The future of Schengen
“Schengen” is the elimination of traditional border-crossing rules in Europe, a development that has been hailed and welcomed for years but which is increasingly threatened by Europe’s Muslim refugee crisis. If you’re interested (and I certainly am) in the topic, take a look at this article about the state of the Schengen policy:
What makes the allegiance to Schengen so strong among Europeans? We found that in 13 countries, protecting the principle of free movement is the most important issue regarding how member states feel about the future of Schengen. Second on the list were two tied results, the economic benefit of the Schengen zone, and the ability of Schengen to help manage migration flows.
So there’s a principle involved, one that’s attractive to many Europeans and their view of Europe and what it should be. People like the idea of how far they’ve progressed since the bad old days of conflict. The other attraction is practical: money. These two reasons make Europe loathe to give up its Schengen, even in the face of the very real problems they face:
..[T]he idea that terrorism is a European threat which is best tackled together…underlines the sense that although border controls have been reinstalled over the past few months, there is a fundamental belief that these are temporary, not permanent changes, even if the route back to the old Schengen is difficult to see at the moment.
So the principle—the ideal of togetherness and cooperation—is being applied to a possible solution for the refugee problem, at least in people’s minds if not in the practical sense. In the practical sense, Schengen has been very advantageous—so far, anyway:
It is clear that the economic effects of a suspension to the Schengen system are destructive for countries that have built their markets on the assumption of free trade and movement. Time is money, and border controls make commuting and cross-border transport a significant cost factor.
Competing with all of this is the fear that many citizens of European countries have that, unless immigration/migration is checked, Europe will be in trouble both demographically (and therefore culturally) and economically. This has led to an increase in support for nationalist and anti-immigration parties in many countries across Europe. The tension between the borderless EU dream and what people perceive as the results of the vast influx of “migrants” is inescapable and likely to continue.
Schengen, like the Euro is Europe’s attempt to emulate the Untied States: A common currency; travel and commerce without intermittent border-crossing stops.
We live in inverted times. The more Europe tries to mimic the United States, the more the United States seems set on mimicking the old Europe.
Well said T.
The attraction of free commerce across borders is evident. It took the refugee crisis to highlight the most serious problems.
Europe’s problem is the same that it has always been; and I suppose that it always will be. Cultures rub against each other uneasily.
I have not been to Europe since most of the the EU policies have matured. When last in England they were still destroying dairy herds to bring their milk production in line with EU limits. EU citizens did get to bypass immigration controls at Heathrow, etc. That seemed to be the primary benefit. I wonder if there is a common language across Europe; and how that is received by the common folk?
If you approach the Rotherham horror by searching with the term. “rock the multicultural boat”, you can see the extent to which the Muslim question is silenced officially and unofficially.
Schengen now means importing a violent, misogynistic, unassimilable culture about which nothing may be said.
Oldflyer,
The common languge is English, although the EU does have lots of translators.
Free travel is great, especially if you live rather close to a border and cross it frequently. It’s all the damned rules about what you can eat and food labelling, etc that are really obnoxious. There are too many lefties in the EU parliament.
Schengen is only sustainable amoung capitalist economy democracies. It is not sustainable among socialist democracies because socialist economies are not sustainable. Europe’s low birth rate socialist societies require low wage immigrants, i.e. M.E. Muslims, which turns Schengen into a suicidal policy.
Reportedly, 65% of Germans think that Islam is incompatible with German culture. How many realize that Germany’s prized socialism cannot survive without Muslims? Can’t live with them and can’t retain what they value most without them…
“How many realize that Germany’s prized socialism cannot survive without Muslims?” [GB @ 1:49]
Nor without the U.S. subsidizing (i.e., doing the heavy lifting of) the defense budgets of Germany and the other Western European nations.
The success of their quasi-socialistic states is an illusion. Like any progressive scheme, it is not capable of sustaining itself; it is a parasitic philosophy.
I traveled in Europe back in the days when you had to show your, “Papers please.” It was inconvenient and made you feel like, if some little thing was amiss, you might end up in the clink in a foreign country with a somewhat less honest justice system.
Schengen has been a good thing. But the problem is, just like here in the U.S., the progressives want to have open borders with nations outside the EU. That doesn’t work, as pointed out by G.B., if you have a socialist system that pays benefits to all comers. And if the immigrants are incompatible with and unwilling to integrate into the native culture.
Germany can get along without cheap labor from the ME. There are plenty of Poles, Czechs, Romanians, Ukraines, etc. who will move to Germany and work at below the normal wages. The last time I was in Berlin I heard complaints about Polish tradesmen who worked cheaper than their German counterparts. Right, expat?
The allowed influx of Muslims has been a result of the progressive desire to diversify their culture. As we know the progs see that as a major goal of their new utopia. Fortunately, as G.B. points out, a majority of Germans are now opposed this idea. The question is, will the elites in government take note?
“the ability of Schengen to help manage migration flows” is patent poppycock.
With a birth rate of 1.1 per woman (steady-state requires 2.1), the Germany of Germans is history.
It is too late to abort Eurabia. In another two-three generations, it will be part of the new and eternal Caliphate, and white Europeans will pay jizya to live in the land of their ancestors.
“The question is, will the elites in government take note? [JJ @ 2:36]
The answer: NO!
Why? Because the left is establsihed inside these govts (as it is in ours) and the classic defense of failed socialism is not “It doesn’t work,” but “It just wasn’t executed properly; we’ll get it right next time.” It’s always “next time.”
J.J.,
I haven’t heard much about the lower wages for the Poles, but there are limits on how long they can stay. In my town, there is a group of Polish women who come to do housecleaning. They can stay for several months, but then they have to return home for two months before they can return. Also, Poles come to harvest asparagus, which here is buried undr earth so that it stays while. The last I heard, people like teachers were coming here for a month or two to dig out the asparagus, then went home to continue teaching. I gues the amount of resentment depends on the area and the number of low-skills jobs available. Lots of Polish women also come here to take care of the eldery so they can stay in their homes.
expat, interesting. It appears that Germany has a form of our old Bracero program. Strange, isn’t it, that they seem to accept immigrants from the ME and yet bar immigration from Eastern Bloc countries? Eastern Bloc immigrants could, I’m sure, integrate quite nicely into the German culture. At least better than the Muslims. I guess common sense has just been overcome by a utopian vision of “It’s a Small World, After All.”
T, so true. It is to weep.
expat – Your comment about Polish workers only being allowed to stay for a limited time seems odd. As Poland is a member of the EU their citizens have the full and unrestricted right to work in Germany. And this has nothing to do with Schengen.
In the UK a lot of the dissatisfaction with the EU fueling Brexit and the UKIP has historically been about Eastern Europeans and their right to UK social services.
There was among the pan-Arabist intellectuals of a generation and two generations ago something of a Schengen idea that the entire region could become hyper-cooperative and thus more of a force in the world. That has rather obviously become worse, not better. It is modern European intellectuals who have the greatest fondness for Schengen as well. They like the idea of it. Yet cultures rubbing up against each other seems to work only under limited circumstances, such at the idea-based nations of the Anglospheric colonies, or the retreat-to-tribal identities of Europe after WWII. Germans going back to Germany seemed to help everyone.
As for border-crossings, I still cannot fit it into my imagination when remember crossing from Hungary to Romania in 1998. The lines were hours long precisely because everyone was so supicious (and waiting for bribes). If I can remember it, Romanians can certainly remember it more clearly. Schengen is unstable. It depends on trust. Houses of cards can be built quite tall.
@DNW – I not only like your comments, but I notice the author, because we have the same initials.
There’s a problem with Western Europe trying to replace it’s low wage Muslim immigrants with Eastern European low wage labor; the natural resentment that arises and is exacerbated by the perception that one European ‘tribe’ has and is, mistreating another European tribe. Which inevitably leads to nationalism and then physical conflict.
I’d bet that the Russia-Ukraine conflict initially had the Europeans ‘wetting their pants’ in private.
After the truly devastating conflicts of the first and second world wars, internal conflict within Europe is an absolute anathema. Europe remembers it’s bombed out cities and, in the immediate aftermath, its emaciated peoples, far better than do we.
I suspect it is that paranoic fear that led Europeans to first start and then continue to import Muslims from radically different societies, rather than the much more assimilable Eastern Europeans.
JJ:
“Schengen has been a good thing. But the problem is, just like here in the U.S., the progressives want to have open borders with nations outside the EU.”
T:
“Like any progressive scheme, it is not capable of sustaining itself; it is a parasitic philosophy.”
That sounds more like a cancer than a parasite. A cancer is worse than a parasite in that cancer joins beneficial, even necessary organs, so that treating the cancer is destructive of the body.
The trick is removing the cancer while protecting the organs.
I asked my husband about the time limits for Polish workers. He thinks it was some sort of temporary agreement when Poland joined the EU, but he is not sure when the expiration date is. One thing to remember is that West Germany had to absorb the East Germans in an economic sense, which was a big burden. That there are still big differences between Easterners and Westerners can be seen in the existence of a Left Party and the rise of Pegida, which is largely an Eastern phenomenon. Of course, many in the East feel completely at home in a united Germany. The AfD party started in the West, but many of its founders have dropped it as Pegida sentiments in reaction to Syrian immigration have angered people.
Merkel’s party (CDU) has beeen working for years to address the problems with Turks living in enclaves in larger cities. Elsewhere the Turks are pretty well assimilated. Many of these were rather secular Ataturk Turks, and many expected that they would one day return to Turkey. They have recently began establishing their own senior facilities because the realize now that the Turkey of their youth has changed too.
expat – I did a little more research. Poland joined in 2004. Under the joining agreement each country could impose its own restrictions on migrant workers up to a maximum of 7 years. Germany imposed the maximum which expired in 2011 so since then Polish workers have unlimited rights in Germany. The UK decided not to impose any limitations for workers but they did limit access to benefits.
The free movement rules were pretty much the best thing about the EU (IMO). But the usual suspects managed to ruin in… on the other hand; a lot of bad came with the EU too… so if it all has to go…
Schengen and the right to work in other countries within the EU are two separate things. Schengen was just about border controls not the right to work. The UK is not part of the Schengen area and so it still requires passports checks for entry whereas Germany etc do not.
“Schengen and the right to work in other countries within the EU are two separate things. Schengen was just about border controls not the right to work.”
London Trader is right. Schengen Agreement was folded into the EU law, but there still exists the Schengen Area which defines where unrestricted travel is allowed. This is perhaps why there is a conflation with the right to work.
The problem with unrestricted travel between nation states is that all become subject to the weakest laws / administration within a member nation regarding border control.
There was a strategic reason why the refugees were/are targeting Greece.
“So the principle–the ideal of togetherness and cooperation–is being applied to a possible solution for the refugee problem, at least in people’s minds if not in the practical sense. In the practical sense, Schengen has been very advantageous–so far, anyway:”
Is this similar to how once cancer invades one organ, it metastasizes to all the other organs?
Sorry, while Schengen has been very advantageous in the past, common sense would tell you it will not be that way in the future. Simply being non-PC here, the refuges have no desire to become a homogeneous group that have similar values. There intent appears to be- just give us our “rightful welfare payments”, leave us alone and in 2 generations we will tell you what to do.
You may disagree with me but tell me this- Two generations ago, would typical Americans have tolerated a group of illegals waving Mexican flags and flipping off Americans going to a political rally? I would say back then, both D’s and R’s would have stood shoulder to shoulder and moved to deport this invading army. But somehow that generation has died off and now all we can do is say- “Can’t we all just get along?”
You see the immigrants that came here before desired to be Americans first. Those that come now come here to be Americans second right after their country of origin and their EBT benefits. Doubt this? Ask anyone of your staunch immigrant defenders if their illegals have a right to these and they will tell you Yes. Yet none of these enlightened people would let someone have access to their home or bank account. If something is not good on a micro level, why would it be good on a macro level?
MikeII:
I am describing what the article is referring to, an attitude on the part of Europeans.
It is not MY attitude. It is not MY opinion.
My mistake in quick reading. Sorry 🙂
Frog — one can only hope that someone will have the cajones to grab the art treasures from Europe before the Caliphate blows it up. That sounds like a joke. It isn’t.