0

Greetings from the Board of Directors

1

Dear delegates,

My name is Irfan Prawiradinata, and as the director of the European Union, it is with the

most joyous of pleasure and deepest of honor that I welcome each and every one of you to

the 2014 Indonesia Model United Nations!

Before getting to know all of you during the conference, I’d like to share a little about

myself. I’m a senior Economics student at Universitas Indonesia, with a double

concentration in Industrial and Regional Development. I’m currently finishing my thesis on

assessing Indonesia’s Human Development and Poverty Alleviation efforts, from which I’ve

learned, amongst other things, that creating even the smallest of changes for people, often

require the largest of efforts from governments; such beliefs from which the United Nations

itself was built upon - and uphold till this day.

Prior to my career in Model United Nations, I have been active in debating, where in high

school, I was given the honor to represent Indonesia in the 2010 World Schools Debating

Championship and the 2009 Asian Schools Debating Championship. In my junior year in

college I made one of the best decisions of my life to immerse myself in the world of MUN.

My most memorable experiences include joining IMUN 2013 in the World Health

Organization, and representing UI at the 2014 Harvard National Model United Nations,

where I had the honor of being the only Indonesian delegate to present a draft resolution.

Now, the honor is yours to be not only a delegate, but also, if not importantly, an agent of

change in communally discovering a solution for the daunting topic of Europe’s Crisis of

Migration in the European Union. It is through such topics that I believe we are able to learn

the true meaning of freedom in the modern world, when we uncover how, ironically,

sometimes it is not from the absolution of freedom that we experience the best or most

realistic form of it. Such freedom, particularly that of movement, has been left vague in the

midst of such crises in the European Union. And with that said:

The floor is yours.

Sincerely,

Board of Directors

2

EUROPEAN UNION INDONESIA MUN 2014

HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE

I. The Rise of the European Union

World War II and its huge impact had

deteriorated Europe and weakened its

economic power to the lowest point. It shifted

the international politics to be no longer

Eurocentric but it drove Europe to become

the object of power struggle between the

United States of America (USA) and the Soviet

Union. Perceiving the threat from Soviet

Union’s expansion, in September 1946,

Winston Churchill urged the idea of European

integration through reconciliation of France-

Germany within a kind of “United States of

Europe”. He believed that such reconciliation

would strengthen France and Germany

economies and lead the more steady political

and security in Europe expected to

counterbalance the received threat.

In the following year, this idea came

into reality as the Marshall Plan Aid treaty was

signed by Western Europe, which required

the establishment of an organization

purposed to administer the aid, namely

Organization for European Economic

Cooperation. Subsequently, European Coal

and Steel Community (ECSC) was also

proposed by Robert Schuman in 1950.

Comprising of Belgium, France, Italy,

Luxembourg, West Germany, and the

Netherlands, this community sought to pool

their coal and steel resources by providing a

unified market, lifting restrictions on imports

and exports, as well as creating a unified labor

market. In other words, the main platform of

ECSC’s establishment was to build a common

market. As a result, those initial countries

tightened their cooperation by signing Treaty

of Rome (1957) to form the European

Economic Community (EEC) and the European

Atomic Energy Committee (Euratom), in

addition to the Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development (OECD) and

the European Fair Trade Association (EFTA)

which then united them on economic

grounds.

Bringing them closer to an integrated

market, the Single European Act was passed

by European leaders to eradicate all barriers

that potentially hinder the flow of goods and

capital. Seeing that this act had been

inadequate to answer the fears and concerns

about the future of European integration,

Maastricht Treaty was approved in 1992 and

the European Community (EC) has officially

become the European Union (EU). The treaty

proposed that the member states should join

together in a political and economic union,

adopt a single common currency, share the

same set of policies on social and domestic

issues, and have a common foreign and

3

defense policy.

II. The European Union Democracy

EU and its institutions cling to

democracy as its underlying value to undergo

all administrative activity, ranging from

member states recruitment to decision-

making process. To be part of EU, a state has

to implement a non-communist system in

running its country. In other words, the

identity as a democratic country is essentially

required. It is proven, along with the

increasing level of cooperation, that EU’s

membership was gradually expanded from

originally six to twenty-seven member states,

which consists of Belgium, Germany, France,

Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Denmark,

Republic of Ireland, United Kingdom, Greece,

Portugal, Spain, Austria, Finland, Sweden,

Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia,

Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta,

Slovenia, Bulgaria and Romania, states which

proceed their government in a democratic

way. Departing from Immanuel Kant’s

proposal of ‘perpetual peace’, EU believes

that democracy would ease the cooperation

among states within the Union for it is

assumed that each state has understood basic

values of democracy in which peaceful way is

prioritized, especially in conflict resolution. It

is imperative to maintain the unity of the

Union.

To administer this organization,

European Union Council holds a vital position

in EU’s hierarchy because it produces key

policy decisions and leaves it to other EU

institutions to be elaborated and

implemented. Generally, it arranges

resolutions towards the issues of internal

economy, foreign policy, budget disputes,

treaty revisions, new member applications, as

well as institutional reforms. This Council

comprises of head of governments and

foreign ministers of EU member states, along

with the president and vice president of

European Com- mission itself. It works with

Council of Ministers to prepare an agenda

that is usually set according to delegations’

proposed issues, continuation of previous

summit, or an emergency that urges a quick

decision. Based on one of its goals ruled in

Solemn Declaration on European Union 1983,

to release an ultimate decision, the Council

strives to reach unanimity or consensus.

Nevertheless, the mechanism of the decision-

making is usually appropriated with the

situation. When a unanimity or consensus is

impossible to be achieved, a formal vote

system would be highly suggested. However,

all taken decisions have to accommodate the

citizens’ needs as Maastricht Treaty stated the

Union, “In which decisions are taken as closely

as possible to the citizen”.

III. European Union Immigration

Europe’s history has been shaped by

migration. For centuries, merchants,

craftsmen and intellectuals crossed the

continent to practice their trades or start new

4

lives. Millions emigrated from Europe, first to

the colonies and later to the Americas and the

Antipodes. Europe also has a long history of

forced migration: from the expulsion of the

Jews from Spain to the population shifts in

southeast Europe caused by the many wars

between the Russian, Austro-Hungarian and

Ottoman empires.

Large-scale immigration into Western

Europe is more recent. From 1960 to 1973,

the number of foreign workers in Western

Europe doubled from 3 to 6% of the

workforce. It was highest in places like the UK

and France, with relatively open access for

citizens of their former colonies; in Germany,

too, the number of foreigners rose 4 million in

the 25 years after 1960, although they seldom

became citizens.i The foreign-born population

has continued to grow, not least because

most countries still issue tens of thousands of

residence permits each year for the purposes

of family reunification. EU countries also issue

thousands of work permits each year. Despite

so, the proportion of foreign-born residents in

the EU remains low, ranging from 9% in

Austria, Belgium and Germany, to under 2% in

Spain.ii

Since the late 1980s, the number of

people applying for asylum has increased

sharply. In 1984 there were only 104,000

applications in Western Europe. This figure

grew to 692,000 in 1992 and then declined

during much of the 1990s. Numbers grew

again to 350,000 in 1998, and about 400,000

in 1999. Thus asylum has become one of the

principal means of immigration into the EU.iii

This has yet to change until now. The

European Union is experiencing ever-growing

influxes of both usual and usual immigration

amongst its member states, as well as from

neighboring countries. Regional conflicts that

surround the European Union area

exacerbate this issue, driving certain countries

to its limits. For this very reason, the

European Union at Indonesia Model United

Nations 2014 rises the topic of this very issue,

to be discussed, as an effective and

comprehensive solution has evidently been

long overdue.

5

THE EUROPEAN CRISIS OF MIGRATION : THE DRAMATIC IMPACT OF REGIONAL

CONFLICT AND FINANCIAL COLLAPSE ON INTERNATIONAL BORDERS

HISTORY AND DISCUSSION OF THE

PROBLEM

I. The Overarching Crisis of Migration in

Europe

The unprecedented crisis in global financial

markets that hit the world economy in mid-

2008 has led to the most severe recession

since the Second World War. This crisis has

affected the wider global economy and

increasingly had an impact on the labour

markets of European countries. After many

years of relatively high economic and

employment growth, the global economic

crisis is taking Europe back to growth levels

not seen for decades. Annual GDP growth

dropped from 2.9 per cent in 2007 to 0.9 per

cent in 2008 in the EU. By the end of 2008

over half of the economies of EU Member

States were either in recession or in the

process of entering one. From 2008 to 2009

the average unemployment rate for the EU

rose from 7.0 per cent to 9.9 per cent.

Although growth in the euro area resumed in

the third quarter of 2009, the labour market is

expected to remain weak.iv

As a result, citizens of European countries

suffering from economic decline have begun

migrating and seeking employment within

more prosperous EU countries. Germany in

particular has experienced a huge surge of

migrating European Union citizens from other

countries, with an increase of 73% from Greek

immigrants, an almost 50% growth from Spain

and Portuguese, and a 35% increase from Italy

from 2011 to 2012.v By August 2013, the

number of Spanish citizens registering for a

national Insurance number for the United

Kingdom had increased to 45,500 from 30,000

in 2012. There was also a 35% increase of

citizens from Italy and 43% increase from the

citizens of Portugal attempting to obtain work

in the United Kingdom.vi

Political upheavals in the Middle East and

North Africa have also begun reshaping

migration trends in Europe. In 2011, the

number of illegal border-crossing detections

in the EU jumped by nearly 35 percent from

the previous two years to 141,000 as

thousands of Tunisians started to arrive at the

Italian island of Lampedusa, off the coast of

Sicily, following the onset of the Arab Spring,

and Sub-Saharan Africans fleeing unrest in

Libya in 2011–2012. In 2013, European border

agency Frontex reported another spike of

detections along the EU's maritime borders

due to the growing numbers of Syrian

refugees. The EU also received more than

6

350,000 applications for international

protection in 2013, the highest number since

data collection began in 2008.vii

With ever more migrants and asylum seekers

fleeing turmoil in Africa and the Middle East

and from economic collapse in Southern

European countries, European policymakers

still reeling from the political consequences of

the Eurozone Crisis faces complex challenges.

To date, Europe's collective response to its

growing migration crisis has been ad hoc and

more focused on securing the bloc's borders

than on protecting the rights of migrants and

refugees. Many European Union countries

struggling with high levels of unemployment

and reduced government services have also

seen a rise in political extremism and

xenophobia. These developments have raised

concerns about a reduction of critical EU core

values like human rights and freedom of

travel that were opened under the Schengen

Agreement. While the new European Union

leadership brings hope for new beginnings, it

remains unclear if political headwinds will

facilitate a new climate of immigration

reform.

II. Definitions

To fully understand the arguments and

discussions on the Migration Crisis in Europe,

it is necessary to understand the exact

definitions of various important

terminologies. According to Amnesty

Internationalviii:

Migrant: A migrant is a person who moves

from one place to another to live, and usually

Picture 1 :As there are international treaties that compel governments to save and allow entry for anybody who is in trouble in the country’s territorial water, the migrants many a times put their boats in trouble.

7

to work, either temporarily or permanently.

They may be forced to leave because they do

not have access to adequate food, water or

shelter, or in order to ensure the safety and

security of themselves and their families.

Refugee: The 1951 Convention relating to the

Status of Refugees defines “refugee” as a

person who:

Owing to well-founded fear of being

persecuted for reasons of race, religion,

nationality, membership of a particular social

group or political opinion, is outside the

country of his nationality and is unable or,

owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself

of the protection of that country; or who, not

having a nationality and being outside the

country of his former habitual residence as a

result of such events, is unable or, owing to

such fear, is unwilling to return to it.

The Convention, however, limited this

definition to only those people displaced due

to events occurring before 1 January 1951.

Because events after the Convention

continued to result in an increasing number of

refugees, the United Nations General

Assembly decided to expand the scope of the

definition and of their responsibility. The 1967

Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees

maintained the definition of refugees but

removed the date limitation.

Asylum Seeker: A term used most often in

reference any refugee or displaced person in

need of protection and assistance. Official

organizations use the term “asylum seeker” to

refer specifically to a person “in transit who is

applying for sanctuary in some other place

than” his or her original place of residence.

In addition, according to UNHCRix:

Refoulement: The act of forcibly returning an

asylum seeker to the location in which his or

her freedoms are threatened. The 1951

Convention takes a strong stance of non-

refoulement.

Repatriation: The act of returning refugees to

their home nation. To achieve voluntary

repatriation is one of the United Nation’s

paramount goals in addressing the refugee

problem and the ideal solution in most

situations. A complete and thorough process

of repatriation includes key steps known as

the 4Rs: repatriation, reintegration,

rehabilitation, and reconstruction.

Migration has often been, and is likely to

continue to be, an important catalyst of

advancement. But refugees and migrants are

fundamentally different, and for that reason

are treated very differently under modern

international law. Economic migrants who

choose to move in order to improve the

future prospects of themselves and their

8

families are different from those who were

forced to leave due to a crisis which bars

them from adequate living. On the other

hand, refugees are people who have to move

if they are to save their lives or preserve their

freedom. It is this difference in motivation

that led to their different status in law.

However, at the end of the day, these

distinctions are not as clear-cut in the eyes of

international law, as rules and regulations are

unique to important to assess carefully the

impact of the economic crisis on migrants and

migration policy in the European Union,

especially at this time when Europe has

recognized the importance of migration for

the future competitiveness of the Union.

The figure below shows that water

management is the least uncertainty and

impact on migration while the key factor

which could alter the migration trend and has

the greatest uncertainty within the European

Union is its own economic growth.

Furthermore, migrants are especially affected

by changes in the economic situation in

Europe, which explains why their situation

worsened due to the Eurozone Crisis.

Conversely, while highly political and often

projected factors, such as xenophobia or

conflict, also have an impact on migration, it is

not important as the economic situation in

the EU.each country and it goes without

saying that such instances, let alone crises,

such as migration, refugee and asylum

seeking are that of which involve multiple

Picture 2: Key Uncertainties for Migration in Europe in 2035: Relative Impact and Knowledge.

9

parties with their own distinct laws. This

confusion of jurisdiction is what pushes

supranational organizations such as the

European Union to clarify and act upon.

III. Impacts on Migration

In order to create policies concerning

migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers, it is

In essence, this figure highlights the

interrelated connection between the

economics of the EU and the patterns of

migration. Therefore, how the EU and its

Member States continue to respond to the

economic crisis and recovery is of particular

relevance to the success of many initiatives,

such as EU’s Stockholm Programme and

Europe 2020 Agenda, which gives renewed

emphasis to migration as a priority area in the

European Union and highlights the

importance of migration for the

competitiveness of the EU.

IV. Humanitarian Situation

The number of irregular migrants crossing –

and dying in – the Mediterranean Sea has

surged in recent years, fueled by conflict and

instability on the Sea’s southern shores. Since

January 2014, an estimated 124,380 have

landed in Europe; the majority in Italy

(108,172), followed by Greece, Spain and

Malta; an incredible increase from 2013

(60,000), 2012 (22,500) and 2011 (69,000).

While the European Union (EU) attempts to

secure its borders against this influx of

irregular migration, a humanitarian crisis is

unfolding at its border. In August 2014,

UNHCR reported that 1,889 Europe-bound

migrants have drowned in 2014; this is a

dramatic difference from 2012 (500 people)

and 2013 (600 people).x

The main departure point for migrants

crossing the Mediterranean to Europe is

Libya, which according to UNHCR, “where the

worsening security situation has fostered the

growth of people smuggling operations, but

also prompted refugees and migrants living

there to decide to risk the sea rather than

remain in a zone of conflict.” Human

traffickers have taken advantage of this

political instability and ongoing conflict,

establishing Libya as a transit point for

migrants from Africa and the Middle East. xi

10

The result is a complex humanitarian crisis,

often overshadowed by talk of immigration

enforcement and border security. UNHCR has

called for “urgent and concerted European

action including strengthened search and

rescue operations in the Mediterranean.”xii

The staggering number of deaths in 2014

alone highlights the dangers of this journey,

where smugglers often crowd large numbers

of people onto unseaworthy boats. After 366

people drowned off the coast of the Italian

island Lampedusa when their boat capsized in

October 2014, the Italian Navy and

coastguard launched the “Mare Nostrum”

(Our Sea) mission to patrol Mediterranean

waters for migrants; in September of the

same year, the European Commission

announced that it will eventually take over.

Regrettably, such enforcement missions often

neglect humanitarian and human rights

considerations.xiii

Picture 3 : Rescue workers recover bodies on the beach in the Sicilian village of Sampieri, Italy.

11

These missions can and do save the lives of

thousands of imperiled migrants, yet their

primary mission is border control. xiv That

often means turning back migrants before

they reach Europe’s shores. Before the Libyan

Revolution, Italy and other European

countries cooperated with the Gaddafi regime

to enforce EU border controls – through deals

that enriched Gaddafi while raising serious

accusations of human rights abuses on both

sides.xv

For one, the wave of irregular migrants

crossing the Mediterranean includes many

potential asylum seekers – people with

recognizable grounds for temporary or

permanent refugee protection. xvi Many of

those risking their lives at sea in their attempt

to find safety in Europe are refugees fleeing

war, conflict, violence and persecution. Many

come from countries ravaged by extended

civil wars, such as Syria, Mali and Somalia.

Under international law, refugees have a right

to protection, and cannot be forcibly returned

to places where they fear violence or

persecution – a foundational principle of

international refugee law known as non-

refoulement.xvii

While states have a sovereign right to control

immigration to their territories, the EU cannot

simply turn away irregular migrants from the

Middle East and North Africa, as many have

legitimate claims to protection under

international law. xviii Beyond a border

enforcement approach, states must also

address the humanitarian and protection

needs of migrants and asylum-seekers on

their borders. xix This includes rescue from

dangerous conditions on the high seas,

registration, food and shelter, medical and

Picture 4 : An airport hangar in Lampedusa contains the bodies of more than 300 migrants who drowned trying to cross the Mediterranean in October 2013. Photograph: Roberto Salomone/EPA

12

psychological services, and access to fair and

efficient asylum procedures. Often,

compliance with the principle of non-

refoulement requires at least temporary

admission for asylum-seekers. There is also

need for greater international efforts to

combat human trafficking and smuggling,

international crimes that prey on vulnerable

would-be migrants and refugees. xx More

broadly, addressing the surge in irregular

migration will ultimately require getting at its

root causes: conflict, violence, persecution,

instability and extreme poverty in many

regions of the world.xxi

V. Impact on Social Protection and Access to

Welfare

A current issue has been a lack of a welfare

safety net for migrants. Workers from certain

countries need to work and register under the

Workers Registration Scheme for 12 months

before they are granted social supports. Due

to the difficulties of achieving this

requirement, many workers cannot gain

welfare support and thus have very limited

access to social benefits. Additionally, even

after being eligible, many migrants are still

reluctant to claim the welfare benefits, as

claiming such benefits may negatively impact

on their residence status. In some countries,

such as Ireland and the Czech Republic,

migrant workers who register as unemployed

have to find new employment within a certain

period, or they lose their permission to stay.

The emphasis on EU migrants and their access

to benefits is symptomatic of at least two sets

of issues. On one hand, there is the economic

crisis and the need for governments to be

seen as delivering protections to their

domestic constituencies. xxii On the other

hand, the question of individual member

states’ sovereignty in relation to EU-level

governance, as well as domestic perceptions

of this issue, serves to frame domestic

politics. In the case of benefits, there are

concerns about lack of state control over an

essential policy area such as migration.xxiii In

the U.K., the inability to control EU migration

has led to discussions limiting EU migrants,

which would require a renegotiation of free

movement provisions with the EU. This option

is portrayed as a way of regaining sovereignty

back from Brussels, regardless of whether it

would actually be possible to backtrack on

free movement. xxivThe EU as a system of

governance, together with the saliency of

migration policy, allow for the exploitation of

discrepancies and tensions to cultivate

domestic political agendas. xxv

13

VI. Public Opinion and Xenophobia

As unemployment among the general

population increased and job competition

became fiercer during the economic

downturn and surrounding regional conflicts,

it was expected that public attitudes towards

migration would become more negative

compared to what they had been before the

crisis, and that xenophobic and racist

incidents would increase in this period.

Even before such crises, violent racism have

shown a rising trend in Germany, with

reported incidents of racist violence and crime

increasing by 14 percent between 2005 and

2006, going up from 15,914 incidents in 2005

to 18,142 in 2006. xxvi Some British media

outlets have labelled migrants from the

Romania and Bulgaria as unskilled or potential

"benefit tourists". And British police have sent

a team to Romania to try to discourage

jobless Romanians from coming to Britain.

xxviiRomanians already living in England are

upset by negative stereotypes that have risen

from the anticipated January 1 lifting of work

restrictions.xxviii

If the emergence of nationalist and

xenophobic right – wing political parties in

Europe – is a signal of a larger trend towards

increasing xenophobia in the future, it is

Picture 5 : A picture of demonstration on xenophobia. 1

14

possible that there may be more restrictive

and selective immigration policies. There may

be more evidence of this trend in the ‘culture

of denial,’ which currently exists in asylum

processing and bilateral migration

agreements with North African states, for

such process and agreements assume

migrants are not legally entitled to refugee

protection.xxix However, it is highly uncertain

whether and to what degree these trends will

occur. Future improvements in the integration

of immigrant groups might cause a decline in

xenophobia or Islam phobia. Moreover,

Europe’s commitment on international legal

norms and principles and multicultural

aspirations may suggest a future in which,

despite incidences of xenophobia, most

migrants will be welcomed and incorporated

into society. Consequently, the future of

xenophobia, racism, and identity politics in

Europe remains highly uncertain.

VII. Organizations Related to the Issue

The United Nations High

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was

created in 1951 to assist in the international

protection of refugees. The organization’s

primary objective is to ensure that all persons

can exercise the right to seek asylum and find

safe refuge in another state, and to return

home voluntarily. One of the agency’s

pressing tasks is to encourage governments to

adopt fair and flexible processes to promote

just and effective refugee law. When UNHCR

was first established, material aspects of

refugee relief (e.g., housing, food) were seen

to be the responsibility of the government

that had granted asylum. As many of the

world’s more recent major refugee flows have

occurred in less developed countries,

however, UNHCR has acquired the additional

role of coordinating material assistance for

refugees and returnees. Although this was not

UNHCR's original mandate, coordination of

material assistance has become one of its

principal functions alongside protection and

the promotion of solutions.

The International Organization of

Migration (IOM) assists with the return of

rejected asylum seekers and refugees referred

by UNHCR.

The International Committee of the

Red Cross (ICRC) is an independent

humanitarian organization that acts as a

neutral entity in assisting and protecting

victims of war, from providing medical care to

victims to arranging exchanges of family

messages. As members of the civilian

population, displaced persons benefit from

ICRC protection and assistance activities

including the protection of civilians; visits to

detainees; medical assistance; food aid; and

restoration of family links between persons

separated by war. The ICRC does not have a

general mandate to provide protection and

assistance to internally displaced persons.

Over the years, however, it has provided

limited assistance to certain groups of

15

internally displaced persons. The ICRC is

considered well placed to provide such help

given its experience in humanitarian and crisis

situate

CURRENT SITUATION

The European Union has both of its hands tied

with migrations within EU member states and

political refugees from outside EU. It is to be

understood that the ongoing Eurozone Crisis,

an offshoot of the Great Recessionxxx, started

several months after the previous Parliament

Election in June 2009 –with the 2014’s result

being vastly different –, has affected most EU

member states, with the hardest-hit

economies were those of southern Europe:

Greece, Cyprus, Italy, Spain, and Portugal,

along with Ireland. Among other reasons,

harsh austerity measures significantly affected

the public approval of EU leadership. The

percentage of Greeks approving the EU

leadership decreased from 32% in 2010 to

19% in 2013, while in Spain, the approval

dwindled more than a half from 59% in 2008

to 27% in 2013. Overall, only four of the 27

members countries approved the EU

leadership, suggesting that distrust about the

treaties and conventions that hold together

modern Europe appear at an all-time high.xxxi

With the euro zone’s economy sputtering,

countries simply cannot cope with a surge of

migrants and asylum seekers. xxxii Yet the

European Union is dragging its feet on forging

a more unified approach to migration that

would distribute the financial and social costs

of coping with refugees more fairly.xxxiii

Part of the problem is the European Union’s

Dublin Regulation, which makes the country

on which an asylum seeker first sets foot

responsible for processing that person’s claim.

xxxivSouthern European countries are on the

front lines, forced to deal with a

disproportionate number of migrants arriving

from North Africa. xxxvAnother problem is a

treaty between Britain and France that allows

British border guards to check passports in

France. With Britain as prime destination for

many migrants, Calais, the French port city,

has found itself overwhelmed with new

arrivals, mostly from Sudan and Eritrea.xxxvi

The continuing mounting surge of political

turmoil in Africa and the Middle East brings

on the tide of migrants and asylum seekers

fleeing in distress towards the European

Union border, challenging European

policymakers in taking action while balancing

every move taken with the political fallout

and outburst of recent economic upheaval.

The current ad hoc response from European

leaders is mostly due to the Eurozone Crisis

happening since 2008, which in itself creating

huge shift of economic migrants of labors

from Southern part of Europe to its more

stable counterpart in the North. Until 2014,

Many of European Union countries struggling

with being succumbed to a new level of high

16

unemployment rate and reduced government

services due to political extremism shift (e.g.

French, United Kingdom) and xenophobia

inside each EU’s members’ states. These

developments have raised concerns about an

erosion of EU exemplary core values like

human rights and travel freedoms voiced up

under the Schengen Agreement xxxvii . With

most of the nationalist parties projected to

make big gains in the May 2014, the results

actually prove that more conflicts and debates

within the countries of EU were to take place,

even after the European Parliament Election

2014. With September passing – along with

the election –, results shows that in total,

roughly a quarter of all seats went to parties

skeptical of the EU or protest parties. Thus,

the election was seen as far as anti-

establishment. In the wake of the election,

several prominent political figures said the EU

needed to realign its priorities in a hurry.

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte called for

"fewer rules and less fuss", while British Prime

Minister David Cameron said "Europe should

concentrate on what matters, on growth and

jobs, and not try to do so much.xxxviii

Violent turmoil in Libya, a major departure

point for migrants attempting to reach Europe

across the Mediterranean, is causing panic,

and traffickers are overloading boats. On

August 29, 2013, 19 migrants were rescued

from a boat that sank off the coast of Libya

and had been carrying 270 people.

xxxixMeanwhile, Spain is blaming Morocco for a

surge of some 1,000 migrants that made it

across the Strait of Gibraltar on calm seas

within a single 48-hour period in July 2014.

Morocco is reeling from its role as a staging

ground for people attempting to reach

Europe, many by climbing the razor-wire

topped fences that surround Spain’s North

African territories of Ceuta and Melilla. xlItaly

is at the breaking point. More than 100,000

people have arrived in Italy from North Africa

since the beginning of this 2014. Italy says it

has rescued 4,000 migrants over one

weekend in August alone.xli

Only an end to terror and conflict in Syria, Iraq

and Libya and a significant improvement in

African living standards would stem the flow

Picture 6 : The migration crisis needs to be tackled at European Level.

17

of desperate people from Africa and the

Middle East who are reaching Europe.xlii That,

unfortunately, is not likely to happen in the

immediate future. Europe has a crisis on its

hands that is feeding the rise of populist anti-

immigration parties and ugly xenophobia

across the Continent.xliii

Unfair Burden Sharing

The Southern European governments have

begun to demand, in their perspective, a

fairer sharing of the burden of dealing with

the crisis with northern European states and

an increase in EU funding. The countries on

the frontline of the migration crisis, due to

their close proximity with the Mediterranean

route, are also among the hardest hit by

Europe's financial crisis, leaving them with

little financial flexibility to deal with the mass

migration. More than 32,000 migrants from

Africa and the Middle arrived in Italy and

Malta in 2013, which according to the United

Nations, and made a hazardous crossing of

the Mediterranean in rickety boats. Italian

navy and coast guard ships rescued more than

700 migrants between Sicily and North Africa

overnight as the immigration crisis showed no

signs of abating. xliv

However, the governments in wealthy

northern countries, wary of opinion polls

showing a surge in anti-immigration

sentiment and rising support for far-right

parties that are proven to do well in May's

European Parliament elections, resist

increasing their responsibility for handling the

problem.

EU leaders have proposed no specific new

steps to counter the crisis, beyond composing

an EU task force to examine more effective

migration methods. They have yet to mention

any increase in resources for the EU's

FRONTEX border control agency.

The common European immigration policy

needs to provide a flexible framework that

takes into account European Union (EU)

countries’ particular situations and is

implemented in partnership between the EU

countries and institutions. xlv Proper

communication will provide principles on

which the common policy will be built upon

and the necessary actions for implementing

these principles. EU countries will also need to

aim at ensuring that legal immigration

contributes to EU’s socio-economic

development, EU countries’ acts are

coordinated, cooperation with non-EU

countries is developed further and illegal

immigration and trafficking in human beings

are tackled effectively. xlviThe European Union

needs to reform a migration policy that clearly

is not working. Besides more and faster

search-and-rescue operations at sea, Europe

must provide legal avenues to safety, lest

more migrants lose their lives on deadly

journeys.xlvii

18

PAST INTERNATIONAL ACTIONS

I. European Convention on Human

Rights

The European Convention on Human Rights

was created to protect human rights and

fundamental freedoms in Europe. Drafted in

1950 by the now defunct Council of Europe, it

was officially entered into force on 1953.

Through this convention, the European Court

of Human Rights was established, which

enabled violations of human rights to be

trialed and convicted.

Within this convention, the important articles

regarding refugees are articles 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9,

10, 13, 14, and 16. It is important to note that

the European Convention on Human Rights

does not contain any right to asylum and

makes no direct references to asylum seekers

or refugees.xlviii However, a very important

case by the European Court of Human Rights

established that states were indeed

responsible, in certain instances, for the

wellbeing of individuals in other countries.

xlixThe concerned case is in article 3 of the

European Convention, where it states that

"No one shall be subjected to torture or

inhuman or degrading treatment or

punishment".

In recent years the European Court has again

stressed the unconditional nature of the

prohibition against ill-treatment and

established the principle that a state wishing

to deport even an individual found guilty of a

serious criminal offence or constituting a

threat to national security must first make an

independent evaluation of the circumstances

the individual would face in the country of

return. Although article 3 is most often called

upon to protect asylum seekers and refugees,

other articles may also be invoked to ensure

that their human rights are respected. In

particular article 4 (prohibition of forced or

compulsory labor), article 5 (deprivation of

liberty), article 6 (right to a fair and impartial

hearing "within a reasonable time"), article 8

(respect for private and family life), article 9

(right to freedom of thought, conscience and

religion), article 10 (right to freedom of

expression), article 13 (right to the grant of an

effective remedy before a national authority)

and article 16 (no restrictions on political

activity of aliens) can offer substantial

protection.l

II. Stockholme Programme and Action

Plan

The Stockholm Programme was adopted in

2009 to set out priorities in the area of justice,

freedom, and security for the period 2010-

2014. The program signifies the priority given

to migration issues in Europe, issues that

range from migration and development to

labour migration, to irregular migration and

integration. The Stockholm Programme differs

from previous programmes in its migration

19

priorities, in that its top priority is the The

Global Approach to Migration, or the external

dimension of the EU’s migration policy based

on partnership with third countries. A weak

point of the Stockholm Programme is that it

does not discuss how to develop a common

labor migration strategy. Fortunately, the

Stockholm Programme does emphasize equal

rights between third-country nationals and EU

nationals and places greater emphasis on

integration.

Although, in April 2010, the European Council

issued an Action Plan for the implementation

of the Stockholm Programme between 2010

and 2014, the Plan is yet to be endorsed by

the European Parliament and the Council. In

particular, the EC communication states that

the economic crisis should not prevent the EU

from “consolidating a genuine common

immigration and asylum policy... with

ambition and resolve.” In this respect, the EC

intends to focus on developing community

legislation in the field of seasonal

employment and admission of third-country

nationals in the framework of intra-corporate

transfer. Moreover, the EC intends to foster

debate on specific areas of migration policy by

issuing communications on increased

coherence between immigration policy and

other relevant EU policies, in particular on

how to strengthen the link between the

development of migration policy and the

Europe 2020 strategy and address labour

shortages through migration in EU Member

States, and on an EU agenda for integration,

including the development of a coordination

mechanism.li

III. Europe 2020 Strategy

The Europe 2020 Strategy is a 10-year

strategy proposed by the European

Commission in 2010 which aims to provide

smart, sustainable, inclusive growth of the EU

using greater coordination or national and

European policies. Europe 2020 identifies

several strategic priorities, namely,

developing a knowledge and innovation-

based economy, promoting sustainable

growth and inclusive societies characterized

by high employment, social and territorial

cohesion, and setting related headline targets.

In particular, the new strategy includes

reinforced references to migration in the

context of raising employment levels and

combating poverty by removing barriers to

labour market participation.

The strategy puts forward seven flagship

initiatives, including an “Agenda for New Skills

and New Jobs” that strengthens the

importance of this joint policy initiative by the

EC and the EU Member States launched at the

end of 2008. The “New Skills for New Jobs”

initiative wishes to modernize labour markets

through faciliting labour mobility and the

development of skills and forecast future

needs for new skills in the EU labour markets.

20

Guideline 7 calls for “increasing labour market

participation and reducing structural

unemployment”, including through promotion

of labour market integration of legal migrants.

The EU headline target is “to bring by 2020 to

75 per cent the employment rate for women

and men aged 20–64.” Furthermore,

Guideline 8 refers to “developing a skilled

workforce responding to labour market

needs, promoting job quality and lifelong

learning”, specifically stating that “quality

initial education and attractive vocational

training must be complemented ... by

targeted migration and integration policies.”

Overall, the Europe 2020 Strategy supports

migrants through the provision of jobs in the

EU labor markets, providing the education

and training required for those jobs, and

promotes the integration of legal migrants to

labor markets.

IV. Admissions Restrictions

Countries of destination, in particular, have

adopted various measures such as admissions

restrictions, which tend to focus on low-

skilled sectors, prioritizing nationals, reducing

quotas, and changing visa and admissions

requirements such as those pertaining to the

minimum salary required. Many of these

measures were mainly adjustments to existing

policies rather than changes to overarching

frameworks.

In Italy, quotas for migrant workers were

almost completely cancelled in 2009, with

only seasonal agricultural workers and

workers in the tourism sector admitted.

However, with 2010 decree on immigration

flows and quotas has been published by the

Corte dei Conti (State Auditors Department),

there was no quota for regular workers and

only 80,000 seasonal workers (in the

agricultural and tourism sectors), which also

included 4,000 self-employed workers. In its

2009 immigration law, Italy has also made

illegal entry and stays a criminal offence,

leading to immediate deportation and high

fines. In addition, the total number of work

permits issued by the Hungarian government

decreased by 33.5 per cent in 2009 compared

to 2008. Similarly, Portugal had also reduced

its quota for foreign workers to 3,800 in 2009

from 8,600 in 2008.lii

Spain and the UK have reduced admissions

based on limiting the skills requested on

labour shortage lists, while Ireland changed its

visa requirements for entry, including new

provisions such as minimum salary

requirements. In February 2008, the UK

government introduced a civil penalty system,

which has substantially increased penalties

(up to GBP 10,000 or two years in prison) for

employers who hire irregular workers. Since

the introduction of this new system, the UK

Border Agency has issued more than 1,000

fines totalling more than GBP 10 million. This

is a considerable tightening, considering that

21

between 1997 and 2006, only 37 employers

were found guilty of offences under a

previous legislation relating to illegal work. In

Austria and Germany, restrictions on

admissions of nationals of Member States

that joined the EU in 2004 continue.liii

V. Timeline of Significant Events

1948 – Universal Declaration of Human

Rights,

1949 – European Convention on Human

Rights,

1951 – UN Refugee Convention, ‘The Creation

of United Nations High Commissioner

for Refugees’

1967 – Protocol Relating to Status of Refugees

(geographic restrictions removed from

1951 Refugee Convention),

1969 – Convention Governing the Specific

Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa

1984 – Cartagena Declaration on Refugees by

Organization of American States

1989 – Convention on the Rights of the Child

1994 – Declaration on the Elimination of

Violence against Women

1999 – Tampere Programme

2004 – Hague Programme

2009 – Stockholm Programme and Action Plan

2010 – Europe 2020 Strategy

BLOC POSITIONS

Tensions between state policies and

disparities in the diverse financial health of

European States – in particular, the difficulties

facing countries like Greece, Ireland, Portugal,

and Spain in managing their primary deficits –

reveal challenges to the economic and

political cohesion of the European Union.

While it is unlikely that EU and Eurozone will

completely fragment by 2035, the future

strength of EU cohesion, the position of the

less prosperous member states in the Union,

and the future of the process of EU expansion

remain highly uncertain. liv If cohesion

weakens on an economic level, whether or

not states withdraw from the Eurozone, and

markets become increasingly depressed in the

weakest European states while others remain

stable or even experiencing growth, a process

of economic divergence will occur and the EU

may experience troubles in the future. lv

General international consensus agrees fully

that the migration situation requires

immediate and full attention, yet states are

less enthusiastic to offer refugees asylum or

to provide the much-needed financial support

to United Nations refugee organizations. The

debate then becomes a question of how to

achieve a solution, which involved every party

to take on the burden, and how to manage

the allocation of limited resources.

The division of viewpoints on the subject of

22

refugees rest primarily in a nation’s

geographic location, economic strength, and

their experience in dealing with migration in

the past. Each nation, therefore, has a specific

perspective to bring to the migration debate,

but there are opinions associated with certain

blocs of nations that share similar general

characteristics.

As with the sovereign-debt crisis, national

interests have consistently trumped European

ones in the areas of migration and asylum. lvi

This was illustrated in 2011, when France

briefly reintroduced border controls in the

free – movement Schengen area, a

cornerstone of the European project, in

response to the influx of thousands of

Tunisian and Libyan refugees in neighboring

Italy.lvii

The adoption of "fortress" lviii policies by

several EU member states has come at a high

cost. In Greece, the implementation of stricter

border-control operations, like its Aspida

(Shield program, to bar illegal migrants from

entering Greece) program, has taken

precedence over reforming their

dysfunctional asylum system and while Aspida

has successfully lowered the numbers of

migrants entering the EU via the Greek-

Turkish border, many rights activists believe

that fortified land borders have simply pushed

refugees and migrants to risk more dangerous

sea passages.lix

Host Countries in EU

Nations in the Northern parts of the EU

region, such as the United Kingdom, France

and Germany, as well as nations that neighbor

key sources of refugees, such as Spain and

Italy, often serve as either voluntary or

involuntary host nations to asylum seeker.

The more economically stable countries of the

Picture 7 : Caricature depicting EU's policy towards migrants

23

north have continued to offer more inclusive

migration and asylum policies. In September

2013, Sweden announced that it would offer

permanent residency to all Syrian refugees.

Germany has also committed to offer ten

thousand Syrian refugees temporary

residency. However, some experts says these

policies run counter to the trend of anti-

immigrant sentiment that is gaining hold in

both countries as well as across Europe.

These nations are generally characterized by a

stronger economy with better-off conditions

from the financial crisis, reflected in their

relatively low (hence appealing)

unemployment rate. These nations are also

relatively seen as a safer and secure

sanctuary, both in terms of geographic and

politics. This bloc of EU member states must

deal with the influx of sometimes millions of

people into their land and society, which pose

pressing security, economic, and political

uncertainties for that nation’s government.

These nations ask that other, more southern

nations increase their involvement and

undertake a greater share of the burden. In

many discussions, donor states show a

reluctance to offer any additional assistance,

while in other discussions, host nations

sometimes are not even included. In a

resolution, these host nations states seek

stronger demands of donor states’

governance that commit them to a larger

financial contribution to help expand the host

nations’ capacity for refugees.

One of the greatest concerns of these host

nations is the security risk that refugees bring.

The immigration of new and diverse peoples

puts a strain on national identity and often

leads to conflicts of culture, language, and

resource availability. Furthermore, unless

refugees have a full and successful

acclimation into productive society, their

presence could lead to an increase in

violence, crime, and poverty.

Though, host nations are not all economically

more stable; some, such as Spain, require

other European Union member states and

organizations to provide aid in the

assimilation process. This aid often comes at a

high price tag for donor states. In cases of

violence and conflict between natives and

refugees, a nation might also require

peacekeeping or external military assistance

so as to prevent the conflict from escalating.

Southern Sending Countries in EU

Economically less stable member states

residing in the southern parts of the EU

region, such as Romania and Bulgaria, are just

2 examples of a bloc of EU nations that are

continuously donating an influx of migrants to

fellow EU host nations. Such countries, which

namely migrate to nations such as UK, are in

the process creating friction with these host

nations. In the past, host EU countries such as

24

the UK and France have shown reluctance to

become fully open towards the free-

mobilization of EU citizens from particular

newly joined member states, as these

migrants are seen to potentially become

burdens to the economy. Now, Romanian and

Bulgarian migrants are experiencing

discrimination in both the workforce and

general society in these host nations. This

puts this bloc of southern nations in a tricky

position as they are not as well equipped to

maintain their economy, hence causing the

migration, while on the other hand

continuation of such outflows of citizens is not

seen to be healthy for a nation’s sovereignty

either.

Key Sending Countries Outside of EU

Sending countries mainly include nations in

heavily conflicted regions surrounding the EU

as previously discussed, such as Syria, Lybia,

Iraq, Egypt and other Northern African

countries. This bloc of sending countries also

include surrounding nations facing economic

instability such as Morocco, namely having

resulting a surge of over 1,000 migrants

crossing the Gibraltar strait to Spain in a mere

48 hour period in early August. Such

countries, namely those in the northern

African region, have resulted in a massive

refuge of more than 100,000 people to Italy

since the beginning of 2014. Italy says it has

rescued 4,000 migrants over one weekend in

August alone.lx

PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

The question remains: with limited manpower

and resources, how should the European

Union allocate and prioritize the resources

they do have in order to solve the world’s

continuing refugee crisis? With causes such as

euro-crisis (which affect intra-EU migrations)

and political turmoil outside of EU (which

affect inter-EU migrations), EU needs to take a

stance that adheres to its mandate, while also

promoting international safety. While a

refugee’s situation depends on innovative and

thorough practices on the ground, the greater

solution rests in determining an

organizational structure and division of

responsibility amongst the relevant United

Nations agencies and NGOs to efficiently and

effectively achieves a solution.

EU Communication and Burden-Sharing

One of the most obvious obstacles to a

refugee solution in recent years involves a

lack of cooperation and agreement amongst

member states. Host states that neighbor

refugee conflicts feel abandoned and

overwhelmed with the number of refugees

crossing into their borders. In comparison,

wealthy and developed states, with the

financial capability to enforce immigration

policies and provide assistance, fear the

security risk of taking in asylum seekers.

These, mostly northern, nations prefer a

solution that emphasizes local assimilation or

repatriation, rather than asylum.

25

A past United Nations approach that may be

worthy of recognition by the EU entitled

development through local integration (DLI) –

directs funds and efforts towards facilitating

integration between refugees and the host

countries, so as to make refugees a benefit to

the economy and society of their host nation,

by contributing to agricultural production or

to the local economies. To attract an increase

in financial and other contributions, the

United Nations and the UNHCR, while

themselves remaining a non-political body,

can use the international political

environment to “hook” member nations into

increasing donations.

Although the willingness of member nations

may be limited, the European Union has a

fundamental responsibility to uphold an

institutional framework designed to regulate

the behavior of its member states.

Definition & Organization

There is a great amount of focus and

attention on how the European Union is

perceived as having a lack of a unified stance

on refugees, asylum seekers as well as

migrants. This hinders the possibility of any

organized efforts towards solving such

influxes of irregular migration stemming from

both internal and external crises. In the world,

one of the major current discussions

surrounding the refugee situation involves an

expansion of the 1951 Convention, the

definition of the word refugee, and the

people under the domain of the UNHCR.

Pointing to documents such as the UDHR

mandate, supporters of an expanded role

suggest that the United Nations has a role as a

protector, and that role should not be limited

to only those covered under the current

definition of refugee and IDP.

A 2006 UNHCR report highlights the public

tendency to confuse “economic migrants and

asylum-seekers fleeing persecution” and

emphasizes the need to prioritize those in

desperate situations because “Protection is at

the core of the Office’s humanitarian

mandate.” Although the 1951 Convention

mandates assistance in cases of “fear of

persecution,” many argue that it should be

expanded to include a fear of sexual

exploitation, poverty, generalized

persecution, or violence.

However, the concern over expanding the

definition of people receiving protection

under the 1951 Convention poses a risk to the

UNHCR and similar agencies that handle the

vast majority of the refugee burden. In an

organization that already has a strain on

resources and capacity, expanding the

mandate might force the relevant agencies to

become involved in and spend resources on

situations of low emergency priority, while on

the other hand, the creation of new agency

will also need a lot more resources. It seems it

is better to gain more resources and empower

26

the existing organizations.

Long Term Assistance

During times of limited offerings of asylum,

quick action projects that focus on achieving

repatriation as swiftly as possible become

popular solutions to refugee problems,

especially after refugees have spent long

periods of time in displacement camps,

improper repatriation could lead to further

civil strife or economic troubles. A full and

thorough repatriation process involves

“practical help with money grants, skills

teaching, and rebuilding of homes, schools

and infrastructure.” A collaboration of various

European as well as United Nations agencies

with specialties in many of these areas,

therefore, provides a crucial player in helping

refugees re-acclimate to life at home.

A key aspect to providing local integration

assistance is making the asylum seekers an

active, beneficial, and productive part of local

society. The measures call for assistance and

cooperation between the UNHCR and host

nations to actively work towards providing

new migrants with the training and skills

needed to make a productive transition.

Improving Law on Refugees and its

Enforcement

Concerted action is required to prevent the

exploitation of refugees and asylum seekers

by unscrupulous human smugglers. Even if

this has the effect of closing one of the few

means by which they can enter Europe, it will

also prevent many desperate people from

losing their money and their lives in the

process. At the same time, more vigorous

efforts are required to inform prospective

asylum seekers of the potential risks when

they place themselves in the hands of

smugglers and gangs who are motivated only

by profit. The countries of Europe, which

generally enjoy high levels of democracy,

human rights, stability and prosperity, must

use every asset at their disposal to ensure

that people in other countries are able to

benefit from the same conditions.

SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER

RESEARCH

Reflecting on how complex the

migration issue in the European Union is,

delegates are expected to do further research

to enhance their understanding. This study

will be able to give background analysis, but in

order to get deeper understanding, delegates

can try to utilize access to news outlet,UNHCR

and IOM publication, EU policy brief and

international journal.

To understand the complexity, one can start

to understand migration from development-

security nexus (Sørensen:2012,

Hillifield:2004). There has been many writings

that discuss how migration can contribute to

development (Skeldon : 2008, EU

Communication on Maximising the

27

Development Impact of Migration: 2013) as

well as the security issue it brings with

(Lohrmann:2000, Choucri :2002,

Huysmans:2000).

Normatively, delegates should aim to create

fairer burden sharing and an open region for

humanitarian reason, but delegates should

also consider its country history of migration

and analyze its government-society position

towards migration. Many European countries

which used to be sending countries are

becoming hosting countries as well and

creating a shift in sentiment and policy.

Delegates should also refer to recent news

publication in order to keep their research

relevant to current condition.

QUESTIONS A RESOLUTION MUST

ANSWER

1. How could EU deal with underlying

forces that are causing the continuous

flow of migrants, refugees and asylum

seekers from surrounding regions as

well as within the EU itself? Also, how

could EU promote stability and

prosperity to avoid unbearable influx

of these people?

2. With the world eyes on EU stance on

the ad hoc borders action, should the

EU alter or expand its own definition

of “refugee”, “asylum seeker” and

“migrant”? Should the EU only

protect those fleeing armed conflict

or do other causes merit refugee

status?

3. To what extent should EU member

states have the responsibility to admit

and accommodate such refugees,

asylum seekers and migrants? How

should the EU allocate responsibility

of this complex issue amongst

member states? Should a solution

provide mandates for individual

member states or outline general

guidelines for the entirety of the

European Union?

4. How should the European Union

address the resulting issue of

xenophobia?

5. How should the European Union

involve relevant NGOs and INGOs as

well as other concerned parties?

28

REFERENCES

i Ben Hall, Immigration in the European Union: problem or solution?, accessed from http://www.oecdobserver.org/news/archivestory.php/aid/337/Immigration_in_the_European_Union:_problem_or_solution_.html#sthash.q1Ise20H.dpuf at September 9th 2014

ii Ibid. iii Ibid. iv International Organization for

Migration, “Migration and the Economic Crisis in the European Union: Implications for Policy”, International Organization for Migration, 2010

v Mathilde Hamel, “Europe’s Economic Crisis Prompting Huge South-to-North Migration Within EU, http://www.ibtimes.com/europes-economic-crisis-prompting-huge-south-north-migration-within-eu-1330257, 2013

vi David Barrett, “Immigration Surge driven by Eurozone Crisis”, accesed from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10274266/Immigration-surge-driven-by-eurozone-crisis.html at September 1st 2014

vii Jeanne Park, “Europe’s Migration Crisis”, accesed from http://www.cfr.org/migration/europes-migration-crisis/p32874, 2014 at September1st 2014

viii Amnesty International, “Refugee and Migrant Rights”, accesed from http://www.amnestyusa.org/, at 1st September 2014

ix Kate Jastram and Marilyn Achiron, “Refugee Protection: A Guide to

International Refugee Law”, UNHCR, 2001

x UNHCR, “Three boat tragedies in five days on the Mediterranean”, accesed from http://www.unhcr.org/53fc5e491c3.html at 1st September 2014

xi Julia Brooks, Conflict Migration on the Mediterranean: An Overshadowed Humanitarian Crisis, accessed from http://www.atha.se/blog/conflict-migration-mediterranean-overshadowed-humanitarian-crisis at 1st September 2014

xii Ibid. xiii Ibid. xiv Ibid. xv Ibid. xvi Ibid. xvii Ibid. xviii Ibid. xix Ibid. xx Ibid. xxi Ibid. xxii Nur Abdelkhaliq , EU Migrants Caught

Between Economic Crisis and Domestic Politics,accesed from http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/13807/eu-migrants-caught-between-economic-crisis-and-domestic-politics, 2014

xxiii Ibid. xxiv Ibid. xxv Ibid. xxvi EU Xenophobia Report: Racism On the

Rise in Germany,accesed from http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/eu-xenophobia-report-racism-on-the-rise-in-germany-a-502471.html

xxvii Change in EU migrant law stirs xenophobia , accesed from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/12/change-eu-migrant-law-stirs-xenophobia-2013122261849205586.html, 2014

29

xxviii European Union Agency for

Fundamental Rights, “Report on Racism and Xenophobia in the Member States of the EU”, 2007

xxix J. Souter (2011) ‘ A Culture of Disbelief or Denial? Critiquing Refugee Status Determination’, Oxford Monitor of Forced Migration.

xxx The Great Recession (also referred to as the Lesser Depression, the Long Recession, or the global recession of 2009) was a global economic decline in the late 2000s decade.

xxxi Simons, Ned. “Skepticism And Contempt Color Upcoming European Parliament Elections”. January 21, 2014. http://www.huffingtonpost.com.

xxxii Europe’s Migration Crisis, accesed from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/01/opinion/europes-migration-crisis.html?_r=0, 2014

xxxiii Ibid. xxxiv Ibid. xxxv Ibid. xxxvi Ibid. xxxvii The Schengen Agreement led to the

creation of Europe's borderless Schengen Area in 1995. The treaty was signed on 14 June 1985 between five of the then ten member states of the European Economic Community near the town of Schengen in Luxembourg. It proposed the gradual abolition of border checks at the signatories' common borders.

xxxviii Paul Taylor; Luke Baker, "After seismic elections, EU leaders assess damage". Reuters. Retrieved 27 May 2014.

xxxix The Editorial Board. Europe’s Migration Crisis. Accesed from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09

/01/opinion/europes-migration-crisis.html, August 31, 2014.

xl Ibid. xli Ibid. xlii Ibid. xliii Ibid. xliv Nami O’ Leary, Hundreds of migrants

rescued in sea off Italy , accesed from http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/25/us-italy-migrants-idUSBRE99O0BP20131025, 2014

xlv A common immigration policy for Europe, accesed from http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/justice_freedom_security/free_movement_of_persons_asylum_immigration/jl0001_en.htm

xlvi Ibid. xlvii The Editorial Board. Europe’s Migration

Crisis. Accessed from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/01/opinion/europes-migration-crisis.html, August 31, 2014.

xlviii The Study Guide : The Rights of Refugees, accesed from http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/edumat/studyguides/refugees.htm,

xlix Ibid. l Ibid. li International Organization for Migration,

“Migration and the Economic Crisis in the European Union: Implications for Policy”, International Organization for Migration, 2010

lii Ibid. liii Ibid. liv Ibid. lv Ibid. lvi The Editorial Board. Europe’s Migration

Crisis. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/01/opinion/europes-migration-crisis.html, August 31, 2014.

30

lvii Ibid. lviii Fortress Europe: How the EU Turns Its

Back on Refugees, accessed from http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/asylum-policy-and-treatment-of-refugees-in-the-european-union-a-926939.html at September 1st 2014

lix Jeanne Park, “Europe’s Migration Crisis”, accesed from http://www.cfr.org, 2014

lx The Editorial Board. Europe’s Migration Crisis, accesed from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/01/opinion/europes-migration-crisis.html, August 31, 2014.