Manufacturing crisis

Sophia Lueneburg and Maren Sass 18 December 2021

(Image courtesy of Unsplash) The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of InQuire Media Tonight, temperatures in Grodno remain below freezing, with more snow expected in the coming days. The Belarusian national meteorology institution has advised caution while driving on the icy roads.

What might be tedious to some, is life-threatening to others: These are the conditions that thousands of migrants are currently enduring, deep in the forest at the border between Belarus and Poland. They are there without food, water, access to medical treatment or adequate protection from the elements, lured in with promises of a better life in Europe.

This humanitarian disaster comes as the latest escalation in the EU-Belarusian row that began in mid-2020 over the contested elections that saw Alexander Lukashenko re-affirmed for office with an implausible 80% of the popular vote. In July 2021, in retaliation to a series of EU sanctions, Belarus began making good on its threat of overwhelming Europe with “migrants and drugs” as it advertised reduced air fares and simplified visa regulations for Middle-Eastern travelers. While numbers remain unclear, sources estimate that this tactic brought roughly five times the numbers of migrants to the EU’s eastern border than in an average year.

In response, Poland has beefed up border protection with a makeshift wall and 20,000 additional heavily armed troops. The other two EU member states bordering Belarus, Lithuania and Latvia, have declared states of emergency and erected fences to keep the unwanted migrants out. The EU has recently followed suit in and has suspended its own asylum regulations in order to detain and deport those trapped at the border more rapidly. In its newest “Fortress Europe” framework, refugees are being told to “just go home” – hardly a realistic option for those who spent their life’s savings to escape war, famine or unrightful prosecution.

In mid-November, tensions between Belarus and the EU flared when Polish border guards employed water cannons, flash grenades and tear gas to push back migrants attempting to cross the border. Some 36,000-38,000 attempted crossings have been reported this year alone, and at least 13 people have lost their lives at the border. Meanwhile, the EU and leading western powers are the ones considering themselves threatened as they accuse Lukashenko of “hybrid warfare”, and of using migrants as “pawns” in his retaliation against European sanctions. EU Council President Donald Tusk, citing the involvement of Belarusian security and defense personnel in moving migrants to the border, has even begun openly considering implementing NATO treaty provisions that could be the first step towards the deployment of a collective NATO self-defense force to the Polish-Belarusian border.

However, while Lukashenko might have artificially raised the numbers of refugees at Europe’s doorstep, this was neither unprecedented nor an isolated incident. In the past the EU has granted Turkey funds and turned a blind eye towards human rights abuses in return for Turkey’s efforts to absorb Syrian and Afghan refugees before they could reach the EU. However, when convenient, Turkey opened its border to Greece, allowing thousands to rush to the border. Dramatically, Greece did not open its borders but rather suspended asylum temporarily, firing tear gas at families trying to enter the EU. This was in violation of international and European law, yet no consequences followed – EU countries even backed Greece’s decision while those who did reach Greece were forced to spend the winter in tents with little to no aid.

The crisis, it would seem, is endemic to the EU, despite the countless tragedies which have resulted from it. Thus, Malta has pushed back ships filled with African migrants to Libya, where they face abuse and anti-migrant prejudice in a country still embroiled in a civil war. Meanwhile, Italy has prevented ships from the rescue organization Sea Watch from leaving or entering their ports on their mission to rescue people in distress at sea while crossing the Mediterranean in unsafe boats. A report by Amnesty International also observed push-back tactics in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Cyprus, France, Italy, Slovenia and Spain.

The EU should be taking responsibility for, and acknowledge, condemn, and sanction pushbacks. They would do well to remember that nobody wants to leave their home without a good reason. Nobody wants to get stuck in a Belarusian forest in the middle of winter. However, while there has been some wrist-slapping of newer EU members such as Hungary or Poland, the chances for serious consequences for more integrated countries such as France or Spain are slim. This exposes an even deeper issue that has contributed to these border escalations: Inequality among EU member states is a serious problem and has paved the way for populist rhetoric that harms citizens and migrants instead of helping them. This has left little room for cooperation and human contact with refugees across Europe.

Even when setting ethics and morality aside, the EU has done itself and its image a disservice. With its callous turning away of refugees, it has undermined any of its own credibility of being a “union of values” as it so vocally proclaims. The European Parliament states that “the European Union’s fundamental values are respect for human dignity and human rights, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law”. The recorded and documented incidents at its borders tell a different story. This gives the Union less of a leg to stand on when it attempts to stand up for human rights inwardly, as in the case of Poland, and outwardly, as in the case of Russia.

By obstinately and consistently looking away from the tragedy that has been unfolding at it borders for years, it has allowed geographically peripheral countries such as Greece and Italy to bear the brunt of the entire bloc’s shortcomings. Some countries, such as Germany, might have outperformed others in the number of refugees taken in, but not only do these measures remain insufficient, they have given way to petty finger-pointing among EU member states and stoked overall hostility towards immigration. This hardly corresponds with the principle of solidarity upon which the EU is said to be built. If the EU’s solidarity is indeed so fragile, what’s to say more members countries will not feel emboldened to follow the UK’s example of divorcing?

However, while this shows that there is tremendous room for improvement on the European side, this by no means justifies the harmful practices of Belarus, Turkey or Libya. Deploying migrants as a weapon against other countries only shows how little regard these governments have for their own reputation or the lives of those they are putting at stake. Additionally, the EU has shown that it can, in fact, be exploited and swayed in its decision-making. Any country wishing to pressure the EU, for whatever reason, now knows this is the Union’s weakest flank that it will do quite literally just about anything to protect. The question remains, however, whether migration is the actual threat to the EU, or its hysterical reaction towards it.

While there is nothing inherently wrong with countries debating migration amongst themselves, it should never happen on the back of the people fleeing from untenable hardships and hardly any choices left to build a dignified life. European governments do have a choice, and that is to keep power struggles separate from the ones suffering from it. People are not geopolitical pawns. They are entitled to dignity and the protection of their human rights. Countries on both sides of the divide could use a reminder of that.