[FR] Asylum seekers: The paradox of the Vienna-Rome axis project
After the heated exchanges between France and Italy over the tragic plight of the Aquarius, all eyes are now on Germany, the scene of a political drama between Angela Merkel and her Home Secretary, Horst Seehofer, leader of the CSU party. Both are members of the same coalition that was so painstakingly put together. The Bavarian Christian Social Union leader’s exploitation of the slightest flaw in the Chancellor’s migration policy is in line with the criticism levelled at Angela Merkel since 2016 by the right wing of her political family. The fact that the Bavarian federal minister is willing to push his advantage to the point of threatening to jeopardise the coalition if he does not get his way on tightening the policy on returning rejected asylum seekers speaks volumes about his fears of the AfD, the far-right party that has become the leading opposition party in Germany, in the run-up to regional elections in Bavaria. The Chancellor has seen it all before, but she will still emerge weakened by this political blackmail.
From a European perspective, it is more significant to focus on the approach taken by Seehofer himself, who has been seen alongside the young new Austrian Chancellor, Sebastian Kurz, to support his initiative to form, with his new Italian counterpart, Matteo Salvini, and perhaps with other countries governed by a majority hostile to the reception of migrants, such as the Netherlands and Denmark, an ‘axis of volunteers in the fight against illegal immigration’. While the concept of an axis may bring back dark memories, it actually masks the project that has been nurtured for several months by the upcoming Austrian Presidency of the Council of the European Union to ‘turn the tables’ on European asylum policy.
Australian approach
This policy has been gradually developed over the last ten years on the basis of the so-called Dublin regulations. However imperfect they may be, these regulations guarantee, in a uniform manner, that all migrants in distress who arrive on the soil of an EU country can have their rights respected in accordance with international conventions and the fundamental rights that underpin European integration. They also provide a common framework for the return to their country of origin of those who are not eligible for protection, while respecting the same fundamental rights. This legal basis is now being tested by the inadequacy of solidarity mechanisms, in other words, in the event of an influx, the “relocation” of asylum seekers (transfer of an asylum seeker from the country where they arrived, such as Italy or Greece, to another EU country, NLDR). Strengthening this solidarity by challenging the principle of the responsibility of the “country of first entry” has the corollary of strengthening the quality of controls at the EU’s external borders.
The future Austrian Presidency seems to be pursuing a very different approach. Inspired by the so-called Australian approach, its objective is to prevent migrants who do not have visas from reaching the EU’s external borders. Asylum applications to the EU would be outsourced to transit countries and ineligible persons would be returned to ‘safe’ countries. The mention of countries that could play this buffer role – Turkey, Egypt, Niger, Libya, Albania – inspires all kinds of fears. Such an approach would certainly not eliminate illegal entries; it would cause more suffering, would not resolve any of the underlying causes of forced migration and would betray the foundations of European integration.
It should also be emphasised how paradoxical this new approach, designed to allay fears of foreigners, is. Coming from parties that have become highly Euro-critical, if not ‘sovereignist’, and which never miss an opportunity to denounce Brussels’ authoritarianism, it would require an unprecedented integration of the Union’s foreign policy tools. In order to establish European bases for upstream transit management, commensurate with the high-risk flows across the Mediterranean, currently numbering 150,000 to 160,000 people per year, it would be necessary to successfully coordinate intelligence resources, asylum investigation agencies and even military resources on a scale far greater than anything that has been done to date.
In other words, in order to exempt themselves from solidarity in receiving asylum seekers, the Austrian and Italian governments are not hesitating to take a giant step towards the federalisation of European security. The next European Council meeting on 28 and 29 June will undoubtedly be the first to reveal this dilemma, which we can hope will at least bring to light one undeniable truth: when it comes to migration, the European approach is the only one, because of the cooperation it fosters between EU Member States, that can define a long-term path to control for a Europe that is neither a sieve nor a fortress.
