It is bad enough when states break their own rules and abuse people. But when they start changing laws, we really need to worry. Recent developments in three parts of Europe suggest that governments are climbing another level of violence to secure their borders. These developments are dangerous in themselves. But they also set alarming precedents for how countries in rich parts of the world will deal with future refugee movements – regardless of whether people set off because of war and persecution or as a result of the climate crisis.
In the UK, the Home Office is quietly trying to amend its draconian Nationality and Borders Bill, which is currently on the committees. A new provision aims to grant the border police immunity from prosecution if they fail to save people at sea. Interior Minister Priti Patel thinks this is a fundamentally sensible measure, which she justifies as follows: If boats are intercepted on the canal and sent back, it will prevent people from making the dangerous crossing at all. In fact, such a law undermines a fundamental principle of international law of the sea, namely the duty to rescue people in need.
At least eight dead in the border area
In Poland, the government has just passed an emergency law that allows the authorities to reject refugees who “illegally” enter the country. It is the latest development in a diplomatic stalemate with Belarus that is escalating on the Polish border. In response to sanctions imposed earlier this year, Belarus appears to have encouraged people from Iraq, Iran and parts of Africa to try to get into the EU this way. Poland’s harsh reaction is now leaving countless people trapped in the no man’s land between Belarus and Poland. Aid organizations are warning of an impending humanitarian crisis due to the onset of winter; at least eight people have died there this year, most of them from hypothermia.
In Southeastern Europe, meanwhile, an international team of investigative journalists has uncovered that Croatia and Greece are using a “shadow army” – units in civilian clothes wearing balaclavas – which is in contact with the regular security forces of the countries to prevent people from crossing their borders to hold. In Croatia, these units were filmed hitting people with clubs on the border with Bosnia.
In Greece, the troops are accused of intercepting boats in the Aegean Sea and driving passengers on lifeboats into Turkish waters. (Croatia has pledged to investigate reports of maladministration, while Greece denies the alleged practice). Almost as shocking as the allegations themselves is the fact that EU officials largely shrugged their shoulders at the revelations. The border defense in both countries is supported with financial aid from the EU. Twelve member states are even calling for the EU to change its rules so that it can finance “further preventive measures” at its external borders, including walls and fences.
Taken together, these developments indicate that “pushbacks” – pushing migrants back across a country’s border, even if they endanger it or ignore their right to asylum – are becoming an established practice. What used to take place largely in secret is now being done more and more openly. Some governments are even looking for ways to legalize the practice. However, the British plan has been sharply criticized by the UN refugee agency UNHCR, whose representative said it would “inevitably” endanger lives.
The problem is not just about the present. It is a dress rehearsal for how our governments will deal with the effects of the climate crisis in the years to come. A new report from the World Bank estimates that 216 million people will flee their countries by 2050 due to water scarcity, crop failures and rising sea levels. Even if these predictions are mostly vague and tend to be exaggerated, more people will be on the run in the future. And they are unlikely to return as long as the economic outlook is poor or conflict looms at home. In April, US Vice President Kamala Harris said drought and massive storm damage were the causes of increasing migration from Central America.
Unfortunately, many politicians view displacement as a cultural threat. Before the start of the Cop26 climate summit in Glasgow, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson made the false claim that “uncontrolled immigration” was responsible for the fall of the Roman Empire and that the world is facing a similar fate today. In this portrayal, an environmental disaster that affects us all is transformed into the question of how the rich and powerful can maintain their privileges.
Richer parts of the world have already begun to arm their borders militarily. A process that has accelerated in view of the refugee movements over the past decade. They are supported in this by a growing border protection industry. A recent report from the Transnational Institute warns of “the frontier industrial complex,” a multi-billion dollar industry. It ranges from security infrastructure to biometrics and artificial intelligence. The global market for fences, walls and surveillance alone is expected to grow to between $ 65 and $ 68 billion by 2050.
But that is the wrong form of security. Restrictive and violent border protection makes societies more authoritarian. The violence does not stop people from getting on their way. Instead, they are forced to take more dangerous escape routes. In addition, these countries make themselves vulnerable to blackmail and easily become targets of unscrupulous neighboring countries. The end result is a callous disregard for life.
We need a plan that starts differently. It must help the people affected to adapt to changing living conditions and reduce global inequality. A migration policy is needed that takes into account the reality of the situation of the people. Last year, the UN Committee on Human Rights ruled that governments cannot send people back to regions where their security is directly threatened by a climate emergency. So far there is no legal framework to protect people who are on the move for environmental reasons. A major new US study commissioned by the Biden government recommends laws to protect climate migrants. She does not say what such a law might look like.
Countries will have to decide in the coming years how to deal with refugee movements. Either they work out a system that protects people’s lives and dignity. Or they defend their borders more strongly and accept the human costs of doing so. If we are to avoid the latter, now is the time to question the violent logic of pushback before it is written into our laws.
Daniel Trilling is the author of Lights in the Distance: Exile and Refuge at the Borders of Europe and Bloody Nasty People: the Rise of Britain’s Far Right
.