Worth a read, really a very good article! Highly recommend!
That said, TL;DR:
Rather than addressing the structural drivers of migration, EU migration agreements are exacerbating the socioeconomic fragilities that compel people to move.
It’s colonialism.
Such is the policy when you don’t treat migrants as people, or at least as second-grade people. You don’t do shit, because why invest in helping them even if that would’ve naturally reduced migration, when you can just ask other countries to do whatever you need to keep them out.
The alternative of rights-based development and labour market reform promoted in the article would be just as neocolonial as the current system.
Perfect Sunday read. Well written too!
The EU has a bearbones wealth transfer development mechanism within the EU. Why would it pay for a far more expensive system to develop parts of the world outside the EU?
Even a NAFTA like system would be very unpopular as it would shift a lot of industry and jobs outside the EU.
The point is mainly that the EU should not give money to those countries to crack down on migrants, but rather promote human rights and rule of law to help those countries with the same money.
The EU currently imports a lot from countries like China, due to lower wages. Having strategic partners closer by would be pretty helpful. We are also not talking about some crazy populations here. Northern Africa has the biggest desert in the world as a barrier to the south. Then there is the Med. Russia is relativly rich anyway, so is Turkey. No reason for economic migrants and they are able to work as sponges. The Golf states are also migrant magnets fairly close to the EU. Economic migration can be helped by promoting human rights and helping those countries out.
The other part is war. The 2015 refugee crisis happened due to the war in Syria. The more stable the region, the less refugees. That means the EU has a natural intrest in keeping countries like Israe, Saudi Arabia, Iran and the UAE from blowing up the region all the time.
Three things.
-
The economic transfers to MENA countries to detain migrants isn’t that large. In comparison, “promote human rights and rule of law” is an equivalent to nation building, which will require a much higher price tag.
-
Do MENA countries even want it and will it turn out how we expect it? Lybia has devolved into two civil wars after the removal of Gaddafi. Egypt reversed its Arab Spring moment as the Muslim Brotherhood was writing a constitution to make Egypt a one party state. These countries may not want government level intervention.
-
Part of the reason for EU expansion was to make less developed eastern countries more developed via trade. That process is still ongoing. I doubt these countries are going to want EU development funds to leave the union or for trade to shift to countries with far lower labor costs.
-
