The leaders of the EU 28 have been invited to Brussels on Thursday 28 June to give their comments on the suggestions for defusing the migration dossier. These suggestions were made on Sunday 24 June by the leaders of 16 member states (see EUROPE 12047).
The areas of work suggested involve external border protection in the EU. The Italian Minister for the Interior, Matteo Salvini, however, was in Libya on Monday 25 June and several merchant and NGO ships are still being refused landing for the migrants they have rescued at sea. The areas of work suggested also involve secondary movements in the EU, in response to a request from the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel.
Reform of the so-called “Dublin” regulation, which is at the heart of the European asylum system, has currently stalled at the Council and could be postponed again.
Priority on sealing EU’s external borders
The 16 leaders again renewed a pledge to finance the European emergency trust fund for Africa, as well as the second tranche of €3 billion for the Refugee Facility in Turkey (see EUROPE 12047).
An increase in the European Coast and Border Guard (10,000 agents by the end of 2020), as well as the idea of a new legislative initiative to facilitate the return of irregular migrants to their countries of origin or transit, have also been approved.
According to several different sources, the countries attending the meeting quite clearly rejected the suggestion by the Austrian Chancellor, Sebastian Kurz, on the question of what to do with migrants rescued at sea. Mr Kurz suggested creating migrant centres in third countries near the EU, such as in the Western Balkans, where they would be held after having arrived at Schengen area ports.
This idea resembles a refoulement practice and according to these different sources, did not obtain any support on Sunday.
Two other options, however, were deemed potentially applicable. This would first of all involve working on landing programmes (platforms) for migrants rescued at sea in safe third countries in North Africa, for example, in cooperation with the UNHCR and IMO, with the idea of keeping migrants there who are saved in international non-European waters.
The second option: when migrants are rescued in the international waters of a member state, cooperation should be stepped up between member states in an effort to more efficiently decide what ports could take them in.
Additional closed identification centres (enhanced ‘hotspots’) could therefore be set up in Italy, Greece and/or Spain. Experts would be dispatched to fast track the identification of people who are likely to benefit from asylum and those who are economic migrants.
With regard to people who are able to claim asylum, a form of solidarity could apply. According to suggestions from certain sources on Monday in a backdrop to the mini-Summit, some countries might agree to taking in the people concerned.
Other working areas suggested
Ahead of the mini-summit, the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, and the Spanish Prime Minister, Pedro Sanchez, referred to the idea of closed centres set up in so-called frontline EU countries. Additional EU financial support and qualified personnel would come in to back this up.
These two leaders also supported the idea of financial penalties at a level of structural funds to be imposed on countries that refused to demonstrate solidarity with other member states.
This idea was not discussed on Sunday, according to one source, which pointed out that the Commission had not retained this suggestion when it drew up its report for the 2021-2027 multi-annual financial framework (see EUROPE 12039).
Italian Prime Minister, Giuseppe Conte, very quickly indicated that he would not agree to these kinds of centres on his territory. He presented a 10-point plan in which Rome calls for a radical change in European asylum system reform (so-called Dublin regulation), in order to scrap the rule whereby the country of first entry in the EU is responsible for processing the asylum request.
Italy supports the creation of international protection centres in third countries of transit so that departing candidates cannot go to Libya or set out for the EU.
This is what Mr Salvini requested again on Monday 25 June in Tripoli in a reference to camps in southern Libya. This idea was immediately rejected by the Libyan Vice Prime Minister of the Government of National Union (GNA) Ahmed Meitig, according to reports in the AFP. It was not retained as such in the discussions on 24 June but several countries, including France, have already supported this idea and are working with certain African countries in this connection.
On the other hand, in this paper, Italy rejects any measure to tackle secondary movements of migrants and asylum seekers within the EU. Both Italy and Greece consider that this is not a real problem and is designed to create a diversion.
Germany wants intra-EU inter-governmental agreements
In Brussels, the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, called for bilateral or trilateral agreements to be negotiated in an effort to speed up returns to asylum seekers’ countries of first entry.
According to Ms Merkel, there will be “no European solution” on this issue at the European Summit on Thursday. She therefore called for coalitions of voluntary countries to work in this connection.
Reform of Dublin regulation postponed
One thing is certain: nothing shifted on Sunday on the “solidarity” section in European asylum system reform (see EUROPE 12034).
The 16 member states endorsed five inter-institutional agreements for five legislative proposals in the asylum package (Eurodac, qualifications, reception conditions, resettlement and the new asylum agency) “by the end of July”, explained one source (see EUROPE 12045). They will also attempt to reach an agreement on the Dublin regulation and the text outlining asylum procedures “by the end of year”.
A green light for these five texts would already allow for links to be strengthened between an asylum seeker and the country that granted them protection in an effort to clamp down on asylum “shopping”.
According to one Commission source, however, the Dublin regulation remains “a pillar” in the global asylum architecture and the member states will not be able to scale back on its reform. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)