Good morning, dear reader,
the last meeting ended in lip service and rants. That was three months ago, and the interior minister will be reluctant to remember it. After all, the chancellor can jump to her side today. She needs flank protection, because on the other side of the negotiating table there are opponents who are armed with powerful arguments: The 16 prime ministers agree across the parties that the federal government should give out more money. However, that is exactly what the traffic light coalition partners rule out – electricity and gas price brakes, Bundeswehr special funds and debt service are simply too expensive.
Embed
That is the starting position at today’s federal-state summit on refugee costs. It starts at 2 p.m., before that there is live shooting in radio and television interviews. Will there still be an agreement afterwards, if Olaf Scholz, Hendrik Wüst from NRW and Lower Saxony Stephan Weil give their press conference? “The summit meeting is in danger of failing,” reports our reporter Annika Leister.
In fact, the problems are huge and growing every day: Already more than a million Ukrainians has admitted Germany, to be added 100,000 asylum seekers from other countries – this year alone. This means that Germany has taken in more people in recent months than during the 2015/2016 refugee crisis. Municipalities are sounding the alarm: there is a lack of apartments, school places, integration workers, staff in the immigration authorities and, of course, money. Politicians fear for social peace (and the strengthening of the AfD).
That’s why there are now hourly suggestions on how to stop the migrants – especially those who come via the Mediterranean and the Balkan route: more fences, more border controls, more deportations, transit centers at the EU’s external borders. “We must come to a reduction in the number of refugees,” says Gerd Landsberg, Chief Executive of the Association of Towns and Municipalities, and calls for “a fresh start in migration policy” from today’s summit meeting.
The problem: Germany can achieve almost nothing here on its own. It needs willing partners in the EU – but there has been no progress on the issue of migration for years. “It keeps failing because of the same member states: Italy, Poland, Hungary, Denmark, Sweden,” says the SPD European politician Martin Schulz in an interview with my colleague Patrick Diekmann. “The problem is not the EU, but populist nationalism.”
Do rational arguments help against the blockade of the populists? At the very least, the migration debate urgently needs more facts than emotions. That’s why I Gerald Knus asked to answer a few questions for today’s dawn. The Austrian is one of the leading migration experts and has been dealing with immigration and flight to Europe for many years. Here are his answers:
Mr. Knaus, the EU states want to prevent the increasing immigration of refugees and migrants by tightening border protection. Can this work?
Gerald Knus: Walls and fences as a means of border protection are not illegal. What is illegal are “pushbacks”, i.e. violence at the borders. Pushing back people who reach the European Union is illegal. Robbing people and throwing them into the water is illegal. This is not compatible with European law. Nevertheless, these things happen at the EU external borders of Poland, Croatia and Greece. Border protection using fences, drones and other infrastructure is legal as long as EU law is applied, that is, as long as nobody is pushed back. Because everyone has the right to apply for asylum.
What should effective border protection look like that works permanently on the one hand and protects the rights of migrants on the other?
The goal of European democracies should be a triad: first, fast and fair asylum procedures, second, strategic deportations, and third, generous aid for countries of first asylum. We should conduct asylum procedures in such a way that we can convince other states that asylum is possible. States all over the world should be supported in setting up their own asylum systems. This would mean that we would prevent those who do not need protection from irregular entry with repatriations and offer legal mobility in return. We should expand resettlement programs so that fewer people put themselves in the hands of people smugglers. And expand help for refugees in countries of first reception.
Despite numerous attempts, the EU countries have not yet managed to draft a common migration policy. Why not?
There are different interests and views both within the EU and between EU states and countries of origin. And of course we have to grant protection to those who have a reason for asylum or another need for protection. Otherwise, according to the law, they are to be deported to their countries of origin.
But most of those who have to leave the country stay here.
Yes, it fails because of the repatriations. Effective border protection does not consist of fences alone. Returns are necessary for permanent border protection, so that the number of those not in need of protection is reduced. So far there have been no serious efforts to negotiate with the countries of origin, to make them serious offers to take in their citizens who are obliged to leave the country. This is complicated, which is why it has not been seriously pursued until now.
What would a migration policy look like that benefits both immigrants and the host countries?
All of our societies need immigration to maintain their prosperity. That’s a good argument for migration, but not for dangerous irregular migration. Even small numbers of people arriving irregularly create much greater uncertainty than larger numbers of regular immigration. The best way would be to use humane methods – like partnerships and repatriations – to reduce irregular migration. And at the same time increase regular migration.
This can only be done by expanding the resettlement of those in need of protection: through more legal immigration channels for refugees in need of protection, but also for people who are looking for work and are needed here. Under the Merkel government there was a flight causes commission. She has recommended that Germany resettle at least as many refugees per year as Sweden. That would be 40,000 refugees per year who would reach Germany without smugglers and danger to their lives. That would be a coherent political program for a humane refugee system.
