Take refugees or face visa caps, EU to tell other countries - Die Welt

 

European Union flags flutter outside the EU Commission headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, March 12, 2018. REUTERS/Yves Herman

 

BERLIN (Reuters) - The European Commission is planning legislation that would use the threat of denied visas to encourage countries outside the bloc to cooperate on repatriating failed asylum seekers, the German newspaper Die Welt reported on Tuesday.

 

The arrival of more than a million refugees from war and poverty in Africa and the Middle East since 2015 has caused political ructions across Europe, placing governments under pressure to send back more of those who fail to win asylum protection in Europe.

 

But it has not always been easy to secure the cooperation of transit countries or countries of origin, themselves often subject to enormous macroeconomic strains and security concerns.

 

Under the proposed legislation, which Die Welt said would be announced on Wednesday, countries that failed to cooperate would first see fewer visas granted to elites - diplomats and those with service passports - for an initial period of three months.

 

If that failed to secure change, issuance of visas to "normal" citizens would also be reduced, by means including reducing the number of service windows at consulates.

 

Under the plan, European Union member states would inform the Commission, the EU's executive arm, if they had trouble repatriating failed asylum seekers. The Commission would then offer a response.

 

(Reporting by Thomas Escritt)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-03-13

It surprises me a bit to say this, but this seems like a reasonable, well-thought out plan. Immigration/asylum-seeking is such an emotive, controversial issue in Europe that something is required and this seems to make sense.

 

I do believe that there is a duty to take people in (if there are any Christians out there; are you going to be the one who says to Jesus "there is no room at my inn?"). However, I also think that there is a reasonable approach to doing so and sending people back to their own countries is a fair thing to do, as long as it meets the international obligations that countries and the world have agreed to.

 

Dare I say... 

 

"Good one, EU?"

 

 

Edited March 12, 20188 yr by Samui Bodoh
Lack of coffee

And what are the repercussions on countries like Poland who refuses to take any asylumseekers at all? They have ordered Poland several times to do it but they just won't....and it seems they get away with it.

Another good step in fuelling popularity for extreme right wing parties. Italy, Austria, Netherlands Scandinavia, its all coming together....

The real problem is that these most of the so called 'Refugees' are mostly economic migrants looking for better life by forcing their presence down the throats of countries who are not happy to provide freebies to an aliens of different cultures, languages and customs, and here comes the EU and forces and threaten sovereign countries with visa denials....  

Some EU countries have achieved limited success with government to government agreements for the forced deportation of rejected asylum seekers. As this matter has been ongoing for a number of years, it seems to me the measures in the OP are weak. Given many (all?) of the originating countries have deeply corrupt decision makers would it not be more persuasive to freeze the overseas assets of such people, in parallel to bans on entry to the EU.

 

It would be good to know the criteria for declaring safe countries for forcible return of failed asylum seekers.

Edited March 13, 20188 yr by simple1

12 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Some EU countries have achieved limited success with government to government agreements for the forced deportation of rejected asylum seekers. As this matter has been ongoing for a number of years, it seems to me the measures in the OP are weak. Given many (all?) of the originating countries have deeply corrupt decision makers would it not be more persuasive to freeze the overseas assets of such people, in parallel to bans on entry to the EU.

 

It would be good to know the criteria for declaring safe countries for forcible return of failed asylum seekers.

As far as I'm aware, sanctions (freezing of assets) can only be imposed by the Security Council. The UNHCR doesn't have the power.

I doubt Russia and China would be helpful with the EUs refugee problems.

The proposed visa ban for the corrupt elite from rogue countries could be effective.

49 minutes ago, Old Croc said:

As far as I'm aware, sanctions (freezing of assets) can only be imposed by the Security Council. The UNHCR doesn't have the power.

I doubt Russia and China would be helpful with the EUs refugee problems.

The proposed visa ban for the corrupt elite from rogue countries could be effective.

EU can freeze assets of individuals.

 

Asset freezing refers to the blocking of bank accounts and other financial assets of persons listed in EU legal acts. Such persons may be associated with the Taliban, maybe responsible for serious violations of human rights or whose activities seriously undermine democracy or the rule of law. Asset freezing is thus a targeted sanction, for example, against individuals (data subjects) part of or affiliated to the governments of non-EU countries.

 

https://edps.europa.eu/data-protection/data-protection/reference-library/asset-freezing_en

Edited March 13, 20188 yr by simple1

3 hours ago, Thian said:

And what are the repercussions on countries like Poland who refuses to take any asylumseekers at all? They have ordered Poland several times to do it but they just won't....and it seems they get away with it.

Nothing to do with Poland and the rest of the countries refusing refugees.These are failed asylum seekers that the EU wants to return to there homelands. 

6 hours ago, Thian said:

And what are the repercussions on countries like Poland who refuses to take any asylumseekers at all? They have ordered Poland several times to do it but they just won't....and it seems they get away with it.

 

Two different things. This Law is about dealing with countries who refuse to have their own citizens repatriated when those citizens are either illegal immigrants and/or failed asylum seekers.

 

Poland and some other member states oppose the EU commission being able to instruct member states that they must accept a certain amount of refugee asylum seekers when that number/quota has been decided by some bureaucrat. That whole quota issue was created by Merkel to try and appease the German electorate who riled against her "all welcome" policy. She created a mess and wanted to spread that mess to ease her own situation. Understandably some countries don't want Germany dictating to them through the EU.

23 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Two different things. This Law is about dealing with countries who refuse to have their own citizens repatriated when those citizens are either illegal immigrants and/or failed asylum seekers.

 

Poland and some other member states oppose the EU commission being able to instruct member states that they must accept a certain amount of refugee asylum seekers when that number/quota has been decided by some bureaucrat. That whole quota issue was created by Merkel to try and appease the German electorate who riled against her "all welcome" policy. She created a mess and wanted to spread that mess to ease her own situation. Understandably some countries don't want Germany dictating to them through the EU.

You may like to acquaint yourself with some factual background.

 

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1302_en.htm

7 hours ago, Thian said:

And what are the repercussions on countries like Poland who refuses to take any asylumseekers at all? They have ordered Poland several times to do it but they just won't....and it seems they get away with it.

 

Check out the UN resolution on refugees, you'll discover that the first landfall of a refugee is the country that has responsibility for them.  

 

Poland among other countries has every right to refuse entry.  

5 hours ago, meinphuket said:

 Another good step in fuelling popularity for extreme right wing parties. Italy, Austria, Netherlands Scandinavia, its all coming together....

Little wonder about the rise of right wing nationalism considering the failed policies concerning refugees on the part of left wing lunacy euro governments.

 

The concept of Sovereign borders has reemerged after tidal waves of "refugees" swamped Europe.  

 

For those still bleating about unreserved acceptance of "refugees"  I challenge you to listen to what the populace in those European countries has to say about what they endure from culturally opposed "refugees".

  

Edited March 13, 20188 yr by Kimber

17 minutes ago, simple1 said:

You may like to acquaint yourself with some factual background.

 

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1302_en.htm

 

And your point is?

 

Merkel threw the doors open - not just for Germany but for those front line countries whose border controls were always somewhat lapse. And they just want to pass the problem elsewhere.

 

So the EU bureaucrats come up with legally enforceable EU rules that require everyone to deal with the problem that's been created; but in a way that they find PC and acceptable to their liberalism.

 

The EU borders to external countries should have been fixed and strong enough to deal with calamities like this. And then Turkey wouldn't have been able to try and exploit the situation either.

 

Even today Merkel refuses to actually acknowledge she was wrong! And the growing issue of large numbers of largely young single men, who have high expectations of being given many things whilst making zero attempts to assimilate or change their ways, is festering. 

 

EU commission facts - like all issuers of statistics, they only report ones that support their agenda.

4 hours ago, simple1 said:

EU can freeze assets of individuals.

 

Asset freezing refers to the blocking of bank accounts and other financial assets of persons listed in EU legal acts. Such persons may be associated with the Taliban, maybe responsible for serious violations of human rights or whose activities seriously undermine democracy or the rule of law. Asset freezing is thus a targeted sanction, for example, against individuals (data subjects) part of or affiliated to the governments of non-EU countries.

 

https://edps.europa.eu/data-protection/data-protection/reference-library/asset-freezing_en

 

I note that you're in Noosaville, care to share your spot with a couple of hundred thousand "refugees" ? 

23 minutes ago, Kimber said:

 

I note that you're in Noosaville, care to share your spot with a couple of hundred thousand "refugees" ? 

Silly comment.

Edited March 13, 20188 yr by simple1

19 minutes ago, Kimber said:

 

Check out the UN resolution on refugees, you'll discover that the first landfall of a refugee is the country that has responsibility for them.  

 

Poland among other countries has every right to refuse entry.  

Common incorrect claim - check your facts regards asylum seekers rights under international law

29 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

And your point is?

I pointed to the original EU Commission purposes for  refugee quotas which was to relieve pressure on the front line countries of Greece and Italy. It is well known EU and other wealthy countries had significantly underfunded host countries such as Turkey, Lebanon; warnings were raised which were not acted upon in a timely manner. Way too many people blindly follow the PC rants of the right on centre, to lay the blame solely on Merkel is ridiculous.

 

Merkel did accept responsibility of the fiasco of the EU temporarily losing control of managing the asylum influx. IMO there were numerous other factors with many countries avoiding their responsibilities and pointing the finger elsewhere, so good on her for standing up and not being a coward as so many politicians are.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/angela-merkel-refugees-germany-lost-control-crisis-would-turn-back-time-a7320726.html

Edited March 13, 20188 yr by simple1

Again just thrashtalk from EU. How about first ensuring that their own EU members takes some immigrants. Think its about 10 EU countries that havent received 10 immigrants. Damn Sweden would have 20,000 instead of 200,000 y2017. Otherwise a very good idea that will never see any effect.

Inside Germany's high-stakes operation to sort people fleeing death from opportunists and pretenders

"For those worried about the erosion of German culture, it was evidence that the Muslim world, having failed to sack Vienna in 1683, is now coming back in a bum-rush."

Two years after the peak of the influx, more than 80 percent of refugees were jobless, in a general population whose unemployment rate is 5.5 percent. Successful integration is not assured.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/04/the-refugee-detectives/554090/