Turkey - Deal or No Deal

[SpringingIntoAction]

The latest offer from Turkey is:

Turkey takes back a non-Syrian migrant who has crossed into Greece and 'replaces' him/her by sending Greece a Syrian refugee, on a one-for-one basis

Plus

The EU pays 6 billion Euros to Turkey

Plus

The EU agrees to permit Turks to travel visa-free within the EU from June 2016 (instead of previously agreed 1 Oct 2016)

Plus

Turkey's full EU membership is fast-tracked.

So, does the EU accept Turkey's deal or say 'No Deal'?

AMouse

Couldn't agree more.

This has been the deciding factor for me in my referendum decision. I want no part of such corrupt governance. It's not the fact that it's Turkey the deal is being brokered with. It's that this is how the migrant crisis is being dealt with. Sweep it under the carpet and chuck some money at it. People are being treated like objects. Some of those people are members of terrorist cells. Some of those people have unacceptable views about women. The VAST majority of those people are just like us, people seeking a better life, whether that's economically or fleeing war zones. And they're being passed from pillar to post, swapped like football stickers.

I was never very radical or revolutionary as a young adult. It's arrived late in life. I want shitty people to stop making shitty decisions on my behalf. If we exit the EU, I only have to overthrow one crappy government! Vive le Revolution!

The last bit is tiredness talking.

CauliflowerBalti

People are being treated like objects.

That sums it up. I watched that news conference with Merkel, the EU Presidents and Turkey in utter disbelief that they were will to trade people.

I am no hand-wringing RefugeesWelcome believer but this deal,by anyone's standards, is inhumane and shocking.

I thought surely someone is going to wake and say this is not only wholly impractical and unworkable but it is utterly immoral, But no, Cameron came out and backed it as 'the basis for a deal'

How has it come to be that in C21st century Europe the EU is even considering trading people with a country with s poor human rights record like Turkey? The EU (and the UK's) moral compass has swung way out of true to be doing this ort of abominable act. Is this an act of sheer desperation by the EU to retain their dogma of 'open borders', which is one of the main pillars that defines the EU? If so, it sacrificing people's lives for an idealist policy, that's proved itself unworkable in practise.

The EU were even told in a report they commissioned that this 'plan' wouldn't work - but chose it ignore it.

At least the UN. MSF has recognised that this trade in people that is planned is a breach of international law.

I really am ashamed that our Government is actively supporting this plan

"People being traded like objects"

I've looked through quite a few news articles from yesterday and today in three languages and can't find any mention of "people being traded".

Anyone care to provide a link?

I thought I heard on the radio that the freedom to travel without visa was for business meetings? I thought "hurrah" because I work for a global company and its a royal PITA when we have to arrange visas for when Turkish colleagues need to come to the uk.

The Turkish economy has been booming, admittedly the mutli $billion of housing Syrian refugees has given them a headwind. If I were them I woukdnt want to join the EU.

Try these:

Shipping one migrant from Greece to Turkey and shipping a migrant from Turkey to the EU on a one-to-one-swap is a trade.

Not just a trade, but probably an illegal trade according to the UN and MSF.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/12185806/EU-leaders-meet-to-discuss-migrant-crisis-latest.html

edition.cnn.com/2016/03/08/europe/europe-migrant-crisis/index.html

It seems like a desperate attempt to stop the dangerous practice of immigrant trafficking by boats: "If you want to come to the EU, your best bet is to stay in Turkey and wait".

We will see how it works out. Quite possibly, many illegal immigrants who are already in the EU will now disappear into the woods rather than be shipped to Turkey - that would be one way to empty "The Jungle" in Calais, I guess. As it says in one of the articles you posted, it looks like "the trade" will focus on immigrants on Greek islands (they can't run far on those islands, most of which are tiny).

So EU will end up with the same number of immigrants it has now, but will hopefully end the ongoing flow, while Turkey might be hoping to get an idea of where/who Syrian immigrants are within its borders as they come forward to be considered for relocation in the EU.

yes but then the whole of turkey can move, and their leader is looking more ad more repressive are we going to add turkey to the list of countries people are fleeing from? turkey is listed as a safe country, but for how long?

Its utterly bonkers.

people mention countries like SA to take migrants but what about morocco and tunisa etc?

If Erdogan turns Turkey into another Iran, then there might be grounds to accept Turks as refugees.

The end to visa requirement is about visits, not settling in EU countries. Turks have not needed visas to visit Greek islands for quite some time now, and have not been moving there in droves and claiming asylum.

So EU will end up with the same number of immigrants it has now

Exactly – but the deal actually makes us worse off as we also have to pay Turkey billion Euro, agree visa-free travel for Turks within the Schengen zone and fast-track Turkey’s EU membership

Turks have not needed visas to visit Greek islands for quite some time now, and have not been moving there in droves and claiming asylum.

The Greek islands don't not offer a free NHS system or welfare or accommodation.

turkey is listed as a safe country, but for how long?

Turkey doesn’t meet the UN’s criteria to be considered a safe country. This gem came out after the little boy drowned last year, so Merkel has pressed ahead inspite of this and in spite of a report commissioned by the EU that shoes the idea is unworkable

"worse off as we also have to pay Turkey billion Euro"

There are an estimated 2.5 million Syrians in Turkey at the moment and they have made more than 150,000 babies since entering Turkey. Why on Earth would Turkey want to keep them, especially since most don't want to stay?

If you want Turkey to actively stop Syrians from leaving its territory, you need to help them deal with the consequences. Yes, that means several billion Euros.

Or you can take them. Something about this thread makes me think you really REALLY don't want to do that, so do please stop pretending you care.

"agree visa-free travel for Turks within the Schengen zone"

That was already happening. All this deal did was to pull the date forward a few months from October to June.

"and fast-track Turkey’s EU membership"

That is just posturing on both sides. We all know that it will never happen.

Accession of a new member requires the approval of all EU member states. Whatever Turkey does, whichever hoops it jumps through, there will always be more than 1 EU country to veto its accession to full EU membership.

"The Greek islands don't not offer a free NHS system or welfare or accommodation."

The point is that your fear that Turks would invade EU without visas to keep them away has not materialised although they have been visiting Greek islands and could have easily hopped from there to mainland Greece and then to everywhere in Schengen without visas.

"Turkey doesn’t meet the UN’s criteria to be considered a safe country. This gem came out after the little boy drowned last year"

Um.. a boy drowned so Turkey isn't a safe country of origin when considering refugee applications? Sorry but that's a bit ridiculous. EU's safe country of origin

If you want Turkey to actively stop Syrians from leaving its territory, you need to help them deal with the consequences. Yes, that means several billion Euros.Or you can take them. Something about this thread makes me think you really REALLY don't want to do that, so do please stop pretending you care.

I do actually care. I appreciate the need to spend a vast quantity of money, but it should be spent on camps will full facilities, under UN protection, close to Syria to enable the Syrians to reclaim their homeland once the war is over. Assimilating the entire population of Syria into the EU is not the answer. Is Syria to become a new Empty Quarter?

*"and fast-track Turkey’s EU membership"

That is just posturing on both sides. We all know that it will never happen.*

Don't be so sure. Turkey has a strong hand. Do not underestimate what it can extract from the EU under threat of sending the EU millions of migrants.

*"Turkey doesn’t meet the UN’s criteria to be considered a safe country. This gem came out after the little boy drowned last year"

Um.. a boy drowned so Turkey isn't a safe country of origin when considering refugee applications? Sorry but that's a bit ridiculous*

I thought it was ridiculous too - until I read the UN criteria for determining a safe country

www.unhcr.org/3ae68ccec.html

(as opposed to what the EU would like to consider a safe) country. 'Safe' has a lot of connotations which are not immediately apparent. In the eyes of the UN, Turkey is not a safe country because a safe country has to ensure that refugees claiming asylum 'have access to a durable solution' and in the eyes of the UN Turkey fails to provide that safeguard.

"I appreciate the need to spend a vast quantity of money, but it should be spent on camps will full facilities, under UN protection, close to Syria to enable the Syrians to reclaim their homeland once the war is over."

Don't you think Turks want them to remain in camps close to Syria and go back once their war is over? Most have not wanted to stay in refugee camps, which were nowhere near enough for the numbers anyway. The ones with passports are who knows where now, sleeping rough on the streets.

As for "UN protection" - As they protected Bosnians while they were being slaughtered in the middle of Europe, you mean? Don't make me laugh.

"Assimilating the entire population of Syria into the EU is not the answer."

I agree.

The answer is to turn back time and NOT elect idiots who mess with places they don't understand. Since that is not a possibility, we will all have to deal with the consequences.

As I said, there are 2.5 million Syrians in Turkey right now who have managed to make 150,000 babies in the past two years. Turkey has now closed its Syrian border to refugees, so no more are coming in. But the ones already in Turkey need dealing with, and if you want to not be part of the solution, you will need to give in to some of Turkey's demands to make them deal with it.

"Turkey has a strong hand. Do not underestimate what it can extract from the EU under threat of sending the EU millions of migrants."

If Turkey is a EU member, then those millions of migrants will automatically be EU citizens anyway. It will never happen.

"until I read the UN criteria for determining a safe country"

Click on the link I gave. It is EU's list of "safe countries of origin" for refugee applications and Turkey is on it.

Don't you think Turks want them to remain in camps close to Syria and go back once their war is over?

No, I don't actually. They are pawns in Erdogan's game with Europe and they are commodities for Turkish people smugglers. I think Turkey is quite keen to export as much of this 'problem' as it can, all 2.5 million plus, if possible.

Click on the link I gave. It is EU's list of "safe countries of origin" for refugee applications and Turkey is on it.

Click on the link I gave you to the UN determination of a safe country. Just because it suits the EU to decide that Turkey is a safe country for the purposes of exporting migrants to it does not change the fact that in the eyes on the UN, Turkey does not meet the criteria to be a safe country.

I don't understand the need to keep referencing the number of Syrians born in exile. The number of Syrians who also die in exile is also a factor.

"Don't you think Turks want them to remain in camps close to Syria and go back once their war is over?
No, I don't actually. They are pawns in Erdogan's game with Europe and they are commodities for Turkish people smugglers.I think Turkey is quite keen to export as much of this 'problem' as it can, all 2.5 million plus, if possible."

You misunderstand. My question was if you think Turls prefer to have 2.5 million of them sleeping on the streets & roaming around with no language skills or employment. They would much prefer to have them in refugee camps but most are not interested.

"Click on the link I gave you to the UN determination of a safe country. Just because it suits the EU to decide that Turkey is a safe country"

It's none of UN's business if EU countries see a country of origin as safe enough to refuse refugee applications. EU selects the refugees it accepts, not UN.

"I don't understand the need to keep referencing the number of Syrians born in exile."

Really? I was trying to avoid using the words "breeding" and "rabits" and hoping you would do the math yourself & understand the demographic disaster Turkey is facing here.

If you don't want to have them in the UK, you will need to help Turkey shoulder the burden. Yes, that will mean lots of money and also political concessions.

It's none of UN's business if EU countries see a country of origin as safe enough to refuse refugee applications.

That is a worrying precedent we do not want to set.

LOL what worrying precedent? Do you know what UN does and which countries are in it?

UN isn't telling EU which refugees to accept and which to send back, FYI.

*LOL what worrying precedent? Do you know what UN does and which countries are in it?

UN isn't telling EU which refugees to accept and which to send back, FYI*

When you've studied law you begin to understand it's not quite a simple as that. It depnds on whether countries have ratified specific treaties and whether the EU is exercising its legal entity.

This is hugely relevant as it shows the EU is trying to get itself a full voting member status as the same as any UN member country has. So far it has failed and only has special observer status, so as the EU is not a full UN member I doubt it can be an actual UNCHR signatory? In which case any agreement made by the EU rather than the 28 member countries would not be subject to the UNCHR (although the 28 member countries who'd signed it would be)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_and_the_United_Nations

This is also hugely interesting as it shows the EU buying influence within the UNHCR.

www.unhcr.org/pages/4a2cff03221.html
The EC (European Commission), which supports protection and assistance activities through earmarked contributions, was UNHCR's second largest donor in 2008, trailing only the United States.

He (the EU) who pays the piper (the UNCHR) is hardly likely to be called to account for doing something the piper and most right-minded people find very morally troubling.

Would be very interested to hear anyone confirm exactly what the EU/UNHCR relationship, supremacy of law is.

And now we discover that the deal cannot be done as Turkey is not a full signatory to the Geneva Convention - Turkey only recognises the rights of EU citizens under the convention, not those of returning migrants

www.politico.eu/article/juncker-eu-turkey-refugee-deal-could-require-legislative-change/

What a tangled web we weave.........
The EU is not just morally bankrupt, it's also incompetent

Cant wait to welcome Erdogan to the EU, I'm sure he comes in peace.

www.rt.com/news/335200-cizre-burned-beheaded-kurds-erdogan/

What does that link have to do with anything, AMouse? The perpetrator was some (Egyptian?) nutter. The Turk in that story did nothing wrong that I can see.

Did you just Google "Turk" for a bad story and posted the link?

Can we try to keep this thread on the pros / cons of the Turkey /EU proposal and not veer off into individual cases of violence. Thanks.

"Turkey only recognises the rights of EU citizens under the convention, not those of returning migrants"

What does that sentence even mean? "Only recognises the rights of EU citizens under the convention" - what utter nonsense. Do you mean Turkey would be free to bomb a non-European city in military conflict because those civilians are not European? Or kill off Iraqi prisoners of war, since they are not European?

What that website is trying to talk about is that Turkey signed Geneva Convention's 1967 Protocol on the Legal Status of Refugees with "geographical limitations". As a result, it gives refugee status to Europeans only and offers temporary asylum to others.

That is what you want, isn't it? That Syrians remain in Turkey until hostilities cease and then go back home. That is the definition of temporary asylum.

What seems to be the problem?

No deal

Vote exit

BUT Bitchy my best friend is Turkish, I've spent a lot of time in Northern Cyrpus and around Turks. I in no way recognise your bullshit sweeping statement!