EU Immigration Crisis Megathread

[Syt]

http://www.thelocal.at/20150818/angry-backlash-to-austrias-new-asylum-law

Angry backlash to new asylum law

The leader of Austria's right-wing Freedom Party (FPÖ), Heinz-Christian Strache, has reacted angrily to the news that the coalition government has reached agreement with the Greens on new legislation that would make communities across the country obliged to take in asylum seekers.

The SPÖ and the ÖVP have been struggling to respond to the number of asylum requests, which rose above 28,300 between January and June alone - as many as for the whole of 2014. Officials expect the total to reach 80,000 this year.

The federal government has struggled to provide accommodation for people as many local authorities have refused to accept any refugees.

The draft law means communities who haven't yet taken in any asylum seekers will now be obliged to - with the quota set to up to 1.5 percent of the local population.

The coalition had needed the support of the Greens as the legislation requires a change to the constitution, and therefore needs a two thirds majority in parliament.

Heinz Christian-Strache voiced his anger at the quotas on Tuesday, saying that they have been imposed on the Austrian people in an undemocratic manner. "It's monstrous to try and simply push this law which is hostile to the population through parliament," he said. He is now calling for a petition (Volksbegehren) to be held on the matter.

The draft law still needs to be passed by parliament but is expected to come into force in October.

Human rights lawyer Georg Bürstmayr told the ORF that the legislation is necessary as the federal government is made responsible for human rights issues by European law and "it is not up to the provinces to make decisions about human rights in a democracy".

Amnesty International recently called conditions at Austria's main refugee camp a "disgraceful" violation of human rights. The Traiskirchen camp, 20 kilometres south of Vienna, has had to stop accepting new arrivals because of disastrous sanitary conditions and hopeless overcrowding.

Built to house 1,800 people, the camp and an adjacent government building are currently home to 4,000 men, women and children.

Up till now the federal government was reliant on goodwill from the states, districts and towns to voluntarily accept refugees. As might be expected, the number of volunteers was low, and if an area would take in refugees it would often be a token gesture.

[Valmy]

In my opinion anybody who wants to come to the US should be allowed to come provided they are not some criminal nutcase.

You sure about that?  If this is official US policy, tens of millions of mainland Chinese will arrive at your shores in no time. 

At first sure. It would even out over time. The Mexicans are not really coming anymore for example.

[Valmy]

If Europe wanted to be this dynamic world leading society again that is what they would do.

Well, I agree. Most of my countrymen don't.

We're standing in the middle of a humanitarian crisis on the shores of Southern Europe. Yet we wash our hands. Shameful and unacceptable.

Taking refugees and immigrants are different. Refugees would have preferred to stay home but couldn't as opposed to immigrants who really want to be in Norway or wherever. Refugees are more problematic and that is why the EU should step in here and ration them to each member so the burden is spread equally. Or rather it would be nice if it could, I do not really know the EU Constitution that well. Damn thing is like 700 pages.

[Syt]

Taking refugees and immigrants are different. Refugees would have preferred to stay home but couldn't as opposed to immigrants who really want to be in Norway or wherever. Refugees are more problematic and that is why the EU should step in here and ration them to each member so the burden is spread equally. Or rather it would be nice if it could, I do not really know the EU Constitution that well. Damn thing is like 700 pages.

It took Austria months to get to a point where the federal state can distribute the refugees equally across the country, and the new law will only come into effect in October.

Imagine how much harder it would be within Europe.

It's very much a situation of everyone for themselves, because no one really wants to take them in for fear of public opinion (Foreigners! Muslims! Leeches!), and it disproportionately affects the border states who are left alone with their problem.

[Valmy]

It's very much a situation of everyone for themselves, because no one really wants to take them in for fear of public opinion (Foreigners! Muslims! Leeches!), and it disproportionately affects the border states who are left alone with their problem.

And in that situation nobody wants to be the sucker left with all the refugees. Hence the problem and why the EU, or somebody, needs to step forward.

[Tamas]

It's very much a situation of everyone for themselves, because no one really wants to take them in for fear of public opinion (Foreigners! Muslims! Leeches!), and it disproportionately affects the border states who are left alone with their problem.

And in that situation nobody wants to be the sucker left with all the refugees. Hence the problem and why the EU, or somebody, needs to step forward.

Unless some miracle happens this will be the end of the EU as we know it.

[Valmy]

Unless some miracle happens this will be the end of the EU as we know it.

No offense but the EU as we know it is not all that.

[Norgy]

If Europe wanted to be this dynamic world leading society again that is what they would do.

Well, I agree. Most of my countrymen don't.

We're standing in the middle of a humanitarian crisis on the shores of Southern Europe. Yet we wash our hands. Shameful and unacceptable.

Taking refugees and immigrants are different. Refugees would have preferred to stay home but couldn't as opposed to immigrants who really want to be in Norway or wherever. Refugees are more problematic and that is why the EU should step in here and ration them to each member so the burden is spread equally. Or rather it would be nice if it could, I do not really know the EU Constitution that well. Damn thing is like 700 pages.

This is not going to happen. As much as some of us want it to.
There is no political will to take in more refugees. The Labour Party promised to take in 10 000 Syrians this year if elected. Well, it wasn't an election year, and they soon went back on that, promising just 8 000. I'd happily see another well-educated, talented pool of Syrians in my hometown. Say, 1000. Refugees may have the same statur internationally, but there is a huge difference between taking in a number of Bosnjaks (who have been nothing but a boon for Norway), Somaliis (who cost a lot generally, and seem unwilling to be anything but Somalis) and Arabs. The Arabs and the Kurds are great immigrants. They create their own jobs, learn the language (well, at least some of it) and are pleasant people. One guy gave me a hug in his store when I had bought my weekly ration of spices and veg there. "Good man", he said.

Norway's been pretty much sheltered from the bad influences from the 2008 crisis. There are jobs, there's spending, but we are starting to feel it. The Conservative/Progress Party cabinet has cut taxes on property and on wealth to nothing, hoping it will spur more activity. You know what helps? Slashing the corporate tax like in Ireland. Like the Labour Party did.

[Zanza]

Unless some miracle happens this will be the end of the EU as we know it.

Why? It does not negate any of the advantages the member states get from EU membership...

[Tamas]

Unless some miracle happens this will be the end of the EU as we know it.

Why? It does not negate any of the advantages the member states get from EU membership...

One of the advantages that will eventually go because of this is free border crossings, for example

[derspiess]

An Arab never hugged me

[Tamas]

Recently a Hungarian journalist pretended to be a Russian-ethnicity refugee/migrant from Kyrgyzistan entering from Serbia, to experience the process the migrants went through.

His report would be way too long to translate, but was quite interesting. To summarise, apart from once incident of totally unwarranted screaming abuse, the policemen assigned to the job of handling the migrants are mostly staying professional, although they do vent pressure by shit-talking the migrants in Hungarian.
But they provide cold food, pork-free when asked, and try to pay attention to keeping nationalities grouped together and families as well.
Then again, almost none of the officers he encountered spoke anything better than most basic English, so its not exactly smooth.

However, my conclusion from his report is that the system created for processing these asylum-seekers is already cracking under the pressure as it was never meant to handle this size. Worst part was probably how they closed the migrants in what are basically prison cells for 48 hours so they stay put until properly processed.

And of course the few stories he heard from other migrants just show how impossible it is to differentiate between an "economic migrant" and a refugee (BTW it seemed to him that most people were cagey about where they came from).

For example, this 19 years old kid from Mali who dreams of being a footballer in Finland: he is Christian, and he left his hometown literally in a hurry, when a bunch of Tuareg attacked them and his uncled yelled at him to run, and to go toward Ghana where he would meet him. He has never seen him again.
He spent some time in Turkey but was constantly asked if he was a Muslim, so decided to go for a Christian country.

So, for example, he is technically not a refugee. But I can't blame him for doing what he is doing. And he can't be sent back to Mali.

So yeah, this situation is fucked up.

One other thing the journalist was surpised about is the recent development of more and more Africans entering from Serbia. It seems like quite a detour, but it would appear they go via ship from Libya to Turkey, and then walk from there.

[Zanza]

Germany now expects 650,000-750,000 asylum seekers in 2015. That will really stress our system that is not built for that kind of numbers.

The government has corrected its estimate from yesterday and now expects up to 800,000 asylum seekers. 

Development of the last ten years shows why 800,000 is really a lot. In brackets acceptance rate.
2005 42908 [ 6,5 ]
2006 30100 [ 6,3 ]
2007 30303 [ 27,5 ]
2008 28018 [ 37,7 ]
2009 33033 [ 33,8 ]
2010 48589 [ 21,6 ]
2011 53347 [ 22,3 ]
2012 77651 [ 27,7 ]
2013 127023 [ 24,9 ]
2014 202834 [ 31,5 ]

Country of origin of asylum seekers in percent and the percentage of accepted asylum requests in the brackets:
Syria - 22,3 [ 85,4 ]
Albania - 17,8 [ 0,4 ]
Afghanistan - 6,3 [ 41,0 ]
Iraq - 6,0 [ 89,3 ]
Serbia - 4,3 [ 0,1 ]
Kosovo - 4,2 [ 0,3 ]
Eritrea - 3,3 [ 73,0 ]
Macedonia - 3,0 [ 0,3 ]
Pakistan - 2,5
Montenegro - 2,3
other - 28,0

I guess someone should tell the Western Balkans economic migrants that they generally won't get asylum in Germany... 

[Syt]

You mean like the ad campaign the German government is running there, telling them that 99.8% of applications from there get rejected?

[Josquius]

For example, this 19 years old kid from Mali who dreams of being a footballer in Finland: he is Christian, and he left his hometown literally in a hurry, when a bunch of Tuareg attacked them and his uncled yelled at him to run, and to go toward Ghana where he would meet him. He has never seen him again.
He spent some time in Turkey but was constantly asked if he was a Muslim, so decided to go for a Christian country.

So, for example, he is technically not a refugee. But I can't blame him for doing what he is doing. And he can't be sent back to Mali.

How isn't he a refugee? It sounds like it to me.