The European Union implored its member countries Wednesday to better share the burden of refugees flooding the continent, but the proposal to accept 160,000 asylum seekers was small compared with the growing crisis: a half-million have already arrived and hundreds of thousands more are on their way.
With Syrians, Eritreans and Afghans often hoping to settle in wealthy nations such as Germany and Sweden, the EU is struggling find a more equitable solution that also would send a fair share of refugees to less-desirable and less-welcoming places such as Slovakia and the Baltics.
Hours after EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said Europe had a historic duty to act and relocate 160,000 who have arrived in overwhelmed Hungary, Greece and Italy, a number of Eastern European and Baltic states vowed to reject the imposition of any kind of quotas from Brussels.
The plan is a drop in the ocean for an economic power like the EU, where a half-billion people live, compared with efforts by Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, which are hosting more than 4 million refugees, mostly from Syria.
But despite the troubling scenes of drowned children on beaches, or thousands of people running at razor-wire fences or crammed into buses and trains, the 28 nations simply cannot agree on modest proposals, let alone profound ways to tackle Europe’s biggest refugee emergency since World War II.
With battle lines drawn, the scene is set for an ugly confrontation when EU interior ministers meet Sept. 14.
“If all the focus is on redistributing quotas of refugees around Europe, that won’t solve the problem, and it actually sends a message that it is a good idea to get on a boat and make that perilous journey,” British Prime Minister David Cameron told lawmakers in London.
In the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, Juncker said that now is the time for action because “the refugee crisis will not simply go away.” He underlined that 500,000 migrants have entered Europe this year, many from Syria and Libya.
“Imagine for a second it were you, your child in your arms, the world you knew torn apart around you,” Juncker said. “There is no wall you would not climb, no sea you would not sail, no border you would not cross.”
The Commission’s new plan involves sharing 120,000 refugees from Greece, Italy and Hungary among 22 member states, on top of a proposal the EU’s executive made in May to share 40,000 refugees from just Greece and Italy.
Britain, Ireland and Denmark are not legally bound to take part. Greece, Italy and Hungary are too overwhelmed to participate.
First proposal stalled
Despite the urgency, the EU’s first refugee plan never won full support, and only about 32,000 refugees have been allocated. Hungary was among the countries to reject it, along with the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland.
According to the International Organization for Migration, more than 378,000 people have entered Europe this year, including more than 256,000 crossing the sea to Greece and nearly 120,000 braving the Mediterranean to reach Italy.
Hungary estimates that more than 160,000 have crossed its borders alone this year. The U.N. refugee agency warned Tuesday that 42,000 could arrive there in the next 10 days.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel backed the new immigration plan and also called for it to be made compulsory.
“We need a binding agreement on a binding distribution of refugees among all member states, according to fair criteria,” Merkel said in Berlin.
Germany has taken in more than any other EU country and would have to accept over 31,000 more under the plan.
On Monday, France threw its weight behind the EU plan by saying it would take in 24,000 refugees this year, exactly the figure proposed.
Britain, which is not taking part, said separately that over the next five years, it would welcome up to 20,000 refugees currently in countries outside the EU. Ireland is also taking 520 refugees from camps outside Europe.
The quota battle
But Czech Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka said his government’s opposition to mandatory quotas for migrants has not softened.
“The compulsory quotas are not a good solution,” Sobotka said in a statement. “To continue with a discussion about their establishment all across Europe only prevents us from taking really important and necessary steps.”
The Czechs say most migrants are heading for Germany and don’t want to stay in the Czech Republic anyway. Hungary has also made a similar argument.
Estonia’s social welfare minister, Margus Tsahkna, insisted that “each country should be able to decide how many refugees it is willing to accept. This decision shouldn’t be in the hands of the EU Commission.”
Train service between Germany and Denmark was halted Wednesday after Danish police stopped hundreds of migrants who had arrived by rail across the border, the Danish railway company DSB said.
About 100 people who had arrived from Germany have refused to leave a train in the Danish port of Roedby and they do not want to be registered in Denmark, said police spokeswoman Anne Soe.
Many want to go to Sweden, Norway or Finland, because they have relatives there or believe that conditions there for asylum-seekers are better.
Open arms or closed borders
Why do some countries welcome refugees, while others do everything they can to keep them out? The reasons are many, but one stands out: demographics. In Germany, for instance, a rapidly aging population is becoming increasingly aware of the need to welcome foreigners. Other countries, where the aging trend is much less severe, have fewer incentives to welcome newcomers.
Germany
Empathy and the country’s Nazi past — which turned Europe into a battlefield and later forced many Germans themselves to flee the war — might explain the country’s enthusiasm for helping today’s refugees. But there is another factor that few would openly acknowledge right away: Germany really needs them to ease its rapid population decline.
Sweden
The country has recently taken in the highest number of refugees in Europe per capita, despite having a population that isn’t declining. Its government has historically been among the world’s most accommodating when it comes to refugees, which explains Sweden’s quick reaction in the current crisis. Although the Swedish government allows asylum-seekers to work immediately, chances of finding a long-term job are low.
Britain
Britain already has one of Europe’s most diverse and stable populations and is
among Europe’s demographic exceptions. It is predicted to become Europe’s most populous country by 2060 thanks to immigration and fertility rates that are higher than most of its neighbors, according to the European Commission.
France
It is among the few countries in Europe with a growing population, thanks to immigration and a high fertility rate.
Meanwhile, the country is on persistently high alert. In Paris and in the rest of the country, police officers and soldiers patrol the streets to prevent potential terror attacks. January’s attacks targeting a Jewish supermarket and editors critical of Islam have not helped to bridge the rift between France’s growing immigrant population and its white majority.
Hungary
Contrary to France, many Eastern European countries face a population decline. Nevertheless, they refuse to take in more refugees. Hungary, which has recently built a border fence, has become the most prominent case. The country’s prime minister claimed last week that he was defending European Christianity against a Muslim influx.
The Washington Post
Where they would go
Should the countries agree to the new plan, here’s where the 160,000 refugees would be placed:
Austria: 4,853
Belgium: 5,928
Bulgaria: 2,172
Croatia: 1,811
Cyprus: 447
Czech Republic: 4,306
Estonia: 1,111
Finland: 3,190
France: 30,783
Germany: 40,206
Latvia: 1,043
Lithuania: 1,283
Luxembourg: 808
Malta: 425
Netherlands: 9,261
Poland: 11,946
Portugal: 4,775
Romania: 6,351
Slovakia: 2,287
Slovenia: 1,126
Spain: 19,219
Sweden: 5,838
