taz.de
12.3 Million Euro Cost for German Border Controls in Six Weeks
Germany's increased border controls from September 16 to October 31, 2024, cost an additional 12.3 million euros, raising concerns about their effectiveness and long-term budgetary impact, particularly in relation to the Schengen Agreement.
- What were the direct financial implications of the German border controls between September 16 and October 31, 2024?
- Between September 16 and October 31, 2024, German border controls cost an additional "12.3 million euros," exceeding regular Bundespolizei expenses. This is according to the Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) responding to a parliamentary inquiry. These costs only cover additional expenses directly related to the operation; the total cost including regular police work is unknown.", A2=
- How do the additional costs of border controls compare to the overall budget of the Bundespolizei, and what alternative approaches are suggested?
- The additional "12.3 million euros" spent in six weeks suggests annual costs of approximately "100 million euros" if maintained, significantly increasing the Bundespolizei budget. These costs are deemed excessive and ineffective by some, such as Bundestag member Leon Eckert, who argues for cross-border police cooperation instead of stationary border controls. This is in contrast to the Schengen agreement where border controls between member states are not generally permitted. The German government has already progressively restricted freedom of movement since 2015 by introducing border controls at various times to neighboring countries.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of maintaining stationary border controls for Germany's budget, and its relationship with other Schengen member states?
- The high cost and questioned effectiveness of border controls highlight a potential need for policy adjustments. The focus on stationary controls may divert resources from potentially more effective strategies like cross-border cooperation. Future budget planning must consider the considerable additional expense if these border controls remain in place. The long-term impact on Germany's relationship with other Schengen members also needs assessment.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline and opening paragraph immediately emphasize the high cost of border controls, setting a negative tone. The article prioritizes the criticisms of Leon Eckert (Greens) and presents the government's response as insufficient. This framing leads the reader to view the border controls negatively.
Language Bias
The article uses loaded language such as "ineffective," "symbollic photos," and "immediately ended." These terms convey a strong negative opinion, which could shape the reader's view of the border controls. Neutral alternatives might include "low effectiveness," "ceremonial photos," and "prompt review." The repeated emphasis on cost also frames the policy negatively.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the costs and criticisms of border controls, but omits potential benefits or justifications for these measures from the government's perspective. The article mentions that the Ministry of Interior couldn't provide a full cost analysis due to the involvement of police officers in other duties, but doesn't explore what those other duties are or if the resources could have been allocated differently. The long-term effects of border controls on security and crime are not analyzed in detail. The lack of government justification leaves the reader with a one-sided perspective.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the debate as either maintaining stationary border controls or ceasing them entirely, without exploring alternative solutions or levels of control. It dismisses the government's perspective and presents only the opposition's view on the matter.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the high cost and potential ineffectiveness of border controls, which may divert resources from other crucial aspects of maintaining peace, justice, and strong institutions. The statement "stationäre Binnengrenzkontrollen sind keine effektive Maßnahme gegen Schleuserkriminalität" directly points to the negative impact on effective crime-fighting strategies. The focus on symbolic actions rather than effective measures further underscores the misallocation of resources.