A potential “Grexit”. Terrorism. Security threats. The specter of uncertainty continues to loom over the European Union as the migrant crisis increases tensions between member nations. And yet, each pressing issue presents an opportunity—a critical window for change.
Tragic events and adversity tend to reveal themselves as key players in relationships, possibly strengthening ties, possibly creating rifts. As the European migrant crisis brings political leaders and their responses into the limelight, this could be a defining period of unity or of division, which are often presented as mutually exclusive. This current refugee crisis has shown that this dichotomy need not exist. All member nations are demonstrating a fundamental commitment to human rights, even if they choose to work towards this common goal through different means.
On Wednesday, the European Commission presented a package with an emergency relocation proposal for refugees in Greece, Hungary and Italy, as well as a permanent crisis relocation mechanism for all member nations. When determining a fair distribution of refugees, the European Commission took each nation’s population and gross domestic product into consideration. With Germany spearheading efforts, some nations have received far more asylum applications than the European Commission proposes in its redistribution plan.
Meanwhile, Britain has altogether rejected participation in this plan. David Cameron said that creating migrant quotas “actually sends a message to people that it is a good idea to get on a boat and make that perilous journey.” Whether under this premise, or as the European Scrutiny Committee would claim as policy “aimed at political integration to Europe”, the British have provoked backlash with their divergence. However, Cameron’s pledge to accept 20,000 Syrian refugees over the next five years reinforces the notion that nations can actualize their commitment to human rights in different ways.
It follows to consider whether a united front necessitates a shared immigration policy. The struggle between each nation’s sovereignty and its belonging to a greater entity has resulted in an uncomfortable discord many a time. Amidst another pivotal moment in this political sphere, it is time to take another look at the concept of union. Our subscription to the current paradigm of European unity creates artificial boundaries, prohibiting room for relations to develop organically. In this current situation, it is conceivable that the European Union’s mandate could transcend economic and political integration to find unity in a common sense of humanity.
Although nations are varying in their initiative and approach towards alleviating suffering, it remains evident that an ideal of human rights is shared throughout Europe. This translates to a certain type of solidarity, one that may not align with what had originally been sought. Nevertheless, this allegiance underscores the actions of each member nation, and as such, the emphasis should shift from ensuring uniform response and censuring those who exercise autonomy to a more accommodating sense of union.
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.