Nolan writes:
“Making the situation worse, pursuant to the EU’s Dublin II regulation, refugees are supposed to apply for asylum in the first EU country they reach, and EU nations are resisting any changes to this regulation that would cause them to receive more migrants.
This has created an impossible burden for Greece and Italy, which have become the main gateways for 1.5 million refugees arriving on Europe’s shores over the last three years.
The EU Commission sought to redistribute 160,000 asylum seekersthroughout the EU from Greece and Italy, but lack of cooperation from other EU nations made it impossible to achieve that goal. When the program ended, only 31,000 refugees had been resettled.
But fewer migrants are coming to Europe. Only 186,768 migrants came in 2017. The following chart provides an overview of arrivals that year.
The numbers have not gone down because fewer people need refuge.
European governments entered into partnership agreements with North African countries in 2017. They offered financial support to them in exchange for stepped-up border patrols and crackdowns on migrant smuggling in their territories.
While these agreements have succeeded in reducing the numbers, it has come at a human cost. In Libya, the launch point for most of the migrant journeys to Europe, migrants intercepted while fleeing from Libya are sent to detention centers. Government and NGO reports have documented widespread physical and sexual violence, more conditions and killings at these centers.
Crime.
In 2016, Germany accepted the largest population of asylum seekers in Europe, but it has not worked out well for Germany. According to a study conducted by the Zurich University of Applied Sciences, the German state of Lower Saxony has experienced a 10.4 percent increase in violent crime.
German criminologists claim that the best way to prevent violent crime among migrants is to provide them with better integration opportunities. It also could help if Germany allowed them to be reunited with their families. Germany recently limited family reunifications.
In view of Europe’s low natural population growth rate, refugee family reunification could be a great benefit by adding to the birth rate in the EU. In the first half of the 1960s, the population of the EU increased by only 0.8 percent a year, and the birth rate is even lower now.
The European economy, meanwhile, is growing, which is producing labor shortages. Europe needs population inflows from outside the EU to increase its workforce.
The EU needs to ensure that the Schengen Agreement does not prevent individual nations from securing their borders, and it should consider making a greater effort to integrate its migrant population.
Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an executive branch immigration law expert for three years; he subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years.”
*************************
I encourage you to go over to The Hill at the above link to read Nolan’s complete article.
- It’s difficult to impossible to solve migration problems solely by working on them at the “receiving” end. I suspect that there will continue to be additional arrivals and more deaths unless and until the problems causing the refugee migration are addressed at the “sending” end.
- Seems like the African nations acting as “middlemen” are the only “winners” here. The get paid by the EU for shutting down some routes for refugee migration. In the meantime, I suspect that they get paid by the smugglers for leaving some routes “open” or “looking the other way.”
- Nolan’s point that Europe’s economic future might well depend on their better integrating migrants is well taken. Generally, the US has done a superior job of integrating migrants into our society. That’s one reason why our economy generally has done better than those of most EU nations.
PWS
02-27-18
