The role of some NGOs operating in the field of migration needs to be addressed, the president of the European Council Charles Michel has told Times of Malta.
“I feel that we must address all the questions, including the difficult questions. And to be honest with you, I feel there is a growing debate about the role played by some of the NGOs,” Michel said in an interview.
“I don’t speak about all the NGOs, but on the role played by some of the NGOs.”
He was replying to a question of whether he was comfortable with the situation in Malta following NGO claims of migrant boats being sent back to Libya.
Determining how to address migration was the responsibility of governments, said Michel, adding it was “not a secret... that some NGO boats are acting in a way that, in my opinion, is opening some questions.”
When pressed for details, Michel refused to elaborate.
“You understood very well what I wanted to pass as a message. I think we need to address all the topics, including the role played by some of the NGOs,” he said.
Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that operate rescue operations at sea have sometimes been blamed for acting as a “pull factor” for migrants crossing to Europe. Italy recently restricted their ability to perform rescues.
However, research suggests that the presence of NGO ships has little to no effect on the rate of migrant crossings.
The president of the European Council (EC) was in Malta for last week’s ‘EU-MED9’ summit, which saw leaders of nine Mediterranean countries meet in Valletta as the EU was attempting to reach a deal on how to handle asylum seekers and irregular migrants.
The summit came a day after EU interior ministers met to discuss new migration rules that were slated to be announced within days.
The EC president was asked to respond to a statement from the charity Oxfam International saying the bloc’s latest proposals signalled its desire to barricade Europe from asylum seekers.
“I don’t agree with this [barricading] approach, or this statement made by this NGO,” he said, highlighting the EU’s track record on development aid, fighting poverty and climate change.
If other developed countries were to match the efforts of the EU, more could be achieved at an international level, Michel said, while emphasising the importance of migration procedures being adhered to.
“There are rules, there are principles, and we need to make sure the rules are applied,” he said.
Does the EC president agree that the phrase ‘burden-sharing’ – a term seen regularly in EU policy documents when discussing migration – could be seen as an example of a hostile attitude to migrants?
“I prefer the words ‘solidarity’ and ‘opportunity’,” Michel replied, but stressed it was for Europe to decide who were allowed into the bloc, and not people traffickers.
“I think that the main point is very simple: it is not the smugglers who are allowed to choose who is allowed to come to the EU,” he said, calling the issue a question of “European sovereignty”.
Cooperation with origin countries
In 2020, Malta and Libya announced a joint migration centre in Libya, a move Michel doesn’t believe reveals a Maltese lack of faith in European institutions.
“I think that is a good example, which is showing that there was a pragmatic approach; with pragmatic cooperation it is possible to address this challenge,” he said.
“A few years ago, there were many more difficulties in terms of migration in this country. But it shows that when there is a political will to act... we can deliver.”
Would he be happy to see more frontline EU countries follow suit?
“What’s important is that when borderline countries are making agreements, these are done in solidarity with the European Union... the external borders of Malta are the external borders of the European Union, we shouldn’t forget that.”
In February, the EU announced a deal of its own with Tunisia worth €1 billion, which, as well as aiming to boost economic ties, promises to step up efforts against human traffickers and strengthen border management.
But with the country’s record on human rights in the spotlight following a recent Amnesty International report alleging crackdowns on civil liberties and a power grab by its President Kaïs Saïed, is it appropriate to funnel European money to Tunisia?
“It’s not for Tunisia, it’s for the Tunisian people,” responded Michel, stressing the need to improve prosperity in neighbouring countries such as Tunisia.
“If some observers are thinking that with more insecurity and more economic deficiencies it would be better for those people in Tunisia and better for us in Europe, they are making a huge mistake,” he said.
When asked if the move indicated that European values were up for sale, Michel said such values of peace and prosperity required investment, “including in countries which do not have exactly the same institutional model.”
Hosting-or-cash approach
In June, EU nations voted on changes to a preliminary agreement on the bloc’s rules for hosting asylum seekers and migrants.
The revisions included a provision for members states to pay €20,000 per person into a fund managed by Brussels as an alternative to taking in arrivals.
When asked if this allowed countries to simply buy out of their responsibilities as member states, Michel didn’t think so.
The basis of the proposal was to ensure there was “effective solidarity” between member states, he said, adding he “understood” the debate about how the subsidies were implemented.
“There are probably different options for making sure there is solidarity,” he admitted, but he remained optimistic that despite ongoing debate surrounding the issue, negotiations were moving forward.
“I don’t want to say things publicly today that would make more difficult the ongoing negotiations, but I think that in comparison to a few years ago we made some progress,” he said, adding there was “much more” understanding between EU leaders.
“It doesn’t mean we are all on the same page; it’s why we have those difficult decisions on the migration path,” admitted Michel.
When quizzed on Malta’s abstention from voting on the agreement – which it had said did not go far enough to alleviate the pressures on frontline states – the EC president conceded it was an “ongoing debate,” but hoped in the coming weeks “tangible progress” would be possible.
European unity
Describing migration as a difficult and emotional challenge, Michel stressed his confidence in European unity.
Despite the challenges posed by COVID-19, climate change and the war in Ukraine, the EU had succeeded in sticking together, he said.
“Even while some observers were a little bit pessimistic, we succeeded to... be extremely united, and it will be the same with migration,” Michel said.
“It doesn’t mean that it will be easy. Of course, we’ll have some debates and political democratic disputes. But it’s not a problem if, at the end, we are able to be on the same page.”
Could migration provoke the rise of nationalism?
“I’m certain that some political groups will try to use this topic – like they are using other topics – to try to promote a form of fragmentation of this European Union project,” he said.
“But in the end, I’m confident the vast majority of citizens across the EU feel how the European Union has been protecting their fundamental interests in those times of crises.
“Those who would like to try to convince the people that only national solutions will work are not telling the truth... the people are very smart, and they will understand where their interests are for the future and for the future of their children.”