Based
on the readings for class, the migration of Syrian refugees to Europe poses a
security threat on several levels. First, the refugees making the daring trek
through war-torn Syria and attempting to travel by boat to countries like Greece
and Italy risk their lives by travelling unsafe routes and with a lack of
supplies for the journey. Secondly, these countries that the refugees are
travelling to have the burden of accommodating more refugees in states that are
not prepared for them. For instance, many states along the Mediterranean
continue to have financial and economic problems from the 2008 recession.
Expanding the refugee program places great stress on an already weakened
welfare system in such states. When the European Union members become divided
over the refugee crisis it harms the system as a whole when the states like Germany
promise to approve asylum to over 800,000 migrants but other states like
Hungary or Croatia refuse to accept any more migrants. However, there are more
implications to the crisis than on the state level. The European Union must
establish a clear stance towards the refugee issue because with no uniform
stance, it is only hurting both the refugees and Europeans.
The
European Union must have a uniform answer towards the refugee crisis because no
action would continue to hurt the thousands seeking asylum. By the EU not
having a declared stance on the crisis or a program to allow for asylum acceptance,
migrants would take drastic measures to be smuggled into Europe. NBC published
troubling accounts from migrants attempting to get into Europe through trucks
on the way to Vienna filled with 24 teenagers locked in the back with welded-shut
windows and no air or when a train was stopped in Paris heading to London because
asylum seekers were on top of the train trying to get into England[1].
These startling stories threaten all the Europeans’ sense of security as well
as the refugees’ physical security if they’re risking their lives in these extreme
cases. Europe and the world cannot sit back and wait for more astonishing accounts
of refugees washing up on shores dead from wrecked ships or thousands of
migrants trapped in no man’s land Europe because no country will accept them.
The
refugee crisis is a double edged sword because in part I would say that Europe
does not have an obligation to these refugees if their own economies and people
are suffering. On the other hand, by just denying these refugees food, water, and
shelter, like in Hungary, it only causes the refugees to take more drastic
measures or turn to violent means. It is also unfair to countries that want to
help and can support programs helping the migrants such as Germany. In
addition, an important fact many critics must understand is that states
neighboring Syria (Turkey, Lebanon, Iraq, and Egypt) have taken in about 95% of
the Syrian refugees. In theory, Europe would not be taking in that many
refugees, especially with many EU member-states having low birth rates,
refugees will balance the growth rates.
An
interesting idea I came across while doing some outside reading was the idea of
EU members and industries building temporary refugee cities. These cities could establish
housing, supply centers, activity areas, and school/ career centers for the
migrants. These cities can be built in safe areas approved by the EU, it can
have shared responsibilities from all EU members, construction of these cities
build EU-Middle Eastern relations, and they give construction firms in Europe
the opportunity to compete for building contracts. Although arguments will
follow of where to build or fund these cities, they can ease tensions across
Europe as well as help migrants and protect the pro-national ideals found in
some states. These temporary cities can prevent the death and dismay of more Syrian refugees attempting to enter the EU as well as ease the resentment of many Europeans.
I agree with your argument that the refugee crisis causes a security issue because it divides Europe. This causes strain for the nations within the EU if not all countries follow the same protocol. I do, however, disagree with the beginning of your argument where you say that it is a security issue because it is dangerous for the refugees. How is that a security threat for Europe? Does the well-being of these people and the dangerous means of travel affect European countries?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI believe when the migrant people take risks to enter the EU it threatens Europeans' security because it impacts their ontological security. For instance, if we were traveling on a train and heard banging on the roof or the train randomly stopped because there were people on the top of the train car, it would stir emotions and concern many people. People would also begin to ask questions as to how the refugees got on the top of the train or how long they have been there. Some people in the United States or Europe would normally feel safe and secure in their daily lives, but when they hear of stories of desperate refugees trying to get into a country, it may stir emotions. It may make people think if desperate refugees can get into countries how would trained terrorists covertly get into countries?
DeleteI think the desperation of the refugees attempting risky modes of travel does affect European countries because it will probably lead to European governments to increase the security around travel centers. These daring methods of transportation may increase resentment against refugee acceptance as well because citizens would not enjoy increased stops for migrant inspections or increased inspections before travel. Look at American security, people who have to fly get outraged at the slow security checks from TSA causing them to miss their flights. Overall, the daring decisions taken by migrants can impact Europeans’ ontological security and push the governments to increase security funding to prevent dangerous attempts.