Author : Claje Castillejo
Site of publication : econstor.eu
Type of publication : Briefing Paper
Date of publication : September 2018
In recent years, the EU has launched initiatives aimed at curbing migration from Africa that have caused significant controversy, notably the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa (EUTF) and the Migration Partnership Framework (MPF). So far, results have been limited and it has soured relations with some partner countries.
The AU-EU Summit: joint declaration, differing interests
The summit declaration that Europe and Africa would “deepen cooperation” on migration hides the reality that EU and African priorities are not aligned. The current focus of EU migration policy threatens to undermine important political and economic ambitions of the AU and some African regional organisations. Central among these are aspirations towards greater intra-African mobility to foster economic development.
European member states have differing interests in relation to migration from Africa which shape their approach to the collective EU migration agenda. Equally, there are internal differences on the African side, with many African governments and regions not supporting free movement in practice.
The EU’s migration initiatives: a focus on prevention and return
Since the Valletta summit of 2015, the EU has launched some high-profile initiatives aimed at curbing migration from Africa — notably the EUTF and MPF.
The basic premise of the EUTF is that migration from Africa is driven by poverty, insecurity, and environmental, demo- graphic and humanitarian pressures and that addressing these will reduce irregular migration. However, the fund’s five-year period and limited budget does not seem well suited to addressing the enormity of such challenges. There are serious questions over the EUTF’s governance, management and implementation, which are not in line with development best practice.
The MPF emphasises keeping migrants out of Europe and sending them back : The MPF is therefore the most openly interest-driven of the EU’s migration initiatives, and the one that appears furthest removed from the principles of genuine partnership. The MPF appears to undermine the EU’s development and human rights principles. So far, the MPF’s achievements at country level have been limited.
Need for a new approach
The EU must accept that demographic and socio-economic realities mean that Africans will continue to migrate and that Europe will increasingly need African labour (although matching African skills to European markets is a challenge).
Hence, the EU needs to work with African partners at national, regional and continental level to explore how best to foster intra-African movement that supports Africa’s economic growth and allows both continents to benefit from safe and orderly African migration to Europe. The EU must move from attempting to address “root causes” of migration with short-term emergency funds to examining how the EU could really readjust its trade and investment policies in Africa to create more decent jobs and opportunities. It must also continue to press African governments to deliver on their own responsibilities to provide a decent life for their citizens.
The EU must accept that demographic and socio-economic realities mean that Africans will continue to migrate and that Europe will increasingly need African labour
The EU must look again at its approach to returns. A functioning migration system requires the return of those ineligible to stay.
The EU also needs to give much greater priority to ensuring protection of refugees and vulnerable migrants. What is required is a systematic focus on enabling people with genuine claims to access asylum and on providing protection to all vulnerable people on the move. Finally, the EU needs to get its own house in order on asylum and migration. This requires being honest about conflicting interests between member states and working towards effective common systems that can effectively manage fluctuating migration flows and integrate incoming people.
Les Wathinotes sont soit des résumés de publications sélectionnées par WATHI, conformes aux résumés originaux, soit des versions modifiées des résumés originaux, soit des extraits choisis par WATHI compte tenu de leur pertinence par rapport au thème du Débat. Lorsque les publications et leurs résumés ne sont disponibles qu’en français ou en anglais, WATHI se charge de la traduction des extraits choisis dans l’autre langue. Toutes les Wathinotes renvoient aux publications originales et intégrales qui ne sont pas hébergées par le site de WATHI, et sont destinées à promouvoir la lecture de ces documents, fruit du travail de recherche d’universitaires et d’experts.
The Wathinotes are either original abstracts of publications selected by WATHI, modified original summaries or publication quotes selected for their relevance for the theme of the Debate. When publications and abstracts are only available either in French or in English, the translation is done by WATHI. All the Wathinotes link to the original and integral publications that are not hosted on the WATHI website. WATHI participates to the promotion of these documents that have been written by university professors and experts.