Misreading the Refugee Crisis: Question Whether European Countries Lack Sympathy
01 October 2015
By Ramzy Baroud
So far this year, ''nearly one quarter of a million migrants have crossed the
Mediterranean to Europe'', reported Al Jazeera's Inside Story, citing the
International Organisation for Migration. The situation is indeed bleak, not
only because the number of refugees is constantly on the rise, but also
because Europe appears rather disinterested in addressing the root causes of
the problem.
The guests who appeared on Inside Story were all quite articulate and
well-informed. Yet, not one of the three made even a fleeting mention of the
fact that Europe should feel a slight moral accountability towards these
refugees for it, either directly or indirectly, instigated or contributed to
conflicts in the Middle East. In fact, a sensible question by the host on
whether European countries' lack of sympathy towards the refugees may have
been caused by deep-seated racism was rejected as being untrue by one of the
guests.
But why the insistence on disconnecting the discussion of the refugee crisis
from its proper narrative — that war begets war refugees and Europe, as with
other warring parties, should be called to account for the involvement — to
some other marginal discourse?
Another take on the crisis was offered in a recent article in the Guardian by
Ellie Mae O'Hagan (republished in Gulf News on August 21) who latched onto
the old argument that the Syrian conflict is rooted in climate change. The
article was summarised as such: ''What's the common factor between the tragic
deaths of refugees in the Mediterranean and the Arab spring? Food shortages
driven by global warming.''
Again, not a single word about the western world's contributions to the wars
in the Middle East. Although blaming global warming for the 'tragic deaths of
refugees' might rightly address an interesting aspect behind the social
upheaval that preceded the war in Syria, one remains baffled by the fact that
such intellectuals are oblivious to the commonalities between the fact that
the thousands of refugees who wash up onto the Greek shores come from
Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.
What do these countries have in common, aside from war, one may ask? They all
have US-European hands in their conflicts, a reality that remains largely
ignored. Also ignored is the fact that most refugees who brave the perilous
seas into Italian shores come from Libya. Italy's connection to the crisis is
particularly interesting and poignantly telling.
On April 26, 2011, a meeting that can only be described as sinister took
place between the then Italian prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, and the
then French president, Nicolas Sarkozy. The most pressing issue discussed at
the meeting in Rome was how to deal with North African immigrants. Sarkozy,
who was under pressure from his right-wing and far-right constituencies to
halt immigration originating from North Africa (resulting from the Tunisian
uprising), hoped to strike a deal with the opportunistic Italian leader.
Italy was accused of allowing immigrants to cross through its borders to the
rest of Europe. Thus, in exchange for an Italian agreement to join a French
initiative aimed at tightening border control, France would resolve major
disputes through a series of takeovers, involving French and Italian
companies. Moreover, Italy would then secure French support for a bid by
Italian economist and banker, Mario Draghi, as the head of the European
Central Bank.
Another point on the French agenda was active Italian participation in the
war on Libya, initially spearheaded by France, Britain and the United States,
and later championed by Nato.
Initially, Berlusconi hesitated to participate in the war, although hardly
for any moral reasons, considering that the war was deliberately based on
misconstrued interpretations of United Nations Security Council Resolution
1973 of March 17, 2011. To place this comment in context, the resolution
called for an 'immediate ceasefire', the establishment of a 'no-fly zone' and
using all means, except foreign occupation, to protect civilians. The war,
however, achieved entirely different objectives from the ones stated in the
resolution — a regime change, the bloody capture and murder of Libyan leader
Muammar Gaddafi, and a bloodbath in which thousands of civilians were killed,
and continue to die due to the chaos and civil war that has gripped Libya
since then.
Berlusconi's change of heart had little to do with common sense or moral
integrity, and much to do with oil and gas. He was walking a tight rope. On
one hand, about a quarter of Italy's oil and nearly 10 per cent of the
country's natural gas, was imported from Libya. Destabilising Libya could
interrupt the flow of Libyan energy supplies at a crucial time — Italy was
desperately attempting to recover from its deep economic recession.
One would recall that following the Libyan war, France marched to Mali. Thus,
it appeared to be inclined towards intervention and holding all the cards in
Libya could be devastating for Italy.
''The Franco-Italian spat over immigration follows sharp differences over
Libya, where Rome has been dragged into a war it would rather avoid, fearing
a Paris-Benghazi nexus will freeze out its substantial interests in Libyan
oil and gas,'' the Financial Times reported at the time.
The successful meeting between the two leaders paved the way for Italian
intervention, which occurred in earnest in the Libyan war, on April 28. In
the meanwhile, France honoured its part of the bargain, and on November 1 of
that same year, Draghi succeeded Jean-Claude Trichet as the president of the
European Central Bank. Both countries benefited, despite Libya being
destroyed.
Now, few in the Italian government would care to remember their country's
role in the war on Libya which, despite initial hesitation, was embraced with
utmost enthusiasm. The refugees who are lucky enough to make it to Italy's
shores are constantly and particularly demonised by the Italian media and
perceived as a burden on the still-struggling Italian economy.
Even Greece (which displays little patience or regard for humanitarian laws
in its treatment of the many thousands of refugees arriving from Syria, Iraq
and Afghanistan, via Turkey) fulfilled a minor part in the war in Libya
(2011) and provided assistance to the US-led war on Iraq (2003).
The relationship between war and the rising challenge of refugees, immigrants
and asylum seekers cannot be overstated. It is both ironic and particularly
tragic that the many thousands of war refugees are seeking shelter in the
same European and Nato countries that either directly (as in Libya, Iraq,
Afghanistan) or indirectly (as in Syria) contributed to the destruction and
destabilisation of their countries.
However, the countries that should be confronted most about their moral
responsibility towards war refugees are those who ignited these wars in the
first place. While Libya continues to descend into chaos, and Syria and Iraq
subsist in a state of bedlam, both France and Britain discuss the problem of
refugees attempting to cross into both countries as though the refugees are
swarms of locusts, not innocent people who were victimised mostly by
US-European wars. Meanwhile, the US, geographically removed from the refugee
crisis, appears completely unperturbed by the chaotic scenes of desperate
refugees, capsizing boats and pleading families. Those who wage war should,
at least, shoulder part of the moral responsibility of addressing the
horrible and devastating consequences that armed conflict inflicts upon
innocent people. The Italian example is a display of how economic interests
trump morality and not a single Nato country is innocent.
Now that the refugee crisis is worsening, it behoves Nato to deal with this
problem at least with a degree of humanity and dare one say with an
enthusiasm comparable to that which led them to several devastating wars in
recent years.
– Dr. Ramzy Baroud has a PhD in Palestine Studies from the University of
Exeter. He has been writing about the Middle East for over 20 years. He is an
internationally-syndicated columnist, a media consultant, an author of
several books and the founder of PalestineChronicle.com. His books include
'Searching Jenin', 'The Second Palestinian Intifada' and his latest 'My
Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story'. Visit his website:
www.ramzybaroud.net.