While we’re here, we may discuss how the entire Orban government pushed the problem away from itself with the fence and the border closure. Although the fence idea seemed a bit daft, it turned out quite well: if anything, it confirmed that, with a strong stance and with some not intended inhumanity, the migrants can certainly be rerouted in a different direction. And according to Orban, the construction of a whole fence system maybe even put an end to the issue, or at least shape it into a reasonable state. The construction of this southern European fence would be the logical final piece to the ˝fence-puzzle˝ – physical and natural - that stretches around Australia across to the American-Mexican border, Ceuta and Melilla in Northern-Africa and finally finishing off with the fence around Israel. With this the developed North may finally separate itself from the ever younger and ever hungrier South.
Looking back towards Europe we see the following: the Schengen Agreement falling apart in front of our eyes as each state reintroduces border controls within the EU. Simultaneously, Serbia switched from transporting the migrants towards Croatia instead of Hungary; Croatia, after pronouncing for a week how much more humane they were going to be than those rascal Hungarians, within 24 hours fall apart and coupled with the most idiotic communication yet, they began sending buses to Hungary and Slovenia. The only thing missing now for the reestablishment of the Little Entente is for Slovakia to follow suit and join the Serbian, Romanian, and Croatian government officials, which of course Slovakia won’t do for the simple reason that it would undermine their own interests. The recently productive (pun intended) Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs with Captain Szijjarto at the helm believes that the best defence is a good offence: give a good kick to anyone who is criticizing us.
All the while, Brussels is talking about quotas, and the very same Germany who had recently let out resounding cries for the safety of the migrants is now preaching about a ˝joint solution˝. As I write these lines, a crowd of uncontrolled people are entering the EU, this time, not through Röszke but across the Croatian-Hungarian border and Croatian-Slovenian border. We are no closer to the solution, despite that the monitoring and registration of this crowd – whether at Röszke, Serbia or Turkish hotspots – is what will determine whether there’s any use in discussing long-term solutions.
Migration and us, Europeans
Does Europe need so many immigrants? Can we cope with so many refugees? Which question should we discuss at all? This is such a suggestion, that to find a solution we need to first register the refugee, and then complete a thorough investigation.
I completely agree with the stance of the Hungarian Helsinki Committee and the HCLU (Hungarian Civil Liberties Union): refugee status has pretty much disappeared in this new system, and the rights of asylum-seeker has certainly been damaged. It is up to them to research this and to act to resolve this. During more peaceful times, I also wrote about such problems, for example about the catch 22 in family reunification, or the problems concerning our integration system.
But right now we are in a state of crisis. Even if the Hungarian state wanted to validate the laws of asylum-seekers, or if the migrants wanted them to be validated, it still couldn’t. And all this simply because they are unwilling to be registered, to request refugee status, and to be temporarily placed in a Hungarian refugee camp – but most are unwilling to do this even in Austria, Germany, Denmark and Sweden. Is this normal? I doubt it. I realize that Serbia isn’t safe, nor is Hungary according to new legislation – but what about the other previously mentioned states, where quite often the Wilkommenskultur is overdone? Europe has every legal right to control the crowds entering it: its important, if not for any other reason, then because it will allow for proper examination of refugee status claims.
If the EU can begin to control the torrent of migrants – either at its borders or in Turkey – then we can begin discussing how we can perform our humanitarian requirements towards the refugees of the Middle-East; or how we can solve the supply-side of European immigration, if there truly is such a large demand as we see. We do require immigration of some organized form; the southern-Spanish aluminium foil industry swallowed up thousands of cheap labour immigrants from Africa and the Middle-East.
However, before we do anything else, the refugees and the migrants must understand the rules. It is not the obligation of European nations to adjust to the demands of those arriving, but rather it is those arriving who must fulfil this societal obligation. This principle must be severely enforced. With regards to the refugees, they must be aware that their stay is based on a determined time length, and that after the situation in the Middle-East is resolved, it would be preferred and supported – materialistically as well – that they return home; with regards to the migrants, it must be made clear what we demand: that they follow our laws, and at least respect the society that admits them. And if they like what they see here – why wouldn’t they, if this is their chosen destination? – then they should be hasty in becoming a part of it.
What this requires most is a prompt, joint action by Europe, in which the first step is for the European leaders to recognize: even if the negative media becomes directed at them, they need to step-up against the extraordinary crisis that is currently underway at the southern border of the Schengen zone.