150 thousand).
Cruelty and suffering
Investigative reports have recently been published in “desert landfills” in Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia. This practice involves driving migrants (including children and pregnant women) to distant desert areas and leaving them to fend for themselves.
While Brussels denies any involvement, the articles state that “two top EU sources said it was ‘impossible’ to fully explain how European funds were ultimately used.”
By outsourcing work to autocratic regimes willing to make use of such cruel methods as an alternative of addressing the foundation causes of migration, the E.U. she violated her values, deepened internal divisions and damaged his human rights status. It undermines the EU’s ability to rise up for principles equivalent to human rights, democracy and the rule of law, limiting its moral standing and strategic autonomy.
One example of how this has worked is the EU’s cooperation with Libya to stop migration across the Mediterranean. Despite well-documented human rights violations in detention centers in Libya – including on torture, forced labor and sexual violence – the EU provided funding and training to the Libyan Coast Guard to intercept migrant boats and return them to those violent conditions.
Over the previous couple of years, reports have surfaced serious abuses against migrants in Libya – including the sale of men at slave auctions – highlighting the acute cruelty faced by migrants trapped there. However, The EU continued its partnershipjustifying it as a option to save lives at sea and turn a blind eye to the terrible reality that migrants face after they return to Libya.
Weapon migration
Entrusting key security functions to unstable or autocratic regimes also exposes the EU to political crises and manipulation of migration flows.
For example, through the Arab Spring in 2011, under attack, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi threatened to unleash “flood” migrants to Europe if it continued to support the protesters. Since then, Turkey has also adopted an analogous strategy, regardless that it received an extra €3 billion on top of the 2016 migration deal. Outside the Mediterranean, Belarus is accused of comparable practices on the border with Poland in retaliation for EU sanctions.
Governments looking for financial aid can due to this fact easily manipulate EU funding. The belief that cash alone can discourage people from leaving their countries ignores the indisputable fact that fundamental changes are needed inside those countries. Once the cash is shipped, there may be little to forestall authoritarian governments from using it to consolidate their regimes fairly than implement reforms that profit their residents.
EU self-sabotage
By compromising its values, creating dependence on independent powers and exposing itself to risks, the EU reduces its ability to act as a robust and persuasive leader on the international stage. If the EU is to take care of its credibility, uphold its rules and increase its influence on the earth, it must adopt a principles-based and holistic approach to managing migration.
The notion that tough external migration deals can calm or conceal far-right sentiment may additionally prove delusional: fairly than addressing the foundation causes of migration or upholding its liberal values, these reactive measures could further damage the EU’s credibility within the eyes of its residents and communities international. This defensive power combined with a gross inability to uphold one’s values is Add fuel to the fireplace for far-right parties and their allies.
To maintain its values and strengthen its position on the earth, the EU needs a more sustainable and rules-based approach to managing migration. It can do that in a variety of ways: supporting meaningful democratic reforms in MENA countries; establishing greater accountability in migration management and, most significantly, opening secure routes to cut back migrants’ dependence on illegal routes and people smuggling networks.
The current strategy is failing miserably on every count. This amounts to little greater than throwing money at the issue, money that, if properly applied, could prevent lack of life, improve living standards and the economies of MENA countries and, above all, reduce incentives to go away these countries.
