Why border enforcement might not be the right solution

Throughout human history, the movement and displacement of people from one country to another has always been present. It also remains controversial as it did hundreds of years ago. Many different push and pull factors are the reasons for which people migrate, and these can be classified as economic, social, political or environmental. From 2015 onwards, migration to Europe has been quite tumultuous due to a global rapid increase of labour and forced migration, and these movements are expected to last for decades due to various geopolitical dynamics. The arrival in 2015 of almost one million refugees and migrants to Europe prompted much research, as it gave life to social issues and humanitarian crises. One of these crises is exacerbated by the so-called externalisation of borders.

One of the founding strategies of European immigration policy for the past ten years has been the “externalisation of borders”, which is the transfer of border management to third countries. The first step of this strategy concerns the identification of key partner countries to cooperate with on migratory issues and the definition of the kind of cooperation to establish with each of them. The main objective of the policy is to support the countries of origin and transit to block migration flows through militarisation of the borders and promoting development projects that should eradicate the causes of migration. Clearly, these agreements between countries are far removed from a real development, as they focus only on improving border control and on facilitating readmission to both countries of origin and transit.

What is the risk in adopting these strategies?

Blocking at departure both economic migrants and asylum seekers (i.e. those fleeing from wars and persecution) makes it easy to reject even those who would be entitled to asylum. By making this type of agreements operational, people who could obtain refugee status or some form of protection would be sent back or blocked before leaving. Through the externalisation of borders and controls, any semblance of interest in human rights is abandoned, relieving Europe from the responsibility to give protection to people who are entitled to it. Not to mention the dangers of a form of criminalisation upon return, whereby those who emigrate are considered deserters and risk prison and other forms of persecution upon return.

The mechanism of militarisation of borders is also strongly linked to unacceptable violations of the principle of international law of non-refoulement of asylum seekers and refugees, as well as a violation of EU directives on international protection that allow everyone access to the territory to have their applications for protection or asylum examined. By allowing and accepting this life-threatening strategy, it is thus forgotten that the increase in arrivals from Africa to Europe is due to wars or internal conflicts fuelled by Western interests and to environmental crises that devastate those territories. Border externalisation thus contributes to crimes against humanity: the monetisation of the relationship with African countries seems to forget the human rights and the fate of thousands of people on the African continent.

History shows us that people move when the conditions of their lives are difficult, they look for a better place to live, but what is certain is that we cannot take everyone without proper organisation, and we cannot allow people to die at sea either.

What should we do, then? Europe could be the only answer and it should organise with at least two solutions: the first one would be a proper reception, integration and development plan. In fact, Europe is still lacking an efficient reception system for migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. The second would be strong and decisive action in the countries from which one migrates. Only by improving the living conditions of these countries will there be a decrease to migration. Therefore, by acting and improving the quality of life in African countries may we be able to decrease the natural flows of migrants in a fairer way that respects fundamental human rights.

Migration constitutes an expanding phenomenon that so far has not found effective answers in terms of management by institutions. It cannot be considered only in the case of tragic events, in the same way it should not be faced without investing in solidarity. To think of solving the phenomenon of migratory flows without a global approach is a failure. Instead, long-distance support combined with strategies for co-development could be a way to guarantee concrete action towards a real and participated development by the whole population.

Short Biography

Valeria Qualatrucci is a MA graduated student in Language, Society and Communication at the University of Bologna. She graduated from the University of Perugia in Foreign Languages, Cultures and Literatures in 2018, after spending a semester abroad at the University of Vienna, Austria. While her early studies allowed her to gain knowledge on the multicultural European environment, her current focus is on communication strategies and analysis of discourses. In particular, her MA thesis focused on discourses on Asylum Seekers, Refugees and Migrants and analysed the content of two Italian Newspapers