Luxembourg, 16/06/2015 (Agence Europe) - Will the meeting of EU home affairs ministers in Luxembourg have taken the venom out of discussions on the mechanism for the compulsory distribution of 40,000 asylum seekers and cleared a possible path for compromise?
Opinion remained divided after discussion lasting close on three hours on Tuesday morning 16 June, though some seemed a little less pessimistic on the proposal's chances of success, maybe even before the end of July.
At any rate, the more positive atmosphere was felt by the Luxembourg home affairs minister, Jean Asselborn, whose country will take over the mantel of the presidency of the Council of the EU on 1 July and will try to reach agreement before 31 July. The idea of “solidarity and responsibility along with burden-sharing [in taking migrants] has been accepted”, he made clear at the press conference, stating that the member states had understood that “there are other alternatives to these proposals”.
In its Agenda for Migration, the European Commission put forward a proposal requiring the member states to share the 40,000 migrants requiring international protection, 24,000 from Italy and 16,000 from Greece. With close to 100,000 migrants having already reached Europe's shores since the start of the year, this sharing would be done on the basis of four criteria: national GDP, population, the unemployment level and the number of migrants already taken in. The proposal was highly controversial and was very quickly criticised by several countries, in particular those from the east of the EU.
According to some sources, further countries stepped forward on Tuesday to support the Commission proposals. Others laid conditions on their support: some, for example, would like to revisit the “geographical cover” of the mechanism and want the Western Balkans flows to be taken more into account. The criteria should also be re-jigged, other delegations say, since there is as yet no clear majority in favour of those tabled by the Commission. These difficulties no longer seem insurmountable on Tuesday, some observers believe.
Asselborn feels that consensus was reached on Tuesday and “solutions will be found” with regard to the allocation mechanism, he trusts, as well as on the distribution criteria, which could be adjusted in technical discussions at the Council. The minister also trusts that all member states will be involved in the mechanism. However, questions remain as to whether the mechanism should be compulsory or voluntary, and whether it should be temporary or on-going, with some already of the view that it amounts to amendment of the Dublin rules.
Questions on the role of the European summit. Difficult discussions are likely on whether or not member states should be forced to accept a certain quota of asylum seekers, some argue, and the European summit on 25-26 June could be the meeting at which final decisions are taken. “It can be clearly seen that the European summit will be where basic principles will be agreed”, said Latvian Home Affairs Minister Rihards Kozlovskis. Some sources felt, however, that, apart from providing political impetus and continuity with the commitments made on 23 April at the special summit on immigration, the heads of state and/or government would only have a limited role and that the work would be done essentially at technical level.
One idea was nevertheless being put about on Tuesday, particularly by those countries that feel it unlikely that a compulsory mechanism for all will be agreed. Under this idea, the willing countries would take their share of the total without waiting for the others. “This could be called a 'voluntary coordinated' system”, said a source.
European leaders might have to consider another aspect - that of responsibility, illustrated by the return of so-called economic migrants and the “selection” of those who can legitimately claim protection in Europe and those who have to be returned.
European migrant-return policy and the “hot spots” proposed by the Commission on 27 May which would see member states, Europol, Frontex and the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) coming to the aid of the Italian and Greek authorities in making this selection was discussed in some detail by ministers in Luxembourg.
On 9 June, Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos wrote to ministers exploring ways to strengthen the migrant-return policy, only 34% of decisions to return having been implemented in 2014. He suggested amending the role of Frontex, giving it greater powers on returns and negotiating new readmission agreements with the migrants' countries of origin.
The letter still does not go far enough for some delegations. Other obstacles remain on how to determine who asylum seekers are and who should be sent back. Indeed, to which country should they be sent? How can it be determined that migrants, who often arrive with no papers, are really Syrian or Eritrean refugees? These questions are nagging away at ministers and the solidarity they are prepared to show depends to a great extent on the answers. “No solution is possible in the long term without an effective returns policy”, in the view of the Latvian minister.
Power play between Italy and its partners. In Luxembourg on Tuesday, Italy is thought to have accepted that foreign teams from other member states, Frontex, Europol and the EASO help its agents in trying to identify migrants. The atmosphere at the start of the meeting in Luxembourg was, however, tense, French police having stepped up controls along the Italian border over the last few days in an attempt to stop migrants trying to leave Italy. The meeting was also taking place after the threats by Prime Minister Matteo Renzi of putting into effect a plan B, under which the Italian authorities would deliver temporary residency permits to these thousands of migrants allowing them to move legally within the Schengen area.
“We will definitely not be issuing temporary permits”, Italian Home Affairs Minister Angelino Alfano clarified at midday on Tuesday at a joint press briefing with his German and French counterparts, Thomas de Maizière and Bernard Cazeneuve, who have consistently argued that there is a duty of responsibility on member states which will receive aid. Has Italy's aggressive strategy to force solidarity borne fruit? The Italian minister said after the debate that “positive” discussions had taken place.
The fate of the Schengen area and maintenance of the freedom of movement would also seem to be key issues in the debate on distributing asylum seekers. “If this responsibility (Ed: of the member states on the front line) is not implemented, it could mean the end of free movement in Europe. We want to avoid that, but we all have to be aware of the danger”, warned de Maizière on Tuesday after his meeting with his Italian counterpart and Commissioner Avramopoulos. Asselborn agreed: “If no solution can be found, the result will be chaos, because Schengen will be in danger”, he, too, argued. (Solenn Paulic)