Cyprus-Forum.com

[Sotos]

Those who helped screw up Syria should be the ones who should take the most refugees. Turkey is one of the main culprits. They want to remove Assad because supposedly he is so bad for his people. Well ... if the Turks, the Americans and the Saudis care so much about the Syrian people then why don't they want to help the Syrian refugees and they want countries who have no fault in the Syrian crisis (such as Greece) to take the weight of the problem they created? The EU is STUPID for falling for Turkey's blackmail. Turkey is in the corner now... they screwed up their relationship with Russia, they screwed up their relationship with most of their neighbors... they have no alternatives to turn to if EU tells them that they either do what they are told or their accession negotiations will end (or even kick them out of the customs union). If Merkel wants to be EU's leader then she needs to show her power with countries such as Turkey... not by being tough with troubled EU states!

[Sotos]

Who else can the EU do a deal with to stop the flow of irregular migration from Turkey to EU (Greece) other than Turkey ?

Yes, but the EU should stop using carrots and start using a stick to get Turkey to do what it wants. Turkey not only is one of the main culprits for creating the problems in Syria, it is also a Muslim country where the Syrians will integrate much easier. If the Syrians prefer rich EU countries that is a completely different story ... most people in poor third world countries would prefer to live in rich EU states ... this has nothing to do with being refugee or not.

[erolz66]

Many of the migrants have been in Turkey for five years but it's only during the last two years that the mass exodus started. How come?

The number of Syrian refugees in Turkey at the end of 2011 was around 10,000. By end of 2012 around 135,000. By Aug 2014 815,000. As of Feb 2016 2,600,000. I would, with respect, suggest that this has a bearing on why so many more have tried to leave Turkey for the EU in the last two years.

They don't need to patrol the sea to stop the majority of the people smuggling, they simply have to find the source of supply for the rubber boats and outboard motors that are imported. A couple of months ago a British reporter said that outside a boat dealer in Izmir he saw openly for sale piles of rubber inflatables. Turkish efforts to stem the flow are a joke, they have used these poor people to screw concessions out of the EU that go beyond solving the problem of immigration into Europe.

That Turkey could do more to stem the flow of irregular migrants , I agree with. The question is, it seems to me, why would Turkey (or any country in a similar position) be motivated to do this, to the benefit of the EU and its own detriment, given that it already housing nigh on 3 million refugees ?

[B25]

Turkey housing 3mln refugees is not the same as the EU housing them. Turkey just provides 10 square miles of desert and dumps them there. In the EU they would be housed, fed, schooled, medicated and the rest. So don't give us you fucking Turkey supporting opinions. F dickhead.

Turkey is using this problem she created to blackmail the EU and the EU is to stupid and corrupt to say no. Pure and simple.

[erolz66]

Those who helped screw up Syria should be the ones who should take the most refugees. Turkey is one of the main culprits.

We (the world) could respond to this crisis by saying - ok we need to totally overhaul from scratch the existing legal norms with regards to the treatment by nations of those fleeing war (or famine, or other life threatening situations in their own countries) and implement one based on the principal of 'those who caused the thing that in turn leads to people having to flee their homes and move to other countries, should be the ones to take in those people'. We (the world) could do that. However it seems to me that your 'solution' still has many 'problems', like who decides which countries are responsible for the cause of people fleeing and to what degree each is responsible ? Is in this current situation not Syria also partly responsible (be it Assad, ISIS, or any of the other Syrian groups) ?

[erolz66]

Turkey housing 3mln refugees is not the same as the EU housing them. Turkey just provides 10 square miles of desert and dumps them there. In the EU they would be housed, fed, schooled, medicated and the rest. So don't give us you fucking Turkey supporting opinions. F dickhead.

If you really that this is the case, then the only logical conclusion, under international law and norms (as well as EU and national laws), is that the EU and no member within it can legally return any migrant with a valid claim to asylum to Turkey. In fact there are NGO organisation like Amnesty international who are making this very claim, that any return of a valid migrant is illegal because Turkey's treatment of such migrants is so bad.

Turkey is using this problem she created to blackmail the EU and the EU is to stupid and corrupt to say no. Pure and simple.

Who is the EU ? Are you part of the EU ? is the RoC ? Is Greece ? According to your thesis WE are too stupid and too corrupt to know how to deal with this issue. Personally if my choice as to who makes these kinds of decisions is between those who currently do and say you, I think I'll stick with the current bunch, as bad as they are, for the other option imo would only lead to things being even more bad than they are now. Being more serious I would like to see massive changes in how such decisions get made in the EU, more transparency, more democratic accountability and such like, but that is for me a different subject entirely.

[Sotos]

Those who helped screw up Syria should be the ones who should take the most refugees. Turkey is one of the main culprits.

We (the world) could respond to this crisis by saying - ok we need to totally overhaul from scratch the existing legal norms with regards to the treatment by nations of those fleeing war (or famine, or other life threatening situations in their own countries) and implement one based on the principal of 'those who caused the thing that in turn leads to people having to flee their homes and move to other countries, should be the ones to take in those people'. We (the world) could do that. However it seems to me that your 'solution' still has many 'problems', like who decides which countries are responsible for the cause of people fleeing and to what degree each is responsible ? Is in this current situation not Syria also partly responsible (be it Assad, ISIS, or any of the other Syrian groups) ?

There is no such thing as "We (the world)". Who decides for EU is EU. The EU can tell Turkey: "We know what you have been doing in Syria. You have a great share of responsibility for the problems created there and therefore we DEMAND that you keep most of the refugees and treat them right". If Turkey denies their guilt or refuses the responsibility then EU should respond with a STICK. The EU should not allow itself to be blackmailed and played by a country such as Turkey. The EU should show to Turkey who is the big power in this relationship.

[Maximus]

Those who helped screw up Syria should be the ones who should take the most refugees. Turkey is one of the main culprits.

We (the world) could respond to this crisis by saying - ok we need to totally overhaul from scratch the existing legal norms with regards to the treatment by nations of those fleeing war (or famine, or other life threatening situations in their own countries) and implement one based on the principal of 'those who caused the thing that in turn leads to people having to flee their homes and move to other countries, should be the ones to take in those people'. We (the world) could do that. However it seems to me that your 'solution' still has many 'problems', like who decides which countries are responsible for the cause of people fleeing and to what degree each is responsible ? Is in this current situation not Syria also partly responsible (be it Assad, ISIS, or any of the other Syrian groups) ?

Sufficient laws are there, it is the implementation of these laws or the adherence to them that is the problem,

Like for example, a refugee must wait in and apply for asylum in the first safe country they arrive in. This is being disregarded in the context of this EU migration crisis.

So what do you do with a rogue nation that disregards these laws?

So what do you do with a nation that is responsible for causing people to flee for their lives, then settles their country, land and property with their own citizens?

[erolz66]

There is no such thing as "We (the world)".

Well actually there is but let's not get hung up on this point.

Who decides for EU is EU. The EU can tell Turkey: "We know what you have been doing in Syria. You have a great share of responsibility for the problems created there and therefore we DEMAND that you keep most of the refugees and treat them right".

So how many is 'most' of the refugees. Of a total of say 5 million how many MUST Turkey (pop 90 million) take according to you, and how many would the EU take (pop over 500 million) ? What mechanisms would you propose for this division ? Would you demand Turkey to use force to physically stop migrants in Turkey trying to reach the EU , and would that be compatible with Turkey 'treating them right' (so using tear gas to stop them accumulating at potential crossing points, like we saw recently in Calais) ?

If Turkey denies their guilt or refuses the responsibility then EU should respond with a STICK. The EU should not allow itself to be blackmailed and played by a country such as Turkey. The EU should show to Turkey who is the big power in this relationship.

Arguments of 'more stick' and 'less carrot' re negotiations between them that is driven by the need for the EU to secure cooperation from Turkey in order to deal with this issue, I can understand. Most of the other arguments made here so far I am struggling with.

[erolz66]

Sufficient laws are there, it is the implementation of these laws or the adherence to them that is the problem,

My point in reply to Soto's was that these laws have no provision within them for saying - country X caused y % of the problem therefore it must take y% of the refugees created by that problem.

Like for example, a refugee must wait in and apply for asylum in the first safe country they arrive in.

Actually there is no legal requirement (obvligation) on the refugee to do this, there is a legal right of states to be able to return refugees that arrive in their country if they have first passed through another country where they could have validly claimed safe asylum. This last bit "could have valid claimed safe asylum" is crucial. So if for example they were smuggled in such a way they actually had no ability to claim asylum in previous countries (because they were locked in a truck, or under guard etc) then the country they end up in can not legally return them to a prior one. More relevant is, you can not legally return such a refugee if you know that they will not be treated properly OR have an ability to make a valid claim of asylum in the place you return them to. So in short you can not legally return them to a country that says 'we will not grant such returned people asylum'.

This is being disregarded in the context of this EU migration crisis.

Several EU countries have voluntarily chosen to suspend their right (not the seekers obligation) to return such refugees within the EU nations, as a response to the crisis. If they had not done so Greece would even more fucked that it already is. With Turkey they could demand that Turkey take back all refugees arriving in the EU from Turkey and that they in turn will take none but doing so would only increase the chance of Turkey responding by saying we have granted 3 million asylum in Turkey - we will grant no more - at which point no EU country would be able legally return a single refugee.

So what do you do with a rogue nation that disregards these laws?

It really is not that simple, at least as I understand it. I can see why people would want it to be that simple but I just do not believe it is.

So what do you do with a nation that is responsible for causing people to flee for their lives, then settles their country, land and property with their own citizens?

That is a different subject - that we could get into but really I have little desire to do so, yet again and having tried for nigh on ten years already.