dw.com
Germany's Dublin Agreement Failures Expose EU Migration Challenges
Germany's efforts to return asylum seekers to other EU countries under the Dublin Agreement have largely failed; of 74,583 requests, only 5,827 were accepted, with significantly lower success rates for Italy and Greece, leading to political criticism and calls for policy changes.
- Why are Italy and Greece resisting the return of asylum seekers from Germany, and what are the broader consequences of this resistance?
- The Dublin Agreement mandates asylum seekers apply in their first EU country. However, Mediterranean countries, overwhelmed by arrivals, resist accepting returns, creating friction with Germany and other states.
- What is the extent of Germany's success in returning asylum seekers to their first EU country of arrival under the Dublin Agreement, and what are the immediate implications?
- Germany made 74,583 requests to return asylum seekers to their first EU country of arrival, but only 5,827 were accepted. This low rate, especially concerning Italy and Greece, highlights challenges in implementing the Dublin Agreement.
- What are the underlying systemic issues revealed by Germany's difficulties in implementing the Dublin Agreement, and what are the potential future implications for EU migration policy?
- Germany's failure to return asylum seekers places strain on its own system and fuels criticism from parties like the CDU, advocating for stricter border controls and a change in migration policy. Continued resistance from other EU countries suggests a systemic issue requiring broader reform.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline and lead focus on Germany's challenges with returning migrants, framing the issue as a problem for Germany primarily. The CDU's call for a 'change of direction' in migration policy reinforces this framing, making it appear that the main issue is Germany's inability to return migrants rather than a broader systemic issue within the EU's migration framework. The inclusion of a quote from a German government spokesperson, acknowledging the frustrations, further strengthens this framing.
Language Bias
The article uses relatively neutral language, but the repeated emphasis on Germany's dissatisfaction and the use of phrases like "yasa dışı göç" (illegal migration) could subtly influence readers to view migration negatively and from a German-centric viewpoint. The use of words such as "hayalkırıklığı" (disappointment) to describe Germany's experience adds to the negative framing.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on Germany's perspective and the challenges it faces in returning migrants, while providing limited details on the perspectives and challenges faced by Italy, Greece, and other EU countries. The article mentions that Italy and Greece are struggling with migrant influx but does not elaborate on their specific situations or arguments against accepting returns. There is no mention of the potential humanitarian impacts on migrants returned to countries that may not have the capacity to adequately care for them. This omission could limit the reader's understanding of the complexities of the issue.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat false dichotomy by focusing on the failure of the Dublin agreement without fully exploring the reasons for this failure or alternative solutions. The complexities of international cooperation, differing national capacities, and the humanitarian concerns are simplified. It is implied that stricter border controls are the solution, ignoring more nuanced approaches.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the failure of EU member states, particularly Germany, to comply with the Dublin Agreement on asylum seeker relocation. This demonstrates a weakness in international cooperation and burden-sharing on migration issues, undermining efforts to establish fair and effective migration policies. The low number of asylum seekers returned to their first country of arrival indicates a lack of adherence to established legal frameworks and poses challenges to the rule of law within the EU.