Europe's intention to manage migrants

The meeting in Paris between France, Spain, Germany, Italy, the European Union, Chad, Niger and Libya aims to regulate migratory flows to Europe, alleviating the disadvantages for the coastal countries, Italy and Greece before all but Even Spain, caused by the Treaty of Dublin, now outdated by the events. The participation of only four European states with their representatives, but without the extended invitation to Athens, represents a split with other states, especially those of Eastern Europe, which will have no impact on the balance of Brussels. However, some of the reasons for this encounter is just to overcome the resistance of the eastern nations to receive the shares of the refugees they are destined for. But in this way, it seems that the eastern countries' reasons are legitimate and this can not be a serious precedent, even on other issues that will be presented in the future. The inability to comply with the decisions of the union sanctioned and formalized a weakness in Brussels, which does not offer guarantees for the future, while on the other hand does not include in the discussion all European countries, offers the perception of the creation of ' Europe at two speeds, though, for the time being, only for the issue of immigration. Going beyond these considerations concerning the European system, the will that seems to prevail is to stop the traffic of refugees before Libya, with identification posts that can allow refugee recognition and continue to move towards European countries throughout Security, without the risk of passing through the sea, through the network of men's traffickers. This, basically, is the line of the French president, which aims to preserve the country from the immigrant issue and to which Italy seems to be able to absorb, because it is no longer able to absorb the growing number of refugees, Spain, which It does not want to be the new destination of the landings and the European Union, which hopes to end the internal disagreements, the issue of migrants and their welcome. This method would be good if the migration issue was only about the refugees that the United Nations subscribes to their lists, but refusing to manage so-called economic migrants will not interrupt migration flows and the profits of traffickers. Probably in the ideas of European governments the places of identification located on the Libyan border in Chad and Niger should be able to make the necessary filter and set back those who are victims of famine or drought or are simply so desperate for the lack of opportunities to undertake A very risky journey. Under these conditions, the traffic of economic migrants and refugees will be rejected, but in the face of objective reasons, they will find alternatives and new routes on which to move. This is at least as long as the aid in poor countries does not have a proper contribution and a need for prudent management that can mitigate the conditions that cause migration. If this chapter is needed for the management of the phenomenon in the general economy of the project, one might think that it is possible to come to a positive solution, and vice versa, the barrier for economic migrants will be circumvented with alternative solutions. It may be thought that the decision of the countries assembled at the Election is a first step others should follow in the management of migration, however, France's attitude seems to collide with the control that its president seems to want to exercise in a manner Exclusive and with which it intends to communicate to the world an image of problem solver, which for others are unresolvable. If it is undeniable that there has been a decrease in people's traffic, and certainly not for the decisions of the French President, it is necessary to wait for the reorganization of traffickers and developments in the Libyan political situation, which is framed in a scenario of profound internal divisions and where Adjusting the amount of migrants to enter Europe, still represents a non-indifferent pressure mode.