The EU facing illegal migration landings

As often happens, unexpected political, economic, and social emergencies have brought to the fore hanging – albeit long-running – key issues, that had been repeatedly minimized or postponed sine die . Thus the popular upheaval and the storming changes in North Africa (extending to Iran and to other Asian countries) or the ever-increasing boatload “landings” of immigrants on the southern shores of the continent, give priority to the lack, and even the absence, of a true euro-Mediterranean policy.Certainly, stepping up relations among EU States, including the Balkan, Middle-Eastern and Maghreb Countries is not the solution to all the ongoing conflicts in the region, notably marked – with varying differences – by the absence of democracy, the negation of human rights, social and economic backwardness, migration flows, political, ethnic and religious frictions, environmental threats with direct spin-off on the quality of living (health, drinking water, crops, sea pollution…). Notably, controversial questions arise in the Southern and Eastern shores of the Mediterranean (the Holy Land), which are also interconnected and potentially capable of fuelling each other. Indeed, the lesson of Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria highlighted poorly democratic institutional systems, delays on the front of development, widespread poverty, ongoing difficulties amongst coexisting religions. It is a dangerous mix that could lead to popular upheavals and turmoil that risk leading to the establishment of authoritarian or military regimes.Certainly, Euro-Mediterranean policy is not the magical bullet. However, since the 1995 Barcelona Process such policy has always been viewed as the right path to face questions involving North-African, Middle-Eastern and European states. The new Euromed political line, launched by French EU presidency in the summer of 2008 was presented for this purpose. On that occasion president Nicolas Sarkozy convinced EU27 that the Mediterranean was a priority area for the Union as a whole. On July 13-14 of the same year 43 heads of Government or State set up the “Union for the Mediterranean” with the purpose of “giving new impetus to the efforts aimed at transforming the Mediterranean in an area of peace, democracy, cooperation and prosperity”. Thus a new, transcontinental, international organization was born, with political priorities and “concrete projects with a regional dimension, bearers of a de facto solidarity”. It took place under a rotating presidency, which at the time had been entrusted not only to Sarkozy but also to Mohamed Hosni Mubarak, the currently fleeing Egyptian president.Since then the Union for the Mediterranean remained dead letter, evoked only in case of emergencies, such as the protests in the Maghreb, or illegal immigration flows into Greece (from Turkey), Malta and Italy (via Libya and Tunisia) and into Spain (from Morocco). Unheard references to a Euromed strategy are accompanied by tardy appeals, calling upon the EU to find a solution to illegal mass immigration to Italian shores. In reality, almost all European governments opposed Community Europe’s handling of migration policies for two main reasons: firstly because certain nationalistic forces viewed it as yet another “cession of sovereignty” to Brussels; secondly, for the fear of being involved in solidarity and reciprocity engagements due to “somebody else’s” problems.As to migrations, the “Common Space of Freedom, Security and Justice”, is yet to be implemented by means of the “Stockholm Program” launched by the European council of December 2009, which was created to ensure European citizens’ “security” along with external borders control (Frontex agency). “The Stockholm Program provides for simpler entries into the EU for all those motivated by legitimate interests. At the same time, the Union and its Member States must ensure EU citizens’ security. Policies regarding integral frontier and visa control should be customized to these objectives”. A few steps have been made over the past year, despite new obstacles and delays created by EU capital cities. The Barroso Commission recently confirmed its intention to intervene on the question of immigrant boatload landings in the South of Europe, but it is necessary to endow the EU with the necessary tools and resources.Thus – as has been repeatedly demanded by the European Churches through the CCEE (Council of the European Bishops’ Conferences) migration and foreign policies are needed that will respond to the problems and challenges of an ever more interdependent, complex and dynamic world.