EU's 5-Point Migration Problem in a Nutshell


The migration problem in the EU is unsolvable. Competing political positions explain why.

Five-Point Synopsis

  1. Germany Merkel's CDU: Seek a consensus solution under existing EU rules.
  2. Germany Seehofer's CSU: Turn them back at the border (i.e. Send them back to Italy through Austria)
  3. Italy Five Star and the League: Change the "Dublin Rules" which state migrants must apply for asylum in the first country in which they land. Italy wants to distribute existing migrants throughout EU. It also supports "safe areas" in Africa.
  4. Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia: All refuse new migrants
  5. Austria: Austria's Prime Minister, Sebastian Kurz, wants quotas and "safe areas" in refugees' countries of origin. In a controversial twist, he said Brussels should organize it and "back it militarily."

There are other positions such as that of Barcelona's Mayor who openly welcomes migrants.

In contrast, Viktor Orban, Hungary’s prime minister, accuses migrants of destroying “Christian Europe”.

On July 1, Austria will take over the position of the Presidency of the EU Council. The position rotates every six months.

Austria's stated goals on March 1 included this item: The fight against illegal immigration by securing external borders.

Not Solvable!

Anyone who thinks this is solvable under existing EU rules is downright crazy. Heck, it is not solvable at all.

Yet, Merkel was foolish enough to ask CSU leader Horst Seehofer for two weeks to solve the problem.

Under German law, Seehofer has the right to implement policy in Bavaria. He threatened to "send them back". Also under German law, Merkel can fire Seehofer.

If she fires Seehofer, as I expect, it will be the end of the CDU-CSU coalition.

And by foolishly asking for time (and getting it), Merkel, not Seehofer, will take the blame.

Her own stubborn arrogance will have done her in.

Libertarian Position

Some readers suggest that open immigration is a Libertarian position. Indeed, it is. But free benefits are not.

We can condense the EU's unsolvable problem down to one statement: Open migration is not compatible with free education, free services, free lodging, etc.

I have some US friends who will disagree. But the US also has another barrier: oceans. The EU is reachable by land or the Mediterranean Sea.

For discussion, please see Trump's Immoral Immigration Tactics: What's the Libertarian View?

Don't Downplay the US Role in This Mess

US warmongering policies in Libya, Syria, and Iraq kicked off the current wave of migrants into the EU.

It's easy (and correct) to blame Merkel, but few point to the US for its role in this madness.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Comments (11)
No. 1-11

Not only are free benefits not a libertarian position, illegal immigration is not either. Let's be clear about legal vs. illegal immigration. The U.S. for example has close to 15 million illegals. I don't think sneaking into countries undocumented is a libertarian position.


Funny how none of the rich Arab countries (and richer on a per capita basis than any EU country) take in ANY muslim moochers. Maybe they know something...


Actually League in Italy has gone full-Merkel and started demanding that there should be EU asylum centers in Africa taking asylum applications to come to Europe and giving out asylums in Europe for people applying for asylum in these EU asylum centers in Africa. Conte the Italy prime minister said these demands of putting EU asylum processing centers in origin and transit countries of asylum seekers and giving out asylums to europe in them to Merkel and Macron and they both supported the idea. Salvini visited Libya today and wanted to put such center in southern Libya but Libya said NO! Of course to anyone with a brain it is clear putting EU asylum centers in Africa would lead to millions going to the centers to ask asylum from Europe every year and millions getting it every year meaning millions of new african refugees to Europe every year. So either Salvini and Conte are both really dumb and do not understand what they are actually demanding or transporting millions african refugees to Europe every year is a good idea in their mind.


Seehofer demands a strange thing because seehofer demands that germany should turn away at the border asylum seekers that have been registered in some other eu country and this is a strange thing to have a "fight" with Merkel about because under current Dublin agreement these can be returned as dublin returns in couple days to the eu country where they were registered so seehofer is fighting with Merkel over a non-issue. . The only reasons i can think of for having this "fight" is that it is political posing making both look tough to different voter Groups OR germany has not done dublin returns at all that it could have done under Merkel leaving tens of thousands people that germany could have returned to the eu country where they registered (mainly italy, greece registered under 1% of people going thru it in 2015) to live in germany instead as merkel's political decision and seehofer and merkel are trying to hide this from german voters with their fight. When Merkel met Macron after the fight with seehofer she said to media as accomplishment that macron had promised to take back asylum seekers registered in France that go to Germany to seek asylum. The reality is that Macron is already obligated to take these back as dublin returns in a couple days so it was a non-accomplishment from Merkel. . One option is that neither Merkel nor Seehofer know how Dublin returns work and what is written in the Dublin agreement and the german bureaucrats at BAMF german asylum agency have not told them and have not done dublin returns. Seehofer recently fired the lady who was the head of BAMF so this is possible too. . In sunday's meeting with 16 eu leaders that Merkel convened with Claude "you have to lie when it's serious" Juncker after the fight with seehofer there was talk of creating an automatic and obligatory eu relocation system for asylum seekers that would spread people coming to greece and italy around eu countries quickly. This would of course mean that what austria and slovenia did By closing their borders in early 2016 and so closing the route from greece to welfare countries so crashing the arrivals to greece by 90% ( merkels turkey deal later took care of the rest) would be reversed and greece would again be a shortcut to germany and sweden and other welfare countries. This would cause millions to come because there are almost 4 million syrians living in turkey in safety and i am sure many would use this new opportunity to get to germany and saaden. In 2015 Greece pushed over 1 million people north that came to greece from turkey where they were already safe and greece itself registered just 11 000 asylum seekers (no welfare in greece). When it comes to Italy they also left over 50% of the people they saved at sea un-registered hoping they ask for asylum from some other country. In 2014 Italy saved 170 000 people from the sea and only registered 70 000 as asylum seekers meaning they pushed 100 000 asylum seekers to rest of Europe. France had to do something so in summer 2015 hollande ordered french border police to stop all migrants at the border so they stopped both asylum seekers that were un-registered and that were registered in italy at the border and french border police do not accept asylum claims at the border because neighbors are safe countries. The sad fact is that germany could have done since 2015 what France has done since 2015 but it is 2018 and seehofer and merkel are play-fighting about a non-issue of stopping asylum seekers already registered in some eu country at the german border despite dublin agreement enablin dublin returns easily in a couple days for those already registered...


We all know that 15 million illegals in America meams 15 million more Dems once they can vote. Let's just say hypothetically in some weird world all illegals tended to vote Rep once they got citizenship. In that case Dems would be the most crazed deportation zealots in world history!


The Arab countries have the highest, by far, percentage of immigrant workers of anywhere in the world. Even in a country as large as Saudi, about a third of the population are foreigners. In some of the smaller countries, it's darned near everyone. And this is the percent of the population. As a percent of the active workforce, foreigners are pretty much all there is.

As you say, the Arabs are even richer per capita than the West. So there is even more stuff they want, and can afford, to have done, but don't want to do themselves. Creating a huge demand for labor, which foreigners are more than willing to fill.

As opposed to most Westerners, many Arabs are also so far down the road to affluensa, they don't want to do anything at all. At most, they may be bothered to read the Koran for an hour, between goofing off in the Benzes their share of the oil foreigners lift out of the ground for them, buys.

As opposed to the West, foreigners can almost never reach citizenship status, nor vote. Nor is even the idea around, that some mere foreigner should somehow have the "right" to any of the services the Arabs' oil wealth affords them. Get your salary, fend for yourself, shut up and be happy for your opportunity, is the MO. And, with the salaries on offer, that is plenty to lure in everything from Sri Lankan dock workers to Swiss doctors and American Oil execs.

Which, if not proving, at least lends support to the notion that "free," or at least massive, immigration, can work well, as long as free services are not provided as part of the carrot.

While also lending support to the, currently unfashionable, notion that attempting to "integrate" immigrants by force, are simply fools errand. American immigration worked fine and dandy, as long as Italians could try creating Little Italy, the Irish could build their neighborhoods around pubs, the Germans could set up and settle in conservative Lutheran parishes inventing stuff, the Chinese chainsmoke in Chinatowns, the Scandahoovians could eat their lutefisk in their newfound Minnesota winter wonderland, the English practice reading Shakespeare with a stiff upper lip in New England, the Mexicans tend to their barren dessert ranches in the Southwest, and the Jews could trade garments and count their gold and diamonds in New York.

The bunch of them only integrating at their own, voluntary pace; in pursuit of economic and social opportunity. Rather than all being forced to play the same designated "managed by we-the-experts" worker-ant role, in the same petty progressive social experiment.


“US warmongering policies in Libya, Syria, and Iraq kicked off the current wave of migrants into the EU.”

Sorry, but I have to disagree. The current wave reaching Europe’s shores might be traveling through Libya to reach the Med coast but they are not Libyans. They are mostly economic migrants from sub-Saharan and central Africa. For some reason they have a desperate urge to reach the same countries who were their former “colonizing oppressors”.

As for Syria and Libya... these societies can’t seem to get their act together for whatever reason. I think it is quite a stretch to blame the US on their internal situation.

  1. Let's not forget that Libya was done at France's behest. The US was the (willing) patsy, and the EU the driver.

  2. Very few of the people being trafficked from South Asia, the Middle East, North and Central Africa were displaced by war. The vast majority, including almost all Africans and Pakistanis, are simply freeloading young men unwanted in their own lands.


And the problems in Africa are a result of changes after post colonial rule? and in Sub Saharan Africa the result of climate change? Of course the US is blameless, or the industrial revolution, or a culture of consumer product gratification, of course you should have everything you want, even at the expense of others, and you should be able to enjoy it without feeling guilt or a crippling sense of moral obligation which you buy off with a donation here or there. Perhaps when robots do all the work every Third world nation can join the party where no one is exploited to fuel the greed and aggrandizement of a few who we know are in no way exceptional other than privilege, because if they really were superior human forms they would have no qualms about herding these people about like cattle, for the same purposes. They would have no problem using these people shamelessly if they really were superior life forms, instead of pretending they are one of them. So you see the hypocrisy really stinks

Global Economics