For an open migration policy to end the deaths and crises in the Mediterranean

The current crisis
surrounding migration is not one of numbers – migrants’ crossings of the sea are
at their lowest since 2013 – but of policies. The drive towards closure and the
politicisation of migration are so strong after years of tension that the frail
bodies of a few thousand migrants arriving on European shores are triggering a
major political crisis throughout the EU.

One epicentre of this crisis
is in Italy, where Matteo Salvini, the country’s new far-right Interior
Minister, is preventing NGOs from disembarking rescued migrants. Such was the
case with the 629 people on board the Aquarius.

Another is Germany, where
the governing coalition led by Angela Merkel is at risk as the hardline
Interior Minister Horst Seehofer has threatened
to turn back refugees at the German borders. The European
Council summit on 28 June 2018 promises to be rife with tensions. As EU
member states will most probably continue to prove unable to offer a common
response to migrants once they have arrived on European shores, they will reinforce
the policy they have implemented since 2015: preventing migrants from crossing
the sea by outsourcing border control to non-European countries.

The consensus of closure

This policy of closure has
had horrendous consequences for migrants – such as the subjection to torture of
those who are intercepted at sea by the Libyan coast
guard, which has been equipped, trained and coordinated by Italy and the
EU. Despite this, it has gathered growing consensus. Faced with the
politicisation of migration which has fuelled the rise of far-right populist
parties across Europe and threatens the EU itself with disintegration, even
humanists of the centre left and right ask whether these inhumane policies are not a necessary evil.

Would it not be better for
migrants to “stay home” rather then reach a Europe which has turned its back on
them and which they threaten in turn? Whispering or shouting, reluctantly or
aggressively, European citizens increasingly wish migrants would simply
disappear. Whispering or shouting, reluctantly or
aggressively, European citizens increasingly wish migrants would simply
disappear.

Powerful forces driving migration, failed policies

This consensus towards
closure is delusional. Policies of closure that are completely at odds with the
dynamics of migration systematically fail in their aim of ending the arrivals
of illegalised migrants, as the record of the last 30 years demonstrates.

Ever since the European
states consolidated freedom of movement for European citizens in the 1990s all
the while denying access to most non-European populations, the arrival of
“undesirable” migrants has not stopped, but only been pushed underground. This
is because as long as there are strong “push factors” – such as wars and
economic crisis, and “pull factors” – such as work and welfare opportunities as
well as respect for human rights, and that these continue to be connected by
migrants’ transnational networks, state policies have
little chance of succeeding in durably stemming the migration they aim to
restrict.

Over the last 30 years, for
every route states have succeeded in closing, it has only been
a matter of time before migrants opened several new ones. Forced to use
precarious means of travel – often controlled by criminal networks, migrants’
lives were put at growing risk. More than 30,000 migrants are recorded to have
died at sea since the beginning of the 1990s. A sea which has connected
civilisations for millennia has become a mass grave. More
than 30,000 migrants are recorded to have died at sea since the beginning of
the 1990s. A sea which has connected civilisations for millennia has become a
mass grave.

Fear breeds more fear: the vicious cycle

These policies of closure,
often implemented by centre governments allegedly in the aim of preventing the
further rise of anti-immigrant sentiments, ultimately contributed to them.
Despite the spectacular military means deployed by states to police borders,
illegalised migration continued, giving European populations a sense that their
states had “lost control” – a feeling that has only been heightened in the wake
of the Arab uprisings.

Migrants’ illegalisation has
led to unjustifiable status inequality within European societies, allowing
employers to pull salaries down in the sectors in which precaritized migrants
are employed. This has lent to working classes the impression that migrants
constitute an unfair competition.

Policies of closure and
discrimination thus only generate more fear and rejection of migrants. The parties
which have mobilised voters on the basis of this fear have left unaddressed –
and in fact diverted
attention from – the rising unemployment, social insecurity, and inequality
amongst Europe’s “losers of globalisation”, whose resentment has served as a
fertile ground for anti-immigrant sentiments.

In this way, we have become
trapped in a vicious cycle that has fuelled the rise of the far-right.

Towards an open migration policy, de-escalate the mobility conflict

Over the years, the
Mediterranean has become the main frontline of a mobility conflict, which has intensified in the wake of the 2011 Arab
uprisings and European debt crisis. Since then, both the factors spurring
migrants’ movement towards Europe and those leading to the drive to exclude
them have been heightened.

The lack of solidarity
within the EU to respond to arrivals in so-called “frontline states” in
southern and eastern Europe have further fuelled it. As long as the same
policies continue to be applied, there is no end in sight to the political
tensions and violence surrounding migration and the worrying political trends
they are nurturing.

A fundamental paradigm shift
is necessary to end this vicious cycle. European
citizens and policy makers alike must realise that the question is not whether
migrants will exercise their freedom to cross borders, but at what human and
political cost.

State policies
can only create a legal frame for human movement to unfold and thereby partly
organise it, they cannot block it. Only a more open policy would allow
migration to unfold in
a way that threatens neither migrants themselves nor European citizens. No longer policed through military means, migration could
appear as a normal process that does not generate fear. States could better
detect individuals that might pause a threat.

With legal access to Europe,
migrants would no longer need to resort to smugglers and risk their lives
crossing the sea. No longer policed through military means, migration could appear
as a normal process that does not generate fear. States could better detect
individuals that might pause a threat among migrants as they would not be
pushed underground. Migrants’ legal status would no longer allow employers to
push working conditions down.

Such a policy is however far
from being on the European agenda. For its implementation to be even faintly
imaginable in the medium term, the deep and entangled roots of the mobility
conflict must addressed.

Beyond the EU’s incoherent and one-sided “global approach”

Today, the EU claims to
address one side of the mobility conflict. Using
development aid within its so-called “global approach to migration”, it
claims to tackle the “root causes” that spur migration towards Europe.
Researchers however have shown that development
does not automatically lead to less migration. This policy will further
have little effect as long as the EU’s unfair trade policies with the global
south are perpetuated – for example concerning agriculture and fishing in
Africa.

In effect, the EU’s policy
has mostly resulted in the use of development aid to impose policies of
migration control on countries of the global south. In the process, the EU is
lending support to authoritarian regimes – such as Turkey, Egypt, Sudan – which
migrants are fleeing. The EU is lending support to
authoritarian regimes – such as Turkey, Egypt, Sudan – which migrants are
fleeing.

Finally, when it has not
worsened conflicts through its own military intervention as in Libya, the EU
has proven unable of acting as a stabilizing force in the face of
internationalised civil conflicts. These are bound to multiply in a time of
intense competition for global hegemony. A true commitment to global justice
and conflict resolution is necessary if Europe wishes to limit the factors forcing
too many people onto the harsh paths of exile from their countries and regions,
a small share of whom reach European shores.

Tackling the drivers of migrant exclusion

Beyond its lack of
coherence, the EU’s so-called “global approach” suffers from one-sidedness,
focused as it is on migration as “the problem”. Policies
of closure have failed to end illegalised migration and only fuelled the rise
of the far-right and the disintegration of Europe.

As a result, it fails to see
migration as a normal social process. Furthermore, it does not address the
conditions that lead to the social and political drive to exclude them. The
fact that today the arrival of a few thousand migrants is enough to put the EU
into crisis clearly shows the limits of this approach.

It is urgent for policy
makers – at the national and local levels, but also researchers, cultural
producers and social movements – to not only morally condemn racism and
xenophobia, but to tackle the deep forces that shape them.

What is needed
is a more inclusive and fair economic system to decrease the resentment of
European populations. In addition, a positive vision for living in common in diverse
societies must be affirmed, so that the tensions that arise from the encounter
between different people and cultures can be overcome.

Crucially, we
must emphasise the commonality of fate that binds European citizens to migrants.
Greater equality and solidarity between migrants and European citizens is one of
the conditions to defend all workers’
conditions. Greater equality and solidarity between
migrants and European citizens is one of the conditions to defend all workers’ conditions.

All in the same boat

Addressing the entangled
roots of the mobility conflict is a challenging agenda, one which emerges from
the realisation that the tensions surrounding migration cannot be resolved
through migration policies only – and by policy makers on their own for that
matter.

It charts a path worth
following collectively as it points in the direction of a more open migration
policy, but also a more just society. These are necessary to bring an end to
the unbearable deaths of migrants at sea and end the vicious cycle of closure,
violence, and politicisation of migration.

Policies of closure have
failed to end illegalised migration and only fuelled the rise of the far-right
and the disintegration of Europe. If Europe is to stop sinking, it must end the
policies that lead to migrants’ mass drowning in the Mediterranean. The NGOs
being criminalised and prevented from disembarking migrants in Italy are not
only saving migrants, but rescuing Europe against itself. Whether we like it or
not, we are all in the same boat.