Via Marginal Revolution, a somewhat sensationalist account of European moves to end the Schengen passport-free travel regime.
I believe that this would be a reversal of one of the truly great accomplishments of the past 50 years.
European nations moved to reverse decades of unfettered travel across the continent when a majority of EU governments agreed the need to reinstate national passport controls amid fears of a flood of immigrants fleeing the upheaval in north Africa.
In a serious blow to one of the cornerstones of a united, integrated Europe, EU interior ministers embarked on a radical revision of the passport-free travel regime known as the Schengen system to allow the 26 participating governments to restore border controls.
… The policy shift was pushed by France and Italy, who have been feuding and panicking in recent weeks over a small influx of refugees from Tunisia. But 15 of the 22 EU states which had signed up to Schengen supported the move, with only four resisting, according to officials and diplomats present.
The proposed changes would still have to pass the EU parliament, which is by no means assured. It’s a political reaction to domestic xenophobia in front of 2012 elections in several countries, and though it may not come to pass at this point it’s still something that until recently would have been unthinkable and signals instability of the pan-European project.
Sorry, but this report is sheer nonsense! Please don’t write something like this before making sure you know the facts. It is simply not true that the EU plans to generally reintroduce border controls.
At this stage, the EU is simply DISCUSSING the requirements to allow member states to TEMPORARILY reinstate border controls in exeptional circumstances, should one of the member states prove to be unable to maintain the safety at a border with a non-EU-country.
Aside from that, Denmark has decided to not honor the Schengen treaty anymore, for the time being, but has done so by itself!
Just as a side note – even before, ever since the implementation of the Schengen treaty, member states were able to reinforce border controls under certain circumstances such as to keep hooligans from attending certain sports events like the Soccer World Cup.
Because temporary restrictions always remain temproary. And this isn’t just about Denmark, it’s about the French demagoguing Tunisian immigrants landing in Italy and fear that they’ll migrate to France. The agreement to push the issue forward isn’t binding as I noted, it requires parliamentary approval which is far from assured. The point is that this would have been unthinkable jsut a couple of years ago, and represents a sign of contuing European crackup and reversal of the tremendous gains of the past few decades. To me, a truly sad development.
“a sign of contuing European crackup” – what do you mean? Nobody in their right mind would claim that the US is cracking up, just because they’re tightening up the border with Mexico. And yes – at this stage this is solely about Denmark, because this is the only country that has announced the reintroduction of border controls. France and Italy want the EU to establish legal grounds on which the reintroduction of border controls COULD be implemented. Besides – the EU consists of more countries than France and Italy…
Not really a fair analogy to compare the US tightening border controls with Mexico to Schengen members tightening passport restrictions amongst themselves.
In your anology you compare the EU (which is an economic and political union of 27 independent countries) to the USA which is one country. The prospect of the EU and/or Schengen area “breaking up” to some degree is much more viable than any of the US states “breaking away” from the union.
Passport free travel for EU & EFTA nationals as well as visitors is really a great thing in Europe. While I could understand France wanting to secure its Mediterranean border, it should not be cause to undo all the benefits of Shengen.
Mike, If they already have the ability to “reinforce border controls under certain circumstances” or to simply drop out (Denmark), what is the need for the EU to discuss anything?
Gary says that passport-free travel within Schengen is a “gain” and it is, from the point of view of the traveller’s immediate convenience – just as abolishing the TSA would be. However, recent events on Europe’s doorstep have had a significant adverse effect on the ability of individual countries to control their borders and this is a direct result. The trigger is Italy’s decision to grant temporary residence permits to 20,000 migrants allowing them to move freely throughout Schengen, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg – the scale of the problem is massive.
So countries are now establishing that the gain from this is starting to be outweighed by the loss from it all – just as we would discover were we to abolish the TSA.
Of course, ultimately, it comes down to a political question and as akin to the states’ rights question at the heart of US political dialog. One thing is for certain – the convenience of visitors to the EU in having passport-free travel will not be a relevant factor in any decision.
Sure, Passport free travel has been very convenient for us, but the national interests of individual member nations trump everything else. Sometimes we forget that everything our Govt. does, is also dictated by our national interests. Why do we always think that we are smarter than the collective wisdom of the European public/politicians who live under, and have to deal with a different set of ever evolving situations? Let us keep our egos in check and not be so judgemental!
@Ram “Sometimes we forget that everything our Govt. does, is also dictated by our national interests.” Do you really think that? I’d argue that politicians face their own incentives (mostly re-election) which leads them to pander and demogague rather than act in the “national interests.” Further the whole point is that if what you believe is correct, then European national interests conflict with Pan-European interests, and that underscores an EU crackup, which I would much lament.
@HoKo the relevant comparison, given the context of EUROPEAN INTEGRATION, isn’t US tightening borders with Mexico but rather New York tightening borders with New Jersey.
GARY , U ARE WRONG WHEN U SAY “small influx of refugees from Tunisia.”— IT IS NOT JUST THE RECENT IMMIGRANTS, I LIVE IN GREECE AND NOW 10% OF THE POPULATION ARE IMMIGRANTS MOST CAME ILLEGALLY FOR ECONOMIC REASONS, EUROPE IS BEING OVERRUN !!
Convenience for tourists not worth it? This ease of travel and a common currency has encouraged tourists to visit and spend money and has facilitated business and contributed to the economy. It has encouraged the sense of Europeanness if there is such a concept. It’s another example of the deterioration in freedom caused by fear.
The controls belong at 1st point of entry to Europe. I travel intra Europe infrequently but I agree with you Gary that this is a worrisome proposal.
The EU-parliment politicians also face election, so I wouldn’t put to much hope on them.
Still, this is header and whole article is blown out of proportions, just like Mike summarized.
As for EU instability, you can date it back to the start of the whole enterprise and it’s expansion.
Speaking of current intra-EU/EFTA/EEA mobility allowances for people traveling within/to/from the relevant countries under current practices already in play, this is far from being eliminated in its entirety anytime soon.
I always had my doubts that this kind of arrangement would be sustainable in the absence of true political union being created — with that political union having, as its prerequisite, popular buy-in into some kind of unifying EU mythology.
Large “states” need a “common” “enemy” myth to sustain themselves, particularly when times are a bit rougher than usual.
@Gary “I’d argue that politicians face their own incentives (mostly re-election) which leads them to pander and demogague rather than act in the “national interests.” ”
Point well taken. Not to get into an argument with a savvy person like you, but when the politicians bend to the will of their constituents, they are essentially doing what is required of them – to represent the will of the people who they represent, which by definition becomes the interest of the people of the area/state/nation.
“Further the whole point is that if what you believe is correct, then European national interests conflict with Pan-European interests, and that underscores an EU crackup, which I would much lament.”
Like you, I too don’t much like the EU crackup, but I also understand that they will do what they think is best for them. If England/France/Denmark (or whoever else) think they are saturated with immigrants and want to opt out of taking in more refugees, that is their choice. If they believe that the most effective way to control immigration is through sealing their entry points and having visa controls, so be it. It will make my visits harder, but I have to bend to their wishes to be able to visit ‘their’ countries. They don’t exist for ‘my’ pleasure. The survival of their life style/living standards is paramount to them, and as much as I may not like the proposed changes, I would not want to second guess their choices. I would like to be benevolent to the poor and needy and shower them with money, and let them sleep in a tent in my backyard, but I have my limitations. That is why I have doors to my house and will call the cops if homeless people started sleeping in my backyard. There are many, many undercurrents governing the EU situation, which may not be so obvious to the outsiders, living thousands of miles away. Race/religion/color/work ethics of the immigrants, and the general state of the economy of various countries coupled with the ability/willingness of the inflow to assimilate are troublesome to many. That is why I beg of people to try to put on the shoes of EU nations before telling them what is best for them. I respect your right to have a divergent opinion and I am sorry, if I don’t make any sense to you. Maybe, I am not as well informed as many others.
Given that the EU Commission is threatening to sue Denmark due to its plan to reintroduce border checks, claiming it’s a violation of the Schengen treaty, I’d say foundation of this blog post is rather questionable.
Maybe a bit more trustworthy:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13372118
RAM U DO NOT WANT HOMELESS PEOPLE SLEEPING IN YOUR BACK YARD ( HOME OR COUNTRY ), MOST AGREE THEY TOO DO NOT WANT THAT IN T/BK YARD EITHER.
GREECE HAS 15% UNEMPLOYMENT , MANY EMPTY STORES , EVERY APARTMENT BUILDING HAS SIGNS OUTSIDE ” FOR RENT ” ON THE STREETS YOU SEE PEOPLE ( NONE GREEKS ) BEGGING , OTHER IMMIGRANTS ARE SELLING ILLEGAL COPIES OF DVDS HANDBAGS BELTS ETC. , I HAVE SEEN THEM URINATING IN THE STREET IN THE DAYTIME!!, WE ARE A POOR COUNTY AND CAN NOT HANDLE THE IN INFLUX —15 YEARS AGO EVERYONE IN GREECE WERE “GREEK” –TODAY 9 MILLION GREEKS ONE MILLION IMMIGRANTS. WE CAN ONLY HANDLE SO MANY AND FOR THAT SAME REASON IS WHY OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES WANT TO CLOSE THE BOARDERS –AMERICA HAS THE SAME PROBLEM
THE OBLIGATION OF A COUNTRY IS TO FIRST TAKE OF OWN PEOPLE AND TO OBEY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE
@stan ath the problems of Greece have virtually nothing to do with immigration, and immigrant labor could do a lot to jump start an economy where average work hours, not to mention productive work hours, are very low.
If only our country would get smart and more to stop the “flood of immigrants” fleeing Northern Mexico. I think every country has the right to defend its borders including those in the European union. Yes, it is an inconvenience for travelers like us, who have become used to traipsing around Western Europe like they were the states, but they aren’t states. On the plus side maybe we can start getting more stamps for our passports. I’ve been to France 3 times and still have nothing to show for it.
GARY –MY POINT WAS “BECAUSE ” OF THE PROBLEMS THAT GREECE HAS( YES SELF INFLICTED ) THEY CAN NOT ACCEPT ECONOMIC IMMIGRANTS, THEY ARE ECONOMICALLY IN THE I.C.U.WARD AND NOT SURE IF THE PATIENT WILL SURVIVE.
UR THEORY “immigrant labor could do a lot to jump start an economy ” — YOUR RIGHT , JUST AS IF GM IMPORTED 50,000 CHINESE TO WORK IN THE FACTORIES , THEY WOULD WORK FOR WAY LESS THAN A U.A.W. AND PRODUCE MORE , NO END TO THE “CHEAP” LABOR YOU CAN IMPORT.
WHEN I WENT TO AMERICA I WENT LEGALLY AND HAD TO WAIT TO GET MY VISA , WHAT GIVES THE “ILLEGAL” IMMIGRANTS THE RIGHT TO JUMP TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE ,THE GOVERNMENTS HAVE EVER RIGHT TO RESTRICT WHO ENTERS,YES IT WILL BE A PAIN TO HAVE TO SHOW A PASSPORT FOR EU CITIZENS AND TOURIST ,BUT IT IS NOT GOING TO STOP PEOPLE FROM TRAVELING
@Stan Ath, Sorry Stan, a couple of lines of my rambling post got misunderstood. I am in total agreement with you. I was in Athens about a year ago and did see all the things that you have described. The head of Govt. of every nation is sworn to look out for the welfare of his people and would help others ONLY when possible. Peace!
As a Brit I have never enjoyed passportless travel within Europe as the UK refused to sign-up. Despite this the UK has a huge amount of illegal immigration. I think the EU needs a policy that means that arrivals in the EU who do not have papers are handled in the first country they land in. Italy has been handing out right-to-travel papers, which is the French objection. Couple this with quick deportations and we might deter people from setting out for our shores.
As a dual Greek USA and Greek citizen, I have enjoyed Stan Ath’s posts (please do not type in all CAPS!!). As stated previously, Greece’s problems go way deeper than the illegal immigration problem. Some things happening in Greece these days are totally incomprehensible but when you realize the whole country is going through such a gut wrenching upheaval…unfortunately, they become understandable. They always go for the easy victims I am afraid. I said this several years ago when I noticed so many non Greeks living in Greece and have noticed this in my European travels. It is a HUGE problem and when you have it at such difficult economic times it becomes…well, unbearable. Just last week in a central street of Athens a guy was murdered because he went to get his video camera before he transported his pregnant wife to the hospital for baby delivery…but he never made it as 3 illegal immigrants stabbed him to death to steal his camera. Talk about a tragic moment! There are sections of Athens that are just too dangerous to visit! Things were not like this before! I also agree that the immigrants can have a profound effect on the economy. Most are hard working people willing to work (and yes, for lower wages). Greeks have gotten lazy and fat living on borrowed money for so long and the country has been betrayed by its inept and corrupt politicians for decades. Well, you get to a point where no country will loan you money and now you need to do all these reforms NOW and it’s just unbelievable difficult and gut wrenching. I feel for everyone back there. The whole national economic model is wrong and everyone tries to live off the state. Someone said Greece’s economy resembles “byzantine communism”. Well, he was not that far off! The only sector looking good right now is tourism and the continued TV scenes from yet more strikes and clashes with the police are doing their part to get tourism to be negatively affected. In other words, Greeks are digging their own grave and it is so convenient to blame others (Germans, French, illegal immigrants, corrupt politicians-you elected them so maybe it’s your own fault, the Big Powers, etc etc).
On the positive side, hotel prices have come down a lot and that Doubletree in Kos island oh looks so good:-)
I fully agree with Stan Ath’s responses. The requirement to show a passport has never stopped me from visiting any country. Is having to show a passport really that much of an inconvenience? Having to show it is but ONE MEANS a country has to prevent terrorists, criminals, smugglers, perverts, etc. from illegally entering and thus, protect its country and citizens.
@Gary Agreed, my comment was directed at Mike’s comment not your OP (since he was the one drawing the comparison with the US/Mexico).
I was also originally thinking that the relevant comparison was something along the lines of what you said (NJ/NY tightening border controls) but decided that it wasn’t really a relevant comparison. This is due to the fact that NJ and NY are individual states making up part of the union in a federalist government whereas the member states of the EU/Schengen area are undeniably independent states that are NOT part of a federalist government.
Consequently, as I originally posted it is much more realistic to expect that EU members would get into a tiff and tighten border controls than to expect two American states to do the same.
This is completely incorrect. Also Mike and Gary (and all others referring to the changes made by Denmark) are all incorrect.
What has been published in the Danish proposals (I read and speak fluent Danish) is not an introduction of passport free travel, but an increase of border patrols by customs agents. Like today these custom agents will have powers to stop and check cars passing through land and sea borders and if required ask for passport identification and vehicle registration papers.
Airports are unaffected and passport free travel will continue to Schengen countries there.
Don’t blow something out of proportion without having the right information at hand!
Wow. What a HOT TOPIC!