Stop the boats; destroy them and attack the smugglers; and
so halt the refugees for their own good – this is now the message of Europe’s politicians’,
faced with the tragic mass deaths resulting from their refusal to continue
Italy’s sea rescue campaign of 2014. By blaming the smugglers and their boats,
EU leaders may politically succeed in shifting their culpability of down-grading
the Operation Mare Nostrum search and rescue mission to a more limited and
cheaper to run Operation Triton onto a reviled group, as a scapegoat for their
own criminal inhumanity. All the predictions of the experts that many migrant
lives would be lost unless there was a real replacement for Mare Nostrum have
come all too true. EU leaders at an emergency summit on migration discussed
plans to capture and destroy smugglers’ boats. Italy, which is shouldering much
of the burden of migrant arrivals, would like to go further and is pushing for
a military operation to take out smuggling networks. But the human smuggling
trade in Libya does not have a hierarchical structure with one Mafia-style mob boss
at the top who can be targeted. From the southern border to the beaches in the
north, each smuggler has his own network. When migrants complete one stage of
the journey, they are given phone numbers of partners in the network who can
help them with the next stage. Armed groups across North Africa and the Sahel
are profiting from the increasingly lucrative migrant smuggling trade, but
neither Libya Dawn, an alliance of militias controlling most of the western
coastal cities, nor Islamic State, the other major force in the area, are
involved in the business as they are unable to control the entire chain from
south to north.
Anyway, what is the point of taking out a few individuals or
destroying their vessels – difficult as this will be in practice – if the
demand driving their trade remains in place? At the time of Spain’s 2006 “boat
crisis.” As Spanish border guards confiscated the Senegal-based people
smugglers Yamaha motors, new ones could always be found; and as their long
wooden fishing boats were wrecked in the 1,500-kilometre crossing to the
Canaries, new ones were easily built. At least the European border agents at
work in West Africa knew that destroying the thousands of small fishing boats
there was nonsensical; not only would they immediately be replaced with new
ones. If you destroy their delivery mechanism, they will simply find another,
more fragile kind. The problem is not the vessel, nor the person piloting it;
rather, it is why the market exists in the first place.
Politicians keep talking about “unscrupulous traffickers,”
insinuating that migrants and refugees are passive victims. But people forced
to move are creative, resourceful and anything but stupid. Most refugees and migrants
know about the risks yet still they embark rusty vessels, since staying behind
is either more deadly – as in Syria – or a recipe for wanton incarceration and
endless desperation, as in chaos-ridden Libya. As demand grows, a market has
emerged in the shadow of more controls, replacing the fishermen-captains of
yore with professional smugglers and criminal networks. Worse, repression has
helped create a captive market in Libya, where migrants are seen as fair game
by security forces, militias and bandits. Instead of being valued customers,
they are now brutalised like cattle, kept as hostages or packed into the hull
of rusty ships – which should preferably remain unpiloted, to avoid the
detention of anyone seen as “trafficker.”
Instead of trying to destroy part of the smuggling supply
chain, the EU should undercut their business by creating incentives not to use
it. This means taking in refugees through new legal routes, for instance
ferrying them out of Libya and Syria. Such a move would remove the captive
element of the smuggling market, greatly diminishing its predatory hold and its
profits – while limiting the man-made tragedies of the Mediterranean, as long
as a full rescue response is also put in place. People will keep trying to
leave no matter what obstacles we put in place, no matter how many boats we
burn, no matter how many smugglers we prosecute. A market will emerge to cater
for their needs. It is within our power to regain control of that market: to
organise it, to legalise it, to undo its predatory trend.
Destroyed Libyan ships will be replaced by even more
precarious vessels; existing routes will be pushed into even riskier areas; and
new criminal gangs will fill the gap left in the market by European “attacks”
on smugglers. And all this will yet again bring more, not fewer, deaths in the
Mediterranean. Boarding smugglers’ boats in the hope of reaching Europe is only
one of the many perilous steps in a journey that for many never reaches the
shores of North Africa. Before reaching the coast of Libya, where the majority
of boats depart, many have endured kidnappings, detention, rape and torture
along the way. “Crossing the sea is just the last tiny bit,” noted Meron
Estafanos, an Eritrean journalist and human rights activist who regularly listens
to harrowing accounts from Eritrean asylum-seekers at different stages of their
odysseys.
Many of the 1,750 migrants to have drowned in the
Mediterranean this year were sub-Saharan Africans who boarded smugglers’ boats
in Libya. We will never know all their individual stories, but it is possible
to retrace their steps through the deserts of Sudan, Chad and Niger to Libya’s
porous southern borders, and north to its coastal cities and the beaches where
the boats were launched. Each stage of that journey is facilitated by
smugglers, who have thrived amidst the conflict and turmoil that have gripped
Libya since dictator Muammar Gaddafi was toppled in 2011.
Libya’s southern border is largely controlled by the Tubu
ethnic group who live in northern Chad and northeastern Niger as well as
southern Libya. Tubu border guards receive a cut for each migrant convoy they
admit. The route through Niger is the main one used by West Africans, although
many Malians also enter via Algeria, where the smuggling trade is controlled by
the Tuaregs, another ethnic group. The fee to be smuggled from West Africa to
Libya via Niger is usually about $1,600, plus another $400 in payment to the
Tubu at the border.
After crossing, the migrants are dropped off outside towns
in Libya’s southwestern Fezzan region. After reaching towns, the exhausted and
disoriented travellers find shared rooms to rent and spend their days at
roundabouts and main roads trying to get casual labour jobs. Libyans often
employ them to do low-paid work such as collecting rubbish and cooking. The
majority of the migrants only spend a few weeks or months in Sebha, Fezzan’s
capital, or other cities in the region, in order to save enough money to
continue to the northwestern coastal cities of Tripoli or Misrata. Transport
north is usually organised by local Arab tribes, mainly the Ouled Slimane. At
Al-Jaraba Street roundabout in downtown Tripoli, migrants have plenty of
stories of mistreatment by employers. For female migrants, working conditions
are even more precarious. They are usually employed to do domestic work and
stay in their employers’ homes. Migrants who manage to avoid detention save
their earnings until they have the roughly $2,000 needed to complete the final
stage of their journey – taking a boat to Europe.
Khoms, Garabouli and Sabratha beaches, all on the northwest
coast, are popular places for smugglers to launch boats, but Zuwara, where the
smuggling trade is controlled by the long-marginalised Amazigh minority, is the
most used. When the weather is calm and the wind blows from the south, young
migrant smugglers drive the 120-kilometre trip from Zuwara to Tripoli to
collect their “shipment.” To avoid detection, they wait until the last moment
to bring the migrants in taxis or mini-buses. The smugglers call their contacts
in Tripoli to gather the migrants, at the most three days before the boat
leaves. For these young men, they just see it as easy money. They bring the
wooden boats from Egypt or Tunisia where they are built. It costs between
$11,000 and $15,000 for each boat. Any future possible loss of the boats will
simply be an additional cost of doing business to add to the price demanded of
the migrants.
In 2014, Eritreans fleeing repression and indefinite
military service at home made up the second largest nationality arriving in
southern Europe after Syrians, according to the International Organization for
Migration. Most leave Eritrea without the required permission, which is rarely
given to those under the age of 50. If caught, the penalty can be a lengthy
jail sentence, but Eritrean authorities have also been known to use a
shoot-to-kill policy for people found in certain border areas. After arriving
in eastern Sudan, some register at refugee camps near the town of Kassala,
while others head straight to the capital Khartoum. There they join others,
including Ethiopians and Somalis, hoping to connect with smugglers who can take
them across the Sahara desert and into Libya.
“The worst part is getting through the Sahara,” Estafanos, a
presenter for Radio Erena, which broadcasts from Sweden into Eritrea, told IRIN. “A lot of people die of thirst; some fall off the car and the smugglers
don’t stop for them. Eritrean asylum-seekers know the risks when they make the
decision to embark on the journey to Europe, but view the alternative -
remaining in Eritrea - as worse. In Eritrea you’re alive, but it’s like you’re
dead.”
No one knows how many migrants die in the Sahara. Their
deaths are seldom reported and their bodies rarely recovered. In addition to
the hazards of a desert crossing is the kidnapping risk. In some cases,
traffickers abduct Eritreans from Kassala and take them to torture camps where
they are forced to phone relatives and beg for ransom money. Until recently,
many were sold on to Egyptian traffickers operating in the Sinai Peninsula
where they endured more torture until relatives could raise ever-higher ransom
amounts. Researchers estimate that between 2009 and 2013, as many as 30,000
people were victims of trafficking and torture in the Sinai Peninsula, and that
between 5,000 and 10,000 of them did not survive their ordeal. In Libya,
migrants must either take their chances with smugglers or risk being arrested
and detained for months in over-crowded detention centres where Human Rights
Watch has reported dire conditions and abusive behaviour by guards. The human
traffickers operate with relative impunity, keeping migrants in “connection
houses” until they can be put on boats. UNHCR reported that a migrant boat
rescued off the coast of southern Italy’s Lampedusa Island contained a number
of burn victims. According to survivor accounts, a gas cylinder had exploded in
one of the connection houses, killing several people and injuring others.
Rather than get medical help, smugglers loaded the injured onto a rubber dinghy.
a second dingy containing burn victims was stopped by soldiers before it set
off and the group of 87 migrants is now being held at an unknown location on
the coast until they can pay $600 to secure their release. Their burns are very
severe and they haven’t been treated
EU leaders merely address the cameras, not the root
problems. Stefan Kessler, senior policy officer with Jesuit Refugee Service
(JRS) Europe, observed “Overall, the clear message from this meeting is: ‘Keep
protection-seekers far, far away from Europe so that their deaths don’t make
the headlines in European media.’ ” What new plans, if any that are likely to tackle
the causes of the growing crisis? Tuesday Reitano, head of the Geneva-based
Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime, “Bombing or sinking
boats is going to do nothing. We have evidence that there are now containers
full of rubber dinghies being bought in Asia and shipped to Libya. The dinghies
are less safe, and infinitely replaceable.”
The people smugglers have managed to put down roots and
tentacles that are very far spread. A United Nations Security Council
resolution that would allow a military operation might enable some low-level
smugglers to be caught and arrested. But Reitano warned that the kingpins
controlling the increasingly professional and adaptable smuggling networks
would continue operating. Targeting smugglers also does nothing to reduce the
demand for their services, which is only likely to increase with mounting crises.
Measures such as returning migrants and refugees merely shifts the burden to
countries on the migratory route and making them responsible yet few possess
the infrastructure to cope. Lieutenant Khaled Attumi, director of a detention
centre for male migrants in Zawyia, Libya admitted conditions were unsanitary
and that detainees were suffering. He blamed the Tripoli-based government. “If
it goes on like this, I will release all of the migrants,” he said.
Far from making a commitment to accept significantly higher
numbers of refugees through resettlement as the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, had
urged ahead of the meeting, the EU pledged only to set up a voluntary pilot
project. An earlier draft of the statement had offered a very modest 5,000 resettlement
places, but the final draft contained no figure at all. Expanding resettlement
programmes in the EU would reduce the need for refugees to board smugglers’
boats. Europe’s current contribution to resettlement remains low, with only
about nine percent of refugees resettled globally taken by member states. Even
a programme to relocate asylum-seekers from over-burdened frontline states like
Italy and Greece to other member states would be on a voluntary basis and is
still being considered. Jeff Crisp, former head of policy and evaluation at
UNHCR and now an advisor with Refugees International, noted the summit’s “complete
failure to acknowledge that many of the asylum-seekers originating from
countries such as Eritrea, Somalia and Syria have a very strong claim to
refugee status.” The reality is that the vast majority arriving are those with
protection needs – Eritreans, Somalis, Syrians. Yemen is going to make it
worse, Boko Haram in Nigeria is going to make it worse. There is too instability
and poverty and human rights abuses to dry up the supply of desperate people,
fleeing dire conditions in the hope of a better life.
In 2014, 800 merchant
ships were diverted to rescue some 40,000 migrants at sea, most of them in the
Mediterranean. At a meeting to address mixed migration by sea hosted by the
UN’s International Maritime Organisation (IMO) in London in March, ship-owners
said they were struggling to cope with the financial and security costs of such
rescues. UNHCR, says shipping companies are now re-routing their vessels to
avoid areas likely to encounter migrant boats. One of a list of proposals put
forward by the UNHCR is to compensate private shipowners for the losses they
incur rescuing migrants at sea. A mechanism set up by the IMO during the exodus
from Vietnam in the 1980s still exists and could be re-activated, said the
agency. Migrants and asylum-seekers are increasingly opting for sea crossings
because overland routes have become impenetrable. Greece fenced off its border
with Turkey in 2012 and other countries have followed suit. Bulgaria erected a
fence along a section of its border with Turkey. Frontier guards from several countries on the frontlines of
the EU have been accused of pushing back migrants and denying them access to
asylum.
Numerous rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, have
pointed out that reducing rather than bolstering border controls and creating
safe and legal channels to the EU are the only lasting solutions to the
worsening crisis in the Mediterranean. Instead of investing in more rescues and
establishing legal routes into Europe, politicians are calling for more
“collaboration” with African states to halt flows at source or in transit.
Refugee reception centres on African soil, naval patrols by North African
states and political deals to curtail human smuggling is the projected plan. The
idea is to outsource tough policing while heaping risks and responsibilities
onto African countries, accompanied by a pile of “gifts” for those willing to
play their part in the “fight against irregular migration” from policing
equipment and top-up pay to re-purposed development aid and diplomatic
concessions, all under the guise of a humanitarian concern for the well-being
of migrants. North African states in particular have in the past decade
squeezed substantial political capital out of deepening border cooperation.
Morocco has perfected the art of using its new found status as “transit state”
to extract concessions in fields as varied as fishing rights, aid, acquiescence
over occupied Western Sahara and even some selective mobility for its own
citizens. In Libya, long an important destination for African workers, Gaddafi
used migrants as a bargaining chip even as NATO bombs started to fall. That
legacy has been continued by militias and security forces, which have
increasingly treated African migrants as fair game for extortions, beatings and
arbitrary detentions. Further south, in similarly migration-dependent
Mauritania, cooperation with Spain has brought arbitrary raids, detentions and
deportations. And in Algeria, migrants have been serially expelled and robbed
at gunpoint as they were bundled into cattle carriages rumbling through the
Sahara. Migrants arriving in North Africa are becoming a valuable commodity not
just to smugglers preying on a captive client base, but also to police and
politicians. All this makes life increasingly impossible for black foreigners,
who desperately start scrambling for an exit. It is a vicious cycle that has to
be broken.
Instead of fuelling
this trade in human misery, European politicians should be doing the opposite –
minimising rather than inflating gains from the border business. This would
mean encouraging the normalisation of mobility, for instance via more legal
pathways into Europe and via the decriminalisation of irregular migration in
North Africa. It would mean re-framing migration not as a security problem in
need of more policing cooperation but as an inevitable socio-economic force
that can yield substantial benefits to Europe as well as its neighbours.
Political amnesia in European political circles – not to mention the opportunistic
onward march of the right – means there is little chance of a rethink.
The Socialism Or Your Money Back blog has to ask why it is that money is free to pass
through borders to tax-havens in a milli-seconds, while desperate people in dire
need die trying to reach a safe haven?
No comments:
Post a Comment