Washington Kurdish Institute
Giulia Anderson November 23, 2021
Since before the 2011 refugee crisis, Europe has been a safe haven for migrants crossing the border to flee from conflicts and famine to pursue a better life. However, since the wars escalated in the Middle East and North Africa in this past decade, the European Union has applied rigid acceptance procedures towards those who enter the continent illegally.
Articles 79 and 80 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union both emphasize the importance of the principle of solidarity when approaching the topic of illegal migration. The treaty sets the standards for admission in the continent, but it also highlights its position on preventing and reducing illegal migration by applying an effective return policy as long as it is consistent with fundamental rights. The Treaty of Lisbon, ratified in 2009, added new jurisprudence on illegal migration, making it clear that the European Union shares competence with all Members States regarding the number of migrants allowed to enter, legally and illegally. It also gave the Court of Justice full jurisdiction in the field of immigration and asylum.
Notwithstanding these treaties mentioned above, Europe has changed its stance on acceptance policies case-by-case in the last decade. The Global Approach to Migration and Mobility, adopted in 2011, established general guidelines on EU’s relations with third countries in the field of migration. For example, under these principles, Italy signed a memorandum of understating in 2017 with Libya regarding the patrol of the Mediterranean Sea to combat illegal migration, human trafficking, and contraband. However, according to many, this made NGO’s, and non-profit organizations involved complicit of human trafficking and Italy guilty of cooperating with Libya who, according to Amnesty International, does not respect human and fundamental rights.
In 2014, the Stockholm Program on migration expired, and so the Union published new guidelines stressing the need to adopt a holistic approach to migration. This agenda set up a new measure on managing borders effectively, protecting those who need it, and combating illegal migration. However, in 2015, the EU suffered from the largest refugee crisis and, notwithstanding these principles, applied a different tactic which consisted in redistributing the seekers among all Member States – though this policy almost tore the Union apart.
Ever since, the EU has been handling each crisis on a case-by-case scenario, trying to fortify the borders and giving funds to countries who act as first responders, like Italy, Greece, Spain, and many more. All in order to avoid a situation like the one that occurred in 2015.
Currently, Europe is dealing again with one of the largest refugee crises it has ever seen, though two new factors contribute to the emergency: Covid-19 and power politics. More than 10 thousand people are stuck at the border between Poland and Belarus, 8 thousand of whom are believed to be Iraqi Kurds. They are pushed by the latter’s police officers to enter into the former’s border illegally, a situation which has escalated quickly into violence. This is a scenario the EU has never dealt with before. No country has ever played power politics with the life of people escaping their homes in search of a better future in such a violent approach.
According to some reports, President Lukashenko of Belarus (who has been President since 1994) allows asylum seekers from the Middle East to fly through Minsk and move at the border with the EU, in this case, Poland, to cause a refugee crisis in the Union. Many believe this is a retaliation plan Lukashenko has been strategizing for months after the EU applied sanctions against Belarus for its numerous repressions against fundamental rights and condemned the last election results, which outcome it does not recognize.
Poland has called upon the EU and NATO for help, reporting the events as an attack on the unity of the European Union and violent aggression on humanity. No reporters are currently allowed on the Polish border, though there are videos that circulated before the journalist-block, which prove the inhumane situation these people are living in, most of whom are Kurdish. However, there are other reportages published by the Belarusian authorities that are allegedly forged and used as domestic propaganda against the EU.
For these people, the situation is unbearable. Aside from the clashes with the police, which have caused many victims and deaths, the weather is not favoring their situation: cold, snow, and a below zero (Celsius) climate. Under pressure from the EU, Minsk has moved some of the migrants into a warehouse, but it has no intention to funnel them back to Minsk.
As the crisis continues, the EU has applied new sanctions towards Belarus in order to resist this alleged “blackmail,” sanctioning everyone involved in the transportation of people to Minsk and to the border – airlines included. However, some believe this might worsen the situation as the rational behind Minks’ actions is, per se, a war against EU sanctions. International diplomats also weigh in their support towards the EU, asking their home countries to tighten any sanction currently in place and helping countries, for example, Iraq, organize repatriation flights for all of their nationals stuck between the borders.
President Lukashenko is asking the EU to open a humanitarian crossing with Poland or Germany, though the EU has no intention to fall in his agenda, as it is believed to be a crisis orchestrated by Lukashenko himself. The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, spoke with Russia as well in an effort to have Moscow weigh in its influence on Minsk and stop the crisis. Nevertheless, President Putin seems to have no intentions in interfering with President Lukashenko’s decision. Contrary to what many believed, Poland received funds from the EU to help with the crisis, but it is still unclear how Warsaw will use this aid. One thing that remains clear is the fact that the EU has no intention to follow up on Lukashenko’s plan, it did not work with Turkey years before (even if the situation was not as violent), and it will not again. However, this is again a demonstration of how the EU applies its migration policy according to a case-by-case scenario and the political implications of each action.
Disclaimer: The views, opinions, and positions expressed by authors and contributors do not necessarily reflect those of the WKI.