Brussels, 29/07/2016 (Agence Europe) - On Wednesday 27 July, Agence Europe interviewed Vincent Cochetel, Director of the European office of the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), to take stock of the situation on the EU-Turkey agreement of 18 March and, in particular, its migration plank. The UN official said that the failed coup in Turkey casts doubt over the room for manoeuvre actually available to NGOs and humanitarian agencies and that the recent terrorist attacks in the EU may also have a bearing on relocation decisions. (Interview by Solenn Paulic)
Agence Europe: What impact has the abortive coup in Turkey and the ensuing wave of “purges” had on the EU/-Turkey agreement of 18 March? Do you feel, as the European Commission seems to be saying, that things can continue as they were?
Vincent Cochetel - It's all a bit up in the air. Several scenarios are possible. We don't think that the Turkish policy towards refugees will change, it will continue to be a generous policy, but what will the capacity for action of the humanitarian agencies be? It is also too soon to say whether events in Turkey will have major consequences on arrivals in the EU. We shouldn't give in to panic. We are also hearing from the Syrians that they don't want to come to the EU, that there is no work, that conditions are complicated… But the agreement (of 18 March) has been suspended de facto, as there are no more interlocutors on the ground (in Turkey). Since the coup, the Turkish asylum liaison officers have returned to their own country, which means that returns have ground to a halt. If dialogue resumes with Turkey, it's reasonable to assume that unsuccessful asylum seekers will be sent back there. However, the attempted coup creates complications in achieving the various objectives of the 18 March agreement.
How would you assess the agreement? The Commission called it a success before recent political events.
If you look at the number of arrivals in Greece since its implementation, despite a slight increase over the last two weeks of July, with 70 arrivals per day and 54 last month, we are looking at a daily average of 74 with peaks of 120. That is manageable. No country can completely close off its borders. The figures are entirely manageable for Greece, particularly with the support of the EU or UNHCR. And so that part of the agreement is working, the Turks are controlling their borders better. But it is also because the Syrians, Afghans and Iranians know that the borders are closed, for instance, between Greece and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the Balkans route. People know that if they get to Greece, there are no longer these big state movements to facilitate transit and the wave of terrorist attacks has also led to people staying put. There is a lot of fear. If the drop in the number of arrivals is the indicator, then the agreement is working, but if we look at it in terms of the number of returns to Turkey, it's hardly working at all. There have been fewer than 500 returns of migrants who arrived illegally (468) and 27 Syrians have returned home of their own volition; this is still very low. You might also think that certain asylum seekers whose applications had been rejected on the grounds that Turkey is a safe country would have been returned. However, not a single one has been. There have been two final decisions for two Syrian asylum seekers, but neither of them has been sent back. As regards resettlements (of Syrian refugees on Turkish soil, the other part of the agreement of 18 March), UNHCR has put 3,216 cases to the member states. Since the start of the agreement, we are only on 819.
You spoke of a generous Turkish policy towards Syrian refugees …
Yes, we think that a number of Syrians may return to Turkey, that they have temporary protection and can regain that status. But we're not saying that all Syrians can go back to Turkey, there have been problems, deaths. Syrians have had problems with the Syrian opposition, but we are not completely opposed to sending Syrians back to Turkey. A number of Syrians have left the EU voluntarily and wanted to return to Syria. They said that this was because of a lack of prospects in Europe and they felt that it wasn't the best choice. For non-Syrians submitting asylum applications in Greece, we have been more circumspect. On paper, the Turkish asylum system is good, but in practice, it isn't.
What do you think of the criticism made by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan that the EU is not fulfilling its obligations in paying the amount earmarked to help the Syrian refugees in Turkey?
The EU pledged between €3 and €6 billion. So far, just €740 million has been allocated and is starting to be handed over. The EU has not given all that it promised. However, it's also true that, as Turkey has always traditionally had difficulties absorbing budgetary funds, for instance, the European pre-accession funds, it might not even have been able to absorb the money.
How do things stand with the relocation mechanism, in which UNHCR is also involved?
Of the 66,400 people to be relocated from Greece, just 2,485 people have been (2,681, according to the figures announced by the Commission on 27 July). Despite improvements, there are still problems registering asylum applications in Greece and in the member states in the current context, but even before the terrorist attacks, they were not exactly falling over each other to make relocation offers. This is the problem being faced.
In this regard, do you feel that the recent wave of attacks in Europe will further toughen the EU migration policy?
We are not opposed to reinforced security controls on the refugee populations or asylum seekers, but it must be stressed that not all of these terrorists are refugees and that refugees are also fleeing violations. Bundling everything together is a dangerous game. But it is clear that reinforced security controls on the borders are desirable. If there had been tighter security controls last year, we would not have had these problems. It is not just one country involved. A number of EU countries are still not carrying out all checks with regard to European or Interpol databases. Furthermore, not all border posts are set up to access Eurodac (the database of digital fingerprints of asylum seekers). There are still major challenges ahead for the EU. We hope that the future border guard agency will allow more quality controls on the high-risk profiles.