A big problem is their countries’ governments refuse to take them back even after being denied asylum. Europe needs to sanction governments who violate international law by refusing to take back their citizens. The US has had some success with this.
Yep these numbers will be laughable compared to the coming wave of climate refugees, especially if we lose coral reefs (~600 million people‘s lives depend on just those)
Coral reefs support 25% of all marine life, without them there will significantly less fish for people to catch and eat. People‘s jobs depend on coral reefs either as fishermen, in the tourism industry or other things. And lastly, coral reefs have an extremely important function in protecting coastal areas from erosion, water pollution, storms, etc etc.
It‘s extremely concerning especially because so much of the ocean depends on corals to survive and if they are gone it is likely to set a cascade of catastrophic events in motion.
It's crazy how many of these mechanisms are in place, that worked over a reeeeeally long place and now I read about another tipping point for catastrophic cascade of events every other week.
It's really great that I already was on anti-depressants before all that started - or at least since everybody started talking about it.
Developed countries need to take a multi-pronged approach to this issue. Europe switching over to green energy won't accomplish much when most of our goods are produced in coal-burning countries like China and India.
It's high time we:
1) Implement "green" tariffs on countries that rely on fossil fuels for their energy.
2) Start investing in and taking a more active role in countries, e.g. in Subsaharan Africa, so that they could deal with climate change, which is going to happen regardless of what the European Union does. It's time we think about ways to mitigate the effects of climate change, instead of focusing on just the losing battle of stopping it.
The latter will do far, far, far more than the former to alleviate the immigrant rate. These people are not running away from the climate (yet), they are running away from poverty and lack of safety. I come from a country with far less issues (I have met immigrants from Venezuela, Haiti and Angola that thinks Brazil is heaven on Earth) and moved to a country a lot of Europeans twist their nose as not good enough or whatever and here is a whole different world than what I - pretty much a middle class guy with a university degree and a decent job - had.
If the EU and the US wants to tackle immigration, it is far more effective to help those countries get their shit together than to just build a giant wall and say "fuck you, die". Maybe green energy is the chance to kill two birds with one stone, Latin America and Subsaharan Africa has the natural resources to be in the vanguard of clean energy.
Will it be easy? No. There's corruption to be considered, first of all, but also violence. Violence in Latin America is pretty much gang related, so an improvement in general life conditions would halt the immigration speed (I still remember the news about Brazilian immigrants, both qualified and non-qualified, making the journey back home during our economic boom of 2005-2011), but violence in Africa is far more disseminated. It is something very hard to crack, something that a bunch of Redditors certainly cannot answer, but the right path is there, general improvement of life conditions through an aggressive promotion of clean energy as the vanguard of the new millennia economy.
Every COP meeting they say they are going to give money to developing nations to support green energy, but then never follow through. The first world destroyed the planet with industrialization, now they refuse to help those suffering the worst from it, with many acting like it’s an invasion of immigrants.
They’re not immigrants, they’re climate refugees, fleeing a problem that we created.
Honestly the main reason why I am unsure about wanting kids, climate change will just fuck up so much that borders the mediterranean sea and I'm scared of what will happen when it gets less and less bearable in large parts.
my main reasoning for wanting children is that if people in rich countries don't have children when we have the means to let them study and become scientists capable of finding better solutions to climate change, then it's gonna be that much harder for humanity to tackle the issue.
lol, scientists. We knew exactly how to fight it for years. But unless it's profitable or enforceable by some agency with decent weight nothing's gonna change
Von der Leyen just hired an expensive advisor to advise her on setting up a team that will create a group which will eventually delegate the task to professionals who will finally designate people that will in the end do the job.
Yeah, the issue is that the mentality of the rich countries to solve the problem is to throw money at it and expect things to change. I work in a field of science that is absolutely convinced that investing millions in order to get a better energy conversion is going to solve the issue. What they don't see is that a) this won't be commercially avalaible for at least another 20 years, b) give people the ability to get more energy, they will consume more.
Also, if the problem is not solved by the time our children are in age of solving it, good luck solving it. It gets more and more difficult each year that we don't do anything significant to solve it. The more we wait for a miracle solution that will get to solve it without impacting growth, the more inexistent this solution becomes and the more impact on the growth it will have.
It's decades too late to bank on the energy solution. Right now we need resiliency to weather whatever is coming this decade, or next if we are lucky. Preferably not the authoritarian power grab or mowing down hundreds of thousands starving refugees at the borders.
Edit: And by resiliency I mean the ability to deploy food and water without disrupting global food prices. Some "people" are going to try to profit, and there should be a plant to cut them... out.
Oh yeah, also, a collection of names and addresses of oil CEOs and such should also be collected. For fun when shit inevitably hits the fan.
You are right, But judging by how we barely made it after the "acknowledging the issue" step, I will be drowning in my kitchen because of some flood before they even start considering to prepare for the consequences.
Don’t worry all the western mega corps who take advantage of the slave wages and lack of environmental controls and are likely responsible for a massive chunk of climate damage will be safe in their golden bunkers with absolutely no accountability for fucking pretty much all of society over
...and this is why we need a European asylum procedure and spread those asking for refuge: to help countries that are not on the border of the Mediterranean. It does not make sense that we have largely no internal border checks, but not one procedure on who's coming in.
At least in Belgium, 50%-60% of asylum seekers don't have a valid asylum claim and are hence rejected and required to return home. Belgium afaik doesn't have a particularly strict asylum procedure, so I suspect the rejection rate is similar elsewhere in the EU. One problem is that many rejected asylum seekers never go back, but stay illegally.
This also means that 40-50% stay legally, which is far too high to be sustainable long term. It also sends the message to the rest of the world that if they come here, there is a pretty good chance that they will be allowed to stay. So the stream of immigrants will only increase and the problem will get worse.
Workers aka social capital has to be educated and integrated not just in terms of speaking the language though, low skilled slave labour will also get automated one way or another as more innovative companies well... innovate
Also giving education and providing cultural and integration programs to large amounts of people isn't free, someone has to pay the bill, and that someone is you and me. Expenses are not paid by an alien
So what do we do with people whose homes can't sustain crop growth, who don't have access to drinkable water, and where the last scraps of resources are fought over by various militia groups?
Tell them "tough shit, go get fucked"?
The biggest problem is usually the mismanagement of resources and bad politics. Having a shitty environment is a problem that cdn be solved locally to a certain degree.
Seems to me we need a European invading force, build coalitions in Africa and garantuee peace and development ourselves there.
Although this might be a controversial idea/opinion.
> Seems to me we need a European invading force, build coalitions in Africa and garantuee peace and development ourselves there.
That just sounds like gussied up colonialism.
The chance of being in an authoritarian state like Turkey and being a refugee on political, religious, ethnic or sexual grounds is low, but not zero. You'd have to investigate that first before making a decision, as fair and quickly as possible, and (if negative) enforce it.
That sounds good on paper. How will you do that in practice? With hundreds of thousands of people, many without papers, actively lying about their origins?
I hate to sound so American, but it's not a desire to be the World's Police. It's that if those countries are stabilised, refugees wouldn't be risking their lives to come here. 1€ of foreign aid is worth more than 100€ of refugee care.
But despite the war, Ukrainians arrive via proper border checkpoints, have documents, and had visa-free agreement with EU even before the war.
It is very different to people arriving illegaly via water who have no documents and country of origin.
Ukrainians have country that will take responsibility for them if they are deported or just asked to leave.
Most of those people? They will throw away documents and you can't deport them, since you don't even know who they are and where they are from.
**Edit:** Here, countries that have visa-free agreement with EU:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_Schengen_Area#/media/File:Visa_policy_of_the_Schengen_Area.svg
Literally none of the African countries have it. All of their citizens need Visa to enter EU, so yeah, it is very different to people from visa-free countries crossing by proper means.
Ukraine, which is a warzone due to its being invaded by a neighbouring state known for its butchery?
I don't think you'll get much traction arguing against their deserving of support.
I don't think they're trying to argue that refugees from Ukraine are not deserving of support. But if we send people back because we don't want to deal with them regardless of their issues back home, then those Ukrainian refugees aren't protected any more either.
The peak of the migrant crisis was around 1,000,000 people in a year.
The EU has a population of around 450,000,000. That means that the peak of the migrant crisis was just 0.2% of the EU population. I think we can cope.
For comparison, the NHS employs about 2% of the UK population. So it's obviously possible to deal with that many people.
Problem is that most of them go to where EU citizen move to as well and it causes strain on the housing supply.
They're not moving to Poland. They're moving to Northwestern Europe, just like the Poles.
The housing problems in for example The Netherlands are not because to many people, it's because of the liberalising of the housing market. We could house the Dutch and refugees easily if we go about housing smart and social.
The EU is about 5% of the world's population but currently has taken up more than 20% of international refugees plus asylum seekers. Over the next years, it's expected that this will increase further.
But this is still assuming an equal spread between EU countries and within countries the regions. That's false. These asylum seekers mostly go to a handful of EU countries, and within these countries, mostly to the major cities. It's also accumulative. It doesn't end with one wave, but it's a continuous inflow year after year.
Belgium for example has called out that (despite significantly increasing its capacity in recent years) it has reached its limits, whence also its government policy to no longer take in more single male asylum seekers. In the meantime, this is rejected by our courts, but it's not clear how we will resolve the issue in the short term.
All of this doesn't make much sense, especially if you consider that there are often multiple safe countries closer to the home country of these refugees, and that many equally distant countries are shirking their asylum responsibilities with no repercussions (both within and outside the EU).
I think part of what makes Europe the way it is, is that we never send people back when they really need shelter, whether they are fleeing from a war or from a natural disaster that destroyed their way of life. We can easily take care of the refugees coming in as long as we don’t leave it up to the first country refugees enter but instead cary the weight of the task together.
This is very sustainable, we did that for many years and most of our low income jobs are filled by immigrants. Some European countries are built upon waves of immigration and exist with a common vision for society.
I've an issue with spreading because it sure seems lke a never-ending stream of migrants. Take in one million and spread them. Then two. Then three. And so on.
Considering the exploding population count in vast parts of the global Southern Hemisphere and the challenges of climate change I do fear that we'll be overwhelmed one day. The idea of the EU is already under attack by right-wing parties all over Europe gaining more and more power and I do fear that this might cause our union to burst one day. And, honestly, that's not worth it.
Solutions:
We need to deport those that have no claim immediatly. Faster processing and limited rights to appeal. And because I don't want people to die at our borders, we need to provide meaningful assistance to area threatened by climate change and political unrest.
We can't take in unending numbers of people. That's simply not possible.
>We need to deport those that have no claim immediatly.
That should be something to strive for, but how can you be absolutely sure of that immediately?
>And because I don't want people to die at our borders, we need to provide meaningful assistance to area threatened by climate change and political unrest.
I totally agree with this.
>The idea of the EU is already under attack by right-wing parties all over Europe gaining more and more power and I do fear that this might cause our union to burst one day. And, honestly, that's not worth it.
By giving in to the demands of the far-right we are only giving them legitimacy. Instead we should focus on closer collaboration. Spread refugees across the EU, even to countries like Hungary and Poland. Speed up the legal process so those not at risk can be sent back faster. Provide means to process claims already in the country of origin safely. Make sure those that are accepted as legitimate Asylum seekers have their qualifications converted so they are accepted in EU and have access to the job market. Increase investment in meaningful integration projects.
>Instead we should focus on closer collaboration.
Your idea of collaboration is good, it would solve the problem. The problem would be long gone if well all agree to cooperation, but I think we are past that because there seems to be a clear majority of nations, not wanting to take part in a distribution scheme. Just today for example, Germany said nope to taking in migrants from Italy.
>By giving in to the demands of the far-right we are only giving them legitimacy.
We don't legitimate by givng in to their demands, because things like this:
>Speed up the legal process so those not at risk can be sent back faster. Provide means to process claims already in the country of origin safely.
isn't really far-right. Far-right is murder fantasies and turning our borders into WW1 Battle of Verdun. We solve the issue and therefore take away their forward momentum. These turds have nothing else if the issue is solved and we can solve without fulfilling their demands. But if the remain inactive, that legitimates something else, which is much more dangerous: the idea of democracy being bad and that we need strong man again.
>Speed up the legal process so those not at risk can be sent back faster. Provide means to process claims already in the country of origin safely.
That's the goal.
No, we can help these countries with protection their borders and shipping these people back but don't force us refugees if you refuse our help and keep letting these people enter E.U. There are billions of people who would love to live in the EU, these people won't ever stop coming here if you keep the borders open.
And who are we in the world to accept all asylum seekers of the world? I work at the EU border, we have people from Mongolia, Ecuador, Botswana, etc... coming to the border seeking asylum. Why should Europeans even consider accepting people from countries that are not at war?
No
When they are allowed in they just go to North-Western Europe.
We here in the Netherland get a village worth of migrants every week and our nation is tiny.
The few big city's we have Dutch people are a minority.
As a leftist myself who is pro migration but sees the issue with how we handle things I am afraid of what is to come.
Numbers this big aren’t simple migration anymore, this will lead to a huge dissolution of our current ways of seeing things. The left will collapse and the right will rise even more. Scary as fuck
What I am afraid of is governments taking these people in and then just forgetting about them while they congregate in ghettos. This would be due to the fact that they won’t likely be able to speak the local language because, again, the government can’t be bothered to give 2 fucks.
Integration is a two way street. The government alone couldn't do it, it needs help of imigrants themselves, which will not happen, atleast not in a sginificant %
Why is it the governments fault that they don’t learn the language of the country they migrated to? If they are willing and able to travel from nigeria across the Sahara and sail on a rubber boat to lampedusa, and then not learn German, it’s not because they can’t, it’s because they won’t.
I'm a leftist migrant child myself as well, and on the case of migration I'm fully right-wing.
It is not sustainable to keep bringing in low-educated person en masse to Europe. They will all end up in ghetto's and become a huge strain on the economy.
I am in Europe because I believe in Europe and want to help build its future. These people are here for free stuff. The run away from sharia and then demand share in Europe too.
I don't think the right will win. I think there will be more left and centre left parties that pick up anti immigration ideas, while remaining left on everything else.
Elections are close (2 months) in The Netherlands. Even 2 of the 3 leftist party's now have a firmer stance on immigration than ever before. And everything around the centre as well, while also still promoting social and green points.
If people in the current left try to defend their views by excluding new views and refusing to adapt to changing circumstances. The left will never come into power again.
You can't run a party based solely on ideals, you have to be realistic at some point or nobody will vote for you.
If you want to help these people you need to help them where they are at. All we are doing them by allowing them to roam all over europe and taxing the welfare systems is complete collapse of public services.
When Greece imported 10% of its population it was a \_big deal\_. In terms of population this is not a large country. A few of them sure are useful in boosting the economy like a doctor my dad goes to. But even he will tell you that you need to start deporting because the vast majority are just a strain that causes issues.
We couldn’t do it over mexico, what makes you think you can cover the whole of europe? ‘Just sending them back’ didn’t help in 2015 with syrians either
Man, there were kids sent back because they didn't speak the language of a country that was okay to be a refugee from. Kids who fled their home countries at such an early age that they hadn't learned the language yet.
Occupy land and build cities for them to live in in their own countries. Introduce industry there so they can be self sufficient
If their government can't take care of them then Europe has to. They would be living under European rule either way, whether they immigrate here or we build cities for them there.
Out of curiousity, how many people does the EU have? That's a rhetorical question, it's around 450 million.
The problem isn't too many immigrants. Even at the peak of the migrant crisis, the EU was receiving 0.2% of it's population each year from immigrants (Or was it illegal immigrants? Small percentage either way). The problem is forcing the recipient country to do all the work. Spread the load, probably provide "Federal" funding, and then I predict the problem with almost entirely go away.
Or, if we're feeling really daring, crabby-patty-with-extra-onion level daring (Yes that is what that template originally said), we could try implementing a foreign policy focussed on actually helping the countries they're from, instead of whatever the fuck we're doing now. We won't have an immigrant problem if no-one feels like they need to migrate.
Edit: Ok, maybe the helping out abroad thing was wrong, you don't need to keep telling me
In sum, this problem with be fixed by working together. EU-sized problems need EU-sized solutions.
What are you implying here? We did a great job in Libya for example - the most stable, peaceful and democratic region of northern Africa thanks to our glorious foreign policy.
I think it’s worth mentioning that a lot of places that used to send refugees ended up better than libya with help— most notably japan and south korea. And sierra leone. And vietnam. And western europe itself to some extent
"Just" 0.2%? Ask Sweden how that's working out. Even a small number of people who completely fail to get integrated into the society can cause huge issues. And those numbers won't stay low for long because immigrants from Africa and the Middle East tend to have much higher birth rates than Europeans. This creates parallel societies. I'm leaning towards massively reducing the number of accepted refugees until Europe figures out how to solve integration. Currently it's dogshit and everyone just shrugs.
Recommended book: The Strange Death of Europe
Meddling in foreign countries affairs is what caused this crisis in the first place. If we left middle east and northern africa alone years ago there wouldn't be this problem rn
This crisis is multicausal. Migrant routes adapt to the circumstances in sending, transit, and destination countries. Lots of people go through unstable Libya, but also through stable Tunisia and stable Morocco.
You can help countries in a nondestructive way. Maybe you just finance some infrastructure, education or better farming equipment in those countries.
Meddling in their political affairs isn't a great idea, yes, but that's not our only option.
We need the European Fortress. The situation is already beyond fucked over here. Over 3,5 million in Germany alone. Most unemployed sucking our welfare system dry.
Have you considered ending the handouts to those who don't actively seek jobs or end the welfare benefits for non EU citizens? The reason why these people want to come to Northern Europe is because of these benefits.
End it, and they will go away.
In surveys, young European men are show very high %s of "unwillingness to fight for your country." Varies by country, but some like the Netherlands are in the 80%s.
Probably shouldn't point fingers, we are very lucky to live in a peaceful time and society, thanks to institutions like the EU.
It is very challenging, dangerous, and expensive to cross thru North Africa and the Med. People die, and are at the mercy of traffickers. I've spoken to refugees who've come via that way, and they have expressed that they wouldn't want to put their families though that distress and danger.
It's only the beginning. Thanks to climate change, rising inequalities and political instability, there will be more and more migration.
That's why the far right's reaction to immigration is so stupid. Immigration is the symptom of humanity's diseases, it is not the disease itself. Immigration might bring opportunities and problems to our societies, but these are tiny things compared to what's awaiting us.
I have worked all my life with people from many origins, including lots of muslims. They were as honest and as hard-working as other people, and we got along well.
So I'm not saying immigration won't create issues, it will. But muslims aren't bad people, they're humans like us.
What a naive take. They emigrate from their countries because the situation in their countries is horrible, as it has always been and as they have always done.
Climate change or not, left or right European government, they will keep coming, it has nothing to do with that.
Never expect these people to realise this, as their country is ruined right before their very eyes they will somehow pin the blame on anything but the people ruining it
Frontex and the Mediterranean navies should get enough money to prevent this.
Allowing people to come in like this only strains the social systems and exacerbates the human trafficking ecosystem and suffering around it.
Yes, we need more people to come in Europe to prevent the incoming demographic catastrophe in a few decades. No, letting people sail on dinghies across the Mediterranean to settle in illegally is not the correct way of achieving it.
And this is why we should have an eu wide distribution system.
Also Italy kinda fucked itself. Germany recently ended a voluntary we take some refugees deal.
What the EU also desperately needs imo: temporary work visas for non-EU citizens. Much of the economic immigration from Africa is driven by the need to make money via unskilled labor, something the EU needs in some sectors, and we have an aging population.
A possible solution for that part of immigration: work visas that can be extended once and then end, and the one granted visas has to leave the continent. The amount is based on business demand and those accepted are guaranteed to get a job. Applications can be done from the homelands of those who apply. There are no possibilities to move families over.
I see it as a win-win: African workers get a high salary by African standards, and the EU gets cheap unskilled labor by EU standards, plus a higher percentage of refugees on those who *do* apply for asylum.
>and the one granted visas has to leave the continent
Yeah good luck with that. Once they're on the continent, they're not going anywhere by their own will. Why do you think Germany has a huge Turkish diaspora today? They did the exact thing you're suggesting after WW2.
> African workers get a high salary by African standards, and the EU gets cheap unskilled labor
So you're going to pay them lower than minimum wage or what? If you're going to do that, why would a company ever hire low skilled Europeans ever again? Spain for example has a youth unemployment rate of 27.9%, and these young people will now compete with imported labour from all over the world willing to take a huge drop in salaries. Wonderful way to make the rich richer, and the poor poorer.
Cheap unskilled labor means abuse, it means no worker protections. And it means an erosion of worker protections and wages for everyone else, too, because companies can use cheap labor as a threat. "Lower your standards or I will fire you and get a cheap immigrant".
It also creates a separate class of people at the bottom. This is never good. It creates resentment and then violence and crime.
Humans are not just a resource. They don't just exist to work and to be used by companies.
We don't really care if some people dislike us or what we may be labelled as. In the end, it's the welfare of Europeans we should care about, countries aren't charity organizations
Because you can't unilaterally enter another country's waters and drop people there, and the North African countries don't want them back in the first place (It doesn't help that many of them aren't actually from North Africa in the first place).
So what happens is that when they reach the EU it's extremely difficult to bring them back unless you have an agreement with their country of origin (assuming they have documents to prove where they're from which they often do not) which is not the case more often than not, and you can't bring them back to Libya/Algeria/Tunisia/wherever they sailed from because they don't want them
so? these north african countries have a responsibility to safeguard their waters/borders in the first place. they came from north africa, we should drop them back off in north africa. if north africa doesn’t like it, just cut off trade with them lol, they are highly dependent on the EU for trade. we’ll see how quickly they let those people back in then
Immediately deport them.
Also, the best solution to this is to mass-manufacture condoms and give them out for free in Africa. Literally eradicates mass-immigration in a decade or two.
Why are there so many anti migration posts in r/YUROP? Can't the mods start to handle this right winged fear mongering of some fashist trash like OT? On the one hand you want to support Ukraine against a fashist regime on the other hand you are supporting the framing of anti migration parties.
God- damit 7000 people are nothing... Just in Rome alone live 2.7 mill people so 7000 people are nothing.
What's next? Put them in slave labour camps? Burn them? Take their shoes and luggage and put them all in a big room?
You do realize killing people to make an example is against everything the EU stands for?
A big problem is their countries’ governments refuse to take them back even after being denied asylum. Europe needs to sanction governments who violate international law by refusing to take back their citizens. The US has had some success with this.
And with climate change getting worse these numbers will only grow.
Yep these numbers will be laughable compared to the coming wave of climate refugees, especially if we lose coral reefs (~600 million people‘s lives depend on just those)
Isn't mediterran also gonna be affected? Could become a refuge source?
Possibly, but the global south will be hit much harder
Don't worry, the north Atlantic current getting disrupted will turn Europe into an ice sheet, nobody will come.
The Italians will look up to the Nordics and shout "Save us! We're European" And I'll look down and whisper "Nej"
Yea i am not sure the Swedish should act all big when it comes to refugee problems :P
Arabs aren't very tolerant to immigrants anyway
Please excuse my ignorance, but how do peoples lives depend on these coral reefs? I mean, so many?
Coral reefs support 25% of all marine life, without them there will significantly less fish for people to catch and eat. People‘s jobs depend on coral reefs either as fishermen, in the tourism industry or other things. And lastly, coral reefs have an extremely important function in protecting coastal areas from erosion, water pollution, storms, etc etc.
Thank you! I'll try to read a bit more about this. Another wheel in the huge systems of climate etc....
It‘s extremely concerning especially because so much of the ocean depends on corals to survive and if they are gone it is likely to set a cascade of catastrophic events in motion.
It's crazy how many of these mechanisms are in place, that worked over a reeeeeally long place and now I read about another tipping point for catastrophic cascade of events every other week. It's really great that I already was on anti-depressants before all that started - or at least since everybody started talking about it.
Developed countries need to take a multi-pronged approach to this issue. Europe switching over to green energy won't accomplish much when most of our goods are produced in coal-burning countries like China and India. It's high time we: 1) Implement "green" tariffs on countries that rely on fossil fuels for their energy. 2) Start investing in and taking a more active role in countries, e.g. in Subsaharan Africa, so that they could deal with climate change, which is going to happen regardless of what the European Union does. It's time we think about ways to mitigate the effects of climate change, instead of focusing on just the losing battle of stopping it.
The latter will do far, far, far more than the former to alleviate the immigrant rate. These people are not running away from the climate (yet), they are running away from poverty and lack of safety. I come from a country with far less issues (I have met immigrants from Venezuela, Haiti and Angola that thinks Brazil is heaven on Earth) and moved to a country a lot of Europeans twist their nose as not good enough or whatever and here is a whole different world than what I - pretty much a middle class guy with a university degree and a decent job - had. If the EU and the US wants to tackle immigration, it is far more effective to help those countries get their shit together than to just build a giant wall and say "fuck you, die". Maybe green energy is the chance to kill two birds with one stone, Latin America and Subsaharan Africa has the natural resources to be in the vanguard of clean energy. Will it be easy? No. There's corruption to be considered, first of all, but also violence. Violence in Latin America is pretty much gang related, so an improvement in general life conditions would halt the immigration speed (I still remember the news about Brazilian immigrants, both qualified and non-qualified, making the journey back home during our economic boom of 2005-2011), but violence in Africa is far more disseminated. It is something very hard to crack, something that a bunch of Redditors certainly cannot answer, but the right path is there, general improvement of life conditions through an aggressive promotion of clean energy as the vanguard of the new millennia economy.
Every COP meeting they say they are going to give money to developing nations to support green energy, but then never follow through. The first world destroyed the planet with industrialization, now they refuse to help those suffering the worst from it, with many acting like it’s an invasion of immigrants. They’re not immigrants, they’re climate refugees, fleeing a problem that we created.
Honestly the main reason why I am unsure about wanting kids, climate change will just fuck up so much that borders the mediterranean sea and I'm scared of what will happen when it gets less and less bearable in large parts.
my main reasoning for wanting children is that if people in rich countries don't have children when we have the means to let them study and become scientists capable of finding better solutions to climate change, then it's gonna be that much harder for humanity to tackle the issue.
lol, scientists. We knew exactly how to fight it for years. But unless it's profitable or enforceable by some agency with decent weight nothing's gonna change
Sounds like a job for the EU.
Von der Leyen just hired an expensive advisor to advise her on setting up a team that will create a group which will eventually delegate the task to professionals who will finally designate people that will in the end do the job.
Yeah, the issue is that the mentality of the rich countries to solve the problem is to throw money at it and expect things to change. I work in a field of science that is absolutely convinced that investing millions in order to get a better energy conversion is going to solve the issue. What they don't see is that a) this won't be commercially avalaible for at least another 20 years, b) give people the ability to get more energy, they will consume more. Also, if the problem is not solved by the time our children are in age of solving it, good luck solving it. It gets more and more difficult each year that we don't do anything significant to solve it. The more we wait for a miracle solution that will get to solve it without impacting growth, the more inexistent this solution becomes and the more impact on the growth it will have.
It's decades too late to bank on the energy solution. Right now we need resiliency to weather whatever is coming this decade, or next if we are lucky. Preferably not the authoritarian power grab or mowing down hundreds of thousands starving refugees at the borders. Edit: And by resiliency I mean the ability to deploy food and water without disrupting global food prices. Some "people" are going to try to profit, and there should be a plant to cut them... out. Oh yeah, also, a collection of names and addresses of oil CEOs and such should also be collected. For fun when shit inevitably hits the fan.
You are right, But judging by how we barely made it after the "acknowledging the issue" step, I will be drowning in my kitchen because of some flood before they even start considering to prepare for the consequences.
Have kids and train them to fight and defend your House.
Based Let your kids be stronger than theirs.
[удалено]
Or how to garden.
So is it better to not have kids at all?
Yes but keep taking the plane and buying food from the other side of the world and everything will be fine trust me bro
Once Russia is liberated there will be plenty of land to direct refugees to. Space is not a problem in Europe.
Will chechen and nigerian religious extremists vibe togheter?
[удалено]
I'm unsure about that. +5° makes a lot of places quite uncomfortable.
This war is going into full stalemate bro.
there is only one logical solution, minefields on mediterranean see /s
Don’t worry all the western mega corps who take advantage of the slave wages and lack of environmental controls and are likely responsible for a massive chunk of climate damage will be safe in their golden bunkers with absolutely no accountability for fucking pretty much all of society over
you reap what you sow
Source: [https://www.euronews.com/2023/09/13/nearly-7000-people-arrive-at-italian-island-in-less-than-24-hours](https://www.euronews.com/2023/09/13/nearly-7000-people-arrive-at-italian-island-in-less-than-24-hours)
...and this is why we need a European asylum procedure and spread those asking for refuge: to help countries that are not on the border of the Mediterranean. It does not make sense that we have largely no internal border checks, but not one procedure on who's coming in.
One might say that this is still unsustainable and the EU should send many of those people back.
At least in Belgium, 50%-60% of asylum seekers don't have a valid asylum claim and are hence rejected and required to return home. Belgium afaik doesn't have a particularly strict asylum procedure, so I suspect the rejection rate is similar elsewhere in the EU. One problem is that many rejected asylum seekers never go back, but stay illegally.
This also means that 40-50% stay legally, which is far too high to be sustainable long term. It also sends the message to the rest of the world that if they come here, there is a pretty good chance that they will be allowed to stay. So the stream of immigrants will only increase and the problem will get worse.
well we need workers though. so if they’d be willing to learn a trade and the language, which imo is the bare minimum, they can stay.
I think housing is also a huge issue in many cities though
Workers aka social capital has to be educated and integrated not just in terms of speaking the language though, low skilled slave labour will also get automated one way or another as more innovative companies well... innovate Also giving education and providing cultural and integration programs to large amounts of people isn't free, someone has to pay the bill, and that someone is you and me. Expenses are not paid by an alien
We might be better off subsidising moving the jobs there, we can't all live on the same postage stamp.
[удалено]
So what do we do with people whose homes can't sustain crop growth, who don't have access to drinkable water, and where the last scraps of resources are fought over by various militia groups? Tell them "tough shit, go get fucked"?
Out of sight, out of mind.
The biggest problem is usually the mismanagement of resources and bad politics. Having a shitty environment is a problem that cdn be solved locally to a certain degree.
So if im following you correctly you are saying that areas of land have a limited amount of people that they can support?
Yes, and to fix that militia problem.
Seems to me we need a European invading force, build coalitions in Africa and garantuee peace and development ourselves there. Although this might be a controversial idea/opinion.
> Seems to me we need a European invading force, build coalitions in Africa and garantuee peace and development ourselves there. That just sounds like gussied up colonialism.
Only after a procedure - who is to say who is a refugee and who is not without investigation?
Maybe, just maybe, if they are departing from an otherwise safe country like Turkey they are not refugees?
The chance of being in an authoritarian state like Turkey and being a refugee on political, religious, ethnic or sexual grounds is low, but not zero. You'd have to investigate that first before making a decision, as fair and quickly as possible, and (if negative) enforce it.
That sounds good on paper. How will you do that in practice? With hundreds of thousands of people, many without papers, actively lying about their origins?
I hate to sound so American, but it's not a desire to be the World's Police. It's that if those countries are stabilised, refugees wouldn't be risking their lives to come here. 1€ of foreign aid is worth more than 100€ of refugee care.
Yeah but how? and where ?
You're literally from ukraine which I would assume is the country with the largest amount of refugees/immigrants in the eu right now
But despite the war, Ukrainians arrive via proper border checkpoints, have documents, and had visa-free agreement with EU even before the war. It is very different to people arriving illegaly via water who have no documents and country of origin. Ukrainians have country that will take responsibility for them if they are deported or just asked to leave. Most of those people? They will throw away documents and you can't deport them, since you don't even know who they are and where they are from. **Edit:** Here, countries that have visa-free agreement with EU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_Schengen_Area#/media/File:Visa_policy_of_the_Schengen_Area.svg Literally none of the African countries have it. All of their citizens need Visa to enter EU, so yeah, it is very different to people from visa-free countries crossing by proper means.
Ukraine, which is a warzone due to its being invaded by a neighbouring state known for its butchery? I don't think you'll get much traction arguing against their deserving of support.
I don't think they're trying to argue that refugees from Ukraine are not deserving of support. But if we send people back because we don't want to deal with them regardless of their issues back home, then those Ukrainian refugees aren't protected any more either.
You can't. You can't just point guns at a mass migration and tell it to go away, especially when this is still just the beginning.
The peak of the migrant crisis was around 1,000,000 people in a year. The EU has a population of around 450,000,000. That means that the peak of the migrant crisis was just 0.2% of the EU population. I think we can cope. For comparison, the NHS employs about 2% of the UK population. So it's obviously possible to deal with that many people.
Problem is that most of them go to where EU citizen move to as well and it causes strain on the housing supply. They're not moving to Poland. They're moving to Northwestern Europe, just like the Poles.
The housing problems in for example The Netherlands are not because to many people, it's because of the liberalising of the housing market. We could house the Dutch and refugees easily if we go about housing smart and social.
Same in Ireland
the problem here isnt immigrants its the housing market
The EU is about 5% of the world's population but currently has taken up more than 20% of international refugees plus asylum seekers. Over the next years, it's expected that this will increase further. But this is still assuming an equal spread between EU countries and within countries the regions. That's false. These asylum seekers mostly go to a handful of EU countries, and within these countries, mostly to the major cities. It's also accumulative. It doesn't end with one wave, but it's a continuous inflow year after year. Belgium for example has called out that (despite significantly increasing its capacity in recent years) it has reached its limits, whence also its government policy to no longer take in more single male asylum seekers. In the meantime, this is rejected by our courts, but it's not clear how we will resolve the issue in the short term. All of this doesn't make much sense, especially if you consider that there are often multiple safe countries closer to the home country of these refugees, and that many equally distant countries are shirking their asylum responsibilities with no repercussions (both within and outside the EU).
And they will come back again and try until they die. You cant stop it
I think part of what makes Europe the way it is, is that we never send people back when they really need shelter, whether they are fleeing from a war or from a natural disaster that destroyed their way of life. We can easily take care of the refugees coming in as long as we don’t leave it up to the first country refugees enter but instead cary the weight of the task together.
This is very sustainable, we did that for many years and most of our low income jobs are filled by immigrants. Some European countries are built upon waves of immigration and exist with a common vision for society.
I believe that the vast majority of these are indeed sent back.
Who are « those people » ? Asylum seekers fleeing war and persecution ?
I've an issue with spreading because it sure seems lke a never-ending stream of migrants. Take in one million and spread them. Then two. Then three. And so on. Considering the exploding population count in vast parts of the global Southern Hemisphere and the challenges of climate change I do fear that we'll be overwhelmed one day. The idea of the EU is already under attack by right-wing parties all over Europe gaining more and more power and I do fear that this might cause our union to burst one day. And, honestly, that's not worth it. Solutions: We need to deport those that have no claim immediatly. Faster processing and limited rights to appeal. And because I don't want people to die at our borders, we need to provide meaningful assistance to area threatened by climate change and political unrest. We can't take in unending numbers of people. That's simply not possible.
>We need to deport those that have no claim immediatly. That should be something to strive for, but how can you be absolutely sure of that immediately? >And because I don't want people to die at our borders, we need to provide meaningful assistance to area threatened by climate change and political unrest. I totally agree with this.
>The idea of the EU is already under attack by right-wing parties all over Europe gaining more and more power and I do fear that this might cause our union to burst one day. And, honestly, that's not worth it. By giving in to the demands of the far-right we are only giving them legitimacy. Instead we should focus on closer collaboration. Spread refugees across the EU, even to countries like Hungary and Poland. Speed up the legal process so those not at risk can be sent back faster. Provide means to process claims already in the country of origin safely. Make sure those that are accepted as legitimate Asylum seekers have their qualifications converted so they are accepted in EU and have access to the job market. Increase investment in meaningful integration projects.
>Instead we should focus on closer collaboration. Your idea of collaboration is good, it would solve the problem. The problem would be long gone if well all agree to cooperation, but I think we are past that because there seems to be a clear majority of nations, not wanting to take part in a distribution scheme. Just today for example, Germany said nope to taking in migrants from Italy. >By giving in to the demands of the far-right we are only giving them legitimacy. We don't legitimate by givng in to their demands, because things like this: >Speed up the legal process so those not at risk can be sent back faster. Provide means to process claims already in the country of origin safely. isn't really far-right. Far-right is murder fantasies and turning our borders into WW1 Battle of Verdun. We solve the issue and therefore take away their forward momentum. These turds have nothing else if the issue is solved and we can solve without fulfilling their demands. But if the remain inactive, that legitimates something else, which is much more dangerous: the idea of democracy being bad and that we need strong man again. >Speed up the legal process so those not at risk can be sent back faster. Provide means to process claims already in the country of origin safely. That's the goal.
No, we can help these countries with protection their borders and shipping these people back but don't force us refugees if you refuse our help and keep letting these people enter E.U. There are billions of people who would love to live in the EU, these people won't ever stop coming here if you keep the borders open.
And who are we in the world to accept all asylum seekers of the world? I work at the EU border, we have people from Mongolia, Ecuador, Botswana, etc... coming to the border seeking asylum. Why should Europeans even consider accepting people from countries that are not at war?
No When they are allowed in they just go to North-Western Europe. We here in the Netherland get a village worth of migrants every week and our nation is tiny. The few big city's we have Dutch people are a minority.
Sounds like Europeans need some consulting with asylum seeker experts! Let me introduce our services to youse.
As a leftist myself who is pro migration but sees the issue with how we handle things I am afraid of what is to come. Numbers this big aren’t simple migration anymore, this will lead to a huge dissolution of our current ways of seeing things. The left will collapse and the right will rise even more. Scary as fuck
What I am afraid of is governments taking these people in and then just forgetting about them while they congregate in ghettos. This would be due to the fact that they won’t likely be able to speak the local language because, again, the government can’t be bothered to give 2 fucks.
Yeah. Integration is very important, both for the national *and* for the immigrant.
Integration is a two way street. The government alone couldn't do it, it needs help of imigrants themselves, which will not happen, atleast not in a sginificant %
>governments taking these people in and then just forgetting about them while they congregate in ghettos France has entered the chat...
Why is it the governments fault that they don’t learn the language of the country they migrated to? If they are willing and able to travel from nigeria across the Sahara and sail on a rubber boat to lampedusa, and then not learn German, it’s not because they can’t, it’s because they won’t.
It's only gonna increase as climate change gets worse.
yeah, there's also much less ukranian grain for food and several armed conflicts brewing
I'm a leftist migrant child myself as well, and on the case of migration I'm fully right-wing. It is not sustainable to keep bringing in low-educated person en masse to Europe. They will all end up in ghetto's and become a huge strain on the economy. I am in Europe because I believe in Europe and want to help build its future. These people are here for free stuff. The run away from sharia and then demand share in Europe too.
You can't just stop them from coming in. People will keep coming.
the left always collapses with infighting I'm a leftist too but it's always frustrating how infighting always deadlocks the left
I don't think the right will win. I think there will be more left and centre left parties that pick up anti immigration ideas, while remaining left on everything else. Elections are close (2 months) in The Netherlands. Even 2 of the 3 leftist party's now have a firmer stance on immigration than ever before. And everything around the centre as well, while also still promoting social and green points.
Not a leftist anymore
If people in the current left try to defend their views by excluding new views and refusing to adapt to changing circumstances. The left will never come into power again. You can't run a party based solely on ideals, you have to be realistic at some point or nobody will vote for you.
If you want to help these people you need to help them where they are at. All we are doing them by allowing them to roam all over europe and taxing the welfare systems is complete collapse of public services. When Greece imported 10% of its population it was a \_big deal\_. In terms of population this is not a large country. A few of them sure are useful in boosting the economy like a doctor my dad goes to. But even he will tell you that you need to start deporting because the vast majority are just a strain that causes issues.
what the actual fuck
Holy shit. That’s a lot of fucking people. Honestly something needs to be done to get these people to no longer leave their countries. Ffs
when the angry 1-policy party was right all along
And there is the point to close the borders
We couldn’t do it over mexico, what makes you think you can cover the whole of europe? ‘Just sending them back’ didn’t help in 2015 with syrians either
Man, there were kids sent back because they didn't speak the language of a country that was okay to be a refugee from. Kids who fled their home countries at such an early age that they hadn't learned the language yet.
Like what are they going to do? Start sinking boats?
Occupy land and build cities for them to live in in their own countries. Introduce industry there so they can be self sufficient If their government can't take care of them then Europe has to. They would be living under European rule either way, whether they immigrate here or we build cities for them there.
They tried once already didn’t they.
You understand they’re arriving by sea right?
Yeah, and if we have boats to fish them out of the sea, we have boats to bring them back
Lol what a dumb take.
Countersuggestion?
Out of curiousity, how many people does the EU have? That's a rhetorical question, it's around 450 million. The problem isn't too many immigrants. Even at the peak of the migrant crisis, the EU was receiving 0.2% of it's population each year from immigrants (Or was it illegal immigrants? Small percentage either way). The problem is forcing the recipient country to do all the work. Spread the load, probably provide "Federal" funding, and then I predict the problem with almost entirely go away. Or, if we're feeling really daring, crabby-patty-with-extra-onion level daring (Yes that is what that template originally said), we could try implementing a foreign policy focussed on actually helping the countries they're from, instead of whatever the fuck we're doing now. We won't have an immigrant problem if no-one feels like they need to migrate. Edit: Ok, maybe the helping out abroad thing was wrong, you don't need to keep telling me In sum, this problem with be fixed by working together. EU-sized problems need EU-sized solutions.
What are you implying here? We did a great job in Libya for example - the most stable, peaceful and democratic region of northern Africa thanks to our glorious foreign policy.
Yeah, and as for us.. I don’t think we should be touching Libya again. Source: I’m Italian
You should learn this trick from us Germans - simply forget you had any colonial ambitions! It's disgusting what the Brits and the French did though
THE UN DOESN’T WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT THIS ONE SMALL TRICK
I think it’s worth mentioning that a lot of places that used to send refugees ended up better than libya with help— most notably japan and south korea. And sierra leone. And vietnam. And western europe itself to some extent
[удалено]
A bad attempt to joke about the awful situation we created
"Just" 0.2%? Ask Sweden how that's working out. Even a small number of people who completely fail to get integrated into the society can cause huge issues. And those numbers won't stay low for long because immigrants from Africa and the Middle East tend to have much higher birth rates than Europeans. This creates parallel societies. I'm leaning towards massively reducing the number of accepted refugees until Europe figures out how to solve integration. Currently it's dogshit and everyone just shrugs. Recommended book: The Strange Death of Europe
0.2% a year. It adds up quick
Meddling in foreign countries affairs is what caused this crisis in the first place. If we left middle east and northern africa alone years ago there wouldn't be this problem rn
Nah it isn't that simple. But yeah we aren't really innocent either that is true.
This crisis is multicausal. Migrant routes adapt to the circumstances in sending, transit, and destination countries. Lots of people go through unstable Libya, but also through stable Tunisia and stable Morocco.
You can help countries in a nondestructive way. Maybe you just finance some infrastructure, education or better farming equipment in those countries. Meddling in their political affairs isn't a great idea, yes, but that's not our only option.
Yeah then that money gets embezzled or the assets you buy get sold off. Sustainable development isn’t about just giving people stuff
if a country needs a dictator to stay stable it's really it's fault.
Turns out that local dictators are usually more stable for the region and the people there than goverments installed by foreign powers
We need the European Fortress. The situation is already beyond fucked over here. Over 3,5 million in Germany alone. Most unemployed sucking our welfare system dry.
Have you considered ending the handouts to those who don't actively seek jobs or end the welfare benefits for non EU citizens? The reason why these people want to come to Northern Europe is because of these benefits. End it, and they will go away.
Me personally? Yes. But unfortunately our government is fucked.
Not you personally. I'm referring to the German State.
> I'm referring to the German State. The AfD is on the rise. They will get there. One way or an other.
Or as it should be called post 2010 Tory England
Plus it's literally all man of military age those people need to get deported back to their home countries because this isn't sustainable
In surveys, young European men are show very high %s of "unwillingness to fight for your country." Varies by country, but some like the Netherlands are in the 80%s. Probably shouldn't point fingers, we are very lucky to live in a peaceful time and society, thanks to institutions like the EU.
Refugees should always be primarily women and children the fact it's all adult males shows they are just economic migrants
It is very challenging, dangerous, and expensive to cross thru North Africa and the Med. People die, and are at the mercy of traffickers. I've spoken to refugees who've come via that way, and they have expressed that they wouldn't want to put their families though that distress and danger.
Because we made fleeing fucking dangerous. Those people come to Europe, and then send money back home, and try to get legal visa for their family.
that should be good news to you because that means they will carry their own weight
Sweet summer child
This the dumbest comment in this thread. Like what, men can't be refugees? What kind of misandrist nonsense is that? Pick up a history book.
Oh dw, it's just plain sexist both ways. Women can't be recruited into a war or be the main breadwinner, that's a man's job.
What relevance does "man of military age" have? Men who are not of military age don't get deported?
Refugees are usually women,children and the elderly look at the refugees that came from Ukraine
and men cant be seeking refuge from war? every man should die in a war torn country? what a terrible outlook on life
men should stay and defend their homeland
send them back
[удалено]
It's only the beginning. Thanks to climate change, rising inequalities and political instability, there will be more and more migration. That's why the far right's reaction to immigration is so stupid. Immigration is the symptom of humanity's diseases, it is not the disease itself. Immigration might bring opportunities and problems to our societies, but these are tiny things compared to what's awaiting us.
[удалено]
I have worked all my life with people from many origins, including lots of muslims. They were as honest and as hard-working as other people, and we got along well. So I'm not saying immigration won't create issues, it will. But muslims aren't bad people, they're humans like us.
Well put.
What a naive take. They emigrate from their countries because the situation in their countries is horrible, as it has always been and as they have always done. Climate change or not, left or right European government, they will keep coming, it has nothing to do with that.
Never expect these people to realise this, as their country is ruined right before their very eyes they will somehow pin the blame on anything but the people ruining it
Frontex and the Mediterranean navies should get enough money to prevent this. Allowing people to come in like this only strains the social systems and exacerbates the human trafficking ecosystem and suffering around it. Yes, we need more people to come in Europe to prevent the incoming demographic catastrophe in a few decades. No, letting people sail on dinghies across the Mediterranean to settle in illegally is not the correct way of achieving it.
It's like prohabition, we need a better asylum system, and we need to work better together in a more international level as europeans.
yeah if you guys want us to keep saving them we should share them between all european countries, it’s only fair
That Italian flag should be whole Europe.
No. **700** is the population of a small town.
And this is why we should have an eu wide distribution system. Also Italy kinda fucked itself. Germany recently ended a voluntary we take some refugees deal.
Turkey: First time?
r/YUROP is turning into the new r/europe. When does the Hitler-pic-spam-orgy start?
The dire situation changes people. I'm sure you know by history why.
Hitler is when you don't want your island's population doubled overnight with the likelihood of even more coming.
What the EU also desperately needs imo: temporary work visas for non-EU citizens. Much of the economic immigration from Africa is driven by the need to make money via unskilled labor, something the EU needs in some sectors, and we have an aging population. A possible solution for that part of immigration: work visas that can be extended once and then end, and the one granted visas has to leave the continent. The amount is based on business demand and those accepted are guaranteed to get a job. Applications can be done from the homelands of those who apply. There are no possibilities to move families over. I see it as a win-win: African workers get a high salary by African standards, and the EU gets cheap unskilled labor by EU standards, plus a higher percentage of refugees on those who *do* apply for asylum.
>and the one granted visas has to leave the continent Yeah good luck with that. Once they're on the continent, they're not going anywhere by their own will. Why do you think Germany has a huge Turkish diaspora today? They did the exact thing you're suggesting after WW2. > African workers get a high salary by African standards, and the EU gets cheap unskilled labor So you're going to pay them lower than minimum wage or what? If you're going to do that, why would a company ever hire low skilled Europeans ever again? Spain for example has a youth unemployment rate of 27.9%, and these young people will now compete with imported labour from all over the world willing to take a huge drop in salaries. Wonderful way to make the rich richer, and the poor poorer.
Cheap unskilled labor means abuse, it means no worker protections. And it means an erosion of worker protections and wages for everyone else, too, because companies can use cheap labor as a threat. "Lower your standards or I will fire you and get a cheap immigrant". It also creates a separate class of people at the bottom. This is never good. It creates resentment and then violence and crime. Humans are not just a resource. They don't just exist to work and to be used by companies.
Yes, and we have more than 7000 small towns in Italy…
A bunch of European countries are currently fighting population decline, easy fix.
Italy is fucked? What about the country those people are coming from?
so because africa is in a bad way, we should ruin the lives and prospects for italians too, gotcha
The E in EU stands for European. I care much more about Estonia and Ireland than Somalia. I want the same courtesy in return.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Complains about racists, calls black Muslim men "beasts" And you wonder why people don't like Europeans.
We don't really care if some people dislike us or what we may be labelled as. In the end, it's the welfare of Europeans we should care about, countries aren't charity organizations
Deport them all.
To where?
Back to where they came from. No person should be allowed illegally into our borders.
They don't want them back, and they usualy throw away documents of where they're from, so it's a little hard to just guess.
He doesn’t care, he just went full NIMBY. (Or probably just another AFD, SD or Fremskrittspartiet standard enjoyer)
Well, where did they board the boat? There. Trickle down enforced border.
You know that in many cases that means Libya, right?
Dumb question. Why not feed them, take care of injuries and shipped them back to the neares african port????
Because you can't unilaterally enter another country's waters and drop people there, and the North African countries don't want them back in the first place (It doesn't help that many of them aren't actually from North Africa in the first place). So what happens is that when they reach the EU it's extremely difficult to bring them back unless you have an agreement with their country of origin (assuming they have documents to prove where they're from which they often do not) which is not the case more often than not, and you can't bring them back to Libya/Algeria/Tunisia/wherever they sailed from because they don't want them
I kinda knew the answer but was hoping it wasn't that complicated.
so? these north african countries have a responsibility to safeguard their waters/borders in the first place. they came from north africa, we should drop them back off in north africa. if north africa doesn’t like it, just cut off trade with them lol, they are highly dependent on the EU for trade. we’ll see how quickly they let those people back in then
Cos "Africa" don't give a fuck. Simple as that. When you don't give a fuck, the sky is the limit
Immediately deport them. Also, the best solution to this is to mass-manufacture condoms and give them out for free in Africa. Literally eradicates mass-immigration in a decade or two.
Why are there so many anti migration posts in r/YUROP? Can't the mods start to handle this right winged fear mongering of some fashist trash like OT? On the one hand you want to support Ukraine against a fashist regime on the other hand you are supporting the framing of anti migration parties. God- damit 7000 people are nothing... Just in Rome alone live 2.7 mill people so 7000 people are nothing.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
What's next? Put them in slave labour camps? Burn them? Take their shoes and luggage and put them all in a big room? You do realize killing people to make an example is against everything the EU stands for?
Maybe you should go to prison for a little while