An unprecedented violent outbreak is taking place among migrants and refugees on the Greek islands of Lesbos and Chios. At the beginning of February the public has witnessed extended unrest in those islands, as the asylum-seekers stationed there have gathered together to protest in what turned out to be a not that peaceful demonstration.

How Many Asylum-Seekers are Currently on Greece’s Aegean Islands?

Island residents and the municipal authorities are agonizing about the future and have been desperately asking for a political solution. According to official data over 40,000 asylum-seekers are currently placed in the Aegean islands. Most of these people are dispersed among the islands of Lesbos, Chios, and Samos, and the numbers are certainly disproportionate to the local population and the size of the islands. It should also be noted that the actual figures might be far higher.

The main demand of the locals is for the aforementioned numbers to be reduced and for no further flows to be allowed or at least the current flows to be efficiently managed. The Greek government — instead of taking the appropriate measures to address the problem — has decided to reinforce the current infrastructure by creating new detention centers, in order to replace the uncontrolled open-air camps. This decision has not been welcomed by the local population at all, who interpret it as a way to postpone the breaking point of the crisis and something that will not solve the problem whatsoever.

Angry Public Reaction to New Centers and Violent Police Crackdown

Work on the detention centers was scheduled to start early this week, but the local population pre-announced opposition and several people have mobilized to block any such process. This reaction was expected and the Greek Ministry of Public Order and Citizen Protection sent numerous riot police units in the two islands in order to prevent any disruption to the scheduled work and manage the situation. This development triggered even more public reaction, however, prompting hundreds of citizens to protest on the roads and express their disapproval. General strikes have also been pre-announced as a coordinated response to the government plans.

Greek Citizens Protest Inadequate Response

Since February 24, several acts of protest have been taking place in the islands of Chios and Lesbos. Hundreds of citizens are demonstrating on a daily basis, with the most notable action so far being reported in the ports of the islands or in the proximity of the designated detention center sites. The local people are mostly trying to block the deployment of equipment and staff via road closure; they are also reacting intensely to the presence of riot police forces that have been brought to the island from across the country.

In the previous few days, clashes between the protestors and the police forces have been reported recurrently. In addition to the port areas of the two islands, violence has erupted in Karava and Mantamados in Lesbos, the main road leading to the new detention center of the island. The riot police used tear gas to disperse the crowds, and several instances of excessive and unjustified police force have been mentioned. Local sources have also published footage with riot police personnel damaging wantonly residents’ vehicles, parked in the area; these videos have caused public discontent and provoked further anger.

The ensuing public reaction has also been rather extreme; on February 26, citizens of Chios identified the hotels where some of the police personnel deployed to the island were staying. In an unexpected move, a crowd of protestors broke into the rooms of the police staff and violently attacked them. Those unprecedented incidents indicate the scope of the problem in these islands and the public discomfort that has been piling up for over five years now.

In the last few days, over 40 policemen and an unconfirmed number of at least ten citizens participating in the protests have been injured; in addition, over ten residents are being investigated by the police with at least one of them having been arrested following the aforementioned violent attacks.

Government Efforts to Limit the Tension and Find a Political Solution

The current political sentiment in Greece is far from collaborative. The opposition representatives, all across the political spectrum, are harshly criticizing the government; from left-wing parties condemning the police repression and the maltreatment both of the locals and the asylum-seekers to far-right politicians who are accusing the government of an inability to manage the flows and demanding that it proceed to the immediate deportation of all the people who have unlawfully entered the Greek territory. The public in the islands and in the mainland is also strongly opposing the government moves so far, while the municipal authorities of the affected islands are openly turning against the current administration, stressing that the lack of a responsible policy on the state level has created a dead-end.

Under these circumstances, the Greek government gave in to one of the islanders’ demands, and, in a move of goodwill, the riot police forces will be withdrawing from the islands with immediate effect. Meetings have also been scheduled during the day with representatives of the municipal authorities of the affected Aegean islands. The government has vowed at the beginning of February to provide a prompt solution to the ever-growing problem, however, the steps taken so far do not point in this direction. The situation is likely to remain tense and difficult to manage unless the Greek administration is willing to face the actual causes that have been fueling the grievances of the islands’ populations for such a long time now.

L'articolo Tension Rising in Greek Islands proviene da InsideOver.

The situation remains tense on the Greek island of Lesbos  following several protests and violent incidents over the last few days.The situation has worsened due to the incapacity of the official authorities to manage efficiently the migration challenge on the island.

The Migrant And Refugee Crisis On Lesbos

A large number of asylum seekers is entering the island, with 200 to 250 new arrivals per day. This indicates the sharp rise compared to the week from January 27 to February 2, when only 376 asylum seekers arrived in Lesbos according to the latest UNHCR report. The island does not have nearly sufficient infrastructure to cope with the crisis and accommodate the significant number of people that need to temporarily remain there until a solution is sorted out. The immigration and refugee problem is still a ticking bomb in the hands of the government, even though addressing and eventually solving this issue has been on the top of the agenda of the current Greek administration since its formation last summer.

Moria Camp

Moria is a small village in the eastern part of Lesbos, with a population of just over a thousand residents. It is also the location of a major camp for refugees and asylum seekers. Moria camp has been a grave burden for Greek governments since the peak of the refugee crisis in 2015. The camp has an official capacity of up to 3,000 people, however, the current estimations indicate that the number of asylum seekers in the camp is far higher. Even though there are no official records of this number, the mayor of Mytilene has mentioned that over 20,000 refugees, migrants and asylum seekers are currently in the area, while unofficial reports suggest that the actual number might be closer to 30,000. The vast majority of these people are of Afghan origin and are seeking to make their way to Europe through Greece.

Protesters From Moria Camp Set Fires

On the morning of February 3, approximately 2,000 asylum seekers organized a massive protest starting from Moria camp and heading to the capital of the island, Mytilene. Local authorities tried to stop the protestors halfway, close to the refugee camp of Kara Tepe. This was the crisis point for the riots, with many of the asylum seekers setting up fires near their route and the riot police using tear gas to disperse the crowd. Fires have been officially reported in three different spots, with at least one of them located close to the local electricity generation station. Amidst the unrest, approximately 500 of the protestors managed to reach the center of the capital and tried to set up a temporary camp in the vicinity of the Rouselleio Municipal Theater of Mytilene, but the police stopped them.

The Local Community Reacts In Anger

Following the protests, numerous Lesbos residents gathered to voice their disapproval about the worrying situation in the island. The residents demanded the immediate de-congestion of the refugee camps and the deployment of additional police forces alongside the permanent presence of riot police in several spots of Lesbos. Some residents have proceeded to “squatting” the building of the General Secretariat of the Aegean & Island Policy in a desperate effort to address the scope of the problem. The municipal administration stands together with the residents, as Northern Aegean Regional Governor Kostas Moutzouris and Mytilene Mayor Stratis Kytelis are turning to the government and insisting on urgent action before the situation becomes irreversible.

Even though control over access is supposed to be implemented when entering or exiting the Moria camp, there have been several complaints about asylum seekers leaving the camp and breaking into nearby houses. In this regard, there have been instances of locals,self-organizing and patrolling the surrounding area. It should be noted that on February 7, 2020, at least seven people were also arrested by local police, as they had allegedly been illegally targeting asylum seekers and NGO members in the context of these self-organized patrols. Charges have not been officially confirmed yet. In the meantime, left-wing groups are present on the island, often provoking the asylum seekers to take to the streets and protest. The tension and frequent clashes between radical groups on the island makes the already fragile situation on Lesbos even worse and reveals the political implications that are also present behind the humanitarian crisis.

Controlling The NGOs And Managing Asylum Seekers

Greek Minister of Migration & Asylum Notis Mitarachi recently addressed a crucial aspect in the light of the recent events that no Greek Government official has ever directly tackled before; the controversial role of some NGOs in the refugee and migration crisis. Undoubtedly many NGOs have contributed considerably to the management of the challenges posed by the high number of migrants entering the country. However it should also be highlighted that only 86 NGOs—of which 13 are foreign-based—have been officially registered with the former Hellenic Ministry of Migration Policy. This accounts for only a fraction of the hundreds of NGOs that have been active in the affected Aegean islands since 2015.

Mitarachi indicated that some NGOs may possibly be heavily involved in fomenting the riots, encouraging the asylum seekers to proceed even to violence under the pretext of demanding better living conditions. Mitarachi’s statement raises serious concerns, as the facts on the ground seem to confirming his claim, while the motives behind the action of these NGOs are still vague. In order to address this concern the Greek government has approved an urgent vote that attaches updated legislation to NGOs operating in Greece. The new bill obliges all NGOs to subscribe to an official registry, with full details of the individuals affiliated with the organization, in order that enhanced control and transparency to be achieved.

Mitarachi: Asylum Application Process Is Broken

Mitarachi has also highlighted the flaws of the current asylum application process for migrants arriving in Greece. As he recently stated, approximately 91% of the appeals that have been made by asylum seekers for a second review of their applications have been rejected. According to the current law, the appeal process can be quite time-consuming, and in most of the aforementioned cases, the asylum seekers have already moved to the mainland by the time their appeal is rejected. The Greek government is seeking to update the procedure in order the asylum applications and any potential appeals to be processed much faster, as per Mitarachi’s comments.

An Unconventional Threat

The events of last week should also raise serious concerns with regards to the internal security of Greece and the readiness of the national and regional mechanisms to cope with such unforeseen crises. The fact that a significant number of asylum seekers have been mobilized with the involvement of the third parties is also worrying indeed. The way the situation developed has proven that the local Greek forces were not ready to control the crowd and restore order in a timely manner. The successful attempt of the protestors to bypass the police forces—utilizing alternative rural routes—also indicates that the moves had been carefully planned and well-executed. The riots and fires close to the electricity generation station is probably the most worrying aspect of these incidents; protestors have managed to approach and put at immediate risk a part of the essential infrastructure of the island. If the fires had reached the electricity station, the consequences would have been unparalleled.

The Greek government and all authorities involved should seriously consider the possibility as well that the protesters in this case were not just mobilized by local entities—like illegitimate NGOs and opposition groups—but by an external actor. Considering that the Aegean islands are very heavily affected by the migration crisis and are located in an area of strategic significance for the Hellenic Defence Doctrine, it is clear that the current situation constitutes an unconventional threat for the country. It is a threat that the Greek side is not adequately prepared to face yet, and in a potential confrontation with Turkey over the long-term disputes between the two countries, it could prove to be catastrophic.

L'articolo Violence On Lesbos Pushes Greece To Reconsider Migration Policy proviene da InsideOver.

Despite protests by Congress-led opposition parties and agitation by people of northeastern states of India, like Assam and Arunachal Pradesh, the Indian Parliament passed its Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) on the night of December 11. The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill will grant citizenship to the non-Muslims – Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists, Jains, and Parsis – from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh on the plea that they fled their parent countries due to religious persecution and arrived in India before December 31, 2014.

Before the Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB), these immigrants were labeled as illegal migrants. The CAB paves the way for Indian citizenship to lakhs of immigrants, and people who do not belong to the said communities would not be eligible for Indian citizenship. Earlier, the duration of the immigrants’ residency was 11 years; CAB had reduced it to five years. Opponents of the bill say faith cannot be made a condition of citizenship as it violates the secular principles enshrined in the constitution. The constitution prohibits religious discrimination and guarantees all persons equality before the law.

The opposition parties termed it as anti-Muslim and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government’s Hindutava agenda to consolidate Hindu votes. They said the purpose of the bill is to tell the Muslims, ‘you are not equal human beings with equal rights’. Congress interim president Sonia Gandhi termed December 11 as a “dark day” in the constitutional history of India and a “victory of narrow-minded and bigoted forces” over the country’s pluralism. But Home Minister of India, Amit Shah, denied the charges. He said the CAB is not meant to snatch anyone’s Indian citizenship; it will provide citizenship to religious minorities who are being persecuted in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. Home Minister Amit Shah said existing rules are open for Muslims of other countries to apply for Indian citizenship. He added that 566 Muslims have been given citizenship. Shah also attacked the Congress for doublespeak on the issue, saying that during its rule, the Congress party had given Indian citizenship to 13,000 Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan ignoring other communities.

According to political observers, people in Assam and the other North-Eastern states fear that the CAB will lead to lakhs of Hindus from Bangladesh flooding indigenous communities, threatening their language, culture, and tradition and aggravating employment situation in these states. People in Assam along with the other North-Eastern states have their sentiments linked to their culture, language, and heritage. Protestors are furious that Assam already bore the brunt of immigrants from 1951 to 1971; it is unfair to impose more immigrants on the state. The protestors lamented that CAB is an attempt to legalize the 17 lakh Hindus and indigenous tribes who were left out of the National Registry of Citizens prepared under the guidance of the Supreme Court of India. Protesters now believe that the CAB will make NRC redundant and bestow citizenship on illegal immigrants.

Why Are States Opposing CAB?

The northeastern will undoubtedly be the top electoral issue in the 2021 West Bengal and Assam assembly elections. The BJP is hoping for a second term in Assam and wrests power in West Bengal. Muslims constitute around 35 per cent of the population of Assam and about 27-30 per cent in Bengal. The Citizenship Amendment Bill puzzle makes it a Muslim versus non-Muslim debate. It will make the Bengal and Assam elections a polarized political affair. The BJP, which is unpopular among Muslims, hopes to gain from the counter-consolidation of Hindu votes as a result of the consolidation of Muslim votes. The CAB will put BJP at an advantageous position vis-à-vis other parties as, except Muslim, Hindu and other minorities will vote for BJP.

The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party accused Congress, and opposition parties of spreading rumours and inciting people of Assam and northeastern states, as the Citizenship Amendment Bill would not apply to tribal areas of Assam, Mizoram, Meghalaya, and Tripura, as included in Sixth Schedule of the Constitution and the area covered under the Inner Limit, notified under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873. This means that Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, and Mizoram, the whole of Meghalaya and parts of Assam and Tripura would stay out of the purview of the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill.

Defending the Bill, R Jagannathan, editorial director of Swarajya magazine, wrote that “the exclusion of Muslims is due to the obvious reality that the three countries Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh are Islamists, either as stated in their constitutions or because of the actions of militant Islamists, who target the minorities for conversion or harassment.”

As the entire North East continues to burn and opposition parties challenging the CAB in the Supreme Court of India, it remains to be seen how long it will take for things to settle down.

L'articolo India Opens Citizenship Door to Religious Minorities of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh proviene da InsideOver.

The interim Libyan government has started taking measures to return hundreds of thousands of externally displaced Libyans, especially in Egypt, to their country.

Interim Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thani, held a series of meetings in the past few days to check progress on the implementation of the plan.

The plan is part of a national reconciliation initiative launched by the government, which is based in the eastern commercial industrial city of al-Bayda.

The initiative aims at bringing the Libyans together, following years of fighting and unrest in the oil-rich North African state.

On November 28, al-Thani held a meeting in the Egyptian capital Cairo with some members of his cabinet to discuss incentives in the plan for returning Libyans living in Egypt home.

To convince them to do this, the interim government is offering to pay for their travel and provide them with accommodation and financial support once they return, according to Ali al-Sagheir, the head of the Committee on Externally Displaced Libyans.

He said the government would find jobs for unemployed externally displaced Libyans when they return home and return civil servants to their original jobs before the 2011 revolution against longstanding ruler Muammar Gaddafi.

Over a million Libyans flocked to Egypt following the eruption of the Libyan civil war in 2011.

Nonetheless, with eastern Libya becoming more stable, hundreds of thousands of Libyan nationals returned to their country. Now, around half a million Libyans live here.

These are the people al-Thani and the members of his cabinet want to return home.

However, the new initiative raises questions on whether these Libyans would be ready to go back home, especially with the situation in Libya still uncertain.

Although most of eastern Libya is stable, there are turbulent areas in the North African state, including in southern Libya. Some territories are controlled by terrorist groups like the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and al-Qaeda.

A war is raging on now on the fringes of capital Tripoli between the National Libyan Army, which controls most of eastern and central Libya, on one hand, and military groups operating under the internationally recognized National Accord Government, which controls the capital and most of western Libya, on the other.

Efforts are being made by the United Nations and different members of the international community to bring about a peaceful settlement to the conflict in Libya. Nonetheless, this conflict is set to exacerbate even more in the coming days with rival regional and international powers backing rival Libyan forces.

These deteriorating conditions are a major hurdle on the way of the return of Libyans displaced outside their country.

Most of those who ran away from Libya were backers of Gaddafi and members of his tribe or members of tribes allied to him.

After Gaddafi’s overthrow, these people were at the centre of public reprisals, which was why they had to run away.

In 2012, the Libyan parliament passed a law that denied Gaddafi’s backers the right to participate in Libya’s political life. The same law stipulated penalties for Gaddafi’s supporters.

Nevertheless, in 2014, the eastern Libya parliament passed a law that offered a general pardon for Gaddafi’s backers. The law is part of a nationwide reconciliation campaign aiming at settling conflicts between Libyans peacefully.

Interim Social Affairs Minister, Fathia Hamed, said huge efforts are made to bring the Libyans together.

The initiative for bringing externally displaced Libyans back home, she said, is based on the national reconciliation plan.

“We will use this plan to convince the Libyans return to their country,” Hamed said. “It is an integral part of the general pardon initiative launched by Libyan state institutions.”

L'articolo Will Externally Displaced Libyans Return Home? proviene da InsideOver.

On Tuesday, November 5, Turkey’s Erdogan said the Kurdish militia YPG (People’s Protection Units) had not yet withdrawn from some areas within the Safe Zone that Turkey aims at establishing in northeastern Syria. The Turkish president also stated that US forces were still patrolling the areas alongside Kurdish fighters.

The agreement Turkey reached with the United States earlier in October to establish a cease-fire in areas of conflict, such as Ras al-Ayn, required that YPG fighters should withdraw from the Safe Zone in return of Turkey stopping its offensive.

Yet President Erdogan, who is expected to visit the White House on November 13, said areas in the Safe Zone were “not cleared of terrorists.” “Terrorists have not been taken out of either Tel Rifaat or Manbij,” he said, referring to two Syrian towns near the Turkish borders where he said Kurdish fighters were still present.

The Turkish president also said that YPG fighters were still present in east Ras al-Ayn, a town that should be under Turkish control according to the Sochi agreement as well. Ankara had reached the agreement with Moscow in late October in Sochi, Russia.

Both the United States and Russia previously said YPG fighters had left border areas. Calling into question both countries’ statements, President Erdogan also said on Tuesday that Turkey would only abide by its deals with Russia and the United States if the two countries keep their promises.

“How can we explain America holding patrols with terrorist organizations in this region even though they made the decision to withdraw? This is not our agreement,” he said.

The Safe Zone

The Turkish incursion into Syrian territory in early October draws from Ankara’s goals of establishing a buffer zone in northeastern Syria along its borders. The idea of instituting a “safe zone” in the region is not novel, and Turkish officials have been enunciating the exact terminology as regards the Syrian frontier since 2015 at least.

But in last spring —after Erdogan’s party the AKP lost a number of seats, including the municipalities of Ankara and Istanbul— the Turkish president and his officials doubled on referring to the safe zone. Other actors in the Syrian conflict appeared to turn a deaf ear so far.

“Our wish is to reach an agreement on the safe zone and put it into action as soon as possible. Otherwise, we will have to do what is necessary by ourselves,” Turkey’s Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said in last July.

In 1998, Turkey had reached a similar deal with Syria —the Adana agreement— following a diplomatic crisis and clashes in the Turkish-Syrian borders. The Adana agreement required shutting down PKK paramilitary training camps in northern Syria and gave Turkey the right to intervene within a depth of 6km in Syrian territory along the whole border.

The 10-point agreement of Sochi is analogous to the Adana one, except for its greater proportions. President Erdogan first initiated the Safe Zone project as we know now in the United Nations in late September this year. With a map in hands, he showed a buffer zone that would run 30km deep into Syrian lands and some 480km along the border.

“Operation Peace Spring”

President Erdogan insisted that Turkey’s objective of establishing the buffer zone – also called “Peace Corridor” – was that of humanitarian measures. When proposing his idea in the United Nations, he said Turkey aimed at resettling some 2 million Syrian refugees living in Turkey in towns located within the Safe Zone.

Turkey currently hosts some 3.6 million Syrian refugees, more than any other neighbouring nation (920,000 in Lebanon, 655,000 in Jordan and 229,000 in Iraq). President Erdogan often threatened to “open the gates of Europe” to the refugees if the European Union calls Turkey’s recent military campaign in Syria an invasion.

Moreover, Turkey dubbed its incursion in northeast Syria “Operation Peace Spring”, and President Erdogan, with this approach, sought not only an international approval, but also that of some Turkish voters who have shown increasing resentment against Syrian refugees amid economic difficulties.

On the same Tuesday of November 5, a survey published by Turkish pollster Metropoll showed President Erdogan’s approval among Turks surged during October (the month in which the cross-border incursion was set off after President Trump announced the withdrawal of U.S. troops from northeast Syria).

The survey indicated that the Turkish president’s approval rate among the people rose by 3.7 points to 48% (the highest rate for the president since his re-election last year), whereas his disapproval rate fell by 9.3 points to 33.7% (the lowest since 2016, when President Erdogan underwent a failed coup).

A Conflict-torn “Peace Corridor”

But despite the emphasis on the incursion’s humanitarian and peace-related facet, the areas that fall within the buffer zone currently stand as Syria’s most conflicted. Thousands of Kurdish families fled their homes after Turkey advanced in its incursion.

Some of the raids the Turkish forces have carried out were said to have hit civilians.

The YPG militia has long controlled the area and served as an armed wing to the PYG (Democratic Union Party), a Kurdish party that formed the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) with other political factions in 2015 to fight Islamic State in Syria.

Turkey considers both the YPG and PYG terrorist groups because of their ties to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which has been in sporadic conflicts with Turkish authorities since 1984.

By displacing hundreds of thousands of Kurds through conflict and resettling Syrian refugees in areas they are not necessarily from, analysts say, Turkey will also remodel the regional demographics in northeast Syria.

The Kurdish forces have controlled the northeastern region of Syria since 2013, when al-Assad’s forces were driven south in fights against Islamic State. The Kurds also controlled areas in the northwest, such as al-Bab, Jarabulus and Afrin, but Turkey seized those areas after a number of attacks in 2016 and 2018.

For Ankara, having a Kurdish autonomous region at close quarters is a substantial threat, as the whole region could quickly constitute a rear base for the PKK.

Al-Assad’s Bitter Victory

Al-Assad’s regime condemned Turkey’s violation of Syrian territory, yet paradoxically benefits from the Sochi agreement insofar as its plan helps his government forces to regain territories conceded to the Kurds during the war.

The Sochi agreement stated that YPG forces should retreat from the Safe Zone and that Turkey would hold control of an area covering Tel Abyad and Ras al-Ayn (where Turkey said it would resettle 2 million refugees).

For Russia, which has long vouched for al-Assad’s government, the priority is to turn the tide by helping the Syrian government to regain territory in hopes of reconstituting a major regional ally.

Before Turkey’s incursion, the Syrian government only had about 60% of national territories. Regaining the areas the Kurds held can constitute up to 75% of Syrian land.

As both Turkey and al-Assad’s regime engage in a race to seize territory pushing back Kurdish forces, the Kurds’ aspirations to form an autonomous Kurdistan after the fall of Islamic State seem to be trailing off.

L'articolo Behind Turkey’s Obsession With Syria’s Safe Zone proviene da InsideOver.

Every dawn there is a fresh exodus from Lutsk. At 05:30 the first bus leaves for Lublin. Half an hour beforehand the station is already filled by an unruly mob, frantic to get a ticket. The day begins thus and so continues until nightfall. A fleet of 13 buses and about 700 people leave this frontier town of western Ukraine for Poland every day.

They have 230 kilometres and six hours in which to find a job and a place to stay. You see them chatting, swapping information. Many already have friends and family waiting for them across the border. Others start on an adventure, at worst they can fall back on working in the fields. Now it is harvest time for apples, at the station in Lublin, there is always someone looking for workers.

Within a couple of hours Yulyia, 25, finds a job as a cashier at the Biedronka supermarket, almost a compulsory step for Ukrainian migrants. Yulyia has a degree in economics and speaks perfect English and Russian. Yet, in a Ukraine riven by nepotism and corruption, the only option is to leave, especially if, like Yulyia, you have a good level of education and a bit of talent but a lack of ‘connections’ to help you.

“Everything changed with the war,” says Yulyia. “Before, people emigrated to Russia. Some people from our area went to Poland because it is closer, but generally it was not a common destination.” The war in the Donbass region has therefore changed the direction of emigration. A significant wave of migrants fled westward, mostly to Poland.

As in all of Eastern Europe, labour is scarce there too. Since joining the EU in 2004, two million Poles have moved to Western European countries. Meanwhile, the economy has continued to prosper, to such an extent that Poland did not go into recession even when the financial crisis hit on both sides of the Atlantic.

To support this level of productivity, however, you need a workforce: in 2017 alone, 683 thousand residency permits were issued in Poland, 68% of which to Ukrainian citizens. This is a record in Europe – no country has ever before granted so many in a year, not even Germany or France. According to a rough estimate, there are about two million Ukrainians in Poland. This is the paradox of Polish nationalism: railing against immigration and yet not being able to do without it.

Lublin is the first leg of the journey for many Ukrainians, and often it is also the last. At the station, the bus stops are plastered with job adverts in Russian or Ukrainian. Particularly the Ukrainians from near the border, or those who are employed in seasonal jobs, remain here in the largest urban centre in eastern Poland. Three months in Poland equals one full year’s salary in Ukraine.

Dozens of people silently wait for their turn at the counter where residency permits are issued. It is a nerve-racking process that can drag on for months. At least eight if you’re lucky, but in the capital you can wait up to two years for a scrap of paper to make your status official. Iryna smiles a bitter smile, saying, “If only the problem were just the bureaucracy.” Originally from Kovel, a Ukrainian border town, Iryna, 24, moved to Lublin a year ago. At first she worked as a waitress in a restaurant. “I found it through someone well known here in Lublin, a kind of intermediary. I worked ten hours a day for three euros an hour. The hardest thing was to find a job with a formal contract.” Black market labour is such a widespread problem that it also makes the statistics for the Ukrainian population in Poland unreliable.

For example, in Lublin, there are less than three thousand registered Ukrainians, but according to marketing surveys carried out by the Polish telephone company Selectivv, there are at least 26 thousand.

By now Iryna has been officially hired as a sales representative in a services company, yet is paid less than her Polish colleagues. “Employers know that many Ukrainians are forced to emigrate, and they take advantage of it to violate our rights while making extra profit,” explains Vitaly Makhinko, president of the Ukrainian trade union Pracownicza Solidarnosc. “State bodies pretend not to notice. Furthermore, in Ukraine no policy protects the interests of its citizens overseas, so migrants are left to fend for themselves.”

Yet, according to Mr Makhinko, the living and working conditions of Ukrainians are slightly improving. “There is,” the trade unionist continues, “greater competition in the labour market, which is forcing employers to change and offer workers better contractual conditions. In the last five years, Ukrainians have gained professional experience and this increases their market value.”

Then, there is another factor driving both employers and the Polish government to improve treatment of Ukrainian migrants: growing demand from Germany for Ukrainian labour. “As soon as Berlin opens its borders, many Ukrainians working in Poland will move there, with the consequence that over time Poland will lose a large number. If Poland is now in second place (after Russia) in terms of the number of Ukrainian workers, in a few years it will be fourth. According to our forecasts,” Mr Makhinko concludes, “Russia will remain in first place, Germany will be second, Italy third, and Poland fourth.”

In the Lublin typography museum, Andrey wanders among the dusty volumes and then moves to magazines and film fragments that were circulated clandestinely in socialist Poland between 1976 and 1989. “This,” he explains, “is the mimeograph used to print the first issue of the underground magazine Zapis. It was also thanks to these publications that Solidarnosc [trade union] was born.”

Andrey, 33, has been working at the museum for a few years. From Lviv, a city in western Ukraine, he moved to Lublin to study international relations. A few short term jobs as an interpreter, then, after graduating, Andrey began the search for a permanent job. “It wasn’t easy. Ukrainians work in the fields, in supermarkets, at building sites, in restaurants. Finding a professional job is almost impossible around here. In some adverts, they explicitly say, “Polish citizenship required”. Even today, when I tell people I work in a museum, I can see the surprise in their eyes. To improve the situation we should first change immigration policy in Poland.”

Since he emigrated to Poland, Andrey has seen a growing sense of hostility towards Ukrainians. Here it has not taken much to bring old ill-feeling back to life, for example with the establishment of the memorial day on 11 July to commemorate the massacre of Volhynia, during which tens of thousands of Poles were killed at the hands of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. This skewed memorial omits Polish responsibilities and forgets the Ukrainian victims.

“There has been a change of mentality in Poland. Before, the people I met were more friendly. Now there is a lot of aggression, both on television and in the street. They shout anything and everything at you: killer, we don’t want you here. I have realised that to stay here I also have to be more radical, to be selective about who I spend time with. Otherwise,” concludes Andrey, “all that remains is to leave – after all, Poland is not the only place to live.”

L'articolo A New Life for Ukrainian Migrants proviene da InsideOver.

Life may never completely return to normal for Syrian refugees displaced by a decade-long civil war, but their plight could at least be treated with dignity and basic respect for humanity. Instead, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has seen fit to use their situation as one would use a card in a game of poker. After receiving approval from United States President Donald Trump, Turkish forces immediately stormed across the Syrian border in an attempt to carve out what Erdogan called a “safe zone.”

Blackmail

As many members in the international community, practically all world powers with the exception of Russia, condemned the wholesale slaughter of Kurds living in a land Erdogan intends for the resettlement of Syrian refugees currently living in Turkey. When European leaders spoke out against the stunning Turkish offensive, Erdogan audaciously tried to blackmail them into silence. 

“We will open the gates and send 3.6 million refugees your way,” Erdogan promised if European leaders continue to label the Turkish attack as an “occupation.” 

Turkey hosts the most refugees of any nation, including 3.6 million Syrians. While it was originally incredibly welcoming of them, Turks have shifted their opinions recently, especially this year, amid an economic downturn. It is difficult to point to one particular factor that has led to economic decline, but the Turks do their best to try by scapegoating Syrians. In the June elections, Syrian refugees were said to be a top issue for voters who turned their fury upon Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party, losing him the Istanbul mayorship. 

Now, in his way, Erdogan is telling the world, “Look, I have a solution to our problem, now keep your mouth shut before it becomes your problem.” The President of the European Council would have none of it, however.

German Response

“We will never accept that refugees are weaponised and used to blackmail us,” said Donald Tusk. It is Europe that helped create this problem, though, after it cut a deal with Erdogan in 2016. It promised six billion euros to serve as a buffer between European states and Syria. In many ways that worked – the number of arrivals fell from 1,015,078 to less than 400,000. In return, Ankara was charged with accepting migrants the EU refused, either because they failed to apply for asylum or due to their claim being rejected.

Germany accepted the largest number of refugees, although an overwhelming percentage passed through Greece first by boat. Berlin received 800,000 asylum applications in 2016 alone, almost double its total from the previous year. In many ways, this has helped the German economy by boosting the number of skilled labourers. 

“We have reasons – not just soft, feel-good ones – to assist and help and push refugees into vocational training,” said Günter Hirth, economist for the Hanover Chamber of Commerce. “The German economy needs qualified workers.” 

Deal with the Devil

The situation is not a perfect solution for Syrian refugees, however, nor all states hold the same attitude towards them. The asylum process is long and arduous and families can even be separated as some members are approved to enter Germany while others must stay behind. Refugees live in poverty with an often uncertain future. Naturally, there have also been integration issues as well.

Erdogan has on several occasions claimed that the six billion euros offered by the EU is no longer sufficient to meet the demands migrants impose on the Turkish economy. Therefore, his best idea is to simply get rid of them, whether it be back to Syria or Europe, it matters little to Erdogan. The EU is not without blame however as it simply agreed to pay Ankara to deal with the problem while turning a blind eye to its actions. Furthermore, by cutting a deal with Erdogan in 2016, it showed that the EU is willing to pay to keep the problem off its doorstep and there is money to be made by politicizing the Syrian crisis. 

Some diplomats are warning the flow of migrants through Turkey has already begun to pick up. The UN recorded 45,600 arrivals so far this year. The solution may be to unite Europe under a single asylum policy, one that would include every state carrying its fair share of the burden. 

“If we leave all the countries on the EU’s external border (to fend for themselves), there will never be a common European asylum policy,” German Interior Minister Horst Seehofer said. “And if there is no common European asylum policy, there is a danger that uncontrolled immigration will once again take place, throughout Europe. We have seen this before and I do not want it to happen again.”

Regardless of how the EU decides its collective policy, it must also grapple with how to negotiate with Erdogan. As Turkey is not a member of the Protocol to the Refugee Convention, some critics argue the 2015 deal should be null and void as Ankara does not guarantee protection to those under its wing. This detail is of little concern to a dictator who is willing to simply push the problem back into Syria, at the expense of the Kurds, or leverage them against the EU, also by pushing the problem out of Turkey. 

There exists no easy solution when dealing with a strongman like Erdogan, but the EU must deal with him nevertheless. It can either act more forceful than the Turkish president in an attempt to break him or it can be more merciful and accept refugees with open arms.

L'articolo Erdogan Threatens EU with Refugee Flood proviene da InsideOver.

60 miles off the Tripoli coast. It`s almost 6 pm and the sun begins to set obscuring the view from the “Ras Al-Jider” Libyan coastguard patrol boat. The sailors watch from the deck, observing the horizon when they spot far away from their quarry: a rubber dinghy with around 90 migrants aboard – a black dot in the middle of nothing. The captain Mustafa and his crew set sail from the naval base five hours ago the moment they received an SOS from the Maltese Air Force giving the coordinates of the dinghy.

The Maltese aircraft flies over the “Zodiac” dinghy once again to assure itself that the Libyans have intercepted it, then turns north and leaves the coastguard to fulfil the duty required of it by the European Union: to gather the migrants and take them back to Libya and the detention centres. A contradictory mission, and sanctioned also by the Italian government, which has provided vessels and logistics.

The closer the patrol boat gets towards the dinghy, the more lively the sailors become. Preparing the rescue operation, they shout “Bye-bye Italy” or “If you don`t like Libya, go back to where you came from”. When finally the dinghy is just a few tens of metres off, the migrants appear, desperate, huddled together in the middle or sitting perilously on the gunwales, the women and children hidden forward.

As soon as the migrants distinguish the flag flown by the patrol boat, the dinghy changes course, trying to escape. But it`s hopeless, the dinghy`s speed is too low and fuel is by now exhausted. Not to add to that, with no point of reference whatsoever, they`ve completely lost their bearings. They begin to shout, argue with the Libyans, displaying resistance “If you want to continue, go on – but you may die”, Captain Mustafa shouts. “Give us your women and children, and die” another sailor shouts.

But a Libyan is already in the water with a rope, which he ties around the dinghy`s motor. It`s all over, the migrants will jump on board the “Ras Al-Jider” and take the route back to Tripoli, that port considered safe by Europe but which has become a torture for sub-Saharan migrants doomed to endure all kinds of privations, not only in the many and dreadful detention centres, there to suffer mistreatment and torture, but also outside, where they have become nothing less than the victims of a migrant hunt, a mechanism created ad hoc by authorities, militias and a part of civil society in order to fleece these unlucky adventurers, threatening them with beatings. Chaos reigns in Libya.

The plywood platform dinghy is brought astern, where disembarkation operations begin. The stench is insufferable as the first migrants come on board, broken and sad, faces angry. They maybe haven`t washed for days, weeks, months, have been confined in some house, expecting to embark. A woman, Sarah, refuses to board. She threatens to throw herself into the water, abandoning her son Amir, only five years old, to his fate. She`s stopped in time by a sailor who has jumped onto the dinghy to expedite the disembarkation. Some of her travelling companions try to calm her. “Better to drown in the sea than return to Libya” she cries repeatedly when the patrol boat is already en route for its Tripoli base. Sarah is a Sudanese refugee, from Khartoum. Amir her son has known nothing but detention centres and flight in his young life. He has never been to school. But Sarah knows for sure that they will not stay another minute in what she calls “the Libyan Hell”. She wants Europe.

Before departing, Captain Mustafa watches while one of his men scuttles the dinghy, lancing it with a knife and throwing the dry bread in the sea, the only food given to the migrants by the human traffickers. The only thing taken on board is the motor: “By seizing the motor we stop the traffickers using it again.” But Sarah knows the truth is the opposite: “They`ll sell that motor for thousands of dollars to the traffickers and make a killing. That`s how everything in Libya works.”

The women, including Sarah, are left astern. They fall asleep despite the horrendous noise of the nearby motor, while the men are brought to the bow deck. They look to the horizon, imagining the horrors that await them from the moment they disembark.

“We`ll give them everything we`ve got. Water, food, even our uniforms if necessary” Captain Mustafa says. It`s not up to me to decide if Libya is or is not a safe port. I limit myself to saving human lives. Mustafa is young. He seems humane and kind, contrary to some members of his crew, rude, hostile. One of them takes water to the dehydrating children, who fall in a scrum to get a sip. “Behave properly, or you`ll be sorry” says a Libyan. The presence of two journalists certainly calms them: they have heard that migrants who have already attempted the crossing say that other times the coast guards beat and mistreated them. Many of the migrants are in a state of collapse from fatigue, while others dry their clothes in the wind or gaze blankly at the horizon.

“When we arrive at Tripoli they`ll put electric wires on our testicles. Understand? Our testicles”, says Afaim, a Senegalese migrant who has already attempted the crossing five times. “They`ll ask us for 500 Euros to get out of the detention centre” adds Kona George. “Blacks are a means of exchange. For the Libyans we`re bargaining chips. They get organised, kidnap us, flog us, then ask for your parents` number to force us to pay. That`s how the houses get built. That`s why we escape from Libya. It`s dangerous and not everyone wants to do it, but we have no choice. Kona tells how they ended up in their present position. “We didn`t have a pilot. We took turns at the helm. It was difficult because we`d run out of water and couldn`t swallow the dry bread the traffickers gave us to eat. They told us to sail in a certain direction for six hours and then to steer with a compass and then continue for another six hours. We sailed for 18 hours, it was better to die in the sea than return to Libya. Europe or death”.

It`s already night, the tide is rising. Water floods the deck and the migrants try to shelter where the swell arrives less violently. The lights of the Libyan capital and its skyscrapers are visible. There’s not a sound. The “Ras Al-Jider” enters the port, everyone gets up. It berths in a deathly hush. The emergency services are not there, only two functionaries of the International Organisation for Migration, partner of the European Union, who observe and count the present migrants, who have been disembarked and lined-up, squatting, in four rows. For lighting, the headlights of the buses come to take them to the detention centres are directed on their faces. The busses` destination, “Tajoura”, written in Arabic, is a detention centre bombed only a few days ago with more than 50 people killed. While the migrants are being put on the busses, two try to escape, rushing blindly into the dark. A police car speeds after them. Sarah too, hiding behind a vehicle with the other women, whispers something and tries to escape, holding Amir by the hand. She`s easy prey for the guards, who stop her and, seeing her tenacity in resisting and protesting, take the terrified Amir howling “Mamma!” hostage. Sarah too must surrender.

All depart for the detention centre, where they will have to pay to get out, avoid torture, and try again to earn enough money to buy another nightmare voyage to escape the Libyan Hell. But it may take years of suffering.

Translation by John Lanigan

L'articolo Voyage of Escape From the Libyan Hell proviene da InsideOver.

L'articolo Migrants fleeing Libya proviene da InsideOver.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan is a strategist. A man who can say everything and the opposite of everything. First he threatens Vladimir Putin and Hassan Rouhani and then tries to find an agreement with them to resolve the Syrian conflict. But the Sultan is first and foremost an able politician who knows how to strike the right note with his country, getting the best and the worst out of the Turkish population. Thanks to these skills he has been able to transform situations that on paper are negative into positive ones. Let’s take the migrant question as an example.

Between 2014 and 2015 the war in Syria become increasingly intense and brutal. The Islamic State was born, bringing death and destruction in its wake. The battles between the regime and the rebels became more cruel and the population did the obvious thing: they fled. Millions of them crossed into neighbouring Turkey in order to get to Europe by land or by crossing the Aegean. A veritable human wave overwhelmed the borders as the migrants tried to escape the violence. Angela Merkel’s Germany threw open its doors whilst Viktor Orban’s Hungary built walls. What did Erdogan do? The Sultan welcomed the migrants and, along the lines of what Morocco’s Mohammed VI had been doing for some time, he used them as a fully-fledged political weapon to use against Europe.

This happened because the same states that just a few months earlier had opened their doors to the migrants now found themselves overwhelmed. They were no longer able to manage the crisis and the continuing deaths. And then Erdogan played the threat card. He said that he would like to stop them but he did not have the forces to do so. So he needed more money. And Europe went along with him immediately. It was November 2015 when the EU announced it would pay the Sultan Euro 6 billion. Three immediately and another three at a subsequent point in time. But this was only the beginning. Just a few weeks ago Erdogan was back on the attack, saying: “We will be forced to open the gates (to Europe, editor’s note). We cannot be forced to manage this burden by ourselves”. He went on to say that Ankara “did not receive the necessary support from around the world and above all from the EU”. Erdogan, in so doing, threatened Europe again and demanded the remaining 400 million of the agreement and asked for a safe zone in Syria in order to relocate the migrants.

The Sultan’s decision to raise the ante is above all driven by the need to win back support. The last mayoral election in Istanbul was won by Ekrem Imamoglu (opposition) against Binali Yildirim (AKP). One of the reasons why the opposition managed to win was the immigration emergency in what is the country’s second most important city after the capital Ankara. Who wins Istanbul wins Turkey, according to an old political adage. Erdogan knows this. And he cannot afford to make any more mistakes. That is why he is ready for a new operation in Syria: the North of the country is needed to move at least two of the 3.6 million migrants.

Before the operation the Reis got the green light from the White House which cannot afford to lose the Incirlik military base and, above all, cannot sever its relations with an ally that is increasingly attracted to Moscow (see the S-400 question). And the Russian also seem to understand Erdogan motives. The Kurds are stuck in the middle. Dumped after shedding blood for an ideal – that of autonomy – which proved to be inapplicable.

L'articolo Erdogan’s real motives for the new war in Syria proviene da InsideOver.