dw.com
EU Tightens Asylum Rules, Faces Challenges in Third-Country Cooperation
The EU is toughening its asylum policies, with Germany and Austria leading the way by increasing deportations, alongside increased funding for border control (34 billion euros) and new return centers, potentially outside the EU. However, the success depends on cooperation with third countries, as highlighted by the recent expulsion of an EU delegation from Libya.
- How does the EU plan to increase the success rate of deportations, and what obstacles are anticipated?
- The EU's new migration plan involves increased funding for border control (34 billion euros) and collaborations with third countries to facilitate deportations. This plan addresses the low success rate of deportations (only 25% of those ordered are actually deported), but faces challenges in negotiating with non-EU countries.
- What are the key elements of the EU's new approach to migration, and what are its immediate consequences?
- The EU is implementing stricter asylum policies, including faster deportations and new return centers, potentially outside the EU. Germany and Austria have increased deportations to Afghanistan and Syria respectively. The EU aims to make these policies effective and demonstrate credibility.
- What are the long-term implications of the EU's reliance on third countries for managing migration flows?
- The effectiveness of the EU's stricter migration policies depends heavily on cooperation with third countries. The recent expulsion of an EU delegation from Libya highlights the challenges in negotiating such agreements, underlining the continued reliance on external actors' willingness to cooperate. The success of establishing return centers outside the EU remains uncertain.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames Germany's shift from a perceived role as a 'brake' to a 'leader' in migration policy positively. The headline and the prominence given to Dobrindt's statements reinforce this narrative, potentially overshadowing potential criticisms of the stricter approach. The positive framing of increased funding for Frontex and the emphasis on deportations, without equal emphasis on the potential negative consequences or challenges, also contributes to this bias.
Language Bias
The article uses language that sometimes leans towards a stricter approach to migration, such as describing measures as 'tougher' and 'aspersim' (harsher). While these are factual descriptions, alternative wording could be employed to achieve greater neutrality, like 'more stringent' or 'more robust.' The repeated emphasis on 'dëbimet' (deportations) might also subtly frame the issue in a negative light. Neutral alternatives could highlight 'return' or 'repatriation' instead of deportation in some contexts.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the stricter approach to asylum policy and the efforts of Germany and Austria in deportations, potentially omitting other perspectives on the issue, such as the experiences of asylum seekers or the views of human rights organizations. The article mentions the high number of asylum applications and low deportation success rate, but doesn't delve into the reasons behind these statistics. Further, the challenges faced by countries receiving deportees are not discussed. This selective focus might leave the reader with a biased understanding of the complexities of the migration crisis.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic eitheor framing by focusing mainly on stricter measures and deportations as the primary solution to the migration crisis. It doesn't adequately address the complexity of the issue, which includes factors like root causes of migration, international cooperation, and humanitarian considerations. The focus on stricter policies implies that this is the only or best solution, neglecting potential alternative approaches.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses the EU's efforts to strengthen its asylum and migration policies, aiming to improve the management of migration flows and enhance border security. This contributes to more effective law enforcement and strengthens institutions responsible for managing migration. Increased cooperation among EU member states on return and deportation procedures also fosters stronger institutional frameworks for managing migration.