At first sight, Ceuta in Northern Morocco is a Maghrebian mid-size town like many others: an old town Centre with narrow alleys; some shipyards; a fish processing plant. Picturesque, perhaps, but not exactly terrific. Yet there is one thing that makes Ceuta different: an enormous fence, four to six meters high with barbed wire on top that surrounds the whole town. The fence is not there to protect the shipyards or the fish processing plant. It is protecting something much more valuable; a few hectares of Eldorado. Ceuta is a Spanish exclave (technically speaking: a “place of sovereignty”) on Moroccan territory. It is a piece of Europe in Africa, and the fence is there to protect the former from the latter.
CLANDESTINE MIGRATION
Its exceptional status makes Ceuta, as well as the town of Melilla, the second Spanish enclave on Moroccan territory, an important stepping stone for Africans trying to emigrate to Spain or other European Union countries. Both towns have a long record of clandestine immigration; every year thousands of migrants try to climb the fences, enter the towns and cross the sea to mainland Europe. However, October 2005 marked a sad climax of this long story. Within only ten days, about 4000 Africans, most of them from sub-Saharan countries, tried to cross the borders. Whilst in the past most attempts had been made by individuals and in secret, the would-be immigrants now came in huge groups. Hundreds at a time assaulted the fences, using ladders and other improvised gear; if beaten off by the Spanish and Moroccan authorities, they retreated and prepared for the next wave. The pictures that made the international news reminded me of a medieval town under siege rather than of the scenes of clandestine migration known to that day.
During the ten days, at least 14 immigrants who attempted to cross the border but were either shot by the Moroccan armed forces or crushed by their fellow migrants. Only a small part of those who tried actually made it to Spanish territory, often badly wounded, and only to be immediately sent back to Morocco and left to the mercy of the local authorities. A press communiqué issued by Médecins Sans Frontières (the “French doctors”--MSF) states that after their expulsion by the Spanish police, more than 500 sub-Saharan immigrants were deported to the desert and abandoned without any provision of water or shelter--an act of almost inhuman carelessness. MSF also reports that a great number (about 25%) of the migrants suffered from the “after-effects of violence” committed by Moroccan and Spanish authorities as well as traffickers and criminal gangs.
“Fortress Europe" is becoming a reality, manifesting itself essentially in two ways
FORTRESS EUROPE
The incidents of Ceuta and Melilla are sad and tragic events. But it would be simplistic – and politically irresponsible – to shrug them off as such. They are only the latest and most dramatic symptom of a much more complex problem: migration between Africa and Europe and the murderous framework within which it takes place. Ceuta and Melilla are symbols--almost caricatures--of a development Europe has been witnessing over the past years. The way in which, for a couple of days, the two Spanish exclaves were transformed into strongholds under siege is seen as a bad omen by those who fear that the European Union is increasingly turning, or has already turned, into “Fortress Europe”, an exclusive club of those lucky enough to get inside the castle walls.
Unfortunately, the signs pointing in this direction are plentiful. “Fortress Europe” is becoming a reality, manifesting itself essentially in two ways. The first reaction to the Ceuta incidents was to raise the fence around the whole town from four to six meters. The EU is making efforts to make sure that its borders are impenetrable by clandestine migrants by investing in patrol-boats, night goggles and a satellite system to control the coastline. A state of art and technology to welcome those who come with empty hands. Dominic Johnson, journalist for the German daily “Tageszeitung”, is right when pointing out that the North-South border is today much more murderous than the Iron Curtain ever was. Over the last ten years, more than 6000 migrants died between Morocco and Spain alone. “The EU is forcing Africa to behave as once did East Germany”, he writes: “the frontier with the rich neighbour is shut; leaving the country becomes a crime”.
The North-South border is today much more murderous than the Iron Curtain ever was.
This points to a second wall Europe is building, less visible yet more important: legislation that makes migration a crime. The last decade has seen a constant decline in the number of asylum seekers but at the same time, estimations for illegal immigration kept rising. These migrants do not choose illegal means to enter the EU, but tough laws that are increasingly undermining their vested right to asylum force them into this humiliating legal status and the precarious circumstances under which they travel. Is it technocratic naïveté or cynical calculation that the European Union considers all immigrants without a valid visa as “illegal”, given the often insurmountable difficulty to obtain one in many African countries? Mobility, the Polish sociologist Zygmunt Bauman writes, has nowadays become a factor of social stratification just as important as material wealth. It seems as though the European Union is not doing enough to back up his point.
DISMANTLING “FORTRESS EUROPE”
This policy, however, is an offense to those who are, and will be, forced to leave their home countries for an uncertain future in the North and it is also against the interest of Europe itself. “Fortress Europe” must open its gates, for at least three reasons: Firstly, because shutting the borders will not make much of a difference for the phenomenon of migration as such. Some of the migrants in Ceuta came from places as distant as the Democratic Republic of Congo; they had been on their way--on foot for several years. Who could honestly believe that someone so desperate could be discouraged by higher fences or tougher laws? Migration is a fact, and the European Union has to face it. But it can do something about the circumstances under which it takes place – and either adopt a sounder migration policy, or continue pushing migrants into illegality and leaving them to criminal traffickers.
The second reason is essentially an ethical one, the idea of Europe as an exclusive club is simply incompatible with the moral standards the EU likes to pride itself on. How can it be justified that Africans are not allowed to enter European territory when on the other hand EU citizens are free to travel to Africa or make business there? There is no moral ground on which a country can declare its borders impenetrable (which does, of course, not contradict the necessity of regulating migration in some way or other). All societies are migration societies, and none has an inherent and exclusive right to the land it occupies. Casting a glance at history is most revealing: a German, French or British refusing a Sudanese, who fled his country because of famine, poverty and political unrest, might want to think about the late 19th century, when no less than 60 million Europeans emigrated to the United States, for exactly the same reasons. To say nothing of the fact that, according to modern archaeology, the politicians undermining the right to asylum in Europe today are themselves descendants of African immigrants (but then the 500,000 years that have passed since may be too much for a clientele thinking in four-year terms).
How can it be justified that Africans are not allowed to enter European territory when on the other hand EU citizens are free to travel to Africa or make business there?
Pragmatic and moral arguments left aside for a moment, it must finally be said that making migration a crime is not in the interest of European nations as most of them face an enormous demographic problem. Their populations are aging, meaning that there are more elderly people to be cared for and less young to finance the welfare system. Countries such as Germany, Italy or Spain, all of which have extremely low birth rates and long life expectancies, are highly dependent on immigrants to maintain their current population levels (Japan would have to multiply its immigrant intake by 20, to cite a non-European example). Demographers estimate that the standard of living in these countries will decline up to 20% without increased immigrants over the next decades. This is not to say, of course that, immigration should be considered as a source of cheap labour and be exploitive to maintain the high standard of living, or that we must, as some politicians do, discriminate between “welcome” and “unwelcome” immigrants. It is rather important to note that immigration is not something Europe should generously tolerate, but something it is very much dependent on.
It must finally be said that making migration a crime is not in the interest of European nations as most of them face an enormous demographic problem.
A SOUNDER MIGRATION POLICY
It may not be much of a revelation, but in the context of the recent events, it should be repeated all the same: that migration has become a global phenomenon and a distinctive feature of our time; it cannot be stopped nor should it be stopped by tough laws and barbed wire. Yet this is exactly what the European Union seems to be up to. It is trying to call a halt to migration by attacking its symptoms. The results are the fences around Ceuta and Melilla, the filthy detention centres filled to overflowing, the corpses caught in the nets of Italian fishermen. Europe needs a sounder migration policy, one that understands the roots and the complexity of this phenomenon.
It is rather important to note that immigration is not something Europe should generously tolerate, but something it is very much dependent on.
One Moroccan minister is quoted as having said that the Moroccan armed forces had acted in self-defence when shooting at the Africans trying to enter Ceuta, because these Africans had been “possessed by the energy of despair.” This is rather a bizarre legitimation for the killing of people; but this statement gives us all the same an important hint.
What else but sheer despair may make a person cross the Sahara desert on foot? It is this despair that a better migration policy must tackle.
If it is despair that is driving African migrants – and what else but sheer despair may make a person cross the Sahara desert on foot? Then it is this despair that a better migration policy must tackle. Most Africans who came to the European Union have left their homes and families because of violence and insecurity, abject poverty and a total lack of perspective; a sounder policy must address all these issues. It must help to alleviate poverty and create chances; it must begin where those migrants come from, and not at the border.
Of course, this is easy to say but much more difficult to be done; there are no easy solutions to complex problems such as economic development and social
security. But it is important to understand and this is something the European Union has not done yet--that all these problems are inextricably linked and cannot be understood or handled separately as bureaucracies and administrations would like to. Thinking migration without development is neither consequential nor effective. Nor is it reasonable, on the other hand, to think development without migration. In most African societies, the Diasporas abroad represent a source of income that by far exceeds the development aid from donor countries and thus is a central economic dynamic. Addressing causes, not symptoms; in this respect, migration policy is more than giving visas, development assistance more than just signing cheques.
CONCLUSION
Our societies may not yet be ready for states without borders and mobility without limits, but this does not entitle the EU to deny refugees their right to peace and security. Fortress Europe must open its gates to those who seek shelter, give them the possibility to integrate and stop pushing them into illegality out of a fundamental moral obligation, but also in its own interest. It needs a different, a sounder migration policy one that builds bridges between countries, not walls.
In most African societies, the Diasporas abroad represent a source of income that by far exceeds the development aid from donor countries and is thus a central economic dynamic.
Toni Weis
Paris
[This article makes references to Médecins Sans Frontières: Communiqué de Presse, 2005-10-07, Johnson, Dominic: Die Mauer muss weg!. Der Spiegel (online), 2005/10/14 Bauman, Zygmunt, Globalization.The human consequences. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998 Musseau, and Francois: Renvois express des clandestins. Liberation (online), 2005/10/08]
