Surprising as it may seem, the mounting evidence that European states are violating international law and using violence against migrants has not halted policies of border externalization and securitization; Instead, it has become a reason to expand restrictions.
Human rights organisations, the international media, some politicians and the European Court of Human Rights have documented the illegal deportations of immigrants and the increasing danger along the routes forced upon them. We the public, as well as our leaders, have seen these images and yet the situation has only gotten worse.
Will reporting on the recent deaths in Melilla and Libya, or the revelation that British athlete Mo Farah was trafficked to the UK as a child, change the UK-Rwanda deal? Will these events cause European public opinion and our leaders to reconsider the violence embedded in our migration policies? Or will we continue to sit and watch the slaughter of migrants?
Massacre in Melilla and thirst in the Libyan desert
A six meter high barbed wire fence, equipped with video cameras and watchtowers, separates Morocco from Melilla. In the early hours of June 24, up to 2,000 people attempted to cross these fences into Spain, resulting in at least 23 African deaths and an undetermined number of injuries, officials said. Most were Sudanese and South Sudanese escaping the armed conflict in their regions.
In an infamous opening speech, which he later qualified, the President of the Spanish government, Pedro Sánchez, blamed the “mafia” for the tragedy and congratulated Morocco on a “well-resolved” episode. A few days later, he admitted he hadn’t seen the video footage.
Just four days after the Melilla massacre, the bodies of 20 dead migrants were found in the Libyan desert
Just four days after the Melilla massacre, the bodies of 20 migrants – two Libyans and the rest Chadians – were found dead in the Libyan desert. Their last call was two weeks before their bodies were discovered. Tragically, these deaths were preventable. They just died of thirst. Kidane from Eritrea described his own journey from Sudan to Libya:
“We traveled through the Sahara for three days to reach Libya. Our brothers fall and die of thirst. You will be left there. There are times when they’re not even properly buried… The Sahara is difficult. A brother is dying of thirst, but if he asks for water, nothing can be done for him. Even if you tell them someone is dying of thirst, they won’t listen to you… And after going through all this, did you see how scared we were of the sea? However, we really wanted to touch the sea because that meant we were leaving this life.”
Outsourcing and Securitization: Violence and Wealth
Two tragedies in North Africa less than a week apart. Unfortunately, this is no coincidence, but an example of the increasing danger and violence migrants face on their journeys to Europe. Over the years, the EU has introduced a “vertical borders” model that applies to countries of origin, transit and destination. Both cases are an extreme manifestation of a system designed to discourage people from attempting the journey at all costs. The borders of Ceuta and Melilla are among the most dangerous and fortified in Europe. Despite the risk involved in trying to cross these borders – the risks of the desert and exploitation by smugglers – migrants continue to see them as preferable to the grim circumstances at home.
Both massacres are the result of policies based on creating chaos and violence at the border through securitization and outsourcing measures. And the resulting mess is used to dig deeper into the same hole in a cycle of endless violence. Human trafficking networks, as well as a well-orchestrated legal industry, generate massive profits for those who know how to exploit them. EU leaders and private companies are investing significant resources to ensure this narrative remains unchallenged.
EU countries pay third countries – like Libya, Niger and Turkey – to take care of migrants and their routes
EU countries pay third countries – like Libya, Niger and Turkey – to take care of the migrants and their routes. Nigerian officials reportedly sent the EU “shopping lists” of cars and helicopters in exchange for tougher migration policies. The UK’s recent deal with Rwanda and its initial dowry of £120m (€141m) is another example.
The EU and Italy have provided generous funding and support for the Libyan Coast Guard to intercept and return migrant boats. Some 32,425 refugees and migrants were arrested at sea and returned to Libya in 2021, despite the UN Secretary-General’s declaration that “Libya is not a safe port of disembarkation for refugees and migrants”.
The 2016 EU-Turkey deal stipulated that migrants crossing from that country to the Greek islands must be turned back, although Turkey refuses refugee status to non-Europeans who have a right to it. This is another example of how the EU orchestrates behavior contrary to international law. Policies of this kind have been in use for years, but the violence advocated by European states today is new.
Illegal pushbacks: State-sponsored violence
Illegal deportations of migrants are commonplace in Europe. Amnesty International has stated that “forced evictions have become the de facto Greek policy of border control in the Evros region”. These returns often violate the international prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment and sometimes amount to torture. The European Commission labeled these deportations as “violent and illegal deportations of migrants” and declared that they must end. The operations are being organized by the Greek security forces and unidentified men – believed to be some of the migrants themselves – who are being coerced by security agents to push people back into Turkey.
The European Parliament and various human rights organizations have found that Frontex (European Border Protection Agency) has ignored reports of migrants returning from Greece. Frontex is significantly involved in the securitization of the migration policy of the EU. Their employees often act without transparency and take over executive functions of the member states. Investigative journalism – such as that practiced by Lighthouse Reports – played an integral part in exposing this agency and forcing the resignation of its head in April this year.
A Frontex ship patrols Greek waters on February 28, 2020.Michael Varaklas (AP)
This approach is nothing new. Spain already put it into practice between 2004 and 2006 during the Cayucos crisis on the Canary Islands route. It was later expanded by other EU countries during the so-called “refugee crisis” (2014-2016).
Ukraine showed us a better way
Governments, institutions, NGOs and much of the public view migration as a threat or a humanitarian tragedy. This binary narrative perpetuates the notion that migration is a problem to be solved, a problem that ignores migrants’ economic and political agency and stifles the development of alternatives.
Getting out of this hole is not impossible. The reaction seen across Europe in welcoming Ukrainian refugees is a glimmer of hope that should guide the creation of a new migration policy to the benefit of all migrants. It is true that not all refugees from Ukraine were taken in immediately, as the African students who were trapped at the border testify. But this time has shown us that working together and creating safe and legal migration routes is possible in a very short time and on a large scale. European leaders can join forces instead of resorting to bilateral deals, which are lucrative for a small elite and devastating for international human rights. The chaos and violence that European borders inflict on non-Ukrainians have proven unnecessary and can be resolved.
Anna Bailey-Morley Y Laia Aycart-Piquer are research associates and senior policy analysts at the British think tank ODI. Gonzalo Fanjul He is Associate Researcher at this institution and Research Director of the Fundación porCausa. An expanded version of this text was originally published in English.
You can follow PLANETA FUTURO at TwitterFacebook and Instagram and subscribe to our “Newsletter” here.