Horst Seehofer and migration: the good, the unclear and the ugly.

Horst Seehofer and migration:  the good, the unclear and the ugly.

Horst Seehofer and migration: the good, the unclear and the ugly.

From our beginnings in 2015, the V4 Report never bought into Horst Seehofer and the CSU of Bavaria. We probably benefited from not knowing what they once stood for in the past, but from our view, they were just Merkel’s ‘show opposition’ to enable the Grand Coalition while preventing true forces on the right from emerging to really challenge the establishment.

Despite the very vague details, Seehofer is taking another shot at migration reform. As usual, the details regarding deportations (the missing link to any solution) are absent while relocations are emphasized. Why?

1. The Good: Seehofer repeated a past call to institute a policy of verifying whether someone is entitled to asylum before they enter the EU.

He said that if a person at the EU border does not have the right to ask for asylum, he cannot be distributed under the EU scheme and must “instead be turned away.”

Great! As usual with Seehofer, this sounds good…but has he thought about the methods that must be utilized to achieve this goal? While the V4 Report may believe these methods are common sense, both Brussels and Angela Merkel would vehemently reject them.

2. The Unclear: The most vital question to ask is which body (the UN, the EU or both) will decide asylum requests? This is a danger in itself, considering the UN/EU’s constant expansion of the definition of a ‘refugee’ to include migrants in ‘refugee-like’ situations. Some are even inventing new cases, such as climate, corona or even health care refugees.

It is no secret that almost all of the illegal immigrants do not qualify for protection. This could easily turn into the model that changes the game and turns illegal migration into legal migration by changing the method of transfer and enlarging the pool of eligible refugees. This is not a detail that can be just glossed over; the UN cannot be a part of this decision process in any way. (Then again, we would not trust Ylva from Sweden either.)

👉 The land borders are somewhat easier, so long as the EU has what it takes to also set up a guaranteed mechanism to deport all of the illegals out of Europe. This cannot be a future promise either, like so many other pledges that never materialized in the past.

Another issue regarding the land borders will be push-backs. Seehofer’s border proposal cannot work without them, unless someone else knows another method to stop the aggressive male migrants from breaking through…or as Seehofer says “to turn them away”.

In order to process applications outside of the EU, as Seehofer proposes, it would also require detention holding centers in Bosnia and Serbia (plus Morocco and Turkey). Whether Bosnia or Serbia agree to this is up for debate.

Still another question…the overwhelming majority are illegal (again, unless UN or EU officials abuse the definition of a refugee) and would need to be sent back immediately (they will not go voluntarily either) to their countries of origin. Who will do this? Bosnia? 😂

The EU (maybe via Frontex), under Seehofer’s plan, would have to be prepared to both fund and deport the illegals out of Europe. Just leaving them in Bosnia or Serbia would not work and would create the same type of situation one sees at the border there now.

👉 The sea borders are more difficult, not because it has to be, but due to the soft beliefs of Brussels.

How does one process asylum claims at the sea borders of Greece, Italy, Spain and Malta before the illegals enter the EU?

On the boat is a possibly, so long as armed guards are onboard to prevent the situation that just occurred in Malta, where migrants threatened violence to the crew to force disembarkment. Still, most are illegal and would have to be “turned away”. Is the EU prepared to transfer them back to Africa by the way they came…by the boatloads?

Another option could be processing centers in some African countries, but this would require consent and reliance on third parties, which can be subject to the type of blackmail one sees from Turkey.

And what about the NGOs or any migrant transfer boat…is the EU prepared to prevent them from entering the territory of Malta or Italy? If not, how will this plan work?

** To be frank, this is typical Seehofer-EPP smoke and mirrors…tough soundbites used as bait to please the public (keep Salvini out) while working to set up an EU-wide distribution mechanism to commit the EU to mass migration.

3. The Ugly: Seehofer could not resist taking shots at the Visegrad and CEE states for being unwilling to take in refugees. This is what it’s really about. Germany and Brussels do not want to stop illegal migration, they want to manage it.

“If a country doesn’t do its part taking in refugees, then it needs to support ‘the system’ in other ways,” he said. He called for a greater show of “flexible solidarity,” but did not clarify what this could look like.

“Whether its sea rescues or retrieving children from Greece or taking in refugees, at the moment it is always only a few countries jumping in,” he said. (Horst, maybe it’s those few countries which are the problem. Since when is solidarity defined the wishes of France and Germany?)

The new EU slogan of ‘flexible solidarity’ is a trap, designed to enshrine the relocation of illegals into EU reform. Supporting “the system” – indirectly or directly – that relocates illegal migrants across the EU is facilitating human trafficking. This only encourages more illegal migration and intensifies the problem for the next generations.

Moreover, this is an EU dominated by the western bloc; flexibility has a very short shelf life in Brussels. Once this genie is let out of the bottle, the others will eventually require all to participate directly.

*** Again, it is easy to propose a goal (no entry without approval first) that everyone can say “Geez, that sounds great Horst…your the best”.

However, it is much harder to actually posses the fortitude and determination needed to take the tough but necessary measures to achieve that goal.

This is the problem with the EU. While Viktor Orban has what it takes, Horst Seehofer and the Eurocrats in Brussels do not.