Two years after the start of negotiations on the EU-Libya Framework Agreement the European Commission and Libya agreed on a common migration agreement for the period 2011- 2013. The agreement was signed by the Commissioner for Home Affairs and the Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy together with the representatives of the Libyan government during a meeting from 4-6 October in Tripoli. Both sides agreed on more dialogue and financial assistance to support Libyan reforms in the field of migration and asylum. For the next three years the EU will allocate €50 million for projects aimed to adopt new legislation on refugee protection, to fight against smuggling and trafficking in human beings, to upgrade the border surveillance systems and not least better control the immigration flows to the European continent.
Libya has become a mayor transit country for sub-saharian migrants heading north to Europe, especially to Malta and Italy. Many migrants try to cross the country in order to reach to European continent or to find work in Libya. Many are asylum seekers coming from African conflict zones such as Somalia, Eritrea, Darfur and western Africa. Following the adoption of the ‘Treaty on Friendship, Partnership and Cooperation’ between Italy and the authoritarian administration of Muammar Gaddafi in May 2009 fewer migrant boats crossed the Mediterranean. In 2009 the number of irregular people caught heading to Italy fell from 32,052 to 7,300 in 2008. The practice of intercepting boat people trying to reach Southern Europe on small ships by border guards in the central Mediterranean and returning them back to Libya has raised concern and criticism by Human Rights Groups. They condemn the current push-back practice on the high seas and accuse Libya of human rights violations, arrests in migrant detention centres, and deportations of the refugees.
No blank check to Libya
Despite of criticism at both domestic and international level against the vague and worrying friendship agreement, the Libyan leader was not discouraged to propose publicly that the EU should pay the North African country €5 billion a year to stop clandestine immigration to Europe or in his words “to prevent Europe from turning black”.
Even if the EU have never seriously considered Gaddafi’s offer the very fact that a cooperation deal with the authoritarian regime is concluded is a worrying point. Within the non-binding agreement, Libya is set to receive money and assistance from EU experts. Although, as the Commission states, the money will not be handed over to the Libyan government but spend directly into the projects under the supervision of the Commission.
Libya is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention or 1967 Protocol for the treatment of refugees according to human rights. The state has no appropriate asylum system and does not even recognize the term “asylum seeker”. In June 2010 the local office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was closed in Tripoli. The UN's refugee agency will not reopen its department in Tripoli unless Libya recognizes international asylum protections standards and the adoption of the Geneva convention. It remains to be seen if the UNHCR will return after the EU’s intention to help building up an asylum system based on international standards and to raise standards in the detention centres.
A starting point for reinforced bilateral relations
For a long time already, the EU is pushing for a dialogue with Libya to improve the cooperation. The deal with Libya on various migration aspects is an important step in the relations between the EU and the North-African country. The bilateral relations between the EU and Libya have over the past three years developed constantly. The Commission has also decided to open an EU-Office in Tripoli, under the authority of the EU Delegation in Tunis, which should become operational in early 2011. The ambitious cooperation agenda on migration could be a starting point for other areas of cooperation. Migration is one of the key areas for Europe next to for instance energy, trade, and security. However, the negotiations about an EU-Libya Framework Agreement, that would cover several aspects of mutual interest such as free trade area issues and cooperation in energy, transport, migration, JHA, environment, maritime policy and education, have been pending since the end of 2008. The Framework Agreement would be the basis for further political dialog and cooperation in foreign policy and security issues. Soon there is another chance for discussion when the next negotiation round takes place in the Libyan capital set for end of November.
Friday, November 5, 2010
Thursday, October 7, 2010
EuroMed Intercultural Trends 2010
A small but important stone in the mosaic of Euro-Mediterranean relations
On 15th September, the Anna Lindh Report "EuroMed Intercultural Trends 2010", a public opinion poll on intercultural trends and values in the Euro-Mediterranean region, was launched in Brussels. For the first time, this report sheds light on the reality of intercultural relations in the region. Coordinated by the Anna Lindh Euro-Mediterranean Foundation for Dialogue between Cultures and the consultancy Gallup about 13,000 people from across the two shores of the Mediterranean were asked in this opinion poll.
According to André Azoulay, president of the Anna Lindh Foundation, the report provides an answer to the key question of how "relations between Islam and the West could be built". The poll gives evidence whether there are any cross-cultural values shared between European countries and those on the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean.
Concerning the mutual perceptions of the people living in societies in Europe and in the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean region the Anna Lindh Report finds out that despite increased interaction the people from the two shores are still suffering from a distorted and stereotyped perception of each other. The main and most pronounced difference in values between people across the region could be found in the importance on faith and religious values, which affects as well the mutual perceptions.
In addition, there are interesting data in regard to the political relations between the two shores. Are the people in favor of a Mediterranean Union and is there a shared vision of the Mediterranean as an organizing concept? Is the Euro-Mediterranean region viewed as one geographic or cultural space and does a solid basis for regional cooperation exist?
The poll confirms that the Mediterranean is a shared space with specific values and even with a shared ‘Mediterranean attitude’. There exists a common mindset which could allow the people of the Euro-Mediterranean region to feel part of a regional grouping. The people across the region expect that common projects, such as the new Union for the Mediterranean, can benefit their societies positively in the future.
To conclude, there is no doubt that important features of interregional cooperation are still lagging behind expectations. The political dialogue, cultural exchanges and the freedom of the movement of the individuals, just to name a few, have to be improved in the future. For all those willing to enhance the cooperation the Anna Lindh Report provides important background information. It is full of interesting and sometimes surprising findings about the perceptions, interests and feelings of the people across the region. Although the Report is just a small stone in the mosaic of intercultural relations, it is an important one which may contribute to a more integrated Euro-Mediterranean Region. Or in the words of Stefan Füle, EU Commissioner for Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy: "This report and its recommendations will help us to address some of the challenges we are facing in the region”.
Go to the Anna Lindh Report website or download the PDF version EuroMed Intercultural Trends 2010
On 15th September, the Anna Lindh Report "EuroMed Intercultural Trends 2010", a public opinion poll on intercultural trends and values in the Euro-Mediterranean region, was launched in Brussels. For the first time, this report sheds light on the reality of intercultural relations in the region. Coordinated by the Anna Lindh Euro-Mediterranean Foundation for Dialogue between Cultures and the consultancy Gallup about 13,000 people from across the two shores of the Mediterranean were asked in this opinion poll.
According to André Azoulay, president of the Anna Lindh Foundation, the report provides an answer to the key question of how "relations between Islam and the West could be built". The poll gives evidence whether there are any cross-cultural values shared between European countries and those on the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean.
Concerning the mutual perceptions of the people living in societies in Europe and in the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean region the Anna Lindh Report finds out that despite increased interaction the people from the two shores are still suffering from a distorted and stereotyped perception of each other. The main and most pronounced difference in values between people across the region could be found in the importance on faith and religious values, which affects as well the mutual perceptions.
In addition, there are interesting data in regard to the political relations between the two shores. Are the people in favor of a Mediterranean Union and is there a shared vision of the Mediterranean as an organizing concept? Is the Euro-Mediterranean region viewed as one geographic or cultural space and does a solid basis for regional cooperation exist?
The poll confirms that the Mediterranean is a shared space with specific values and even with a shared ‘Mediterranean attitude’. There exists a common mindset which could allow the people of the Euro-Mediterranean region to feel part of a regional grouping. The people across the region expect that common projects, such as the new Union for the Mediterranean, can benefit their societies positively in the future.
To conclude, there is no doubt that important features of interregional cooperation are still lagging behind expectations. The political dialogue, cultural exchanges and the freedom of the movement of the individuals, just to name a few, have to be improved in the future. For all those willing to enhance the cooperation the Anna Lindh Report provides important background information. It is full of interesting and sometimes surprising findings about the perceptions, interests and feelings of the people across the region. Although the Report is just a small stone in the mosaic of intercultural relations, it is an important one which may contribute to a more integrated Euro-Mediterranean Region. Or in the words of Stefan Füle, EU Commissioner for Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy: "This report and its recommendations will help us to address some of the challenges we are facing in the region”.
Go to the Anna Lindh Report website or download the PDF version EuroMed Intercultural Trends 2010
Monday, September 6, 2010
THINK EU-MED #3
Europeanization beyond the EU: The Dynamics of Europeanization in the Southern Mediterranean Partner States
by Moritz Schneider
Since the European Union has almost reached its natural geographical borders the process of exporting European values, laws and standards via the membership prospect is more limited. Yet, even without the incentive of a concrete membership offer, the EU has created several policy instruments towards its neighbouring countries to foster Europeanization outside the European territory as well. In the context of the Euro-Mediterranean relations, the EU enjoys bilateral and multilateral policy frameworks to spread the Union’s common values and institutions.
My paper analyses the main mechanisms for inducing Europeanization in the Southern Mediterranean region, namely the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) and the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). The multilateral EMP promotes Europeanization and regional integration through a socialisation and imitation processes, while the bilateral ENP focuses on country-specific Action Plans based on conditionality rules to foster Europeanization in the neighbouring countries. The logic of differentiation of the ENP and the logic of regionalism of the EMP have however proved ineffective strategies to foster reforms or intra-regional integration. The EU’s transformative power in the neighbourhood and the adaptation of European institutions and values has been low in the Mediterranean region. The paper argues that the EU’s external policy framework towards the Southern Mediterranean states is following a dual strategy between the concepts of Realpolitik and Idealpolitik. The lack of a clear strategy undermines the efficiency of EU policies and the possibility to promote Europeanization in the region.
The new Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) is intended to create a new form of institutional governance by abandoning the asymmetric power structure, enhancing co-ownership and promoting a more balanced partnership. However, the UfM is not responding to the policy shortcomings of the ENP and the EMP, but rather seems to be a compromise of bilateral and multilateral patterns of the two former approaches - the logic of differentiation and the logic of regionalism. The paper will conclude that the EU has to reconsider its strategy of the UfM or, even better, remodel its policy approach towards the Southern Mediterranean countries to improve co-operation and foster the process of Europeanization.
L'EUROPE EN FORMATION Année 2010 - été 2010 - n° 356
Dossier: Euro-Mediterranean partnership: The end of a vision?
Europeanization beyond the EU: The Dynamics of Europeanization in the Southern Mediterranean Partner States, Published: August 2010
by Moritz Schneider
Since the European Union has almost reached its natural geographical borders the process of exporting European values, laws and standards via the membership prospect is more limited. Yet, even without the incentive of a concrete membership offer, the EU has created several policy instruments towards its neighbouring countries to foster Europeanization outside the European territory as well. In the context of the Euro-Mediterranean relations, the EU enjoys bilateral and multilateral policy frameworks to spread the Union’s common values and institutions.
My paper analyses the main mechanisms for inducing Europeanization in the Southern Mediterranean region, namely the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) and the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). The multilateral EMP promotes Europeanization and regional integration through a socialisation and imitation processes, while the bilateral ENP focuses on country-specific Action Plans based on conditionality rules to foster Europeanization in the neighbouring countries. The logic of differentiation of the ENP and the logic of regionalism of the EMP have however proved ineffective strategies to foster reforms or intra-regional integration. The EU’s transformative power in the neighbourhood and the adaptation of European institutions and values has been low in the Mediterranean region. The paper argues that the EU’s external policy framework towards the Southern Mediterranean states is following a dual strategy between the concepts of Realpolitik and Idealpolitik. The lack of a clear strategy undermines the efficiency of EU policies and the possibility to promote Europeanization in the region.
The new Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) is intended to create a new form of institutional governance by abandoning the asymmetric power structure, enhancing co-ownership and promoting a more balanced partnership. However, the UfM is not responding to the policy shortcomings of the ENP and the EMP, but rather seems to be a compromise of bilateral and multilateral patterns of the two former approaches - the logic of differentiation and the logic of regionalism. The paper will conclude that the EU has to reconsider its strategy of the UfM or, even better, remodel its policy approach towards the Southern Mediterranean countries to improve co-operation and foster the process of Europeanization.
L'EUROPE EN FORMATION Année 2010 - été 2010 - n° 356
Dossier: Euro-Mediterranean partnership: The end of a vision?
Europeanization beyond the EU: The Dynamics of Europeanization in the Southern Mediterranean Partner States, Published: August 2010
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
THINK EU-MED #2
The Union for the Mediterranean -Evolution and Prospects
Roberto Aliboni’s 8-page long paper assesses the nature of the Union for the Mediterranean. The author sheds light on the various dimensions contributing to the failing of the UfM after its inception more than two years ago. The high ambitions to give new momentum to the EU's cooperation with Mediterranean countries have not yet translated into tangible achievements so far. This lack of visible results is, according to Aliboni, related to the political identity of the UfM, its relations with the acquis of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership and the functioning of its institutions.
Taking these problems into account, the author lists a number of recommendations how the EU might improve the policy output of the Union:
First, institutions matter: the institutional profile of the UfM needs a revision. The Co-Presidency and the structure of the Secretariat of the UfM should be revised and the UfM must be a policy of the entire EU.
Second, multilateralism matters: Aliboni suggests to “create a parallel, but connected, multilateral dimension” within the realm of the Neighbourhood Policy.
Third, projects matter: The large-scale regional projects of the UfM should be implemented as soon as possible. Furthermore, the EU should not only boost progress in the six areas of the UfM but also include other fields, such as agriculture that is still absent in the Euro-Mediterraean relations framework.
Aliboni concludes by proposing to scale back any high ambitions at the political level, that the UfM can promote political solidarity in the short- and medium-term future.
Roberto Aliboni is Vice-President at the Istituto Affari Internazionali and head of the Institute's programme on the Mediterranean and the Middle East.
The Union for the Mediterranean Evolution and Prospects; Published: 12 February 2010
Roberto Aliboni’s 8-page long paper assesses the nature of the Union for the Mediterranean. The author sheds light on the various dimensions contributing to the failing of the UfM after its inception more than two years ago. The high ambitions to give new momentum to the EU's cooperation with Mediterranean countries have not yet translated into tangible achievements so far. This lack of visible results is, according to Aliboni, related to the political identity of the UfM, its relations with the acquis of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership and the functioning of its institutions.
Taking these problems into account, the author lists a number of recommendations how the EU might improve the policy output of the Union:
First, institutions matter: the institutional profile of the UfM needs a revision. The Co-Presidency and the structure of the Secretariat of the UfM should be revised and the UfM must be a policy of the entire EU.
Second, multilateralism matters: Aliboni suggests to “create a parallel, but connected, multilateral dimension” within the realm of the Neighbourhood Policy.
Third, projects matter: The large-scale regional projects of the UfM should be implemented as soon as possible. Furthermore, the EU should not only boost progress in the six areas of the UfM but also include other fields, such as agriculture that is still absent in the Euro-Mediterraean relations framework.
Aliboni concludes by proposing to scale back any high ambitions at the political level, that the UfM can promote political solidarity in the short- and medium-term future.
Roberto Aliboni is Vice-President at the Istituto Affari Internazionali and head of the Institute's programme on the Mediterranean and the Middle East.
The Union for the Mediterranean Evolution and Prospects; Published: 12 February 2010
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Failed Summits -The Union for the Mediterranean at a standstill
After being in place for two years the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) has not achieved any policy outcome and still lacks a visible rapprochement between the two shores. This is even more frustrating when considering that the Spanish EU presidency will pass the torch to Belgium in a few weeks without having been able to breathe new life into the Union. Once again the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has blocked any policy developments in the Euro-Mediterranean relations. Does the Union have any future at all?
When Spain took over the EU presidency, it was expected that Madrid is able to bring the Union back on track after two years of political stagnation. Spain’s high ambitions in the fields of EU’s foreign and neighbourhood policy should be especially translated into the relations with the countries of North Africa and the Middle East. Two summits were considered as one of the cornerstones of the Presidency’s agenda, namely the 4th Euro-Mediterranean ministerial conference about water-management in the region and the 2nd meeting of the Head of states and governments which should have been one of the political highlights of the Spanish presidency.
The Water project is among the six key priorities of the UfM and should manage the water resources and promote common initiatives in the region. It was one of the areas of cooperation which was seen beforehand as a rather uncomplicated field as it was designed to make progress in a specific technical field of cooperation without touching sensitive political areas of the participating states. In addition, it was supposed to be an important field of cooperation for the water scarce region affected by climate change and high population growth. The summit in Barcelona in April 2010 brought together ministers from the 43 countries of the UfM in order to declare the joint ambitions of lowering the consumption of water between now and the year 2025, to levels 25 % below those of 2005. However, instead of signing the document, the conference ended without any feasible result and hampered again any multilateral approach. The conference failed because of a nuance of terminology when Israel and Arab countries disagreed over how to name the occupied Palestinian territories. Israel’s representatives objected to “occupied territories” in the document and proposed instead the term “territories under occupation” which was not accepted by the Arab bloc. In the end, the meeting failed to approve a joint strategy for guaranteeing the water resources of the whole Mediterranean basin.
The 2nd summit of the Head of States and Governements in Barcelona, scheduled to be held in Barcelona on June 7, should have been a key date in the agenda of the Spanish Presidency and give fresh impetus to the stalled relations.
The summit has been cancelled and postponed to November to give the peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians a chance to succeed and time to bear fruit. In a statement, the Spanish foreign ministry said: “This postponement will also give a greater amount of time for the process of Israeli-Palestinian talks, which has just been launched, to begin to yield results that will help create the right conditions to ensure the success of the summit.”
Unofficially, many Arab governments have threatened beforehand to stay away from the summit if Israelis foreign minister Liebermann would attend the summit. What actually motivated the Spanish presidency of the EU and the two co-chairs of the Mediterranean Union, Egypt and France, to postpone the Summit is however secondary. Neither Spain is to blame or the new structures of the rotating presidency after the Lisbon Treaty but again the EU’s approach towards the Mediterranean which is depended and too vulnerable from the Arab-Israeli conflict.
The Middle East conflict remains the major impediment to improved EU-Med relations and to regional integration. The relations with the MENA region are infected by the conflict which will hinder the implementation of any common strategy in the near future. After the Gaza war in late 2008, the East Jerusalem settlement expansions and most recently the Gaza flotilla conflict it will be increasingly difficult that Israelis and Arab representatives will sit on the same table within the UfM.
How to overcome this standstill?
Should the EU go ahead without including Israel in the future network of cooperation as Eberhard Rhein suggests?
Should the EU-Med relations be completely redesigned by making peace in the Middle East a priority?
Should the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation try a new regional approach, particularly in the Maghreb as Jean-Baptiste Buffet proposes?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
.gif)
