Will fewer refugees come to Germany due to the planned EU asylum reform? So far there isn’t much evidence for this. Member states on the external border could continue to wave migrants through. Cooperation with countries of origin and transit is also hardly reliable.
Separation to the outside, closedness to the inside. This is the message suggested by the EU member states’ plan for a reform of the common asylum policy, at least at first glance. Those who have little prospect of asylum in the European Union are accommodated in camps at the external borders for a few weeks before being deported. Migrants with a residence permit or a high chance of receiving one are then distributed among the individual states, which in turn are asked to pay if they refuse to be admitted. That’s the theory.
However, this does not necessarily make the ailing foundations on which the European asylum system is built any more stable. Problems that caused a common migration policy in Europe to fail for many years remain despite the reform. Contrary to the assurances of the federal government, it is not certain that Germany can expect a lower flow of refugees in the future. Because the distrust that prevails between the EU member states can hardly be reduced by changing the law.
The states that receive the majority of the refugees feel that they have been left in the lurch. Italy reached 50,000 migrants in the first months of this year, about 2.5 times as many as last year. The countries of arrival are obliged under EU law to carry out the asylum procedures. In recent years, the countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea have protested loudly against this requirement from the so-called Dublin Regulation. They demanded a binding key according to which refugees would be distributed across the continent. Without success. As a result, they no longer fulfilled their duty and waved migrants through to countries like Germany.
Poland wants to forge a coalition against the migration pact
The planned reform now provides for 30,000 refugees per year to be distributed from the countries of arrival to other members. But this number is not particularly high given the migration flows that Italy alone has to cope with in a few months. In addition, fines of 20,000 euros per migrant should be incurred for the first time if a nation refuses to accept them.
Poland and Hungary in particular, who have always resisted any kind of migration, are taking to the barricades. Warsaw has announced that it is looking for allies in the European Parliament to form a coalition against this solidarity mechanism. MEPs still have to vote on the reform before it is passed.
Resentment could also arise among the countries of arrival. If, in their opinion, the solidarity evoked in the new migration pact leaves something to be desired, they could go back to simply letting refugees pass. They even face new obligations as a result of the change in the law. So-called asylum centers are planned at the EU’s external borders.
Migrants can still submit multiple asylum applications
These are camps in which asylum seekers are supposed to go through their process under prison-like conditions. A fast-track procedure is planned for people who come from countries with a recognition rate of less than 20 percent. An application could also be rejected if migrants arrive from a transit country classified as a safe country of origin, such as Tunisia.
People aware that their chances of getting asylum are slim might try to avoid the camps. Erik Marquardt, member of the Greens in the European Parliament, said in the ARD “Tagesthemen” that the poor conditions of accommodation could lead to migrants in the countries of arrival “not registering or reporting at all”. He fears that they will then “take smugglers who may come directly to Germany.”
Even if asylum seekers register properly, there is nothing to prevent them from applying again in another EU country. The reform does nothing to change this weak point in the Dublin system. And Germany is still one of the preferred destinations for refugees in Europe. The federal government has the right to send people back to the country of arrival in which they went through their first asylum procedure. In many cases, however, countries such as Italy refuse to take them back. The fact that parts of the Greens are up in arms against the EU amendment may not only be based on ideology, but also on doubts about the practical implementation.
Tunisia’s president doesn’t want to play “border police”.
The EU cannot achieve the goal of curbing the flow of refugees on its own. It must rely on cooperation with countries of origin and transit so that these prevent migrants from traveling or at least accept them again if they do not have the right to stay. For this reason, the draft law in its current version explicitly allows the deportation of migrants to transit countries that are classified as safe.
During their visits to Tunis, both EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Federal Interior Minister Nancy Faeser wooed President Kaies Saied to prevent refugee boats from leaving the coast of Tunisia. Cooperation with Libya, which has been intercepting migrants escaping across the Mediterranean for years, could serve as a model for a pact with the autocrat. Human rights organizations such as “Human Rights Watch” accuse the EU border protection agency Frontex of using planes and drones to locate refugee boats so that the Libyan coast guard waits for them. The people would then be put in camps where there was a risk of torture and ill-treatment.
In order to deepen a probably similar partnership with Tunisia, von der Leyen put a total of more than one billion euros and visa facilitation for specialists on the table. However, Saied’s enthusiasm about the offer was limited. He doesn’t want to play Europe’s “border police,” he said.
Upward trend for populists puts EU under pressure
Perhaps Saied is playing poker so that European heads of state and government have more gifts of money with them on their next visits. Or he really doesn’t want to. On the one hand, this is supported by the fact that the president himself initiated the latest wave of migration from his country through racist agitation and the destruction of the last remnants of democratic institutions. On the other hand, like many other African countries, Tunisia vehemently refuses to take in its compatriots if the EU wants to deport them. So why should Saied now become a reliable partner when it comes to intercepting other nationals?
The attempts to bond with the autocrat reflect the desperation of the EU. The number of refugees on the continent will most likely continue to rise, also due to increasing climate catastrophes. In addition, the upward trend for right-wing populist parties in many countries on the continent put the heads of state and government under pressure to reach an agreement on the permanent construction site of asylum policy that can be sold as progress. Because many MEPs are already nervous about the upcoming European elections next year in view of the poll numbers.