Is the problem of migration the European Union cracks?

How to curb the influx of refugees? Discuss Vladislav Belov, Gabor Croat, Semyon Mirsky

• The head of the German Ministry of Internal Affairs and the leader of the Christian Social Union (CSS) Zeehofer is ready to resign due to disagreements with Chancellor Merkel in migration policy.
• Despite the measures agreed with the EU leaders at the Summit in Brussels , the head of the CSU does not see the alternative to the expulsion of part of the migrants from Germany.
• The European Union intends to build refugee camps in northern Africa and create closed camps for migrants in the EU, whose asylum applications are under consideration.
• Today, the European Union is far from the best form and gropes the ways of its strengthening.
• The resolution of the summit on June 28–29 in Brussels on a migration problem is a very important step on a very long journey.

Presenter - Vladimir Kara-Murza - Senior .

Video version of the program

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: The head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Germany and the leader of the Christian Social Union Horst Zeehofer announced his readiness to resign from both posts because of the disagreements with the Chancellor of the Angel Merkel in migration policy. The decision of Zeehofer threatens the collapse of the coalition of the CSS and the CDU, which was created three months ago to put an end to the political crisis in Germany.

We will discuss the current situation with our guest - political scientist Vladislav Belov, director of the German Center for the Institute of Europe.

Vladislav Borisovich, does the current conflict face the collapse of the ruling coalition into Germany?

Vladislav Belov: I think this is one of the possible options. Zeehofer bit his bit and did not want to hear his partners in the party, and primarily Mr. Zedera, Prime Minister of the Earth Bavaria, to whom he gave way, remaining the head of the party as part of the future coalition, Mr. Dobrindt, the head of the KhSS land in the Bundestag. They tried to convince him to agree to Merkel’s compromise, saying that she was at the EU level and in Brussels on the 28th and, as part of the Culuar meeting of the 24th, was still able to move the stone from a dead point-she received a lot of countries to use new mechanisms at a bilateral level.

By the way, today the "General Plan" on integration, which consists of 64 theses, has become a public. The piquancy was that the “Minister of the Interior” was indicated on the first page, but “Chairman of the Party of the Christian Social Union”. And the "green" somehow said: "How does Mr. Zeehofer conduct a pre -election campaign?" Let me remind you that on October 14, there will be land elections in Bavaria. The CSS would like to pull the electorate to his side, which went to the Alternative for Germany, to other parties, to again become the ruler of the minds and hearts of Bavartsev. Critics ask: "How does Zeehofer use the funds of the ministry?" The ministry said to this: "He wrote this plan himself, and in the ministry we are still finalizing it."

The compromise will still be reached

In my opinion, the compromise will still be achieved. It seems to me that Zeehofer showed himself a strong politician, a strong Bavarian guy who defends the interests of not only Bavaria, but also of all other federal lands. A profitable position, very close to an alternative to Germany. Namely, the "alternative" was primarily criticized by Zeehofer, realizing that he began to play on her field. The position of social democrats and others is clear. There is a coalition agreement signed on February 7 and entered into force on March 14, when the government was formed. The HDS went to meet her "sister" on Blok. A quantitative parameter has been introduced: a maximum of 220 thousand refugees during the year. Restrictions on the reunification of families have been introduced - no more than 12 thousand families can unite during the year, that is, a maximum of a thousand within one month. A piquant paragraph - paragraph 18 of the German Law on Migration. He says that persons who have submitted a statement to the provision of asylum in another country do not have the right to cross the German border, but must remain in the state where they first submitted an application. It is clear that these are Mediterranean countries. And it is clear to Merkel’s desire to explain to his colleagues that so far it is necessary to find an intermediate decision that, according to the Dublin regulations , in accordance with the court decision of 2011, it is allowed to take citizens, refugees, for humanitarian reasons for some time in another state, which should finally make this decision. So, on the one hand, the danger of leaving the CSS from the coalition is, on the other hand, the most likely, in my opinion, is the situation: the coalition is preserved. At the same time, both Merkel and Zeehofer lose their image, and the coalition from this crisis comes stronger.

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: The leaders of the European Union countries tried to resolve contradictions regarding the migration policy at the summit in Brussels, which took place on June 29. And although the final agreement is replete with vague formulations, politicians call it a good signal.

Details - in the report of the correspondent of the Reuters agency Artem Pennov.

Correspondent: After intense and emotional negotiations that lasted 12 hours, the leaders of the European Union were still able to come to an agreement on the problem of migrants. This was announced at five in the morning of Friday in the morning of the German Chancellor Angela Merkel to reporters.

Angel Merkel , German Chancellor : I consider it a good sign that, following the results of an intensive discussion, we came to a general agreement on the most acute problem of the European Union - migration. However, Austria, as the EU President, has a lot of work.

Correspondent: As the diplomats note, the final document is full of vague formulations. In particular, politicians agreed to create migration centers that will determine whom to send back and whom to provide asylum. At the same time, the leaders made it clear that the construction of these centers, as well as the reception and resettlement of migrants within the EU countries, will be carried out "on a voluntary basis." In addition, the document mentions the strengthening of the external borders of the European Union, an increase in financing of Turkey and North Africa countries, and take measures to restrict the movement of migrants within the EU. The agreement also considers the possibility of creating regional centers of refugee landing outside the block - against which, in particular, Morocco actively opens. On the eve of the Prime Minister of Italy-the Euro-Suseeppe Comte-said that he would not sign the final document of the summit if the EU does not meet his requirements on migrants. Tens of thousands of refugees from North Africa arrive through the Mediterranean country to Europe, and Rome believes that the responsibility of the bloc for their maintenance and resettlement should be higher. But the new agreement arranged it.

Giuseppe Conte , Prime Minister of Italy: following the results of this summit, we received more responsible and united Europe. Italy is no longer alone.

A correspondent: a meeting in Brussels showed how the migration crisis began in 2015 continues to press the block strongly, despite the fact that the number of people who seek salvation from conflicts and economic difficulties in the Middle East and Africa has decreased significantly.

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: Semyon Mirsky, observer of Radio Liberty in Paris, joined our conversation.

Semyon, we received a message that the French president withdrew the French ambassador to Hungary Eric Furtun. The dismissal of the diplomat was a consequence of the publication of his confidential correspondence with Emmanuel Macron. Are there any details of this event?

Semyon Mirsky

Semen Mirsky: Details are the fundamental incompatibility of the views of the President of France Macron and the Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orban not only on the migration policy of the European Union, but also on the principles of the democratic structure of society. The review of the ambassador is just a detail and a means of pressure that the President of France has on the Hungarian leadership. I think the forces are unequal here. Macron, a very decisive person, who knows how to be very tough in strict situations, wanted to show the boundaries of the authorities that the leader of a small country that began to flirt with the most reactionary, the most right, populist, and sometimes fascist forces, without having time to free himself from the communist yoke. This is a signal, which is aimed at clearly indicating what the European Union in the person of the leader of France is not ready to reconcile.

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: We have a Hungarian journalist Gabor Horvat in touch.

Gabor, how do you feel about the conflict between the French ambassador to Hungary and the president of France?

Gabor Croat: Firstly, according to our information, the Furnier ambassador finished his work in Budapest, his three-year term expired. His dismissal is not a disciplinary act by the President of France. Secondly, such diplomatic notes as his report, which he sent to Paris, are usually not published. Thirdly, according to our information, the Furnier ambassador has always adhered to rather right-wing views. An interesting detail: his ambassador was appointed by the previous, socialist president of France. Apparently, at that time in France this position was not very important. And the fact that the ambassador in his report supports the ideas of Viktor Orban is surprising for those Hungarians that follow the events in France and in the world. But for those who knew Furnier’s ambassador even before his appointment to Budapest, according to our information, this was not a big surprise. The new Ambassador of France in Budapest is appointed, and he seems to adhere to moderate glances. This means that French President Macron is trying to put pressure on the Hungarian government, but he has few instruments for this.

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: At the end of June, new measures were agreed to limit the influx of refugees. What is fundamentally new here - camps for migrants in northern Africa, verification of documents so as not to accept them back if they establish that they are in the database?

Vladislav Belov: Probably, these are camps outside the European Union and in the European Union itself. I think the idea partially comes from Merkel. In these camps, there is a check of the grounds on which these persons appeared there. After all, we are talking not only about north of Africa, but also about the Balkan countries, about safe countries, migrants from which are immediately sent from Germany. And Merkel supports Zeehofer. If refugees from the so-called safe countries are in Germany, then they must be sent without any discussion. All these proposals were before, but these were good wishes.

It is necessary to solve the problem of migration of refugees where it arises

Germany spent the idea that North Africa must help, that it is necessary to solve the problem of migration of refugees where it arises. In my opinion, the problem is that it is not clear what to do with the remaining route along which refugees cross the border of the European Union. This is the prerogative of Frontex . But of all the routes-from Balkan, from South Mediterranean-the central one remained. The Mediterranean route rests on Italy. Conte says: "Enough, we will not accept." Scandalous situations arise when the Italians send ships, suppose to Spain, when it comes to not accepting the vessels that give the SOS signal. They must deal with this themselves. The decision that Merkel brought with her to Berlin, primarily for Horst Zeehofer, is the fundamental readiness of 16 countries to recognize the principle of bilateral obligations. True, Mr. Babish from the Czech Republic disavowed this statement, to which Berlin told him: "We regret it if we misunderstood you, or you take our words back." The Baltic position has changed a bit. But no one especially gets to the Baltic states. It is clear that the principle of joint responsibility does not work. It is clear that it is necessary to introduce changes to the Dublin regulations. But the merit of Merkel: She pushed her idea that on a bilateral basis you can agree on the return of refugees. Indirectly Merkel confirmed: "It will cost extra money, but we will find money for this." According to the statistics that I saw in the German press, the European Union in 2018 significantly reduced the costs of refugee support and significantly increased the costs of Frontex, that is, to protect the lines. From today in Bavaria, primarily on the Bavarian-Austrian border, new border forces began to operate, they say that they had been preparing for this for a long time. Therefore, apparently, the number of refugees will constantly decrease. These will still be significant numbers, thousands of people.

Vladislav Belov

Now the processes of internal movement of refugees arise, which should be under tight control, and Zeehofer is ready to ensure this tight control. At the same time, Zeehofer has no direct support among his supporters. He really hoped to support the new federal chancellor Sebastian Kurtz. But Kurtz said that the own path of each state is unacceptable, nevertheless, there should be some kind of pan-European decision. And Mrs. Merkel took a couple of steps on this path. At least there is a search for solutions. And most countries agreed that, despite national legislation, it is not good for each state to make strict decisions, even without discussion with others. And there is an understanding of Angels Merkel - probably this is also her merit. And in this regard, Italy is grateful to her when she says: Spain, Greece, Italy and Bulgaria are those countries that are objectively the buffer through which a wave of illegal immigrants is coming to us. By the way, perhaps a new one is a change in European legislation as a whole, which should be reoriented to a greater extent to the possibility of illegal immigrants to enter the Law on Labor Migration. That is, if you want to enter, then be ready to work, and not sit on the neck of a state through which you got into the territory of the European Union. Still remains the legislation on political asylum. This is also one of the merits of Angel Merkel. She says: "We must see that behind a wave of hundreds of thousands of social migrants there are citizens who need political asylum."

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: How painful is the memory of the attacks that occurred in the French capital? In particular, the defeat of the Charlie Hebdo editorial office, a bloody terrorist attack in the south of France, when the truck was used as an instrument of death .

Semen Mirsky: This is the argument of the right -wing forces of the political landscape of France, claiming that among migrants, especially from the countries of the Arab East, there are people who are obviously agents of ISIS (prohibited in Russia) who choose this path in order to get political asylum in France and strengthen the ranks of Islamic underground, Islamic fundamentalists. France has accumulated a very large and very painful experience in combating Islamic terrorism. All this, of course, is not forgotten and not forgiven. But people who establish a clear causal relationship between the problem of migrants and the problem of Islamic terrorism most often put forward their arguments contrary to the existing facts. Migration is not nutritious soil for Islamic fundamentalism. Most migrants who have settled in France are law -abiding citizens who integrate into the society of this country.

Not only the fate of millions of migrants, but also the fate of Europe itself is put on the card

In Brussels on June 28-29, the European Union summit was held on a migration problem, but the Brussels resolution does not mean its solution. European participants in the summit agreed to create refugee centers on their territory, but a much more important problem and a more promising project is to create such centers in North Africa. This problem has not yet been resolved, although the European Union has already allocated multimillion -dollar amounts in order to try to agree with the leaders of countries such as Libya, Algeria, Morocco. Therefore, what happened in Brussels is a very important step on a very long journey. And moving along this path, Europe should solve not only the problem of migrants and legal, semi -legal and illegal immigration, but the problem of coexistence in its own framework. Solving the problem of migration and migrants, the European Union, which today is far from its best form, gropes the ways of its strengthening. Yesterday, the body of Simona Weil , who, at the age of 16, being Jewish origin, was deported to the Auschwitz concentration camp, miraculously survived to the Pantheon . After the war, she took up politics, held the post of Minister of Health of France and was the chairman of the European Parliament. France President Macron said yesterday over Simona Weil’s coffin: “Europe owes more to this woman than anyone else. She said: either Europe will exist, or the countries that are part of the European Union will be scattered in its national corner, with its national egoism.” And what is fraught with, Simon Vale knew better than all others. Therefore, when we are discussing what is happening today in the European Union, we are not talking about any petty diplomatic conflict, but about the fate of the European Union as a whole. Europe faces incredibly difficult problems, fraught with very great dangers. Но я думаю, что у людей, которые наблюдают за тем, что происходит сегодня в Евросоюзе, какую политику ведут самые заметные, самые интересные его фигуры (и разумеется, здесь на первом плане находятся канцлер Германии Ангела Меркель и президент Франции Эммануэль Макрон), есть причины для осторожного оптимизма. Ибо на карту поставлена не только судьба миллионов мигрантов, но и судьба самой Европы.

Владимир Кара-Мурза-старший: Значительную ли часть населения Венгрии представляет посол, когда выступает в защиту Конституции Венгрии, которая предусматривает запрет на заселение страны иностранными народностями?

Габор Хорват

Габор Хорват: Виктор Орбан в 2014 году и весной этого года получил большинство в венгерском парламенте, но в 2014 году он набрал всего около 45% голосов, в этом году – около 49%. То есть даже в этом году большинство венгерских граждан, которые принимали участие в выборах, голосовали против Виктора Орбана. Конечно, он изменил законы, которые регулируют венгерские выборы, и благодаря им получил третий раз конституционное большинство. Еще до выборов был объявлен референдум, на котором он просил поддержку своей антимиграционной политики. В референдуме принимало участие меньше половины населения. И более 80% из них поддерживали идею Орбана. Оппозиция призывала своих сторонников не принимать участия. Так что очень сложно решить, какую поддержку имеет политика Виктора Орбана в Венгрии. Естественно, людей, которые не ездят за границу, не смотрят иностранные передачи, не владеют иностранным языком, появление иностранцев на их улице, в их деревнях всегда пугает. Орбан на этом играет. Тот факт, что уровень миграция сейчас снизилась до уровня 2015 года, что почти никто не появляется на венгерских границах, – это не влияет на пропаганду правительства, на кампанию, которую они ведут против иностранцев, против мигрантов уже в течение нескольких лет. Большая часть населения, конечно, боится чужих людей. Но у него нет никакого другого общественного вопроса или большой темы, которую он мог бы использовать в политической жизни. Это единственный козырь в его руках, но он его весьма умело разыгрывает.

Владимир Кара-Мурза-старший: Скоро ли Европа сможет изжить ксенофобию?

Владислав Белов: К сожалению, ксенофобия имманентна правому радикализму. Вышеград, Прибалтика – это именно те страны, которые проповедуют идеологию национализма. Польша жестко огрызается на критику из Брюсселя относительно конституционных прав – свободы слова, свободы судей. Наверное, это может занять, к сожалению, не одно десятилетие. Играть на праворадикальном поле, на поле популизма очень легко, когда указывают на кого-то, кто в чем-то виноват: он виноват в том, что он другого цвета, не оттуда приехал. На примере Германии виден водораздел между западными и восточными федеральными землями. Зеехофер отнимает у правых радикалов идею, что "только мы можем защитить страну от пришедших извне и нелегальных, которые отнимают у нас и деньги, и рабочие места". И это можно менять только последовательно, только с дискуссиями, вскрывая нарывы.

Конечно, Ангелу Меркель справедливо критикуют за фразу, которую она произнесла 31 августа 2015 года: "Мы справимся с этим". Но она забыла, как говорил ее политический "отец" Гельмут Коль про объединение Германии: "Мы справимся с этим, но это нам будет стоить существенных затрат, это будет усилие каждого. Мы должны затянуть пояса". И Ангела Меркель должна была сказать: "Это будет стоить существенных усилий и мигрантам, и всем нам". Она должна была подчеркнуть, что, конечно, будет необходимость в усилиях в первую очередь со стороны мигрантов. Кстати, в середине сентября Томас де Мезьер отдал устное указание пограничникам, как тогдашний глава Министерства внутренних дел, пропускать беженцев через границу, потому что это был котел, готовый взорваться. И они пропустили сотни тысяч. Но потом постепенно поставили крышку на место, пар стал уже работать на государство. Приняты соответствующие законы. К мигрантам-нелегалам относятся все жестче. Мигранты это чувствуют. Конечно, до решения этой проблемы далеко, но Германия пытается. Кстати, коалиционный договор, который подписывал и господин Зеехофер, написан праворадикальным языком. Многие критикуют положение про мигрантов, написанное рукой "Альтернативы для Германии", а не ХДС/ХСС и социал-демократов. Политики правящей коалиции пытаются показать: "Мы тоже понимаем все проблемы, что на первом плане стоит наш немецкий гражданин, а потом уже мигранты". 27 пункт "генерального плана" вызывает разногласия между Меркель и Зеехофером. Госпожа Меркель говорит: "Мы обязательно их вышлем, но не сразу". А Зеехофер отвечает: "Нет, я имею право высылать сразу на границе". И дискуссия, которая сейчас идет в доме Конрада Аденауэра, посвящена тому же самому вопросу – правый радикализм, популизм, ксенофобия: "Что мы должны сделать, чтобы не давать повода гражданам разжигать в себе отрицательное чувство к другим, к "не нашим", к тем, кто не мы?".

Владимир Кара-Мурза-старший: Заметно ли усиление в Европе таких партий, как "Альтернатива для Германии" или "Народный фронт" Ле Пен во Франции?

Владислав Белов: Абсолютно! Посмотрим на Италию – "Движение пяти звезд", "Вперед, Италия!". Они играют на популизме. "Альтернатива" набирает очки, а ХДС/ХСС и социал-демократы в рейтингах падают. Левые, "зеленые", либералы остаются на одном уровне. Очень просто разговаривать на таком языке, очень просто обещать, очень просто проводить политику патернализма. И конечно же, европейцы устали.

А Brexit , на мой взгляд, сделал очень хорошую вещь – Евросоюз вздрогнул, институты вздрогнули, бюрократия вздрогнула. И попытки, начиная с июля-августа 2016 года, критически осмыслить институты Евросоюза – политические, экономические и так далее – это очень хорошо. Именно Brexit сейчас заставляет Евросоюз осмыслить, что такое субсидиарность, что я должен, как Брюссель, передать на места, государствам, а государства – коммунам и так далее. Что я могу сделать для того, чтобы заработала солидарная ответственность, что мы можем сделать для того, чтобы повысить конкурентоспособность пространства хозяйственно-политического Евросоюза, которое сейчас существенно проигрывает популизму Трампа. Популизм Трампа – это не только его высказывание America First, а это еще и экономический популизм, когда я за счет других снижаю ставку корпоративного налога до 23%, понимая, что привлекаю сразу же европейские капиталы и другие капиталы. Конечно, очень просто объяснять, что нормы ВТО в рамках американской Конституции не действуют. Это тоже популизм, против которого выступает Евросоюз, призывая Трампа обсуждать это.

И ксенофобия – это другой вопрос. Это наследие десятилетий, которое, наверное, мы еще не до конца преодолели. Это стоит обсуждать. И Чехия с Бабишем, и Орбан с Венгрией, и поляки – это популизм. Конечно, красивое слово – "народ". Но играть на таких простых чувствах очень легко. И заслуга Шредера, которого в Германии не любят за отношения с Россией, – в 2003 году он отважился на реформы, выкинувшие его из политики, но он это сделал. И он – герой. Ангела Меркель говорит: "Благодаря реформам Шредера экономика Германии заработала с 2005–2006 годов, рынок труда стал конкурентоспособным". Но таких политиков мало. Очень хочется порулить, остаться у власти. Поэтому именно сейчас, я думаю, залог успеха нынешних переговоров – политики (возможно, внутренне поддерживая Зеехофера) хотят остаться у власти и продолжить деятельность в рамках коалиционного соглашения, в рамках коалиционного правительства.