Europe's Refugee Problem

by Tom Kando

I just returned from Europe. I’ll tell you about my recent trip in the near future, but today, I want to address an issue that is timely, and which I could not avoid hearing about daily while over there: The refugee crisis. The topic dominated the news and daily conversations (See also Madeleine’s excellent recent article about this: Exodus: The Refugee Crisis in Europe).

The current crisis touches me in a very personal way, because of the prominent (and ugly) role recently played by my country of birth - Hungary.

This year, due to its geographic location, Hungary became for many refugees the hoped-for point of entry into Europe. Few of the thousands who are seeking refuge planned to stay in Hungary, with its limited economic opportunities. Their objective was to move on to Northern and Western Europe, Germany first and foremost. However, the Hungarian-Serbian border became the flashpoint where the influx met with European resistance. Hungary was the “front,” if you will. It was where the brunt of the pressure occurred, a pressure which did not (yet) affect the more distant countries of Northern and Western Europe.


Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban took it upon himself to do what he viewed as the “dirty work” relegated to Hungary by the rest of Europe: He built a razor wire fence; there were disturbances; chaos and disorder at Keleti central station; water cannons and pepper spray were used against the refugees; a news clipping showed a female Hungarian photographer deliberately trip up and cause a refugee father carrying his baby to fall.

Hungary’s response was truly ugly, as was that of the other Eastern European regimes. The Slovak government announced that it would accept Christian refugees but not Muslim refugees. Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic States all joined in the xenophobia.

Other European countries behaved better: Austria, Croatia and Slovenia agreed to let refugees pass through. Germany’s Angela Merkel was the most magnanimous, announcing that Germany would admit an astounding 800,000 refugees.

However, the disarray has continued. Even the countries with good intentions have had to change their tune at times, when overwhelmed by the chaos. The fundamental problem is that there is no such thing as a “Europe.” I’ll get back to this in a moment, but first I want to tell you why I am ashamed of the behavior of Hungary and the rest of Eastern Europe:

As a child, I was a refugee myself. I was a HUNGARIAN refugee, as were millions of others. In 1956 alone, a quarter million Hungarians fled the murderous Soviet invasion. So did hundreds of thousands more between the end of World War II and the fall of communism. So did millions of other Eastern Europeans while their half of the continent suffered under Soviet totalitarianism. Many of these millions (including myself and my family) were saved by the hospitality and the generosity of Western Europe.

Then, after the fall of communism in 1989, much of Eastern Europe (including Hungary, the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia and the Baltic States) was admitted to the European Union. Once again, it was Western Europe that came to the rescue, lavishing billions on the economic re-development of Eastern Europe.

Now when the going gets tough, the Eastern Europeans refuse to share the burden. They are being selfish and hypocritical. Like a marriage, the European Union is supposed to be for better OR WORSE. The new members forgot the second part of the deal.

To be sure, there is another aspect to all this:
It is also true that no country can admit an unlimited number of refugees/immigrants. One can empathize with Hungary and its apprehensions. It is ironic by the way, that the country was once before the “gate” where the Muslim East was knocking on Europe’s door: From the middle of the 16th century to the end of the 17th century, for a century and a half, Hungary was under Ottoman rule, an empire that reached all the way to the gates of Vienna. At some point the current scenario COULD vindicate the alarmists: There is a growing world of disorder outside of the West. Today, the Syrian bloodbath and ISIS are its chief manifestations, but the number of failed states is growing. Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, Somalia, Eritrea, Mauritania, the two Congos, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, you name it. Half the states of Africa are on the verge of collapse, one day it’s Burkina Faso, the next day it’s Mali or the Central African Republic and the list goes on. In a couple of generations, Africa’s population will be FIVE times that of Europe. One can be forgiven for seeing analogies with the migrations which in the end led to the collapse of ancient Rome. Disorder finally triumphed over order.

It is somewhat facile and not entirely right to dismiss all such apprehensions as xenophobic racism, or to naively assume that all will be well in the end with such massive migrations (Germans use the apt word Völkerwanderung to refer to massive population shifts such as those in Europe from the 4th to the 8th centuries). The naive reasoning here is that the West NEEDS these millions of new arrivals, since its birthrate is now below replacement level. This overlooks the conflict, suffering, and destruction that often accompany Völkerwanderung, especially when the new arrivals are culturally extremely different.  Many people wonder, how is this going to play out?

Be that as it may, we are, today, not at Armageddon. It is good to remember that for many years now, Europe has been absorbing about one million immigrants every year. This is, incidentally, the same number as the number of immigrants the US admits each year, which should put an end to finger pointing on EITHER side of the Atlantic.

Today, Europe’s main problem is that it is utterly incapable of coming up with a coherent and CONCERTED and BINDING plan. One doesn’t have to be a genius to see the outline of such a plan: Agree on a MANDATORY PROPORTIONAL distribution of all incoming refugees to the 28 member states.

Unfortunately, the so-called European “Union” is today as the United States of America were under the Articles of Confederation (1777-1788) - a confederation lacking unity and central authority. Had America not replaced the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution (as Alexander Hamilton ceaselessly urged the country to do in the Federalist Papers), America would not have survived. 

Currently, Europe requires unanimity of all its members for all major endeavors, giving the veto to each member. There is, in fact, no such thing as a “Europe.” There is no unity; there is paralysis. This empowers the obstructionists, in this case the Eastern Europeans. As a result, the facts on the ground may overtake whatever Merkel and others may come up with.

© Tom Kando 2015
  leave comment here