The European Union wants to take military action against traffickers of being human

The European Union has decided to launch a military operation against what is referred to as the illegal trade of human trafficking. Brussels seems to focus more so on the effects than on the causes of immigration, developing a strategy that aims to hit the final stretch of the path of migrants. The reasoning of the European Union is based only on the need to eradicate the phenomenon of migration to its territory, creating a kind of protection, at this stage of the Italian coast, such as to prevent landings in Europe. If this strategy can be justified as acute management of emergency, in which lies the continent of Europe, does not make, however, no solution to the needs of those forced to flee from war and famine. There are, that is, too big reasons why military action might be enough to stop migration. Justification Brussels is to combat criminal organizations, which are often in connection with the fundamentalist Islamic formations, which provide robust funding; this intention is laudable, but it is insufficient to address the complexity of the problem. The perception is that if you close access if they can open another. The construction of the operation into three phases, poses serious questions about the character of speed and urgency required to manage the inflow of immigrants, who, with the improvement in weather conditions, are expected to increase. The joint project involves an initial phase dedicated to the collection of information to stop the boats before departure. Already at the first level we highlight the difficulty of the action plan, which should take place in a country with two governments in office and fight among themselves, without effective measures to punish traffickers and where, probably the same law enforcement agencies could assist the organized crime in the trafficking of human beings; it is true that Brussels intends to lean on Morocco and Algeria, but the center of departures to the Italian coast remains the country of Libya, the most difficult in which to operate. The second phase includes boarding and diverting boats with migrants on board. The management of this phase appears problematic meanwhile could also take place in Libyan waters and both governments, the one recognized by the international community, based in Tobruk and the ninth recognized, based in Tripoli, did not seem to like the intrusion into territorial waters Libyan, but the biggest problem is what to do with ships with migrants: whether to rejections of the question is where or only hinder you may not enter in European waters? In the first case it would expose migrants to secure violence, once back in the country of Libya, while in the second, would condemn them to certain death; In fact the facilities of fuel and food for the trip are always insufficient even to get to the Italian coast and therefore also for a possible return. The third phase involves the destruction of vessels prepared to transport immigrants in Libyan ports. For this type of operation, the European Union does not intend to act without the consent of the United Nations Security Council, which is not so obvious for the likely opposition of Russia. Moreover such an action can not be separated from the use of ground troops on foreign soil, exposing the possibility of European soldiers fighting, even fatal. Then there is the problem of errors, such as the sinking of fishing vessels, absolutely foreign to human trafficking. The project Brussels appears, therefore, negative from the outset: aims to solve a contingent situation, extrapolating from a wider context, not that one thinks, for a solution of the problem at the base, has too many drawbacks, which do not provide even the 'minimum target, no matter how questionable, to close its borders. Once again the attitude of the European Union does not have a proper planning for the role he would like to play, Brussels remains a political dwarf, unable to impose on the world solutions that help people fleeing and then develops solutions precarious and hardly passable own for lack unity among its members. The further proof of the need to re-examine all the European plant, worth the gradual disintegration.