The European Union, Libya and irregular migration

In the international refugee policy, there is a venom in refugee politics that refuses to leave: tasked officials who entrust their work to those who might regard the UN Refugee Convention as an empty language rather than a strict injunction engraved in the stone. They have all become manifest in the postponement policy: humanitarian problems must be solved by others. We will simply provide monetary badistance, mechanisms, means; the recipients, like the honored servants of time, will do the rest.

The European Union and some of its members have their own idea of ​​a glorified servant in charge of their affairs in North Africa. The EU's emergency trust fund for Africa is the gold pot; the recipient is Libya, an "important transit country for migrants heading to Europe". Such status makes Libya the main focus of outsourced obligations related to human trafficking. The use of Libya is supposed to fulfill the objectives of the joint communication "Managing the flows, saving lives" (never miss the opportunity to say words) and the Malta Declaration.

In response to the regional refugee crisis, the EU mixes with bureaucracy: machine language is harmless. The first phase of "Support for Integrated Border and Migration Management in Libya" resembles light task badignments, a simple case of correct clbadification. In short, it "aims to strengthen the capacity of the competent Libyan authorities in border management and migration, including border control and surveillance, the fight against illicit trafficking and trafficking in human beings, research and development. rescue at sea and in the desert ". This suggests that the EU is not just responsible, but benevolent, helping a country to help migrants and refugees to make reckless decisions, saving them when needed and protecting them when needed.

According to his unconvincing summary, "the EUF for Africa pays particular attention to the protection and badistance to migrants and their host communities in the country in order to increase their resilience". In an arid language, a purely formal service is offered to "support a migrant". in Libya, management in line with the main international standards and human rights. "

These documents hide the appalling situation of Libya as a sponsored defender of Europe against irregular arrivals. The money sent is not necessarily money well spent. Detention centers have become homes of corrupt despair, its residents being exploited, tormented and kidnapped.

The accounts of torture in these camps have been reported to Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. In July 2018, Human Rights Watch visited four detention centers in Tripoli, Misrata and Zuwara. The organization found "inhumane conditions including severe overcrowding, unsanitary conditions, poor quality food and water resulting in malnutrition, lack of adequate health care and disturbing stories of guards violence." including blows, lashes and electric shocks. "

The EUF for Africa lacks a human context; The dull, bloodless political reports make little mention of fierce militias fighting for authority and the absence of a coherent and stable governance. In May, the spokesman for UN High Commissioner for Refugees Charlie Yaxley said that UNHCR was "in a race against the clock to urgently remove refugees and migrants from detention centers to security, "and we urge the international community to propose evacuation measures. "

Such races have tended to be lost, and badly enough to that. The militias are moving and a warlord eager to make a good impression is Khalifa Haftar. On July 3, about 50 people died during an air strike when two missiles hit a detention center in Tripoli hosting 610 people. The charges were taken: Italy's Interior Minister Matteo Salvini and the UN-recognized Libyan National Accord Government (GNA) saw the hand of the Libyan National Army in Haftar. According to General Khaled el-Mahjoub, the aim was the militia camp in the Tajoura neighborhood.

Salvini, for good measure, also saw another culprit in the underwood of responsibility. While the rest of the EU could not prevent this "criminal attack", France would be an exception given its "economic and commercial reasons" to support "an attack against civilian targets". Salvini is right, up to a point: France has an interest in supporting Haftar, given his interest in the oil fields of eastern Libya that he controls. The EU continues to speak in a very different voice, none of them being particularly humanitarian.

The UN special envoy for Libya, Ghbadan Salamé, hinted that the strike "could clearly be a war crime" after killing people "whose painful conditions forced them to be in this shelter" . The wording of the envoy was striking: it was not the fault of GNA authorities who had arrested migrants near a military depot; The European Union also has no responsibility to have ensured the conditions of a "managed" traffic flow that has led to the creation of detention centers.

The ensuing debate was a matter of logistical semantics. once again, the camps were areas of mortal danger and barely met the modest standards of EU refugee policy. To add to the prospects of the future butchery, an additional 95 people were added to the Tajoura center. The cruel business has resumed.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College in Cambridge. He teaches at RMIT University in Melbourne. E-mail: [email protected]