The Integration Of The European Union

November 9, 1989, the Berlin Wall falls amid the thawing of the Cold War. Consequently, an elated Europe welcomed a new ‘borderless’ continent. The Schengen agreements dissolved anachronistic boundaries that once separated nations, allowing peoples, such as the Ruthenians, to exercise a loyalty to the states within their immediate realm of influence, while simultaneously preserving their independent identities. A quarter of a century later the continent is amid a refugee crisis unseen since World War II. Detention, deportation, bureaucratic barriers, military, and satellite technologies have all been a part of the some of the most extensive and aggressive border enforcement programs in history. Endeavors that have stoked xenophobic fears and spawned grievous confrontations between some of the wealthiest nations on earth and a stateless people from the most impoverished.

In the final draft I will expand on each of the issues, by looking into more specific examples of both what different European countries are doing policy wise, as well as what the sentiment is among the refugees in the different areas of Europe. To fully be able to understand the conditions the refugees are facing I will be using other scholars ethnography work; One of those works being Katerina Rozakou’s piece regarding the management of refugees in Greece. As a result of that knowledge I will be able to come to an accurate conclusion as to what course of action should be taken in Europe as a whole, to deal with this ongoing

Freely accepting the migrants would be a much better solution. Moreover, distribution of refugees calculated according to host country population or gross domestic product was a gross simplification and unworkable. Also, possibilities of integration of the migrants in particular countries should be taken into consideration. Equally important is the dialogue of all the 28 EU member countries concerning common solutions for asylum policy. Additionally, the

The European migrant crisis began in 2015 when there was an influx of refugees coming into the European Union through southern European countries and by way of the Mediterranean Sea. An extremely large portion of these refugees came from Syria and Iraq. One of the leading causes of the mass migration was war and unrest and the consequent rise of insurgency groups such as ISIS within these people’s home countries. As their homes and cities have become unfit to live in any longer, people have been driven to seek asylum in European countries. Greece and other southern European countries like

Some experts argue that the recent rise in xenophobic promises and policies in European countries has to do with the populace’s fear over job loss, pensions and benefits cutting, and a fear in the loss of a national identity—which some

Thousands and thousands of migrants have begun to flood into the European countries. With immigration numbers higher than ever, these countries have begun to search for solutions. Some countries have considered closing their borders , many are beginning to show violence to keep people out. As always, there is a much better solution other than using violence. The Europe Migration Policy needs to be adjusted to current needs and these countries need to work together to create better opportunities for the immigrants and refugees seeking safety.

Accepting refugees in Europe has become a highly controversial problem in the past few months. Without a doubt, a large number of lives could be saved due to this ethical action; however, there has been a significant rise in protesting refugees. We should consider carefully the advantages and disadvantages of such a substantial

This article explains and show the immigration crisis today in Europe and how it might still yet to get worst. In Europe as it is today, has been serving as a major ground for immigrant refugees. There is over sixty million displaced people and refugees, numbers not even heard of during the period of WW2 coming from not only seria but from other regions like Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa and even Haiti. The must striking thing about this crisis, is that it is still expected to get worst. Say if the tailaban keep trying to extend their territorial gains across Afghanistan, this will force afghans to want to migrate. Due to this attacks, about one hundred thousand afghans are expected to migrate to Europe this year. These numbers increase daily as these refugees try to escape thier home countries due to terrosm or other unpeace conditions. For example many inhaptants of Iraq are already homeless, daily amid wartime shortages of food and medicine and persistent bombardment by Isis . Yemen is not much farther away from Europe than eritia now the biggest source of African refugees, just across the Red Sea, and at some 25 million it is as. According to numerous interviews conducted, Nigeria which has a

The difficult conclusion must be that neither burden-sharing nor diplomacy will end this crisis, that migrants will continue to come in very substantial numbers, and Europe will continue to blunder along, torn between concern about their suffering and fears about a future different from the one we had until now imagined. overcrowded refugee centers and local authorities and police stretched to their

As tension in Syria and the surrounding regions intensifies, more and more refugees are fleeing to Europe seeking asylum; however, the countries they are entering are experiencing many adverse side effects; such as, social unrest, sexual assaults, and terrorist attacks. It is unacceptable for the children in these nations to have to grow up in a nation they once called home and felt safe in but now no longer has that feeling. The same argument could be made for the refugees and that is why the current open door immigration policy that Angela Merkel has in effect must be remedied. The goal of a refugee is to escape war that they and their families can live safely without worry of being killed. Not to change the ways of the nation they are entering and treat the locals with disdain for their differences in ideology, dress, culture and even diet. The host nation of a large number of refugees should not have to change their way of life to accommodate those seeking refuge. It should be the other way around. Assimilation is the goal, not disintegration of native culture. A policy which allows radical Muslims to immigrate into the country and then face punishment only after the damage from their actions has been done is grossly illogical and insufficient for the preservation of a nation’s security. Preventative measures must be put in place.

The migration crisis has reached a level where Europe must take a stand and must present a viable plan, expressing the future goals the European government believes will help solves this crisis. The International Organization for Migration said, between January and November 2015 more than 750,000 migrants are predicted to arrive in Europe from across the Mediterranean. As a union, Europe is showing the world that they are not a cohesive organization prepared to face the future with respects to the mass migration. The policy concerning migration at the European Union level states that each nation has the right to their own migration policies, while adhering to the European migration institutions, which are not fully established. So far, many of the migrants coming to Europe are settling in Italy and Greece; many hope to be able to reach Germany as their final destination.

Europe is facing the largest migrant crisis since the Second World War. By the 21st December 2015 more than one million migrants arrived on European soil. Hundreds are fleeing abuse in Eritrea. Thousands are fleeing war torn Syria. It is estimated that over 6,700 have died crossing the Mediterranean, and they will continue to come. Many European countries are already stretched to the limit with border control and migrant camps. European leaders are torn over crucial decisions. Should we shut all the borders? Should we let them all in? Should we target the problem at its heart?

The failure of the EU to respond to the refugee crisis with a durable and sustainable burden-sharing mechanism has led states to adopt increasingly restrictive asylum policies ultimately aimed at the deterrence of asylum applicants, rather than their protection. The results have been a race to the bottom in protection standards for asylum seekers and refugees. National asylum policies assume that Member States have an interest to contribute to refugee protection and burden-sharing mechanisms. EU cooperation at the supranational level is therefore required to ensure a balance of efforts between Member States in their asylum policies. Furthermore, the national implementation of the Dublin system is dependent on domestic political will. The Dublin Regulation discourages Southern Member States from improving their standards on reception and procedures for asylum seekers due to their geographical location and lack of mandatory burden-sharing mechanisms, and thus threatens the aim of CEAS. The Dublin system privileges EU countries in the North, which is the desired destination of many refugees, at the expense of the South, where refugees first arrive and are forced to remain until their application is processed, which is a timely process in itself. Geographic location and length of borders place a disproportionate burden of refugees on the EU’s border states. The issues that the Dublin Regulation poses has prompted the reintroduction of internal border control and checks, as seen

In addition to this, there has been large prejudices against the migrants due to crime accusations. The result of such events is the rise of nationalist extremist parties in Central and Eastern Europe. A prime example of this is within Hungary. Hungary has been quite vocal about its opposition to accepting refugees and other migrants. These statements were made by Hungary’s leader Viktor Orbán who has been known to have very extreme views on other social issues. The result of Hungary’s statements concerning immigration is an epidemic of other countries having similar views which will contradict the Schengen Agreement. The Schengen Agreement is one of the foundations of the European Union so removing or adapting said intuition would seriously affect the European Union. In this paper I will analyse the international system in which these foreign policy directions have been made whilst examining how Viktor Orbán’s personality and psychology has a direct influence on the decisions made by Hungary and the history of the migration laws of the European Union.

As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, it is imperative to understand how societies interact and the issues they are facing. I have been interested in languages, cultures, and international affairs for many years which is why I have decided to major in Global Studies. To broaden my global perspective, I am currently participating on St. Lawrence University's Global Francophone Cultures program where I am studying abroad in Quebec, Canada; Rouen, France, and Dakar, Senegal. In addition to learning the French language, the main area of focus for this year's program is immigration. One of the courses I am taking is called, “The Age of Migration: Labor Mobility in the EU.” In this course we have read various articles on immigration, researched countries immigration policies, and are studying the economics of immigration. We