“It was like on a roller coaster: the last precipice was used to get over the hill”. In the semi-deserted congress palace in Luxembourg, D-Day on migration becomes the day after: pats on the back and tasty anecdotes. The turning point came with the introduction of the review clause of the Migration Pact. Because the reform is a leap in the dark and nobody knows for sure how we will go from the paragraphs to the facts. Then there are the political implications to take into account. Hungary and Poland, who voted against, are already aiming for zero. Giorgia Meloni, on the other hand, judges the agreement “a step forward” and notes that there is finally “a change of priorities” in the EU.
But let’s start with the losers. The Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, thundered on Facebook that “Brussels is abusing its power” because it wants to “relocate the migrants to Hungary by force and this is unacceptable”. So good and good fake news because the agreement establishes the principle of “compulsory solidarity” but the transfers remain voluntary. The Polish premier is more factual Mateusz Morawiecki. “The mandatory relocation – or the financial contribution of 20,000 euros per person – does not solve the problem of migration but violates the sovereignty of the member states: Poland will not pay for the mistakes of the migration policies of other countries”. And we will see about this.
The process to arrive at the publication of the new Pact in the official gazette is still long and on the other hand in Luxembourg the EU Council has given the green light to only two crucial elements of the reform, which is made up of a patchwork of provisions. Now, in fact, the ball passes to the so-called trialogue, where the Council, Commission and Parliament must find the balance and approve a common text, which in turn must be approved by the Eurochamber and then again by the Council. And this goes for many other legislative pieces in the mosaic. Berlin, while defining the agreement as an “important” step for a “common and supportive” solution to migration management, openly speaks of “bitter pills to swallow” and hopes that the trialogue will indeed “improve” the package, especially on the in the face of guarantees and human rights. The part concerning the possibility of making transfers to third countries – as well as the inclusion of families with children in the detention centers envisaged for the rapid procedure, the nature of which is not clear – is seen as smoke and mirrors by the Greens and there is who, in Luxembourg, hypothesized possible “government crises” for Olaf Scholz. Italy will arrive at the trialogue with one prize to defend: overcoming the Dublin regulation.
Even in Rome they are aware that the text could be improved but, at the moment, the aim is above all not to allow it to get worse. Then there will be the very difficult test of the Eurochamber. The agreement received the endorsement of Ppe leader Manfred Weber but the reaction of the Socialists was much more tepid. And among the Dem MEPs there is open talk of a “disappointing agreement”. For Meloni then there is the obstacle of the allies of the Pis, the Polish government party that sits with Fdi in the Ecr group, to overcome. At the time of therefore the risk of a sensational rift is around the corner. In short, nothing has closed in Luxembourg, if anything something has opened.
Those countries – including Italy but not only – that pushed for greater attention to the external dimension notice how for the first time, with the EU projection fund given by solidarity, a clear link is created with the external dimension internal. And if anything, there is still the European Council at the end of June to add other elements to the picture, such as action to combat illegal flows and aid to African countries. The final story of the Covenant is practically to be written.
The EU finds an agreement on migrants, Italy decisive
Read the full article on ANSA.it