E.U. Reaches Deal on Migration at Summit, but Details Sketchy

Big problem is that there is a lot less amount of wealthy, Westernized nations to flee to than there are nations in bad shape. How can 50 or so countries of the world take in the other 150 country's poor and destitute? It's simply impossible to do. Not without destroying those desirable Western nations. Then we're all riding the same trash barge.

I love the photo that appears on the "Evening Briefing" about the EU meeting in Brussels about migration... ...Theresa May and Angela Merkel surrounded by men, but clearly May & Merkel are "at the center of it all," and the men are leaning in and listening intently. This is what happens when women are at the table...yay!

What ever happened to the 1000's of years of natural law, and recognized by legislated written law in all civilized nations that recognized the sovereignty rights of citizens against having their communities and nations invaded by foreigners? Why, how can we howl in outrage about little green men attacking and taking over Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, continually 'never forget' wail about Hitler's invasion of Poland, or pretend to care about the Chinese invasion and genocide against the people of Tibet, when we won't even defend the rights of our common citizens against invasion floods of foreigners. Illegally invasions, fraudulent refugee floods, illegal border crossings into alleged democracies that the majority not only did not "ask for", but outright opposed in opinion polls for decades? It really is time to call our holier than thou elite's propaganda claiming infinite duties of charity to the billions in the global south for what it is - a gluttonous greed for a never ending supply of slave labor simultaneously now being used to shove the common citizens of liberal democracies back into a the kind of medieval serfdom that still exists in the 3rd World.

Mass migration is not the only critical problem facing the world today. But it is the one seen as most acute at the present time. I see the debate as two sided: 1. Those who want to build a wall around their country, or perhaps all developed counties in the Free world. 2. Those like Angela Merklel who want to start a serious discussion about this seemingly intractable problem. Political solutions always require compromise. Fear is very high among those who see migrants as a threat to their ethnicity and standard of living. The pragmatics of assimilating refugees from war tone states, failed states, or brutal crime states are immense, expensive, and will take years. The First World cannot take in the 63 million desperate refugees that now roam the earth. On the other hand what will the world look like if we build walls and cut the world in half between the halfs and half nots? This is a global problem, not just an EU problem. Solutions will be difficult and will not satisfy all parties. A world conference on this , with countries from the entire spectrum, is called for to address this crisis.

Just to sort out the essence of these arguments: - It takes a right-winger to object to accepting millions of migrants who arrive unannounced to settle in Europe. - Merkel's Bavarian allies disagree with her migrant policy because of "a strong challenge from the far-right, anti-immigration party Alternative for Germany". - The "liberal values" defended by Merkel require that a country welcome all those who arrive at its borders, no matter how many millions there might be. Thank you for clearing up these points.

The unadvertised goal of this “summit” was above all to “save Merkel”. Goal achieved at least for some time. The rest is, as usual, smoke and mirrors. The ink on the agreement document wasn’t even dry that everybody was already thinking about how not to honor their commitment.

I believe the mass, uncontrolled European migration of 2015 set the stage for a Trump presidency. He skillfully used the anxiety it created here in the U.S. That said, global migration is not going away, but will intensify, due to population pressure and climate change. This is a global crisis, and demands proactive intervention now. But, that’s not how we humans operate; we seem hardwired to out out brush fires rather than preventing them in the first place. I don’t know the exact solutions, but I think it involves keeping people from leaving their homes, which means serious population control and investing in environmental restoration. Right now. Otherwise, prepare for authoritarian governments and militarized borders, and a whole lot of human suffering. We have the means to solve the problems, we lack the collective will and cooperation.

The proposed European Union solution is the same as the Trump administration solution: place immigrant in screening centers until it can be determine which are legitimate refugees are asylum seekers.

Would a more realistic solution to the EU migration crisis (and US crisis) lie in either abolishing or revisiting and updating the 1951 Refugee Convention? "Refuge: Rethinking Refugee Policy in a Changing World", Alexander Betts and Paul Collier (2017) Europe is facing its greatest refugee crisis since the Second World War, yet the institutions responding to it remain virtually unchanged from those created in the post-war era ...

The United States should apologize to the European Union for creating this crisis. There would have never been a 2015 migrant crisis without the destabilizing military adventurism of the United States in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya.

Nearly 750 million people in the UE. Any stats on how many legal Immigrants they bring in compared to the United States? Would double our number workable. Has the bubble burst for image of the EU. The progressive has ignored the complex problems of the EU preferring to believe to be we should exactly like them. There's no photos of little girls when the EU try to do something about immigration. Are they Nazi's?

Countries like Hungary do not want to play a role of EU jailers for the migrants. The migrants themselves don't want to settle in most EU states (apart from Germany, Sweden and not too many others) so the only way to "spread" them across the EU would be by forcing them to settle in other, less desirable, member-states. If the EU (or at least the free movement principle) wants to survive, the migrants will have to either be deported or be given a status that allows them to to move freely within the EU. Merkel does not want this because she knows that most migrants will settle in Germany if given the option. You can't have it both ways, Merkel - either you close internal borders and force them to settle in East/Central EU states or you don't, in which case it will be on Germany to deal with the burden. The latter seems more fair to both, the migrants and to other EU countries who don't want them to begin with. So, please, next time you invite a million people to the EU, send German cruise ships to pick them up and leave other countries alone in dealing with your post-WW2 guilt.

the fate of Europe was sealed in 2015 when Frau Merkel unilaterally waived Dublin II. As for this EU Agreement, it has all the weight & effect of saying, "everyone who want a pet flying unicorn, raise your hand..."

There are no comments allowed yet on the op ed on migration and climate change, but commenters have been bringing up this link for a long time now, along with birth control and education / rights of women. These are all linked. Europe may need labor to continue the ponzi scheme that is retirement in modern economies, but it surely doesn't need people who won't assimilate (i.e., become atheists like the rest of Europe has since the Enlightenment). I would hate to see Germany or Italy or France ban alcohol if enough votes from Muslims tip the scale. In addition, encouraging people to come to the first world to escape the problems of the third world will bring most of those problems with them. If we can't stop the world from warming, we must reduce populations as humanely as possible, and even then, we're going to have to defend against the [barbarians?] at the gates, sorrowful as that is for the barbarians.

Maybe, just maybe, the will of the citizens of European countries is getting through to their politically correct and feckless leaders. Unlimited illegal immigration and the growing threat to individual national cultural identity will do that to you sooner or later.

Refugees don't escape the backwardness, war and poverty of their homelands, they bring it with them and unless something changes, the West will resemble the places that these people have left more and more everyday.

I did not find Orban's comment to be harsh at all. The citizens of any country have the right to decide which immigrants and how many enter their country. It may be selfish to say no more or to deport some, but sometimes being selfish is necessary to defend one's own interests. Altruism has limits.

The EU's immigration debacle started with Ms. Merkel's well intentioned, but incredibly naive, "KUMBAYA" based invitation, and subsequent opening of Germany's borders to all migration, using war in Syria and Iraq as the primary reason. It encouraged UNCONTROLLED economic migration into Europe from many countries far removed from this war. NO CONSIDERATION was given to the effect the sudden logistical and economic pressures that would be borne by the point of entry countries. Add to that the sudden influx of religious, behavioral, and cultural differences, plus the DEMAND for Europeans to adapt to them, not the other way around, and you have a clear recipe for disaster. People are beginning to DEMAND for the EU to at least ADMIT refugee crime, which is treated with kid's gloves for the sake of political correctness. In a Bloomberg article titled: "Germany Must Come To Terms With Refugee Crime"; Leonid Bershidsky writes: "There's no denying that the disorderly immigration of 2015 and 2016 has resulted in measurable damage to German society. Despite its major problem with population aging and its need for immigrants, Germany has learned the hard way that it must have more control over who comes in." They have to deal with the open border situation and the effect it has on the internal free travel all over Europe policy, never mind crime. Can't have uncontrolled immigration without compromising security.

“We still have a lot of work to do to bridge the different views,” Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany said after the discussions, which a senior European official described as sometimes virulent. " Too bad the public could not be privy to this intra-European "virulence." It might enlighten our perspective on some of Europe's most prominent leaders whose public faces often lack clarifying mojo expression.

If you take any region or country, even the 'vastly empty' United States, you can measure sustainability and carrying capacity. Look at the region's water tables, forests, arable soil, fish populations in their coastal waters, wildlife, and CO2 emissions. If on a yearly basis net good natural assets are decreasing and net bad assets are increasing, the region is not long term sustainable. I can think of no region of the world you could call sustainable. Many scientists calculate the planet's carrying capacity at less than a billion people at First World lifestyles. In the big picture on immigration, the world is finite, and humans have vastly overpopulated the planet past its carrying capacity. Those regions degrading the fasted have people fleeing to the slower degrading regions, and also have high birthrates. Compassion is certainly admirable and desirable, but unfortunately reality sets in and at some point the sheer math of it all forces limits on compassion. For every immigrant accepted, more are being born to become future refugees. I admire the initial compassion of Merkel and Europe on immigration, but they need to understand that there are limits, and they should not feel bad about admitting there are limits and setting up these procedures to control immigration. The focus needs to be on Zero Population Growth in all affected regions, even negative population growth in high consuming regions.

Hmm, maybe border control and the quelling of endless illegal entrants is a good idea after all?

Merkel did not win anything. She is despised in Germany for her immigration policy. The AFD will win in the end. She is on her way out. The sooner, the better.

And now it has been announced that Greece and Spain have agreed to take back migrants from Germany. If this is actually executed, then it will help reverse the chaos of 2015. How can today get any better?!

The abomination that is the EU is imploding. All the propaganda from the mainstream media trying to put lipstick on that pig is no longer working. History will judge Merkel as the person most responsible for the collapse of both the EU and the eurozone. And Donald Tusk makes Paul Ryan look like Churchill.

The nations of the EU with different cultures, languages, issues; some more affected by immigration, nevertheless, hammered out a compromise and agreed. Whether you agree with it or no; compare this to the current political climate of 'no-compromise', 'no deal' in the US where the Congress and President are in a constant state of gridlock.

Wait a second. When Trump tried this everyone screeched that family detention was immoral and that catch and release was the only solution. Yet the humanist Merkel is willing to give it a try? And we’re not?

Bravo EU! The 21st will be the European Century!

This reacting to a problem rather than trying to solve the problem. Question: If events in your country are sending waves of immigrants to my country, do I have a right to intervene? What form should that intervention take - Humanitarian assistance in country, or imposing order?

China, Africa and India could export 100 million people each, and not make much of a dent in their 1 billion plus populations. Should all those hypothetical migrants come to the EU? Or to the US? Does anyone not think that would be massively disruptive? The wars we incite or enable around the world, the guns we export south of the border, the illegal drug consumption we have that fuels the drug cartels to further destabilize their host countries, all contribute to and drive the phenomena of mass migration. Our lifestyle is based upon the global degradation of the planet, and the dismantling of societies outside the 'developed world'. We are as much the problem ourselves.

The EU seems to be the US writ large: a massive dialogue of opinion and dissension with little optimism for an acceptable outcome. Fortunately -- ? -- no one autocrat appears to be in charge of shoving an outcome down the throats of all. Merkel is at a fulcrum point, and may well lose her authority to the global shift toward protectionism. Meanwhile, violence and malice in some countries push many innocents to seek asylum to -- where? We are internationally in a state of crisis -- and no state, no country has the desire to harbor those fleeing. I fear that with Trump, Putin, and others, we are setting the stage for nothing but a world war that resolves this bizarre dilemma -- an immoral resolution to a moral nightmare.

Interesting the Italy and France took the lead on this vague deal. This was made possible because the Italians voted in a controlled-borders government opposed to the previous open-borders government of Matteo Renzi. Italy has now joined Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Austria with controlled-borders governments. This was enough momentum to finally tip the scale for controlled external borders. Real control will require that the boats no longer set sail. Orban is right, the migrants need to be deterred and those migrants that reached Europe already should have their cases promptly adjudicated, and those with failed claims should be repatriated to their home countries. Orban is also correct that this is what the vast majority of people want. For democracy to survive, the voice of the citizens must be heard, and control applied. He is much more aligned with the people of Europe than Angela Merkel is. His view is ascendant, and Merkel's view is descendent.

On the surface this looks like a good deal but until it's set into place we will have to wait and see. However the one true thing about this deal is that it looks like they will treat human beings with respect, which is more then Trump and company have done.

The EU choice was to either strengthen the external borders or accept internal borders. This time, the EU has chosen wisely. In fact, this could be a turning point in the history of the EU. Borders define identity, and the European identity will now be stronger. It could even bring the eastern European states fully back into fold. The essential plan is to prevent/deter migrants from reaching Europe in the first place. Those that reach Europe will be held in closed processing centers until their cases are resolved. (This mirrors the processing centers now being established in the U.S.) This simple plan should have been put in place two years ago, just as the eastern European countries wanted. Oh well, better late than never. Most importantly, today's agreement sends the proper signal to would-be immigrants. The risks of uncontrolled, mass migration into Europe are finally greatly reduced. Angela Merkel won a critical battle today. And Viktor Orban won the war.