2015-03-14: Yle: Turvapaikkaleirejä Lähi-Itään ja Afrikkaan

[Onkko]

hylätytkin hakijat palkittaisiin rahakorvauksilla, joiden on tarkoitus kannustaa heidät palaamaan kotiin.

Romaneja tulvi tänne kun meni 3kk päätöksen tekoon että turvallinen alkuperämaa ja rahaa tuli... Eli voi suoraan sanoa ettei tule toimimaan.
Rahalla täältäkin koitettiin porukkaa kotiinsa houkutella mutta rakensivat talon kotimaahansa ja jäivät....

[törö]

Tämä on kaikista hulluin ja vaarallisin idea, mitä voi kuvitella. Persut eivät yksin pärjää tätä vastustaessaan. Ainakin Keskusta pitäisi saada mukaan. Silloin asiasta myös keskusteltaisiin, kun Se leviäisi useampaan puolueeseen.  Tää ei voi loputtomasti mennä niin, että maahanmuutto on vain persujen huolena.

Täähän on mitä loogisin idea.

Julkiselle sektorille on muodostunut torppareiden vapautumisen jälkeen turvapaikkoja, joissa torpparin ei tarvii olla tekemisissä oikean työn tekemisen ja muun sellaisen kanssa. Niissä sitten pyritään pelastamaan koko maailman hädänalaiset torpparit Eurooppaan kuhnimaan.

Parhaiten tähän päästään siten, että viedään vastaanottokeskukset sinne missä torpparitkin ovat ja lennättämällä niitä tänne valtion piikkiin.

Kustannukset voidaan kattaa vaikka verottamalla vielä jäljellä olevat yritykset hengiltä.

Nehän on kuitenkin vihollisia, koska niissä on vallalla tämmöinen äärioikeistolainen kulttuuri, missä laskeskellaan tarkkaan tuloja ja menoja. Jos sen antaa olla rauhassa niin se voi vielä levitä julkiselle sektorille ja sitten on sekin pilalla.

Mulla on muuten uusi isänmaa hakusessa. Onko kellään ehdotuksia?

[HDRisto]

Ensin ns. saamelaisille hallinta- ja itsehallinto & vapaat aselait Torniosta ylöspäin ja sitten EU & YK info että vapaata tilaa kuulemma on, asukastiheys kun on "harvaa", ja tervetuloa koettakaa pärjätä älkääkä valittako.
(Isän äidin siskon takia sukuhaara Torniossa, aivan vitun nuivaa ja myönteisesti synkkää sakkia.  )

[Chew Bacca]

Ainoa ratkaisu on tehdä Euroopasta turvattomampi turvapaikanhakijoille. Sellainenhan se on jo kantaväestöllekin.

[Jaska Pankkaaja]

Leirit Afrikassa ja Lähi-Idässä olisivat juuri sitä mitä tarvittaisiin. Tietenkin niiden toiminta olisi päinvastaista kuin mädättäjä-Puolue haluaa eli sinne vietäisiin alueelta tulleita haitakkeita ja turhakkeita, sieltä niitä sitten kotiuteltaisiin yhteistyössä paikallisten viranomaisten kanssa. Eurooppaankin tarvittaisiin leirejä joista sitten täysin lentokonein niitä sosiaalituristeja palauteltaisiin.

Ja sitten tarvittaisiin leirejä nykyään mamutusbizneksissä oleville ja näiden palveluksessa oleville VAstuullisille poliitikoille. Näiden leirien ravinnon ja fasiliteettien taso voisi olla em. leirejä selvästi veronmaksajille edullisempaa ja niiden ylläpito perustuakin rehelliseen työtekoon joka on lähes aina aivan tuntematonta ihmisoikeuksista huolta kantavien parissa.

[Professori]

On myös syytä huomata, että mikäli taakanjaossa hyvitetään aiemmin eri maihin otetuista turvapaikanhakijoista, tähän mennessä oleskelulupien jakopolitiikassaan melko nihkeän Suomen osuus kasvaisi edelle laskemistani oleellisesti. Esimerkiksi Ruotsi otti viime vuonna pelkästään sinne automaattisesti turvapaikan saavia syyrialaisia lähes 100 000 ihmistä.

Ei nyt sentään liioitella Ruotsinkaan tilannetta. Ruotsiin tuli viime vuonna n. 81 000 turvapaikanhakijaa, joista n. 30 000 tuli Syyriasta.

Kiitos huomiosta. Korjasin virheen.

[Professori]

Ainoa ratkaisu on tehdä Euroopasta turvattomampi turvapaikanhakijoille. Sellainenhan se on jo kantaväestöllekin.

No ainakin se on selvästi turvattomampi ulkomaalaisille nuorille kuin kantasuomalaisille. Tätä tuskin kuitenkaan tarkoitit...

[Roope]

Tunisia on valmis neuvotteluihin EU:n turvapaikanhakukeskuksien avaamisesta.

Tunisia open to discuss EU migration centre plan

Tunisia is open to discuss a European Union request to step up migrant reception centres in the country as part of a wider EU initiative to cope with an influx of asylum seekers.

Tunisian Foreign Minister Taieb Baccouche told reporters in Brussels on Tuesday the EU plan "will have to be discussed, to see how it could be put in place, and to what degree it might be applicable".

More than 276 000 migrants entered the EU illegally last year, and Tunisia's conflict-torn neighbour Libya is the main starting point for people headed to southern Europe.

The EU is looking to pre-screen migrants in the countries they leave or transit because its border agencies can't cope. The EU's top migration official will travel soon to Tunisia to discuss the project.

World Affairs 17.3.2015

[Ari-Lee]

Irti €U:sta kuin olisi jo toissapäivänä. Ne kiihdyttävät eurooppalaisen Euroopan tuhoa.

[Tykkimies Pönni]

akez:

Tällöin jonkun päässä voi syntyä tavallisen eurooppalaisen kannalta hullu ajatus hankkia lisää väkeä sieltä, missä väestömäärät kasvavat, eli Afrikasta ja Lähi-Idästä. Käytännössä tämä tarkoittaa Euroopan islamisoimista ja neekeröintiä. Tavallinen EU-kansalainen ei tähän koskaan suostuisi. Hän ei lähtisi tuhoamaan asuinympäristöään joidenkin EU:n valtapyrkimysten takia. EU-eliitin kohdalla tilanne on tietysti täysin toinen. He eivät ole ajamassa kansallisia etuja, eikä Euroopan etuja tavallisen Euroopan kansalaisen kannalta. He ovat kosmopoliitteja, eikä kosmopoliitilla ole koti-, eikä isänmaata.

Viilaan hyvää ideaasi hieman eteenpäin. "EU-eliitillä" ei minun silmään näyttäisi olevan edes "kotimaanosaa". Ei näytä sille että he haluaisivat rakentaa EU:sta mahtavampaa tuomalla tänne massoittain lisää väkeä, vaan näyttää sille että he haluavat heinäsirkkalaumojen avulla tuhota EU:n, ja varsinkin valkoisen miehen ja kansallisvaltiot siinä mukana. Ne yrittää saada aikaan mahdollisimman suuren hallintoalueen, minkä taloudellinen tila on nykyistä huonompi, syystä että köyhää kansaa on helpompi hallita. Taloudella ei ole eliitille merkitystä, koska heidän käsissään on edistynein sotateknologia jokatapauksessa. Nykyisellään tähän alueeseen liitettäisiin pohjois-amerikka ja eurooppa sekä lisää alueita mistäpäin tahansa. Suurin projektin tiellä oleva este on tietenkin valkoinen mies. Koti,uskonto ja isänmaa paskaksi sekä massiiviset mamulaumat päälle, niin johan alkaa valkoisen miehen vastarinta taipumaan. Näin ne marxistit näyttäisi ajattelevan, mutta väärässä ovat jälleen kerran.

[Roope]

The Guardianissa kohtuullisen hyvä yhteenveto EU:n suunnitelmista:

Brussels plans migration centres outside EU to process asylum applications

European commission wants to use offices and embassies outside EU to process applications for asylum and refugee status before migrants reach Europe

The European commission is planning to establish immigrant-processing centres outside the EU for the first time, in a radical policy departure aimed at stemming the movement of hundreds of thousands of people across the Mediterranean.

Struggling to draft coherent immigration strategies at a time when the issue has become one of the most toxic in the politics of many EU countries, the European commission announced it was fast-tracking a policy paper on migration.

Dimitris Avramopoulos, the commissioner in charge of home affairs including migration policy, said Brussels wanted to use EU offices and embassies in third "countries of origin" to process applications for asylum and refugee status before the migrants reach Europe. The aim would be to reduce the numbers of migrants illegally landing on EU shores.

The new policy is strongly supported by Italy, which is on the front line of what has become one of the world's most perilous migration routes, the Mediterranean. Of the 270,000 migrants who arrived illegally in the EU last year – 1.5 times more than the previous year – 220,000 came via the Maghreb and across the Mediterranean, according to Frontex, the EU's external borders agency.

More than 3,500 drowned attempting the crossing. Another 1,000 arrived in Sicily this week after being rescued, including 10 who drowned.

While EU governments view the influx as a crisis, migration professionals argue that the figures are a lot less dramatic than commonly portrayed by politicians.

"We do not consider the caseload of arrivals to the EU as a huge or overwhelming number because the EU can, if managed properly, handle this," said Anna Eva Radicetti, a policy expert at the International Organisation for Migration's European office. "We should not view this as a crisis in terms of numbers of migrants arriving to Europe, and Europe should not respond with a crisis mode."

The United Nations High Commission for Refugees points out that 84% of forcibly displaced people globally are in developing countries.

But the idea of introducing migrant-processing offices in key transit countries such as Niger, Egypt, Turkey or Lebanon is gaining traction in the EU. France is also a strong supporter of such a scheme, while the German interior minister, Thomas de Maizière, is said to be pushing for EU facilities in countries such as Egypt. Small EU member states disproportionately affected by the flow of migrants, such as Malta, are keen on the idea.

The commission has previously resisted pressure on the issue from national governments in the EU. Avramopoulos's statement represents a U-turn. While there is growing support in certain EU capitals, there is also very strong opposition in other countries to a proposal that would entail shouldering the refugee burden more equitably across Europe. Migration experts say that, of the 28 members of the EU, 18 have small immigrant communities and few are keen to see that change.

"This is an enormous step. It means a common European asylum system is getting closer," said Elizabeth Collett, director for Europe of the Migration Policy Institute. "But there will be lots of unintended consequences. It throws up lots of big questions, legally, technically and practically."

A fundamental problem is that there is no European policy on immigration, with national governments jealously guarding their powers over admission and asylum procedures. Anti-immigrant and anti-EU right-wing parties are making electoral gains from Sweden to France, and there is little stomach among mainstream ruling parties to "Europeanise" immigration policies.

Matteo Salvini, the leader of Italy's anti-immigrant Northern League, blamed the Italian government for the arrival of 1,000 in Sicily this week, accusing it of corruption and being in cahoots with the traffickers dispatching migrants from Libya.

"Another 10 deaths and 900 illegal immigrants ready to land," Salvini said. "Pockets are full and hands are dirty with blood in Rome and Brussels. Stop the departures, stop the deaths, stop the invasion." He said the Italian authorities were making things worse by encouraging human traffickers.

The same argument is made by the British government, which refuses to take part in Mediterranean search-and-rescue missions on the grounds that the operations are a "pull factor", encouraging migrants to risk their lives at sea in the hope that they will be saved if in trouble.

The commission policy paper, expected in May, will argue that the third-country processing centres are but one of a gamut of proposals aimed at reducing illegal immigration and creating legal channels for migrants.

Britain flatly rejects that argument, with the government declaring that it is against creating more "legal paths". The government views this as "inconceivable in the current climate" and the home secretary, Theresa May, has told EU interior ministers that "the idea of making it easier for legal routes to stop illegal routes is completely the wrong way".

Denmark, the country with the tightest immigration regime in the EU, would also oppose the commission plans, and last week Viktor Orbán, the nationalist prime minister of Hungary, said multiculturalism in the EU was a "delusion".

"The Hungarian man is, by nature, politically incorrect. That is, he has not lost his common sense," Orban said. "He does not want to see throngs of people pouring into his country from other cultures who are incapable of adapting and are a threat to public safety, to his job and to his livelihood."

Since the beginning of the year at least 20,000 migrants have left Kosovo in the Balkans and gone to Germany, mainly crossing from Serbia into Hungary and into the EU. Orban said the Kosovo influx risked turning Hungary into "a big refugee camp". Last month, 1,400 Kosovars were arriving in Germany daily.

Under EU rules, refugee and asylum applications need to be registered in the country where a migrant enters the EU, but Berlin has been refusing to send the Kosovars back to Hungary because the reception conditions are said to be so wretched.

While migration professionals say that EU processing centres abroad could only be used as a complementary instrument in dealing with refugee flows and not as an alternative to existing procedures within the EU, the proposal raises big issues about capacity and expertise. EU offices abroad do not have the staff to cope with large numbers of applicants, nor does the commission have a large cadre of immigration officers and asylum specialists.

It is not clear whether a refugee would still be able to lodge an application in Europe if he or she has already had a request rejected in a third country.

For the system to work and to decide where successful applicants are going, there would need to be a new, agreed system of burden-sharing or a "distribution key" for taking in migrants in the 28 member states. Experts being consulted on the commission proposals say there is discreet discussion of a distribution key, but there is high scepticism about whether agreement will be reached.

The EU would also need to strike bilateral agreements with the governments of countries hosting the new application centres. These countries could become magnets for regional migrant flows with the refugees reluctant to return to their native countries after having an EU application rejected.

"You would need Faustian bargains with third countries. It is unlikely, say, that Egypt would play," said Collett. "There would need to be an enormous amount in it for them."

The attempted shakeup of migration policy was triggered in the first place by the Lampedusa tragedy 18 months ago, when 366 people drowned off the coast of Italy's southernmost island.

The response in Brussels was to declare that EU frontier search-and-rescue patrols would be introduced, spanning the Mediterranean from Lebanon to Gibraltar. In fact, what happened was that the Italians ditched their relatively successful Mare Nostrum patrols, arguing they were being left to foot the bill for the rest of Europe. This was replaced by an EU operation one-third the size called Triton, mandated to patrol no further than 30 miles from Italy's coast.

Artikkelin mukaan komissio käy kaikessa hiljaisuudessa maahanmuuttoasiantuntijoiden kanssa keskusteluja turvapaikanhakijoiden "jakoavaimesta". Suomen osuus viime vuonna EU-alueelle tulleista turvapaikanhakijoista (626 000) olisi ollut yksinkertaisimmalla konsulttien esittämällä "jakoavaimella" vähintään 27 500 vuodessa. Afrikkaan perustettavat turvapaikanhakukeskukset moninkertaistaisivat tulijoiden määrän.

[Roope]

Madeline Garlick: The Potential and Pitfalls of Extraterritorial Processing of Asylum Claims

Much attention has focused recently on "external processing" of asylum claims, and the possibility of the European Union (EU) establishing processing centers in North Africa or elsewhere to manage asylum seekers and migrants traveling to Europe. While the European Union and Member States have signaled their interest in the topic of extraterritorial processing, no clear proposals have yet emerged.

[...]

The conundrum can be articulated simply: how can the European Union ensure the protection of larger numbers of refugees, whilst maintaining the credibility of external border control? In recent months key actors, including the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), have underlined the importance of facilitated legal paths to asylum to identify those in need of protection before they reach Europe's borders. But can these be designed to ensure their legality, practicality, and political feasibility?

The Benefits and Drawbacks of Extraterritorial Processing

External processing encompasses a wide variety of practices whereby a protection claim is examined to some extent before arrival in an asylum country. While existing EU policy foresees some avenues for those seeking protection, including humanitarian visas or resettlement, recent conversations have focused on another idea: extraterritorial processing, or the assessment of claims for asylum in non-EU countries under arrangements operated or supported by the European Union collectively.

[...]

The concept of EU-sponsored extraterritorial processing, however, still requires the development of a model that is not only acceptable to 28 Member States, but respects several key principles. This includes the crucial obligation of nonrefoulement, not clearly addressed in previous proposals. Supporting this principle, the European Court of Human Rights in Hirsi v Italy (2012) found that whenever a European country exercises control or jurisdiction over a person potentially in need of protection—even in international waters, border zones, or another state's territory—those people cannot be sent back to persecution, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, nor expelled to countries that would send them onwards to those risks.

In short, on legal grounds, any scheme may need to be without prejudice to the right to seek asylum in EU borders.

[...]

Many practical questions have not yet been satisfactorily addressed, deriving from the fact that the Common European Asylum System essentially remains a collection of 28 national asylum systems. Who would take the asylum decision in an extraterritorial processing system? If it were an EU or "joint" body, Member States would have to agree on the applicable law and be willing to recognize the legal authority of decisions made. Would an EU corps of asylum officers be needed?

Post-adjudication, the system would have to ensure access to protection in the European Union for recognized refugees and set up a "distribution key" or other arrangement to designate which EU country would provide it. For Member States, this could mean a potentially unquantifiable open-ended commitment. But without it, no third country is likely to agree to host any processing center. Other outcomes—involving support for removal from the host country—will also be essential for those not in need of protection, to avoid the risk of an unwanted, growing population of failed asylum seekers.

Potential host-country demands may extend beyond a commitment to resettle, including concerns that a processing-center arrangement might draw more asylum seekers (including many not in need of protection) to their territory. Strong incentives, and a demonstration that third countries' interests are served by the arrangement, would be critical.

The Way Forward?

The extraterritorial processing concept immediately raises the spectacle of EU-managed asylum camps in inhospitable locations. But an EU proposal might develop in other directions: for example, use of EU delegations to issue humanitarian visas or a process for granting entry permits to potential asylum seekers. The idea of significantly expanding resettlement to Europe, through an established, EU-funded, and UN-coordinated process, also has untapped potential.

Migration Policy Institute

[Roope]

Africa's envoy to the European Union warned Wednesday that EU plans to process migrants in the countries they leave or transit on their way to Europe are "a dangerous approach."

The EU is trying to persuade Niger, Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Turkey to pre-screen migrants and has launched a pilot project to send immigration officers abroad to help assess asylum demands.

African Union Ambassador Ajay Kumar Bramdeo told EU lawmakers that by outsourcing migrant management, the EU would be "shirking its own responsibility in receiving refugees and migrants, also in footing the bill for managing and controlling migration."

[...]

"It's a little bizarre that we ask other countries outside Europe to show solidarity toward Europe in sharing the burden when within Europe we still haven't got there," he said.

ABC News: African Envoy Expresses Concern Over EU Migrant Center Plans 1.4.2015

Afrikan unionin edustajat sanovat torjuvansa ajatuksen EU:n ulkopuolisista turvapaikanhakukeskuksista EU:n vastuun ja kustannusten välttelemisenä. Tahtoo sanoa, että haluavat lypsää EU:lta paljon enemmän rahaa, vaikka EU-maathan tuosta lystistä joutuisivat joka tapauksessa eniten maksamaan ilman lahjuksiakin. Esimerkiksi jo pelkästään Libyassa arvioidaan olevan tällä hetkellä miljoona Eurooppaan haluavaa turvapaikanhakijaa.

Olisihan se hienoa, jos Euroopan pelastaa omien päättäjien hulluudelta afrikkalaisten päättäjien ahneus.