The political fight over migration is roaring back to life.
Five EU countries that sit on the bloc’s external borders are bucking a proposed overhaul of asylum rules, putting in peril efforts to strike a deal by June’s summit of European leaders.
The pushback from Italy, Spain, Greece, Cyprus and Malta — laid out in a three-page position paper obtained by POLITICO — comes as Bulgaria, which currently holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU, is pushing a proposal aimed at revising the so-called Dublin Regulation and ending one of the bloc’s most bitter policy fights.
Their hard position comes on top of the longstanding opposition by the Visegrad countries — Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia — to any effort by Brussels to force countries to accept refugees, or to set new restrictions on how asylum seekers might be returned to the first EU country they entered.
“Dublin reform is a priority” — Bulgarian presidency spokeswoman
The Bulgarian proposal is pushed by Germany, Sweden and other countries eager to avoid a repeat of the 2015-2016 migration crisis. It revives the idea of applying mandatory quotas for all EU countries to take a certain number of refugees — which was imposed temporarily during the crisis but fiercely opposed, especially by Hungary and Poland. The EU ended the quota system in September 2017 after transferring fewer than 28,000 refugees, far short of the 160,000 goal. However, the new proposal calls for imposing quotas only if refugee numbers spike, suddenly setting off another crisis.
Under this new system, the EU would push for voluntary “allocations” of refugees from countries that are hardest hit to other willing EU countries, in part by offering financial inducements. The proposal is intended to stifle the complaints of anti-migrant European politicians, but any suggestion of mandatory quotas, even in extreme situations, is likely to be controversial in places like Austria or Poland.
In a move that has most upset the Southern European so-called frontline states, the current Bulgarian proposal would change the Dublin system in a way that they fear places a greater burden on them. Under Dublin today, a refugee or migrant who lands in an EU country must register there and can’t seek asylum elsewhere for six months. The Bulgarian proposal, backed by Berlin, would extend that period to 10 years, meaning that those frontline states would potentially be responsible for any new arrival for a decade.
“It would be very difficult to reach a deal by June as we are not willing to accept a Dublin system we perceive as unbalanced,” said a senior diplomat from one of the frontline states.
EU officials at the Council are mulling a compromise to break this logjam ahead of June by scaling back the proposed time limit in the Dublin reform and tinkering with the relocation scheme. They also hope to use the EU’s new long-term budget plan to increase funding to help with the absorption of migrants and also to increase border policing to win over the frontline countries.
Southern discomfort
In their three-page manifesto, which underscores how deeply EU countries are scarred and divided by the migration crisis, the five Southern EU countries lay out 13 concerns with the Bulgarian proposal.
The coastline countries say that the 10-year duration of “stable responsibility” puts them, usually the first countries where refugees arrive, on the hook and, according to one EU diplomat, “will result in the responsibility of asylum and border control to be completely on the shoulders of southern border states.”
“And this,” the diplomat added, “is not fair.”
This is a political nonstarter in countries like Italy that have been swamped with migrants and refugees.
Other officials from the frontline countries said the proposal is focused too heavily on achieving political “solidarity” and not enough on “burden-sharing.”
A spokeswoman for the Bulgarian presidency said that disagreements on such a controversial file are to be expected, but that work is progressing toward an agreement.
“Dublin reform is a priority,” the spokeswoman said. “We have been working very hard in finding the right balance as our leaders instructed us. We are very happy that those countries take active part in the negotiations and have a constructive approach.”
A Libyan coast guardsman watches over 147 would-be migrants rescued on their way to Italian shores | Taha Jawashi/AFP via Getty Images
As for the document produced by the frontline countries, the spokeswoman said: “This is not the first paper and probably won’t be the last one. We as a presidency welcome everything and try and analyze it.”
Search for compromise
The compromise plan also pushes for tougher enforcement of EU border controls and existing migration laws — a persistent demand of anti-migrant politicians — and the Bulgarian proposal calls for mandatory “pre-Dublin checks” on all asylum seekers. This is essentially a review to be sure the applicant legally qualifies to request protection. In a crisis, such checks could delay an applicant’s eligibility for “allocation” to another EU country.
The coastline countries say such checks are time-consuming and should not be required, except in cases where there may be national security concerns. This would potentially make broad categories of asylum seekers quickly eligible for allocation, easing the burden on the first-entry countries.
A diplomat from a third frontline country said the group is keen on getting to a “fair” and “balanced” compromise by June.
“We want a deal by June because the presidency that comes next is Austria, which has extremely conservative views on Dublin and migration and borders,” this diplomat said. “If we don’t get a deal by the summer we will lose credibility vis-à-vis public opinion and we cannot afford that because it would fuel support for populist and extremist parties across the country.”