The EU-Turkey Deal Is Bad but Worse Is Yet to Come

Afghan migrants in Greece. The majority of migrants who enter Europe pay to be smuggled by sea to Greece from Turkey, the main transit route into the EU. Nearly all of those entering Greece on a boat from Turkey are from the war zones of Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)


For many high-ranking politicians, it is already clear that the deal with Turkey has failed. What’s next?

On March 18, the European Union struck a deal with Turkey that was designed to decrease the influx of refugees into Europe. The deal said that anyone who arrives in Greece illegally would be sent to Turkey. And for every migrant sent back, the EU would resettle one Syrian refugee stuck in Turkish camps—with priority given to those who had not tried to enter the EU illegally.

As part of the agreement, Europe also promised Ankara $3 billion in aid, a boost to its EU membership proposal, and an easing of the visa restrictions for Turkish citizens by the end of June.

Many analysts saw this deal as problematic and even illegal, because Turkey does not meet the “safe third country” requirements of the Geneva Convention. Many viewed the deal not as a short-term solution.

The agreement did significantly reduce the number of refugees coming into Greece, but three months in, it is on the verge of collapsing.

Integrated Regional Information Networks (irin), a news agency supported by human rights activists, wrote:

[E]ven before the ink was dry on the EU-Turkey agreement (it was finalized on 20 March), there was plenty of evidence that it wasn’t [a safe third country]. In the past two months, there have been numerous documented cases of Turkish guards shooting and killing Syrians attempting to cross the border. In addition, despite guarantees that those returned to Turkey would have access to asylum procedures there, returnees have instead been detained in remote camps with no access to lawyers.

The EU-Turkey deal has remained in effect despite its human rights violations. More recently, even greater deal breakers have surfaced.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and the Turkish government have demanded visa-free travel into Europe as payment for their cooperation. The trouble with this is Turkey does not fulfill the EU requirements for such travel. But Ankara has great leverage since the EU desperately needs Turkey to go along with this deal. But the success of the deal is also dependent on the support of European citizens. Stratfor wrote:

The European Union will have that flexibility only if European citizens believe that the deal is the Continent’s best option for addressing the migrant crisis. After all, many Europeans are sensitive to Turkey’s alleged human rights abuses and rule of law issues and will be hesitant to loosen the security-related requirements for EU visa liberalization that give Ankara pause.

The German government was the chief driving force in the EU-Turkey deal, but it lost the support of the German people in doing so. According to a zdf survey conducted in May, only 34 percent of Germans believed the deal would be successful; 59 percent thought it would fail. Furthermore, 91 percent of Germans don’t see Turkey as a reliable partner. Many believe that Chancellor Angela Merkel puts too much stock in the deal. Her party has lost popularity despite the decrease in migrant arrivals.

Spiegel, one of Germany’s top-selling magazines, wrote that nobody can believe that the Turkish foreign policy will change with the current president in office. For now, Europe is on its own and needs to work out its own solution. Evidently, Europe is looking for a better solution.

But so far, Chancellor Merkel has clung to her Turkey deal, despite her popularity taking a hit. She knows that when the Turkey deal fails, her refugee policy will fail as well. More importantly, she knows that the alternatives to the EU-Turkey deal is much worse.

As the Turkey deal was implemented, we wrote on

This is what we are seeing in Germany’s deal with Turkey: the first major signs of Europe rejecting that “postwar veneer.” When that fails, the situation will become even more desperate—pushing Europe to take even more desperate measures—moving further away from the left-wing, human-rights-loving, multicultural EU we see today.

Other European leaders want a different solution. In an interview with Spiegel, Austrian Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz said:

The Turkey deal can only be Plan B. Plan A needs to be a strong Europe that is prepared to defend its external borders on its own. If we do not do that, then we are living in a Europe that is dependent—on other countries, and possibly even on personalities like President Erdoğan. And dependency is dangerous.

His plan would seal off the Mediterranean, have joint protection of the EU’s external borders, and more humanitarian aid to the countries of origin. Added to that, he says European countries need to be able to decide who and who not to take in. To accomplish this, he proposed to establish a reception center for migrants on an island in the Mediterranean. His plan would dramatically decrease the number of refugees, loosen its dependency on Turkey, and reestablish more order in the Middle East and Africa. He has a plan, but by no means the power to implement it.

It is clear that the EU-Turkey deal is not a long-term solution. Europe will be forced to act directly in Africa and the Middle East, providing military support. Schäuble also mentioned it would mean financial support and trade:

For Schäuble that means in straight talk: Europe needs its markets open for products from these regions. “The North Africans demand that if they withhold refugees,” said Schäuble. “But they are right doing so after all.” In the globalized world it is necessary “to create once again a moderate revolution, a fundamental change without exaggeration.”

Actually the rich countries don’t need that much growth any longer, Schäuble explained. “But let us rather stronger promote the emerging economies of the south.”

The Turkey deal cannot bring lasting solutions because it does not solve the problem. Schäuble correctly recognized that the problem lies within the countries of origin. But what is their problem? What is the problem with Syria, Libya, Iraq, Egypt and other Middle Eastern and African countries? Radical Islam.

Mr. Flurry has explained that Germany will deal with the root cause of radical Islam. To do so, it will form an alliance with other countries in the Middle East and Africa. Since Turkey is the bridge from Europe to the Middle East, it will have its part to play, but not in the way it is now. Iran will be surrounded and the root of terrorism taken out. To read more on Europe’s plan to solve the refugee crises and what comes afterward, read “The Whirlwind Prophecy.”

Full article: The EU-Turkey Deal Is Bad but Worse Is Yet to Come (The Trumpet)

Comments are closed.