http://euobserver.com/opinion/125139
Libya has never really recovered from the overthrow of Moammar Gaddafi
(Photo: AslanMedia)
Opinion
Stopping the wave of asylum seekers means fixing Libya
29.07.14 _at_ 16:10
Related
EU 'mentors' helping Libya stop unwanted migrants
Libya: hounding of migrants must stop
By Maryla Krol
Picture Maracana, Rio de Janeiro's flagship stadium, which paid host
to this year's World Cup final. One of the largest stadiums in the
world, it has a capacity of almost 79,000.
Now picture the same stadium filled almost to the brim with people in
ragged clothes, covered by the marks of war, hardship and famine.
They are the asylum seekers, refugees and otherwise illegal migrants
that have so far been saved at sea by Italy's Mare Nostrum operation
in the waters of the Mediterranean Sea since late 2013.
Prompted by the tragic Lampedusa disaster, where 366 migrants sailing
from Libya's Misrata port lost their lives trying to escape from their
home countries of Somalia, Eritrea and Ghana, this naval operation
represents Italy's rethink of the former 'cruel to be kind' policy.
Indeed, before the Libyan invasion of 2011, Rome's standard approach
to asylum seekers touching down on its soil or skirting its
territorial waters had been to deport them from where they came -
usually Libya, the traditional crossing point for a majority of
would-be African immigrants.
After Gaddafi's fall though, as the country has inched closer and
closer to the status of failed state, such a policy became synonymous
with a death sentence. Even the UNHCR has qualified this relentless
migration as a "colossal humanitarian catastrophe".
With the 'boat season' almost underway, initial figures published by
Eurostat show a dramatic increase in the number of asylum requests -
the figure has almost doubled between 2008 and 2013 (226,330 to
435,385), on top of the approximately 1.7 million refugees already
registered and living within the bloc.
The number of rescued migrants off the coasts of Italy is expected to
grow almost tenfold in the next few years, with between 400,000 and
600,000 people currently waiting in Libya for their turn to cross the
often treacherous Mediterranean waters.
Equipped more with hope than sea-savviness, most of them will use
shanty dinghies run by human-traffickers that lack any kind of
navigational instruments to reach either the shores of Malta or
Italy's forward island outpost of Lampedusa.
But why has this happened? Mainly because Libya has never recovered
from Gaddafi's overthrow. Essentially, the country is standing on the
edge of the precipice - the authority of the central government
extends only a few hundred kilometres around the capital of Tripoli,
hampered by the tribal structure of the country, which left
rudderless, acts as an obstacle to any form of state control. Not to
mention General Haftar's havoc-wreaking armies in the country's east.
Libya's southwestern tip in the Sahara, close to the Algerian and
Nigerian borders, acts like a revolving door for illegal migrants from
Africa on their way to Europe.
According to Mohamed Abdel-Qadir, head of Ghat's town council, a
border town: "The border is open day and night. Anyone who wants can
cross it. There is no control, most (smugglers) are armed, some of
them drug dealers, some trade in weapons, goods and illegal migrants."
The decay in the traditional structures of power has turned Libya into
a hotspot for crime and regional instability, with brigands and weapon
dealers shuttling to and fro North Africa without being stopped by the
almost disbanded Libyan border police.
More Brussels, but not as you would think
European leaders haven't been too keen on finding a political solution
for Libya up to this point, focusing more on Iran, Syria and, of
course, on their own internal problems. But this dismal picture should
worry them, as the migratory situation will only grow worse and could
ultimately lead to a marked reverse in European integration.
Both Italy and Malta have called on Brussels to come to their rescue,
as the burden becomes too heavy for the two countries to bear.
Presently, the 2003 Dublin Regulation maintains that the country of
first entry is responsible for processing asylum requests.
The regulation was meant to create a one-applicant one-application
system and reduce the number of migrants moving from country to
country. Unfortunately, it put too much of a strain on the most
exposed countries (Italy, Malta, Spain, Greece, Bulgaria), which
started ducking the system by allowing refugees to travel elsewhere in
the Union.
Sadly, any asylum-friendly reform is bound to be scuttled by the
prevalent Eurosceptic feeling. Brussels would more likely offer
monetary assistance to its most exposed members rather than replace
the Dublin Regulation with a common migration policy, which would
install a quota system to allocate migrants across the member states.
But what if we were to turn the debate on its head? Instead of seeing
this as an internal affairs matter, what if we were to reframe it as a
foreign policy problem? Since any radical change in asylum policies is
off the table, European leaders should address the core issue - in
this case, Libya.
Fixing Libya
Usually described as an unsolvable political conflict because of the
different warring tribes that have rejected Tripoli's authority, Libya
could be rescued from its conundrum by its pre-Gaddafi Senussi
dynasty.
Libya's foreign minister even outlined these ideas in a recent
comment, arguing that this is the only way to restore stability and
pacify the country, as the Senussis still enjoy the support of Libya's
tribes.
Indeed, Libya's stability before 1969 came from its system of
constitutional monarchy, largely based on the British system. Thanks
to its influence among the Arab population, a Senussi king would serve
more as the symbol of the state, while the Parliament and the Prime
Minister were tasked with actually ruling the country.
European leaders could pretend that Libya is not their problem, but
left unaddressed it will become everyone's problem - uncontrolled
migration is just one of many potential challenges.
Since deploying boots on the ground is the least desired outcome,
perhaps Brussels should engage in a constructive dialogue with the
Tripoli government and support the idea of a constitutional monarchy.
Because, left to its own devices, Libya has all the makings of a
failed state - and if that were to happen, there wouldn't be stadiums
large enough to contain the fallout.
The writer is a Geneva-based economist.
Section
Opinion
Received on Wed Jul 30 2014 - 12:37:06 EDT