by the editor
The latest document from the Commission is a fascinating read. Page after page cowered in wonderful words and good intentions, such as solidarity, common burdens, human rights, safe ports and migrant-centred approach and so on ad nauseam. What it all means, probably not even the lawyers know. It will work its way into reality through bureaucrats and probably a series of lawsuits at the European Court of Justice, and the European Court of Human Rights – as usual. These ‘nice’ aspects of common efforts and respect for human rights – along with assurance that no extra funds will be needed – were also what the Commission was most interesting in promoting. However, when one turns from high-minded principles to the ‘nuts and bolts’, the questions starts queuing up. The Commission envision a resettlement program to apportion those granted asylum ‘fairly’ (that’s what ‘burden sharing’ means). Staffed by ‘experts’ (in what? No one knows) appointed by the member states and working in their home state’s interest, they will divvy up the immigrants among the EU states… How? And why should ‘experts’ representing a national interest be less intractable than politicians doing the same? And the new ‘European Neighborhood Policy Instrument’ (to replace the existing European Neighborhood Policy) is perhaps very aptly named: With its focus on ‘conditionality’ and ‘monitoring’ it has a whiff of blackmail diplomacy. Note for instance the idea of ‘Safe Ports’. These are primarily to be located outside the EU. Such ‘Safe Ports’ on EU territory is only for use in situations where asylum seekers can’t immediately be expedited out of EU… Oh sorry, ‘where it is impossible to admit people in the Safe Ports at the partner-countries’.
Ingen kommentarer:
Send en kommentar