• عربي
  • Fr
  • Es
No Result
View All Result
European Eye on Radicalization
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Who We Are
      • Editorial board and staff
      • Contributors
    • Vision
  • Analysis
  • Opinion Pieces
    • EER Editorials
    • Contributors’ Opinions
  • Reports
  • Reading Radicalization
  • Events
    • EER Events
    • Events EER attends
  • Interviews
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Who We Are
      • Editorial board and staff
      • Contributors
    • Vision
  • Analysis
  • Opinion Pieces
    • EER Editorials
    • Contributors’ Opinions
  • Reports
  • Reading Radicalization
  • Events
    • EER Events
    • Events EER attends
  • Interviews
  • Videos
  • Contact
No Result
View All Result
European Eye on Radicalization
No Result
View All Result
Home Opinion Pieces EER Editorials

Europe, Walls, and Provocative Proposals

18 October 2021
in EER Editorials, Opinion Pieces
Europe, Walls, and Provocative Proposals
460
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

European Eye on Radicalization

 

Two pillars of the European Union (EU) project have been the pooling of sovereignty and coordinated, mutually beneficial decision-making. Yet Member States struggle to acknowledge them and put them into practice.

A short time ago, the Interior ministers from twelve EU member states signed a joint letter inviting Brussels to finance a barrier on the border with Belarus. “Physical barriers appear to be an effective border protection measure that serves the interest of the whole EU, not just member states of first arrival,” they wrote. “This legitimate measure should be additionally and adequately funded from the EU budget as a matter of priority.”

The letter was signed by ministers from Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, and Slovakia.

The content of the letter refers to the opportunity of amending the rules of Schengen Agreement, which has since 1995 provided for visa-less travel between signatories, now amounting to twenty-six states. Without explicitly saying so, this clearly implies legalizing revisions of Schengen, indeed revoking core tenets.

It seems that these states are finding the model proposed by Viktor Orban, the Hungarian Prime Minister, appealing. During the 2015-16 migrant crisis, Orban said it was necessary to build a border fence to protect his nation from a free flow of migration, and he has now done so.

Five years ago, the fear in the EU was of uncontrolled migrants flows and radicalized individuals from Syria and North Africa. Now, the fear is from Afghanistan, a country that Europe has never fully understood, yet the Continent has struggled with Afghan refugees for some time and now the numbers are increasing.

Judy Dempsey notes that, instead of forging a common migration or refugee policy, the EU has dealt with it by exporting the problem. It has paid Turkey to keep migrants and refugees in the country and strengthen its borders with the EU.

In response to the letter, Ylva Johansson, the Commissioner for Home Affairs, immediately declared that these kinds of projects will never be funded by EU money. Other Member States distanced themselves from the proposal and renewed calls for effective partnership between the EU and the external countries. This seems like a more productive path.

The EU needs a more collaborative approach with the countries of origin, and those states that migrant flows transit—a strategic problem that has been too long delayed, despite models of the kind of accords necessary already existing with countries such as Tunisia and Libya.

The most frustrating aspect of the twelve countries’ letter, however, is that it was always bound to be rejected, and they must have known that. The letter, therefore, looks more like a provocation, than a rational proposal. Its real goal was most likely highlighting the rift within the European Council for political purposes—staking out a position that resonates with sections of domestic opinion.

The twelve countries have asked, and presented, a more extreme proposal, which will now have to be discussed, overshadowing the more realistic and urgent requests of frontline countries with sea borders, such as Italy and Spain. Indeed, the wall solution would create bigger problems for exactly these frontline states by redirecting large parts of the migrant flow to the Mediterranean states.

What we are witnessing is a return to an older style of statecraft. Six out of ten people worldwide now live in a country that has built border walls. Borders have always been core cultural, sociological, and political facts of civilizations. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, however, a different path seemed to have opened up: there were just fifteen physical barriers worldwide between states in 1989; now they are over seventy.

Related Posts

Sweden’s Qur’an Burnings Amidst the Scourge of Ethnic Nationalism
Contributors’ Opinions

Sweden’s Qur’an Burnings Amidst the Scourge of Ethnic Nationalism

16 May 2022
Will Biden Repeat Obama’s Mistakes With Iran?
Contributors’ Opinions

Will Biden Repeat Obama’s Mistakes With Iran?

13 May 2022
The International Community Must Help Egypt Against Rising Terrorism and Economic Shocks From the Russia-Ukraine War
EER Editorials

The International Community Must Help Egypt Against Rising Terrorism and Economic Shocks From the Russia-Ukraine War

12 May 2022
We Should Be Using Conservatism to Counter the Far-Right
Contributors’ Opinions

We Should Be Using Conservatism to Counter the Far-Right

10 May 2022
Violence as Distorted Communication: A Fresh Perspective on Modern Terrorism
Contributors’ Opinions

Violence as Distorted Communication: A Fresh Perspective on Modern Terrorism

9 May 2022
Why Boko Haram is Losing Ground in Nigeria
Contributors’ Opinions

Why Boko Haram is Losing Ground in Nigeria

3 May 2022

Latest from Twitter

Popular

Russia, Afghanistan, and the Islamic State Threat to Central Asia

9 March 2022
Islamist Extremism and Jihadism in Latin America: A Longstanding and Underestimated Phenomenon

Islamist Extremism and Jihadism in Latin America: A Longstanding and Underestimated Phenomenon

14 April 2022

Muslim Brotherhood and Khomeinism in Italy: The Told and the Untold

6 May 2022
Islamist Organizations in the United Kingdom: From the Rushdie Affair to Present Day

Islamist Organizations in the United Kingdom: From the Rushdie Affair to Present Day

17 January 2022
Becoming Ansar Allah: How the Islamic Revolution Conquered Yemen

Becoming Ansar Allah: How the Islamic Revolution Conquered Yemen

24 March 2021
Reflections on the ‘Islamic’ Dimension of Conflicts in the East and in France

Reflections on the ‘Islamic’ Dimension of Conflicts in the East and in France

3 November 2021

© 2018 EER - Copyright © European Eye on Radicalization.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Who We Are
      • Editorial board and staff
      • Contributors
    • Vision
  • Analysis
  • Opinion Pieces
    • EER Editorials
    • Contributors’ Opinions
  • Reports
  • Reading Radicalization
  • Events
    • EER Events
    • Events EER attends
  • Interviews
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • عربي
  • Fr
  • Es

© 2018 EER - Copyright © European Eye on Radicalization.

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used. Visit our Privacy and Cookie Policy.