The number of refugees arriving in Europe by sea has dropped dramatically. Between January and the end of May 2018, only 28,000 migrants and refugees arrived via the Mediterranean route. That’s a 53% drop compared to the same period in 2017, and an 85% drop compared to 2016 (when 193,000 people arrived).

Yet the fall in arrivals hasn’t made the politics any less divisive. Europe is still struggling over what to do with the people already here. Redistributing refugees remains a ferociously contentious issue (see, for example, the anti-refugee rhetoric in the recent Hungarian elections) and large numbers of people remain trapped in a legal limbo, many in reception centres in Greece and Italy waiting to be told they can move to other countries. Critics say EU plans to redistribute refugees have totally failed. Even if they had succeeded, many asylum seekers (including those from Afghanistan) were anyway excluded from the scheme.

Citizens in frontline countries, including Greece, feel they’ve been abandoned. Whilst Greece, for example, has received significant financial assistance to help cope with the refugee crisis, the country has been completely overwhelmed in terms of hosting and processing arrivals. Plus, the refugee and migrant crisis took place while Greece has been undergoing painful austerity measures, including mass redundancies and public sector cuts.

In order to take a closer look at the local impact of the refugee crisis, we have launched our ‘Cities & Refugees‘ project – aimed at fostering a Europe-wide dialogue between citizens, refugees and asylum seekers, NGOs, politicians, and European leaders. The emphasis is on connecting local, everyday life at the city level to decisions made in Brussels and national capitals.

Today, we are looking at Athens. Greece is one of the frontline countries in the European refugee and migrant crisis. The number of arrivals by sea has fallen since an EU-Turkey deal allowing Greece to return new “irregular migrants” to Turkey in exchange for pre-processed Syrian refugees. Still, in 2017 there were roughly 60,000 asylum seekers and migrants stranded in the country.

Greece has a population of roughly 11 million (though it has been declining in recent years), with around 3-4 million living in the “Athens Urban Area” (i.e. the city of Athens itself, plus the greater metropolitan area surrounding it). It’s estimated that more than 2,500 refugees and migrants are living in squats in Athens occupied by anarchists and so-called “solidarity” groups. Conditions for asylum seekers and migrants in Greece have been heavily criticised by NGOs.

Yet, according to Eurostat, more than one in three Greeks in 2016 were experiencing conditions of poverty or social exclusion, including 37.8% of children under the age of 17 (the highest percentage in the EU since 2010). In recent months, there have been protests from both asylum seekers and Greek residents who feel like they’ve been abandoned.

Curious to know more about refugees in Athens and Greece? We’ve put together some facts and figures in the infographic below (click for a bigger version).

What do our readers think? We had a comment sent in from Robert, who believes EU countries should show greater solidarity with border countries such as Italy and Greece and accept more refugees. Is he right? Have European countries failed to adequately support Greece and Italy over the refugee crisis?

To get a response, we put Robert’s comment to the Mayor of Athens, Giorgos Kaminis. What would he say to Robert?

For another perspective we put the same question to Dr. Angeliki Dimitriadi from the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy. Should EU Member States offer greater solidarity to Greece and Italy over the refugee crisis, including accepting more refugees as part of a quota system?

I would say that the answer is ‘yes’ to both. But what we mean by greater ‘solidarity’ for Greece depends on how we understand the notion of solidarity. The EU has shown solidarity in terms of financial assistance; significance funds have come through for the Greek government and NGOs to assist in the crisis, both for first reception, but also for relocation and caring for the vulnerable. So, greater solidarity in terms of funds exists already. What is missing, and this goes to the second part of the question, is the aspect of relocation or intra-EU transfer of refugees.

In other words: we need EU Member States to take more of the people who are already in Greece and also Italy, as well as future arrivals. So, we do need a permanent quota system, we need a permanent redistribution system in the EU because the frontline states simply cannot handle the processing, registration, care, and the granting of asylum to all those who enter through the external borders of the EU.

We also had a comment from José arguing that the core problem of the refugee crisis in Europe lies with border management in Mediterranean states such as Greece and Italy. He believes the frontline countries have a responsibility to tighten their borders and deal with this on a national level, without European support.

What would Mayor Giorgos Kaminis say to José?How would Dr. Angeliki Dimitriadi respond to the same comment?

I would say this is very much an EU issue, for one and only one reason: Schengen. The only reason we’re having this discussion about the external borders is because of Schengen. The rules of Dublin and, frankly, the whole European asylum system is a counterbalance to Schengen and internal free movement. If we didn’t have internal free movement – which, of course, is something we want to maintain – we wouldn’t be having a discussion about the external borders because we would have internal border controls.

From the moment we have Schengen and we want to function as a union were we have internal free movement, it means the external borders are everyone’s external borders, not just Greece’s or Italy’s or Spain’s. This means that all Member States need, in one way or another, to assist and contribute, both in the border management efforts but also in the effect of these efforts. And one of the side effects of heavy border management is the fact that vulnerable people in search of asylum – and, by the way, the right to asylum is a cornerstone of the EU – have the ability and the option to somehow reach a safe country, whether that’s Greece or Germany or any of the EU Member States, and present their application for asylum. If we prevent them from doing that we are going to be in violation of international and EU law, and we also have to question the norms and values of the EU.

So, it’s not just a responsibility of the frontline states. It’s everyone’s responsibility. We can’t have a union that wants to promote and ensure internal free movement but at the same time says it’s the responsibility of only a handful of states to secure the external borders. And we cannot just tighten the external border controls because, at the end of the day, we need to create ways for people to reach safety… So, we have the responsibility and obligation to ensure some sort of pathway to asylum for those in need.

Should richer EU countries take more refugees? How exactly do we define which countries are “richer” than others? And which countries in Europe have the greatest capacity for absorbing refugees? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below and we’ll take them to policymakers and experts for their reactions!

The Debating Europe “Cities & Refugees” project is co-funded by the European Union’s “Europe for Citizens” program.
IMAGE CREDITS: CC / Flickr – Freedom House; PORTRAIT CREDITS: (c) Dr. Angeliki Dimitriadi
EU_for_citizens
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.


163 comments Post a commentcomment

What do YOU think?

  1. avatar
    Pier

    Now it’s the turn of non eu rich countries, muslim countries perhaps…

    • avatar
      Björn

      Moust of Them is unfortently not democratic. And some like Turky have taking in mutch more than we ever have done

    • avatar
      Luana

      Björn Eric Ingemar Grahn what about quatar? saudi arabia? israel? russia? oooh, they are not obliged to take any. Cool. Why is Europe then? Nope. No more refugees. We’re full.

    • avatar
      Anita

      Luana depends who you consider as we, Belgium , for example is full, but in Poland they have plenty of space.

  2. avatar
    Christine

    Why not start by stopping bombing the countries they flee. And stop screwing the economies of poor countries.

    • avatar
      Jose

      someone making sense? how dare you? you are going to be scolded by the nationalist keyboard warriors…

    • avatar
      Fatbardh

      no one are bombing: Pakistan, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, senegal, Gambia, Mali, Marocco, Tunisia, Nigeria ect, ect, the 85% of refugees arrive from these country

    • avatar
      Björn

      Fatbardh Brami plenty selling arms into these countries and interfering with their economies

    • avatar
      Augusto

      Christine Clifford it’s not like selling weapons to rebels or warlords. As much as I despise the selling of weapons to regimes like Saudi Arabia, every country has a right to a legit police force and an army, which has to be… you know, armed.
      If a country meets some basic requirements for democractic rule (i.e. is not a theocratic state or an absolutist monarchy and stuff) I find no reason to refuse to sell arms to it, granted that they’re going to security forces with no repression record.

    • avatar
      Andreas

      Anyway, most of immigrants comes from Pakistan, Afghanistan, from Africa etc, countries that nobody is bombing.

    • avatar
      Andreas

      Yes it does. The EU parliament is form by voting, so, vote more careful on next EU elections, and have your opinion heard in EU parliament.

  3. avatar
    aguysomewhere

    The people who are coming are mostly islamic, there are over 50 so called islamic countries. They should take up their people first. If they are not doing this then sham eon them, not that they would care about this anyways.

    I will say this too the USA, UK, France and NATO are not innocent. They have done the entire world a disservice by doing wars, regime change and arming islamic terrorists under the pretense that they are freedom loving rebels. These insane policies have resulted in creating so many of the refugees that are now fleeing.

    We need a international law that obligates war faring countries to take up every single refugee that they produce.

    Americans complain about Catholic Mexicans just imagine the conversation if it was islamic Libyans, Syrians etc. They are already suspicious of the handful that trek through the desert to enter the us illegally.

    But instead countries like my Switzerland that have absolutely nothing to do with these wars end up having to take care of these people. I remember this all starting 30 or so years ago with the Kosovarians. It has changed my country in a way that I am not exclusively happy with. More crime, more violence, more anti social behavior and for the first time ever the threat of islamic terrorism, and the rise of political correctness.

    Have no illusions religion matters because religion is linked to a persons world view, their moral code, the basics of what they consider to be right and wrong, and who they consider valuable, it even decides over violence or lack thereof. We decadent westerners who are tipping more and more towards atheism have forgotten this lesson of history.

    • avatar
      Simona Mamo

      Well said.

  4. avatar
    Ivan

    Isn’t that up to the people of those Nation States ? . You can either have the EU or you can have democracy. You can’t have both.

    • avatar
      aguysomewhere

      You mean the people who get to vote once every 4 years and even then it’s for a person and or political party and not for a ballot initiative. You must be joking. Not every country does it like us Swiss. Sadly.

  5. avatar
    Spiros

    It s a pity to ask Kaminis and all those priviliged athenian politicians. They te clueless. You should emphasize in the comnunities that serioisly carry the weight, like chios or mitilini. Also the NGOs shouldn t have a say. They re dirty to the core. I ve seen them in accion. Rotten business…

  6. avatar
    Alfredo

    No, by now the European countries should be preparing the return of all the “refugees” to their countries,and stop all immigration.

  7. avatar
    Aris

    The reason is that they involved with us in army operations and business and they create more and more refugers and immigrants. So they have to accept more refugees.

    • avatar
      Ivan

      Why should they ? Your comment assumes people in the rich countries care about the poor countries, they don’t.

    • avatar
      Aris

      Rich people care obly for their profit. Rich countries promote the facsist mode
      l.

  8. avatar
    Björn

    Yes at least 3% of it’s population. If Turky can do about 30% and Libanon aboute 40-50% than Will this be a small number. And also a good way tu increas the population that is mutch needed.

    • avatar
      Ludwig

      from whom is this statistic?

    • avatar
      Fatbardh

      let us suppose that your data ar correct: “Turky about 30% and Libanon aboute 40-50%” have you any idea how these countries are treating these % of refugees, do you think if that Turkey or Lebanon gives to refugees the same rights and benefits as their own citizents, as the UE countries do, could survive. have a look what has happened in UK

      https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/28/world/europe/uk-austerity-poverty.html?recId=15H8O3HBkhf2oYLdPPzIDXRULX2&geoContinent=EU&geoRegion=BZ&recAlloc=thompson_sampling&geoCountry=IT&blockId=signature-journalism&action=click&module=editorContent&pgtype=Article&region=CompanionColumn&contentCollection=Trending

    • avatar
      Björn

      Fatbardh Brami it’s not on how they are treted. Ofcours they are not doi g good. But they are poor countries we are to walthy an can have afford. Mutch better than to waste money on som man playing with Guns.

    • avatar
      Ivan

      Björn Eric Ingemar Grahn To ‘take’ money from your own citizens and give it to illegal migrants is theft, no matter what the barking mad left call it. Give them your money if you want but you do not have the right to give them mine.

    • avatar
      John

      Björn Eric Ingemar Grahn Do you not think culture also plays an important role? While we may have the financial means to accommodate them, I think people are put off by cultural, social and political differences. Syrians going to Lebanon may not face such a strong cultural shock as those going to Sweden, for instance.

    • avatar
      Björn

      Ivan Burrows the problem is many only count cost and neglating the winnings. Economly moust of The countries Will have bad Economy IF the do not take immigranter. It’s only the countries with hi immigrations rates that did good Economy the last 20 years. The immigrations generator hi Economy benifits. The only other way to get the same is to dorce birthrate to go over 2% but it’s not possibule to do. So it’s The only live the immigrations to regulate the population groth. Yust CE how long Japan and Ungary have had bad economic. Same got to Poland.

    • avatar
      Björn

      John McTavish the culture is not n important things. It have always beeb chageing. Like The religion is from There anyway. Same foes for The number we are using

    • avatar
      Ivan

      They have been fighting the same war in the Middle East for 1400 years so an arms trade embargo will achieve nothing except put millions of people in the EU out of work.

  9. avatar
    Paul

    Countries have legal obligations to accomodate refugees.. economic migrants are another matter.

    • avatar
      kevin

      And I would add a moral obligation but I would say the vast majority fall into the economic migrant category . These people should be turned round at the borders

  10. avatar
    Paul X

    As the article states the EU, (i.e the richer EU countries) is already providing funds to deal with refugees and these countries are generally those with the highest pouplation density. Greece is number 20 by population out ot the EU 28 so has plenty of space, why should the richer countries not only provide the funds but also accept more people into there already overcrowded land?

  11. avatar
    Daniel

    I think the question should be. “Should LARGER EU member states take more refugees”. My answer is yes. Malta is small and overcrowded. We dont need more

    • avatar
      Ivan

      Then stop taking them, problem solved.

    • avatar
      Daniel

      I wish

    • avatar
      Anita

      Or rich European countries like China.

    • avatar
      Anita

      Thanks for explaining your opinion.

  12. avatar
    Τζινα

    I think refugees should stay to their homeland or to return to their country if they wish. A big financial penalty should be established for every country who is aggressive to another . These money will be used for the restoration of any country who was under attack . We must prevent war with all the means and I don’t agree with the title like refugees, rich countries,citizens, third world.. This is the 21 st century we have to step further. Is just..one planet to share all the humans, equally,with prosperity .
    All we need is to terminate weapons trade..money paradises..oligarchy.. etc.
    We have to face the Truth ..and ..choose the Truth !

  13. avatar
    A.c.

    The problem is les the number of refugees (less than 1% of European population) but their management. In fact, there is no management…

  14. avatar
    Ελπίδα

    NO!
    They should be serious in trying to stop the wars that make those refugees in the first place.

    • avatar
      kevin

      When was the last war we had in Africa ? The vast majority of ‘refugees’ are young African males not as the picture at the top of this discussion depicts ,children from the middle east . The first step in solving the problem is to sort out those in need from those who just want to move to Europe

  15. avatar
    Ciarri

    No. Now it is time for extraordinarily wealthy Arab states to help their brethren. Saudi Arabia has yet to help any refugees.

  16. avatar
    Kwnstantinos

    The real refugees that have arrived in Greece in 2015-2018 are a mere 15% of total immigrants. The rest are illegal aliens, who then are called undocumented immigrants, and then suddenly all of them are syrian refugees. The actual problem is that some people earn big in this chaotic situation in tha Aegean sea. The solutions imo are:
    1. Stop this “political correct” terminology and stop calling everyone a refugee.
    2. Make the harshest of laws amd aply them to human traffickers that earn big.

  17. avatar
    Tarquin Farquhar

    The question should be based on geographic landmass and not wealth ergo France would need to take the biggest number of refugees and pay for the privilege.

  18. avatar
    catherine benning

    Should richer EU countries take more refugees?

    Over the weekend we Brits heard on our news more excuses for once again opening the door to more immigrants? We need them for the NHS we hear. Yet, our government, paid for by our tax payer, the ones who want a halt to more entering our country from outside our borders getting in to use our streets as gangland highways, cannot persuade those elected by us to train our own safe British citizens. Now why is that. Why is that do you think? What is the attraction to migrant labour? And more importantly why are the British putting up with this?

    It has been going on since the 50,s. Always with the same excuses. We need immigrants to swell our country labour force. Even when, as now, they witness the horror this is causing in our law abiding society. The murders, the acid attacks, the mutilation and abuse of women, the hatred on our streets. Makes no difference. Like robots it’s as if they have been programmed to only speak these unacceptable words, we need more. Add to that the threat we have received of, the intention to give open door health care on the NHS to the world. Expecting us to pay for it whilst going without proper health care ourselves. The ones they bring in are pathetically inadequate. Which again is why they cannot accept our Brexit vote. It does not compute. They line up like simpletons drooling at the door, telling us, we didn’t know what we voted for.

    I cannot understand how the voter here is not taking serious action to stop this torturous behaviour of our politicians and simply stop paying taxes which enables them to do this. It is our money they are using to deny us the services we are paying for. And it is getting more and more blatant. The disdain these people have for those who foot the bill for their whims is chilling.

    Should richer EU countries take more refugees?

    No, unless politicians give each state a referendum asking if we want to pay more for their political and inane policies of denial. Reject, reject, reject is where they are stuck. Even now they see the brave Italians finally making a stand to stop their social decline. We need proper leadership in the UK. Not moron like individuals who appear to have rings in their noses as they are pulled one way around a self perpetuating circle. Freeze taxes has to be an answer. With no money in the pot they cannot pay for the outrageous deception we have been subject to for so many years.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLxhutdnFNU

  19. avatar
    Rob

    Why are we even talking about refugees when over 60% of the global asylum seekers get rejected because they come from safe countries? The problem mainly consist of economic immigrants. Richer EU countries should spend more on illegal immigrant repatriation.

  20. avatar
    Alexandre

    Imposing is never a good way. However the close arms and lack of humanitie should reflect a decrease of some rigths in the Union. EU only sustain itself keeping Humanism and Democracy.

    • avatar
      Alex

      The EU is only gonna sustain itself if it brings obvious advantages to its member states. And unqualified migrants forming ghettos all over the place is hardly something the EU would get celebrated for in many EU countries

    • avatar
      Alexandre

      Why you assume it will be forming ghettos? I ve seen refugees in Portugal..setled in small village farming land their own, fully integrated in local community. Older people helping them with languages and local costumes.
      EU will not perish. EU can only be proud to safe and rescue humans set to death. I do agree they should be equaly shared among the countrys.

  21. avatar
    Bódis

    Countries profiting from the sale of weaponry and responsible for military conflicts should take in more refugees — or they should simply pay a part of the weapons industry’s profit as “humanitarian tax” to the UN.

    Besides, first you should find a solution to sending all the fake refugees home before importing more.
    When is there going to be a discussion about all the fake refugees? They use up tons of resources, they are sometimes a security and crime risk. Those resources are taken from real refugees while real refugees, for example, in Yemen are starving.

    http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=File:First_instance_decisions_by_outcome,_selected_Member_States,_4th_quarter_2017.PNG

  22. avatar
    Giovanna

    Yes, they should…expecially Germany and France.
    Italy has already too many to take care of.

  23. avatar
    Constantinescu

    They are not refugees! Their status of refugee was stopped in the first country where is peace. Their actual status is immigrants!

  24. avatar
    Manuel

    Yes, many millions more, they are very rich, no problem, and not send those to Portugal, because we are very poor gays :)

    • avatar
      Ivan

      The last thing you poor gays need is a people who throw gays off roofs.

    • avatar
      Manuel

      Ivan Burrows I mean that “we are cheerful people”
      or in Latin: “beati simus”.
      In England the Latin language was studied when you were an empire.
      Then someone decided to skip the study of Latim from the schools and then,consequently, you have lost your empire :)

    • avatar
      Ivan

      Manuel Alonso Sorry comrade but the word ‘gay’ as only one meaning now. lol , Empire ? been there, done that & invented the t-shirt so we leave empire building to those pro EU fanatics to stupid to know any better. 8|

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2Ralocq9uE

  25. avatar
    Péter

    “refugees”
    I’m sure you wanted to say human trafficking.

  26. avatar
    Ana

    Yes. The larger and wealthier countries should receive and integrate proportionally more refugees as they also have a larger share in EU decision making formal and non-formal process. Also the EU must do a thorough review of European development aid to third countries in order to make it depend upon human rights respect, namely women rights, and national governments accountability and transparency. Furthermore EU external relations policy must advocate concrete measures for refugees burden sharing with third countries.

    • avatar
      Ivan

      Why should they ? you want the migrants, you have the migrants and leave the rest of us in peace. .

    • avatar

      Forget about her. She is portuguese. In Portugal we have close to zero immigration problems because we are an extremely closed country with very few immigrants, so we have a lot of people that are absolutely obviously to all these issues and just think that it is a good idea to receive tons of illegal immigrants.

    • avatar
      Ana

      Forget about people who dismiss other people’s opinions! Instead of dismissing other people’s opinions they should go back to school to learn about democracy, the democratic way of behaving, and to learn how to listen to and respect other people’s opinions.
      Portugal is not a “closed country” rather the opposite. As it is a well known fact, Portugal is a country open to foreigners like most of the ancient colonialist countries are, it’s a natural consequence of “having hold” a multicontinental “empire” for a few centuries. Furthermore, so far I couldn’t find anywhere “a lot of people” who “think it’s a good idea to receive tons (sic!) of illegal immigrants”! Portugal is open to refugees as any country should on an humanitarian principle. Concerning economic immigrants, Portugal public policy on immigration has been considered at EU and international level an excellent one and a good practice to be replicated by other countries, and this is enough to show that there is in place a set of measures well-designed to properly deal with immigration issues, namely immigrants integration in Portuguese society. So instead of people who want “to receive tons of illegal immigrants”, there is people who addressed this issue in a very responsible way with very good results.

  27. avatar
    Ivan

    As long as you keep the financial migrants in the EU who cares ? 8|

    • avatar
      Alex

      That’s the entire point of the EU. A bigger enthity has more to say. Sorry UK. If the EU wants to bully a country in the region to make a camp there it probably could. The EU is eventually gonna bribe some of the local “chiefs” to stop migration and stuff. That’s how the big boys take care of their interests

  28. avatar
    Mataroa

    Rich countries must remain rich or become richer so yes. they must have all the pay peanuts-immigrants they can get their hands on. Screw the citizens- they are paid a lot, no good for rich countries. So let’s replace them.So,Yes.

  29. avatar
    Julia

    Does the EU genuinely feel sorry for refugees or do the rich EU countries just want labour to exploit and more potential tax payers? Because if the EU genuinely felt sorry for refugees they wouldn’t be paying Turkey €3 billion of EU tax payer money to sell refugee adults and children into slavery, for sexual abuse and to work in factories for 1 Turkish lira a day.

  30. avatar
    Aris

    NOOO. Luxemburg is a very rich country. If it takes 500.000 refugees then Luxemburg will become an Islamic Sultanate..

  31. avatar
    Klaus

    Yes and no

    Momently the side effects of globalism (economic imperialism) are causing allot of havoc.

    A focus on allround economic autarky should be implemented

    This includes improvement of underdeveloped countries which tend to be easier to implement new practices (agricultural, etc)

    This also means avoidance of creating/stimulating massive diasporas

  32. avatar
    Zoltan

    This question is a joke…because if yes it will be never over….

  33. avatar
    Michail

    Showing kids and women, while the majority are young able men illegal intruders. Soros propaganda is strong in this page!

  34. avatar
    Rob

    No richter countries should spend more on the repatriation of refugees and on local shelter camps.

  35. avatar
    Mario

    refugees are not the problem. different story for illegal economic migrants.

  36. avatar
    Philip

    Damn straight they should yet Merkel approaches Greece, Italy and France???? Wtf!!

  37. avatar
    Ivan

    No, send them all to Germany, the German people wanted them so let the German people have them. EU solidarity is a myth. .

    Just heard Merkel say ‘either we share the migrants or the EU is finished’.

    Then the EU is finished. Hallelujah ! 8|

  38. avatar
    Hartmann

    Damned, there no diskussion about refugees, because there are no refugees: should richer countries take all migrants? YES, of course – no mercy.

  39. avatar
    Christine

    Climate Change will give us
    5° increase in temperature which will lead to the death of approximately 50% of the world’s human population. So why worry about people desperate to leave war zones or poverty hoping for a better life now. It might be you in a decade or few

  40. avatar
    Dave

    Unfortunately the uk can’t tell a teenager or younger from a man or woman with a nice new iPhone and gold that clearly in their 30s or 40s so taking refugees or migrants and looking after their own people is a problem for them so no.

    • avatar
      Ivan

      Won’t be our problem for much longer lol 8|

  41. avatar
    Valentin

    Money does not come from heaven ,tax payers must produce them.Instead open borders we must have same GDP per capita in the EU.With more welfare immigrants this is an impossible task.

  42. avatar
    Kamil

    There are 22 arab countries, of which many are oil-rich. They should help their own people. Turkey should extradite the 4 million refugees to the arabic countries where they belong. Europe should resist to the extreme.

  43. avatar
    Stephen

    No we have had enough of this rubbish, if i had my way the UK would end the Foreign Aid budget totally.

  44. avatar
    Amanda

    How bout droning more countries to create refugees to help them to make ourselves feel good bout f#ingover the planetvia oligarchies

  45. avatar
    Amanda

    50th address to parlement Elizabeth salute 😉

  46. avatar
    Stef

    Love the pics with the kids.. dont wanna show the boats full of men???

  47. avatar
    Adreas

    How about stopping bombardize their countries or be part of this cruelty and let them stay at their homeland

  48. avatar
    José

    No. We should only help them with Control. Anyone can enter without documents and Control. ONLY women, children or fammallies.

  49. avatar
    Ivan

    Honestly we do not care what you do with them as long as you keep them within the Schengen area 8|

  50. avatar
    Darko

    Dond mix again refugees and migrants! NO

  51. avatar
    Darren

    No and send all that arrived back.

  52. avatar
    Graham

    No there’s to many here as it is its time we started to look after our own first.

  53. avatar
    Manuel

    Yes, Europe need to give more support to the refugees. And we can do this support on their own country. They do nod need to face a possible dead travel and to pay millions to smugglers. We can construct refugee houses on their own countries.

    • avatar
      Ivan

      The vast majority of them are not refugees and have no intention of staying in their own country no matter what you offer them. Why would they when the West will give them free housing, free education, free health care & free money ?

    • avatar
      Manuel

      Yes Ivan, I understand you.
      In the 19 and 20 century Europe was giving free housing and free money to refugees because they were hoping that these people will return to their original countries and then they will be thankful to the Europeans, in that way they will open their local markers.
      The refugees became from be thousands in the 19 century to be millions in the 21 century. And there is no sign that they will go back to their countries.
      Today it is unfair that people trying to travel legally face the border closed, and they can not complain because they are out of the border.
      But people crossing the border illegally, by jumping the border, or using very dangerous routes, can remain because they are inside the border.

    • avatar
      Ivan

      Manuel It is the Schegen zone that is the magnet for the migrants and it will not end until ‘all’ borders are fully closed. The choice is: live in a free, safer & prosperous Nation with just the inconvenience of showing id at the borders or face cultural annihilation from a 7th century culture.

    • avatar
      Manuel

      The USA has the same problem with illegal migrants than Europe.
      And either Angola and South-Africa are facing this problem of people with a different background crossing the border.
      Today the big Brazil is worry with Venezuela and between Brazil and Venezuela is the enormous and very dangerous Amazon forest.
      And Egypt and Turkey have millions of refugees.
      It is a worldwide problem.

  54. avatar
    Francisc

    Not really, maybe just countries that bombed those countries that give right now refugees.

  55. avatar
    Jan

    The question is not whether or not. The practice should be to offer needed shelter while actively pursuing policies to facilitate their return.

  56. avatar
    Stefano

    Can you ask the same exact question every odd day? No, we don’t need any “refugee”! And they’re no refugee. They’re economic migrants. We need family policies across Europe

  57. avatar
    Apostolos

    I’m so sad watching plenty of comments which say NO and SEND THEM BACK… We are Europe and we need to give solidarity…

  58. avatar
    Stephen

    Migrants or refugees??? Influencing the
    Public

  59. avatar
    João

    No. And make a EU referendum about it.

  60. avatar
    Christina

    No ! The more you take the more will be “SENT” ! Wake up it’s human traffic due to the demographic problem , controlled by Mafia , even Colombian mafia

  61. avatar
    Jay

    I wish you never know war in your lifetime, or suffer the indignity of hunger and poverty; so you shall never find yourself in the desperate situation of deciding to seek refuge elsewhere or migrate. The lot of you have an immense lack of understanding of the dynamics of migration. And by your responses, God save us.

    When no one else can or will help them, it is the moral imperative of those that can to step in an offer aid to refugees. And I’m talking strictly about refugees. (Look that up, many of you tend to confuse the terms and round them up in the same basket). A refugee is given a special status akin a visa, and has to renovate it. If and when the threat that made them refugees has ended, they decide it’s time to go back, then they shall. But if they’ve decided to stay and make a life here, then they have to go through the same procedure as everyone who wants a citizenship or a permanent residency, or whatnot. Those are years of living as anyone else, and in many countries, to have a stable job and command of the language and culture. Naturalisation is assimilation.
    “Send them all back”? Send “who” all back where? People here complaining about London… Well, there are immigrants there from 3 generations ago. Others who’ve been in London for 10. They are, by virtue of the word—a Londoner. Just as much as any white chav.
    Now, if your beef is with illegal immigrants, I agree with you: they need to legalise their status. Either before coming or going through the right channels. But then again, I err as you in not empathising a bit and see that it might not be that easy to get a visa or a passport in their countries. Perhaps the moment they go into a Gov’t office and ask for a travel document, they’ll be ask about their motives and be detained for wanting to leave. (This happens, believe or not). Then, the Gov’t can harass their relatives and make their living there much harder, as if it already wasn’t.
    Yes. Much of the misery in Subsaharan Africa is due to corrupt power, for which we can’t answer as citizens of the EU. We have our own corrupts here, which are no better than those in any other part of the world. Our European corrupts use expensive suits and have assets in the Caiman Islands, and have perfect, long, white teeth to sink in deeper and appear innocent.
    But in Subsaharan Africa, violence, militias and death threats are their daily bread. We enjoy a state of law. They suffer a state of lawlessness. (In Europe it hasn’t been that long since we were also lawless, “lest we forget”).
    All that misery drives people to do desperate things. I imagine you lot haven’t experienced much desperate times. Well, my grandpa was in the Spanish Civil War and I grew up with his bone chilling stories. I grew hearing how his sisters and brothers decided to migrate to France and Belgium. And they’re still there. They’ve grown roots and made families. But they were just as immigrant. Dark skinned, rural, uneducated folk who were escaping the iron fist of Dictator Franco. No better or worse than the Subsaharan Africans escaping their dry, barren countries.
    So it’s not that easy as: close the borders. As a citizen of Spain, if I had to close the borders, I’d close them for all, Europeans, Latinos and Africans alike. I don’t if you’re Somalian, British or Venezuelan. Go back to where you came from and try an make a living there. Try and enjoy it.
    It’s no so easy to just start mass deportations of… Who? Who do you want of your country? Only the illegals? Or truly… Is your problem the people from other cultures and skintones? Because I can’t help reading a hint of latent racism in all of you…

  62. avatar
    Hugo

    What refugees we have migrants now not refugees and we should have proper control not allow anyone to get in…because right now we have ISIS soldiers on Europe, we have people without documents that got in and others that are trying to get in this must stop. We must have a proper border control and analyse the situations because the people that is coming from Africa right now are almost 100% men!!! These are not families or refugees and Europe as to take a stand like Australia did and put this with rules under control that’s why frontex should be allowed to control the borders and to detain illegal immigrants if we don’t do that we have a real danger of the European culture to disappear in 50 years beeing replaced by a radical Islam…, Because people these persons are Muslims and salafists remember that…

    • avatar
      Παυλος

      Frontex is a joke they don’t have the force or the willingness to do something about it
      The only real solution is to saw to Turkey that we mean business..
      But unfortunately European union right now is only retreating to erdorgan’s aggressiveness
      See for example what happened with the OIL drills at Cyprus

  63. avatar
    Valentin

    European Union is not big enough to host all economic and war refugees. The financial burden for italian and greek goverment is too big to handle.That’s why we need an different approuch to this issue.But not with this incompetent EC or European Council.

  64. avatar
    Gustav

    The EU needs to pay up to the MENA-countries, so that they handle this problem for us, because we will never solve it ourselves.

  65. avatar
    Maciek

    Most of them are just illegal economic migrants, not refugees. Big difference

  66. avatar
    Kiriakos

    YES BUT FIRST OF ALL CONTROL. ISIS FIGHTERS MÖRDERS PEOPLE WHO USE VIOLENCE ARE NOT WELCOME

  67. avatar
    Alfredo

    No.
    Except if you are referring to the rich arab countries.

  68. avatar
    Bódis

    You should ask this question after the hundreds of thousands whose asylum application was rejected go home.

  69. avatar
    Vasilis

    Enough with these dilemmas! Neither reach nor poorer countries should host illegal economic migrants because that’s what they are! Europe should sent money to undeveloped countries to create jobs instead of give money to create refugees camps, money that is uncertain if it is used for its purpose

  70. avatar
    Julia

    There needs to be a global systemic change whereby all peoples fundamental basic needs are met. This could be achieved by creating money (like QE) that meets all humanities fundamental basic needs plus a GMI. This money is then written off globally and capitalism is layered on top. It is the most humane option for all humanity. Also, what would abolish alot of human suffering is to take the creation of money out of private hands and abolish interest. Just charge corporations for loans etc. Economists are studying the Islamic Banking model to see how it is still profitable even though Islamic banks do not charge interest for their loans to the people.

  71. avatar
    Michael

    Bad question. The problem is us starting conflicts all the time. If we didn’t do that, there wouldn’t be as many refugees.

    • avatar
      Ivan

      Migrants, not refugees.

    • avatar
      Michael

      I don’t think that this debate is about migrants though. It’s about refugees, isn’t it?

  72. avatar
    Michael

    I’m not sure I understand your comment. Are you saying that those fleeing a conflict are migrants and not refugees?

  73. avatar
    Philip

    Michael I concur,, where is the war in Pakistan!! The majority of these people are economic migrants, thus categorised as illegal immigrants!!

  74. avatar
    Ivan

    Michael No I am saying even your unelected European politburo accepts the vast majority of them are migrants, not refugees & there are already working processes to cope with ‘real’ refugees.

  75. avatar
    Michael

    I’m not sure that this changes my stance much. If we didn’t start and propagate so many conflicts, we would have more time and resources to assess the stories given by those seeking asylum. The issue isn’t us letting too many in or letting none in; it’s us causing a situation which neccesitates that binary decision.

  76. avatar
    Maria

    All the GOOD FOR NOTHING, highly trained top diplomats should only ask the wise honest man working his land in peace bout the ways of the world. And see would have their decent smart answers. But don’t care about solving wars and poverty, they care about taking advantage. and making money. The a***s of the world run it. That’s why it all goes wrong. Refugees run from something. Solve that something, smart a***s! You can’t move entire countries onto other countries, population-wise. Freely expressing my thoughts.

  77. avatar
    Philip

    Without a doubt but Europe has reached saturation point!!

  78. avatar
    Georgi

    No. They must help these people by invading their countries bringing order and justice.

  79. avatar
    Ana

    Yes, they should. European development is mainly due to historical reasons namely the domination and the exploitation of vast empires in Africa, Asia and South America…

  80. avatar
    Fernando

    The only possible answer using hearts, humanity sense and christian values is yes, so now brains should work in the way how this can be made in the most smart way.

  81. avatar
    João

    That’s more than enough. The solution isn’t that one. The african economies must be helped on their development….

  82. avatar
    Virsta

    No, they should cooperate to ease the situation in origin countries

  83. avatar
    Betti

    Nobody should take more refugees…

  84. avatar
    Stephen

    EU has no right to “push” this question. Each country should make it’s own decision. The government that calls them should take them, that would be a legal and correct procedure.

  85. avatar
    Manuel

    refugees should be sent to the ones making profit with the destruction of gov in the origin countries…

Your email will not be published

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Notify me of new comments. You can also subscribe without commenting.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

More debate series – Cities & Refugees View all

By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our Privacy Policy unless you have disabled them. You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them.