Suzanne Lynch: Migrant crisis threatens to divide Europe

‘The ideal of European solidarity and shared responsibility has been replaced by bickering, infighting and confusion’

The appalling humanitarian crisis unfolding across Europe has left the European Union struggling to respond to the biggest mass movement of refugees it has ever experienced. It is also threatening to bitterly divide the continent.

This week, top-selling German tabloid Bild labelled Britain and a host of east European countries as "the slackers of Europe", the Austrian and French ambassadors were summoned by Budapest for their countries' criticism of Hungary, while the Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán inflamed tensions with Berlin by describing the migrant crisis as a "German problem".

The ideal of European solidarity and shared responsibility has been replaced by bickering, infighting and confusion.

Where does the blame lie? In some respects at least, Orbán is correct. The lack of a functioning EU asylum policy has been tragically brought to light this week as confusion reigns over the rules regarding border controls and free movement. Legally speaking, a common EU asylum policy, which is designed to ensure common standards for asylum, exists since the late 1990s. It is up to member states to adhere to these laws, and the European Commission has launched a number of infringement proceedings against member states for non-compliance.

READ MORE

But in terms of control over immigration policy, member states still exercise significant sovereign rights. One of the reasons for the present crisis is that immigration control and asylum policy were never fully brought into the arena of EU collective decision-making.

Single travel area

In this respect the migrant crisis has exposed the deep structural flaws of the EU. Just like the euro zone crisis, the migration issue shows what happens when a collective project like a single travel area is not matched by a unified policy.

Just as a single currency needs a centralised fiscal and monetary system to function properly, a single travel area needs a common immigration policy. But in both cases member states have been reluctant to surrender control of either fiscal autonomy or immigration policy. As ever, the EU is locked in an unwinnable battle between the consequences and responsibilities that come with being part of a shared political community and the desire of member states to guard their national sovereignty.

In particular, events this week have raised questions both about Schengen – the EU’s common travel area – and the Dublin Regulation, a cornerstone of EU asylum law which states refugees must seek asylum in the EU country where they first arrive. As countries introduced police checks on their borders this week, the commission denied Schengen was in disarray, noting that under the Schengen legislation member states have the right to introduce temporary border controls in certain circumstances.

Similarly, the Dublin agreement appears to be at breaking point after Germany effectively waived the convention this week by saying it would accept undocumented Syrian refugees arriving to Germany via Hungary. Whatever about Germany's laudable humanitarian motives, the decision sparked confusion over the status of the Dublin rule, with Hungary allowing undocumented migrants to travel to Germany on Monday, only to reverse that decision the following day.

Mass migration wave

But for all the failures of EU immigration policy, the blame for the current crisis should not rest solely at Brussels’ door. Even before this year’s mass migration wave, the

Juncker Commission

had announced plans to tackle migration. In May the commission unveiled the bloc’s first mandatory relocation proposal to redistribute refugees arriving in Europe. By EU standards it was a radical move – quotas have always been resisted by member states.

But member states failed to back the plan at council level, agreeing to only resettle 32,000 Syrian and Eritrean refugees over two years, less than the already paltry sum of 40,000 originally envisaged.

It is the individual countries of the EU, not the commission, that have failed to step up to their responsibilities and embrace a mandatory quota system.

As the commission prepares to launch a new proposal targeting an extra 120,000 asylum seekers, the real question is whether EU member states will back the plan. Although the events of the last week may have convinced previously sceptical countries to back mandatory relocation, many east European countries are deeply opposed to it. The prospect of an east-west ideological divide on the migrant issue could represent one of the biggest threats to European unity since the accession of former Soviet countries to the bloc.

It is deeply troubling the countries that have benefited most from EU free movement rules as their citizens have migrated westwards to seek a better life are the same countries opposing immigration. How to maintain European unity over the next few weeks will be a key challenge for Europe as it tries to find a solution to the crisis.

Suzanne Lynch is European Correspondent

Twitter: @suzannelynch1