Refugee or economic migrant - either way, Europe faces challenges ahead
In recent months, the plight of hundreds of thousands of refugees or migrants (depending on your news channel) have hit world headlines. These people have been displaced from their homelands, either because life there has become intolerable due to political instability and open warfare, or they are in search of a better future for themselves and their families. Rivers of humanity are now flowing in a north-westerly direction into Europe, in search of a better life, an exodus not seen since the second world war.
European leaders have clearly been caught off-guard. The federalisation of Europe over 30+ years has led to porous borders, and economic or geopolitical pressure in one country is quickly syndicated to other member states. For some countries, the pressure is transitory, as the rivers are flowing across their land. For others, the pressure is more permanent, as they represent the destination countries for the refugees - notably Germany, France, the UK, Scandinavian countries. It is clear however that there are many more people currently displaced (or who may become so in the years to come) than there is capacity in the destination countries. The stronger the flow of refugees and the better the relative outcome for them, the more people will elect to embark on the journey. At some point in the future, if this pressure keeps building, it is almost certain that destination countries will have to stiffen their stance.
The root cause of the issue is the abject poverty and appalling human rights environments in the source countries. The fundamental solution must therefore be to try to improve the situation in these countries, and reduce the relative benefit of moving. The western world is very obviously avoiding military strategies to intervene in the most troubled countries such as Syria, chastened by the experience of Afghanistan and Iraq. The US has relinquished in its 'global policeman' badge, and is now a global 'life-guard', sitting proudly atop its economic and military tower, surveying the global landscape and only springing into action when its unavoidable. Politicians in the UK need only look at the fate of Tony Blair and his tattered legacy before quickly considering non-confrontational intervention alternatives. With such tentative military policy, it is unlikely that geopolitical stability will be quickly restored in some source countries.
Humanitarian efforts may make a real difference, but only if deployed at a massive scale, very much larger than the current efforts. Refugee camps in Turkey and other border states must be converted into viable, relatively attractive settlements with proper schooling, sanitation, policing and health care, and these safe-harbour countries must be encouraged and supported in that regard. Refugees and migrant citizens must have permanent, protective rights as citizens in the various countries they will pass through, so that they can be treated fairly and supported, and the overall situation managed. Western countries, who for centuries have benefited from the economic output of waves of migrants, must prepare to accommodate the many millions that can make a real economic contribution to their countries.
But when all efforts have been made, there is still a very real risk that more people want to embark on perilous journeys in search of a better life, than there are places in destination countries to accommodate them. When that happens, borders will inevitably, and unfortunately, have to close.
When “all efforts have been made” The Borders may very well eventually close. But this attempt at providing a solution to unwanted population is not just a regional problem. This problem is global. Whilst globalisation has worked out well for some, for others - not yet so, and increasingly less so as humanity continues into a future of continuous growth. In order to avoid the obvious difficulties of standing and fighting against a superior force, one option available when in competition with another population for the control and consumption of resources in any defined space or area is to look beyond that immediate environment in search of easier pickings for survival and hopefully prosperity. This expansionist growth strategy has been working pretty well for Homo sapiens since first stepping out of Africa. With an initially small global population, high intelligence and innovativeness combined with seemingly limitless, readily available and useable resources – things have gone pretty well. Expansion and growth has of course in itself lead to competition over certain areas, but in general, global expansion has allowed for the growth and prosperity of humanity. I think however that most people can see that there is a problem with this strategy. The area available for all species to use and inhabit on earth is quite clearly not limitless. Another way to deal with limited resources is for competitors to stand their ground, and compete for available resources. This strategy involves overcoming or eliminating competition. This option involves conflict. This option involves a fight. But as you well pointed out – this option is not well received by many amongst certain populations. Even if Homo sapiens were able to find a way to continue growth without competition or conflict – there would inevitably be a loss of amenity as numbers rise and uninhabited land diminishes. One should acknowledge the permanence of energy which can neither be created nor destroyed. Yet despite constant innovation, the continuous growth of any population and its commensurate consumption increasingly converts readily available and easily useable energy sources into fewer, less readily available or easily useable energy sources or resources. These depleting resources being those which permit a populations very survival let alone prosperity. Entropy ensues. Humanity is now in desperate need of innovating out of this rapidly increasing entropic state. The current rate of innovation will not be sufficient without a change of strategy. We need to stop the population growth. Closing the borders may provide part of a temporary solution for some. But here’s the catch: The global border is already closed. None of us can move elsewhere. We are all trapped within the earth’s atmosphere – competing for depleting resources in an expanding population. Until innovation allows us another option, we will have to stand our ground, and like it or not - we will probably have to fight.