While the situation on the European borders is becoming increasingly violent for people on the move, the EU member states continue in endless meetings, drawing policies to stop migration. They are stopping and not managing migration because their approach to it and the policies they adopt, treat migration as a security issue rather than a humanitarian and social one. Migration and security are synonymous for the offices in Brussels.
In 2019, after Ursula von der Leyen was appointed as the new president of the European Commission, a worrying title appeared on the dossier dealing with migration. This portfolio responsible for upholding the rule of law, migration and internal security was titled “Protection of the European Way of Life”— a title that came to integrate and institutionalise far-right slogans. Soon, the title was changed to “Promotion of the European Way of Life,” primarily to hide the basic narrative that guides the commissions’ approach under the carpet rather than a substantial change.
This narrative, which had been described in Huntington’s work, “Clash of Civilisations”, in the early ’90s, has been widely used by the far-right groups in Europe and North America to portray what they want to suggest as the new threat—the threat to the “Europeans” from “the other,” which meant migrants. Although the narrative of uniqueness in the culture and the race for all Europeans between the East and the West, the North and the South, seems ridiculous for many, it poses a significant threat to human rights and democracy. The basic idea behind it is the superiority of the white-Christian-heterosexual European prototype, which can only be related to the tragedies of the fascist and ethno-socialist eras.
Many felt that these threats were over after the end of the Second World War. Even more so after walls that divided people fell. The so-called dream of a Europe without borders gave hope to many for a new era where a world of freedom, equity and justice would prevail against the world of exploitation, discrimination and injustice. But that wasn’t the case. New walls started rising in the EU peripheral countries and between the EU states. Dozens of state, international, and even paramilitary armed groups appeared on the borderlines, ready to halt what they called an invasion. Thousands are the victims of this militarisation; they either drowned in the Mediterranean or were shot at land borders. New “ghettos” have been built in European countries; in these modern concentration camps, people are being arbitrarily arrested and imprisoned just because of the colour of their skin, their nationality, and their religious beliefs. Meanwhile, dehumanising and discriminatory discourse is normalised, while fake news is widely used to enhance the racist narrative and create points of tension.
Far-right, neo-nazi, and all kinds of racist groups have gained more and more popularity, and the ideology of hate for the stranger seems to have found its roots again. The solidarity, sympathy and compassion for the victims of tragedies have decreased, and the main political actors seem to direct their strategies not into combating this danger, but rather to play along with this far-right’s populist rhetoric. By integrating the bearers of these ideas and the ideas themselves into their ranks, the political class believes it can manage them better and deradicalise them. This strategy tries to conceal the agreement and the benefits of the capitalist ideals from a decomposing society.
In early September, Germany announced the imposition of temporary restrictions on its borders in what it described as an attempt to tackle irregular migration and protect the public from threats such as Islamist extremism. The new restrictions came as a response to last month’s election results of some of its federal states, where the far-right AfD made significant electoral gains after campaigning heavily on the issue of migration. The German state incorporated the AfD’s right-wing populist agenda to halt it. Soon, other EU member states announced their intention to withdraw from the EU agreements. Netherlands and Hungary applied for temporary exit from the EU asylum rules. It is hard to predict what will follow, but things are increasingly worrying.
Is integrating these populists’ racist narratives into the democratic agenda really deradicalising them, or does it actually legitimise and reinforce them by giving them a foothold in the public sphere?
European history has the answer, but recent incidents on the continent offer us insight. The justification and integration of fascist and extreme right groups in the public dialogue has, in fact, radicalised them even more. Migrant and marginalised groups are increasingly facing attacks all over Europe, and antifascists are being killed in the middle of the road like Pavlos Fyssas, who was murdered in 2013 by members of the parliamentary nazi group Golden Dawn. The electoral gains of openly racist parties are increasing.
The insistence of many states that they will face this threat is misleading. People must organise themselves on the basis of solidarity, equity and justice to prevent the fascist monster from once again dominating Europe. With our eyes fixed on the genocides and tragedies being committed, from Palestine to Sudan, from Kurdistan to Colombia, our struggles should become more substantial and more widespread. Only the people can change the future of the world.