Berlin and Paris are asking in Athens and Rome to open registration centers for refugees

The meeting between German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Hollande, to the problem of immigration in Europe, appears to be a summit that crosses the EU institutions and not that which is presented as a collaboration between the two countries. The impression is that Brussels is reduced to a role of the facade, while Paris and Berlin tend to take possession of the scene, perhaps for a future battle over who will dominate the continent. For now what we want to be done is to shine a spirit of collaboration, which, however, tends to exclude other countries in general and in particular those directly concerned. Not the first time this has happened: already during the debate on the definition of debt greek two highest representatives of their respective countries, held bilateral meetings, excluding, for example, Italy, which was still the third largest lender in Athens. This time in Rome, along with Athens, have been excluded from a summit that addresses a problem that touches to be managed just as Italy and Greece. Not only has made the snub to exclude them from the discussion but has also gone further, calling solutions, which have the appearance of obligations. Essentially Paris and Berlin have asked the two countries mainly engaged in providing hospitality to migrants to develop centers of recordings for refugees, who should have the sole purpose of dividing refugees from economic migrants, thus burdening countries Check also the burden of decision on which people send it back. Again, not only the EU, but this time the individual members, albeit the most important, downloading of other countries a role that does not mean that it is their responsibility. France and Germany probably reflect the spirit of the Treaty of Dublin, recognizing however, that the territory of arrival is not only one identified within the physical boundaries of a country, but is also one that matches the criteria of extra territoriality and not It is applied to vessels that collect the refugees in the Mediterranean, then trusting them, for example, to Italy and turned this country the country of arrival. This is just one example of how the interpretation of the Treaty is adapted to the conveniences of the states of northern Europe, who now claim the right to issue regulations that violate the legitimate sovereignty of a state. The issue of migration discover how the European system is weak and to be reviewed in an absolute and how there is no more restraint for the staffs to go beyond the minimum diplomatic convenience. Instead of developing a common strategy, which goes beyond the emergency especially the welcome and concerns measures of a political and military, able to seek a more comprehensive, those states should ensure that the process of integration, they think they interpret their role with a kind of power to address, certainly not official, but only received by the respective economic power. More specifically implement a measure such as that suggested by Paris and Berlin involves a whole series of organizational difficulties that can hardly be overcome by one state, while the only community experience to which reference can be made up to now, that of ' agency for border management, it does not seem to have been positive and so there seems to provide appropriate cooperation. Basically for Greece and Italy should not engage in such a task, compensating for the shortcomings of Brussels and playing the role for other states, since the two Mediterranean countries are only considered milestones for the largest proportion of migrants. Conversely, if there were any conditions of reliability and programming expressed by EU institutional bodies, the issue could be addressed in a completely different way, but certainly not on the directive of other states, not hit by an official power to issue directives that offend legitimate power of foreign governments.