I can no longer stand all the misery ; I
have to make an attempt, for what it is worth ...
Guiding principles:
- It is Europe’s move! ("the ostrich that sticks its head
in the sand has a much bigger problem than its limited visibility, its bottom
is a huge target" thanks to Ricardo Semler)
- A solution is not in one of the extremes: allowing everyone to move
in, sending everyone back. The polarity between these two opposing reflexes is
based on emotion (empathy and fear), and is a bad basis for a solution. A compromise in between will not help
either.
- Open door gives free rein to human trafficking,
abuse of people's despair for one’s own gain, and leads to even more misfortune for the robbed and
unfortunate migrants and to cultural and economic chaos for the recipient
countries. The arguments for an open door are understandable on
empathic and ethical grounds, but not feasible without paying a high,
unprecedented price. It is gambling based on sentiment.
- Sending people back into their misery is
ethically unacceptable, and in the long term provides explosive states of political and religious polarity. That is political incompetence that is based
on defensive fears and self-protection.
- The long-term solution: stimulating the
development of the source countries into economically and politically stable
societies, is noble but will take too long to wait for results and in the short term and would bring us into conflict with the international
autonomy which we are forced to respect, enforced by punishment for out of
control conflicts .
- Solutions will not be found in adding up interests and
opinions, even if you make an average of them, or create a negotiated
compromise. It is like making watered down coffee.
- The solution lies in constructive and
creative thinking; the third point (in addition to the two extremes).
Politicians!, do not use your reflex brain to think about this, but the pre-frontal capacity of your brain!! That's a minimum for leadership!
A solution: four parts
PART 1: create livable enclaves in the countries of
origin in agreement with local authorities
- Negotiate with local regimes to transform
some existing large cities on their coast into a place where the
necessary safety and economic perspective exist.
- Offer a "Marshall" help program in exchange, and ensure proper use of the
delivered resources
- Put those enclaves under local government,
support them with logistical means, and give UNO a security assignment
- This way, a solid alternative is created
for refugees who can build a future in their own culture, possibly find
temporary or definite accommodation.
PART 2: organize a formal selective intake procedure and possibility in those enclaves
- With EU funds, official immigration agencies
can be set up on site to provide sound information about possible destinations
as well as the legal conditions for being allowed to travel to Europe,
temporarily or otherwise. Staff these offices with European officials.
- Since the two main reasons for fleeing to
Europe have been met (security and economic viability) and a solution in their
own cultural environment is possible, only a fraction of the refugees will want
to go to the EU. (especially when they are well informed about
possibilities and consequences).
- Therefore, inform clearly about the
consequences, including cultural differences, and what that means in daily
practice. Make a contract for those who want to continue and be
accepted.
PART 3: develop a clear European integration policy for the entrants
- Develop European criteria to allow people
to immigrate, and organize their immigration up to their destination and full integration
- Also put quotas first according to the
possibilities and willingness of the receiving countries
PART 4: Allow EU member states to contribute
proportionally to the aspects of their choice (financial, logistics or effective
inflow of people)
- Within the EU, countries can choose
whether to contribute financially, logistically, or by hosting immigrants
(according to the criteria).
- Basic funding must come from the EU's
general resources, but an additional budget must be created according to needs. Countries contribute proportionally to the
full program.
- Countries that do not voluntarily
contribute their share are automatically 'taxed' in their current financial balance with the EU.
-
Finally; how to work on a supported decision within Europe?
- Someone must come up with a proposal,
based on a few guiding principles (see above), practically feasible, based
on good arguments that have already been expressed and flexible
in realization (adjust after evaluation)
- European values must be visibly present
and must be a criterion for excluding extreme positions and arguments in the
debate. This must be explicitly stated, even though some
leaders are annoyed by this and disadvantaged in their national political agenda.
- In a debate about long-term collective
responsibility, advocating self-interest is a behavior that should lead to explicit exclusion from the process (with consequences).
- Hurry; set up a clear funnel to get from the
first design to the best possible solution, and adjust. Create a permanent structure (commissioner)
to coordinate agreements and follow-up.
Hugo Der Kinderen
June 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment