When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

You've reached your limit of one free article.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime .


Exclusive International news coverage

Ad-free experience NEW

Weekly digital Magazine NEW

9 daily & weekly Newsletters

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Free trial

30-days free access, then $2.90
per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch

Open Borders Are Immoral And Dangerous — For The Migrants

After a rescue last year off the coast of Calabria, Italy
After a rescue last year off the coast of Calabria, Italy
Klaus Geiger


BERLIN — Last year Angela Merkel said that "the welfare of Africa is in the German interest." Since then, the Chancellor has spoken more about Africa than any of her predecessors and has made the continent a priority for Germany's G-20 chairmanship this year.

On Monday, the German Chancellor invited eight African leaders to a major conference on the continent's future in Berlin. The Chancellor considers her economic and trade policy with Africa, the so-called "African Offensive," a key to solving the refugee crisis. And she is definitely right.

The 21st century will be the African century — one way or another. The continent will either follow in the footsteps of Asia and experience its astonishing ascent out of poverty. Or it will collapse and creep closer to Europe.

Forces will soon prevail in Africa that the world has never before experienced. By 2050, the number of people on the continent will double to 2.5 billion. There will then be ten times more young people there than in Europe. These people could be a great hope or a major risk. They could become the engine for Africa's ascent — or turn into an uncontrollable army of the discontent.

It is therefore right to afford significant attention to Africa. And it is proper that Germany aims to exploit the power of the markets in the process. Private capital should flow to Africa in order to create jobs. The primary economic forces of globalization should catapult Africa out of its longstanding poverty.

But the fight against the causes of migration is a long-term strategy. This struggle cannot supplant rigorous safeguarding of Europe's borders. The African conference in Berlin took place as approximately 6.6 million migrants — at least 2.6 million of them in North Africa — stand at Europe's gates hoping to enter the Schengen Zone according to security authorities, a number that continues to climb.

From January to May, about 50,000 migrants from Africa have reached Italy, 46% more than during the same time period in the preceding year. In total, 260,000 migrants are expected to cross the Mediterranean this year. That is more than ever before. Africa's demographic development threatens to drive these numbers far higher.

The dream remains potent

The idea that Africa could improve its economic situation to the point of ending mass migration within a few years is absurd. The dream of Europe remains potent. As long as it remains realistic to realize this dream, people will set out for Europe.

Currently, the trade-off is as such: Whoever is determined to go and has money for the traffickers — and dares to board a dangerous dinghy — is almost sure to be rescued by European authorities or asylum activists, and be escorted to Italy.

The EU remains the only part of the industrialized world that does not have entry into its territory under control. Meanwhile, the safeguarding of Europe's southern coast has high priority for Brussels.

But the task is highly complex, for the EU has tied its hands with its own asylum laws. The right to asylum in Europe is unparalleled in the world. Through judicial rulings at the regional level, this right has been strengthened to such an extent that it is hardly possible to protect the maritime borders of Europe.

Refugees squatting in Berlin — Photo: Libertinus

Under the current asylum regime, refugee boats may not be sent back to the African coast. Every migrant has a right to have his or her asylum application assessed. What's more: the asylum regime is extremely broad in Europe. All major democracies have signed the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951), but only Europe has placed the right to asylum above the right of states to protect themselves and Europe's external borders. That has been disastrous in light of Africa's demography.

A change to the legal status of refugees is possible, however — and talking about it should not be taboo. In light of its current instability, the EU needs to protect its borders in order to be ready for the turbulent international situation. The EU's asylum policy has been guided by unrealistic ideals instead of practical reason. Europe must redesign its asylum law and border control. The Union must be able to refuse migrants. This is unpopular because it's considered inhumane. But is the current situation humane?

First, open borders themselves endanger human lives. Refugees board rickety dinghies and drown by the thousands in the Mediterranean because they are attracted by the opportunities in Europe. Furthermore, it is hardly humane that parents send thousands of children to Europe without protection.

Open borders are also very expensive. Migration researchers calculated that it is over 130 times more costly to care for a migrant in Europe than near his homeland. At present those who reach Europe win the jackpot. Little money remains for others who are less mobile.

We can conclude that open borders are unjust. Young people who have money at their disposal have the best chance to come to Europe. The ten poorest countries in the world aren't the ten countries that send the most migrants.

These migrants originate from places like Morocco, Ivory Coast, and Senegal —all of them relatively prosperous African countries. The truly impoverished cannot afford to migrate. Some 90% of all migrants are internally-displaced or have moved to a neighboring country where they receive far less than a warm welcome.

The hope for a better life in Europe is understandable. But it should not be encouraged. Only then will a new smarter and more just migration policy be possible, which could include deciding asylum applications in North Africa or in home countries rather than Europe.

Certain politically persecuted individuals reach Europe through resettlement programs. In the future, all other refugees could be provided for nearer their region of origin.

Europe is simultaneously opening itself up to African professionals through a modern immigration system. These qualified individuals could send remittances or return to their home country with new qualifications. This makes more sense than receiving those people from Africa who have no educational background and are overwhelmed by the expectations of modern industrial societies.

We need more than lectures about the fight against the causes of migration. We must also speak about border control and the end of an allegedly humane—but truthfully costly and unfair— asylum policy. Only a strong Europe will be able to help make Africa strong too.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

FOCUS: Russia-Ukraine War

Zaluzhny vs. Zelensky: Ukraine's Heavyweight Feud Puts The War At Risk

Tensions keep brewing between Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, and his military chief, Valerii Zaluzhny. Coming at a critical point in the war's deadlock, the disputes risk undermining Ukrainian unity and playing into Russia's hands.

Photograph of the Ukraine Armed Forces Valeriy Zaluzhny  saluting in uniform

February 24, 2023, Kyiv: Commander-in-Chief of Ukraine Armed Forces Valeriy Zaluzhny salutes during ceremonies marking the 1st anniversary of the Russian invasion

Ukrainian Presidents Office/ZUMA
Roman Romaniuk & Roman Kravets,


KYIV — On November 20, Pentagon chief Lloyd Austin made an unannounced visit to Ukraine.

Austin's arrival was initially intended as a show of respect to Ukrainian war heroes and a reaffirmation of Washington's steadfast support for Kyiv. However, this visit inadvertently exacerbated tensions between Ukraine’s top military leader, Valerii Zaluzhny, and its President, Volodymyr Zelensky.

Stay up-to-date with the latest on the Russia-Ukraine war, with our exclusive international coverage.

Sign up to our free daily newsletter.

"After Austin's arrival,” one Ukrainian government insider revealed, “it seemed Zelensky was suddenly about to replace Zaluzhny. Eventually, though, their conflicts faded away, and were replaced by sarcastic banter.”

Recent weeks have seen global media outlets reporting on the details of the "conflict" between the Ukrainian president and the Armed Forces head. In response, the President’s Office dismissed all such claims as Russian propaganda.

Amidst the ongoing threat looming over Ukraine, disputes between the country's top leaders aren't surprising. Such disagreements can even be seen as part of the carrying out of any war.

The root of tensions between the nation's president and its ranking head of the Armed Forces, can be traced to a complicated blend of war and politics. Zelensky's involvement in military planning and command during the war has caused friction as he's integrated political elements into the traditionally apolitical sphere of the army, inadvertently making Zaluzhny a visible figure in the political arena.

Keep reading...Show less

The latest