The EU27 discussion on migration lasted almost 5 hours on Friday 22 October, but the twelve Member States that had asked the Commission to consider EU funding for anti-migrant walls at their external borders (see EUROPE 12808/8) did not win their case during this exchange, which was largely devoted to the so-called ‘hybrid’ threats posed by Belarus.
The President of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, noted, at the end of the meeting, the existence of a long “tradition in the Commission and the European Parliament of not financing walls or barbed wire” at the external borders. And that will not change.
The topic of migration barriers, however, took up a good part of the EU27 discussion, which also focused on the central Mediterranean and action plans with key third countries for migration management.
But the countries did not go away empty-handed, as EU leaders asked the Commission in their conclusions to come up with new “concrete” courses of action, “backed up by adequate financial support” to ensure an “immediate and appropriate response, in accordance with EU law and international obligations, including fundamental rights”.
They called for further legislative changes to be considered as the Commission presents its review of the Schengen Borders Code in November, where it is expected to introduce new measures to address the hybrid threat posed by the Belarusian regime.
The rather vague wording of this paragraph, which does not approve the anti-migrant walls and refers to international law, has indeed allowed the Lithuanian president, Gitanas Nausėda, to leave the European Summit “satisfied”.
“I think that now our partners understand very well how the frontline countries feel about the attacks of the Belarusian regime; the text reflects the basic needs that we feel” and “we see a wide range of possible measures and amendments to the legal framework if necessary in order to address, to deal with these problems at the EU external borders. We cannot solve the problems of secondary migration without solving primary migration”, the President said.
Austrian Chancellor Alexander Schallenberg, meanwhile, “found the clear commitment to effective protection of the external borders” and to a “robust and clear” EU response to hybrid threats from third countries “particularly satisfying”.
Italy’s Mario Draghi was also satisfied that the balance between responsibility and solidarity had been added to the conclusions and linked to a paragraph that many Member States, including the Dutch and Austrians, wanted on the need to reduce secondary movements.
The five-hour discussion also allowed for clarification of the motivations of all parties regarding the forthcoming revision of the Schengen Code, added the Italian, but also on migration policy in general, with the Prime Minister, for example, having the opportunity to tell his colleagues that return policy cannot be left to one country alone.
Asked about the protection of external borders, French President Emmanuel Macron recalled that, while each “country tries to protect Europe’s external borders and its own in the way it sees fit”, the Commission President “has made it very clear that she would not finance such structures, as this is not her purpose or competence”. Furthermore, “many migrants arrive by air and sea. I am afraid that a wall is not enough”, the French President said.
Mario Draghi also noted that his country was opposed to financing walls with European money.
Link to the conclusions: https://bit.ly/3psyyOX (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic with the editorial staff)