GEAS, Meloni and the Situation in Tunesien

Photo: During a visit to Sfax, President Kais Saïed spoke about the situation of irregular migrants* and stressed that Tunisia refuses to play gatekeeper for Europe. Credit: Tunigate

CEAS

The decisions of the interior ministers and the EU Council on the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) of 8 June 2023 have been met with indignation in many places. Numerous initiatives and organisations, church associations, refugee lawyers, the Left and the Green Youth have protested, as have many activists inside and outside Europe.
The Asylum Procedures Regulation (AVVO) and the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation (AMM-VO) will be valid in all Member States after their adoption by the EU Parliament. Those who want to work their way through the regulations can find them here:

• Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on asylum and migration management and amending Council Directive 2003/109/EC and the proposed Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund],
• Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common procedure for granting international protection in the Union and repealing Directive 2013/32/EU.
  

The German organisation Pro Asyl has been pointing out the dangers of the AVVO and the AMM-VO for weeks and has commented on the changes. The Mediendienst Migration has also formulated five questions that problematise the new procedures. Clara Taxis published a summary critique in Disorient magazine. Lawyers in the field of migration law have described the as a "sell-out of the rights of those seeking protection". What will the decisions bring besides this disenfranchisement?

Money, weapons, hot-spots and a question mark

The CEAS decisions contain special aid for arrival states, with which border protection can be strengthened and new hot-spots can be established with EU funds. Hot spots like the new "closed controlled access centres" will also be set up in Italy, Spain, perhaps also in Poland or Bulgaria.

There is talk of 30,000 detention places. But the number of refugees and migrants is ten times higher. What is to happen to all these disenfranchised people? Will they be held indefinitely, possibly for years, as happened in the Greek camps on Lesvos, Samos or Kos? Some of the detainees will eventually be granted asylum and redistributed. All the others are to be deported quickly – but where to? FRONTEX is available to assist all member states in increasing the number of deportation flights, but many countries of origin have been unwilling to cooperate against their own interests for years.

The decisions also aim to effectively limit the mobility of refugees and migrants between member states. How is this to be achieved? More racial profiling? Or rather an expansion of digital and biometric surveillance systems such as facial checks? Negotiations on the corresponding regulations are already underway. Goodbye freedom of movement.

There is little chance that the decisions will be changed in the parliamentary procedure at EU level. Women and children will also end up behind bars. But maybe some of the member states will realise in time that the CEAS compromise won't achieve the desired goal?

"It is not yet certain whether this compromise will become a law in the end. It is an unworkable proposal that in practice will not reduce the number of those who enter the EU irregularly. I think that Greece, Italy and Germany, too, will soon realise when they calmly analyse the decision: Actually, this does us no good",

says Gerald Knaus, actually a friend and proponents of "migration management", when asked by the Tagesspiegel. And what if the decision of the EU interior ministers ultimately comes into force more or less unchanged? Knaus explains:

"Then, at the latest, we will realise that it will not solve any of the acute problems. Let's take Greece. Greece has been carrying out pushbacks, i.e. illegal rejections of asylum seekers, for three years. According to the decision of the EU interior ministers, Greece would now have to set up camps instead and carry out many border procedures without an idea of what should happen afterwards. Why should Athens stop illegal pushbacks that no other government in the EU has clearly criticised since 2020? Where is the alternative humanitarian control mechanism in the decision of the interior ministers?"

Despite the German koteau, despite sacrificing protection for women and children, for the sake of EU unity alone, the new asylum deal will not work. The EU member states have yet been able to agree on FRONTEX and arming the borders, but not on anything more. The coalition has sacrificed women and children, the rights of migrating people, for something that will turn out as just as badly as the Yugoslavian war did in Joschka Fischer's time. The damage to Europe, but above all to the people affected, is incalculable.

Tunisia

The CEAS decisions provide that in the future refugees and migrants can be referred to allegedly safe third countries without their asylum application being examined in substance, even if they do not receive refugee protection there according to the Geneva Refugee Convention (Refugee Convention). This could apply to so-called "safe countries of origin" such as Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria, but also India and Moldova. The Guardian wrote immediately on 08.06.2023:

“At the weakest interpretation of the "connection" rule, a member state that wants to return a migrant to a third country may need only to demonstrate that an applicant has stayed in the country, which would enable Italy, for example, to transfer migrants to "a transition country" such as Tunisia. Italy's interior minister, Matteo Piantedosi, said: "Today is a day where something is beginning. We are not arriving; we are setting off."

Indeed, three days later, Italy's post-fascist Prime Minister Meloni, Commission President von der Leyen and Dutch head of government Rutte travelled to Tunis and offered the aged authoritarian president more than 1 billion euros if the country would sign appropriate treaties to prevent migration.

"Saïed, who was recently criticised by the EU Parliament for his autocratic style of government, will receive a lavish increase in payments from Brussels. 100 million Euros are to flow for border search and rescue operations, measures against smugglers and repatriation of migrants. 150 million in budget support will be transferred to Tunis as soon as a memorandum between Tunisia and the EU, scheduled for the end of the month, is approved. A macroeconomic cash injection of 900 million euros is to flow before the end of the year,"

Mirco Keilberth wrote in the SZ. In her press statement, v.d. Leyen described the "five pillars" of the new partnership and said:

"We both have an interest in breaking the cynical business model of smugglers. It is horrible to see how they deliberately risk human lives for profit. We will work together on an Anti-Smuggling Operational Partnership. And we will support Tunisia with border management. This year, the EU will provide EUR 100 million to Tunisia for border management, but also search and rescue, anti-smuggling and return."

It should be noted here that, unlike Libya, there are no "people smugglers" in Tunisia. There is a small industry in Sfax that sells (unfortunately very bad) boats and provides technical training for the boat people. Young Tunisians form groups, buy a bigger boat and try to get to Sicily from the north of the country.

Tunisia, which is on the verge of national bankruptcy, appears to be an easy victim for the GEAS strategists. We have written about the background of the racist development there. The country is not safe. Saied has the choice between bankruptcy or revolt. If he had billions, they would be eaten up by debt service and subsidies. And if he were to accept the terms of the current International Monetary Fund (IMF) diktat and remove food subsidies, a next wave of insurgency would be imminent.

"Tunisia agreed to a loan from the IMF, but subsequently rejected the conditions with Saied saying the demanded cuts to subsidies and restructuring of state-owned companies risked igniting social unrest,"

Al Jazeera wrote on 11/06/2023. Meloni would love to subsidise "her dictator" and support him vis-à-vis the IMF, but her power is not enough.

Dictators are not a stable solution

Plans to outsource European border management to North Africa were already quite advanced in the early 2000s. At that time, a "global network of safe havens" was supposed to keep refugees out of Europe. The then Interior Minister Schily spoke of "welcome camps" to be set up in North Africa. But everything turned out quite differently: the Arab Revolution brought an abrupt end to the dictators in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt on whom Europe had placed its bets. Assad remained and waged an ongoing war against the Syrian population; one consequence was the large migration movements of 2015. Finally, in 2018, Al-Bashir also fell in Sudan.
In the absence of stable conditions, the EU - with Italian intelligence leading the way - relied on shifting alliances with warlords and militias, especially in Libya and Sudan. The EU wanted nothing to do with the torture camps in Libya and the crimes of the Sudanese Rapid Support Forces (RSF), but these were a direct consequence of its secret policy.

In Tunisia, the EU is now venturing back into legality; the country acts like a magnet for EU politicians. Saied is senile but clever; his policies seem erratic, but he certainly does not want to antagonise the “common people”. Meloni, von der Leyen & Co are building their camps and structures on volatile sand. The very act of taking back Tunisian migrants could trigger uprisings, just as the laws preventing them from leaving the country helped to topple Ben Ali in 2011. All forgotten already?

Nancy Faeser in Tunis and 150 million more

On 19 June 2023, Faeser and Darmanin were in Tunis, the interior ministers from Germany and France, following in the footsteps of Meloni and von der Leyen in Tunisia. The deal they are offering is called "talent partnerships": trained Tunisian professionals in exchange for the repatriation of rejected Tunisians. Such a partnership would again favour the Tunisian urban middle classes and further disadvantage the youth from the hinterland, who make up the majority of the boat people. It is very questionable whether Saied believes he can afford this.

Just in time for the departure of Faeser and Darmanin, the EU Commission announced that it would provide another 150 million euros from the foreign policy fund NDICI for "border management and anti-smuggling". Darmanin also had 25 million from France in his luggage. The Tunisian government had already sent its wishes to the EU in May: Drones of various sizes, helicopters, coast guard vessels and boats - a total of over 200 million euros, half for the army. The Council will decide on this request at its summit in Brussels at the end of June. Armament always goes.

Refugees in Tunisia

Refugees in Tunisia are caught between the EU and the Saied regime. They have set up a camp in front of the IOM building and sought shelter at the UNHCR. Their demands are simple: safety, means of survival, a future. One of the protesters declared:

"No one wants to find a solution for us and we are left with no other option than to leave everything behind, just to get out of this messy experience we have been going through. No one would risk his or her life to cross the Mediterranean. But because we are not safe, we have no choice. We want our dreams to come true. Some people might think that we are happy risking our life crossing the Mediterranean. This is not true. It is the situation in Tunisia that is pushing us to take this risk. We are not happy to put our family, our wives, our sons and us, in a boat to cross the Mediterranean Sea."