Ebook: Security and Migrations in the Mediterranean

This book results from the work of a NATO Advanced Research Workshop which took place in Lisbon, in 4–6 March 2005, and the edited volume now published in 2006 would not have been possible without the generous support of NATO.

We would therefore like to express our personal thanks, as well as those of the Instituto da Defesa Nacional (IDN), of Portugal, for this support.

In the course of the discussions after each presentation and joint meetings, it became clear that it would be impossible to achieve complete consensus on all issues, including definitional, or on recommendations. Nevertheless, a number of major themes emerged that enjoyed a good degree of support among the participants.

The post-Cold War period made a new concept of security imperative: it encompasses environmental, social, economical, political and military issues. Migrationas a civilizational phenomenon, albeit transitional, goes across this entire spectrum, particularly in a varied historical milieu as the Euro Mediterranean region is.

In turn, reforms and changes need to be carried out by South Mediterranean states and societies, in order to eliminate some of the obstacles to modernization, creating conditions for economic development at home with the help of North Mediterranean countries. Another package of reforms in European countries should empower migrants to adopt a more active citizenship and become more integrated in the societies where they choose to live.

For Mohamed Khachani, a demystification of the question of migratory risk is in order to foster an improved dialogue between south Europe countries and North Africa countries. Sending countries are affected by political crises, socio-economic instability, and illegal migration from North Africa; receiving countries practice discrimination in labour market and social space.

Mendo Henriques argued that a multilevel approach to security is imperative in the Euro-Mediterranean region, on account of the presence of distinct regional and national interests. Stereotypes should be discarded and modernization should be promoted by sharing a doctrine of natural right enshrined both in modern secular and religious allegiances.

To Francis Ghilès, as economical growth in North Africa has been insufficient to stop migration, Europe is having problems to integrate young immigrants and postponing political and economical treaties with Southern Mediterranean. There should be a technical support to needing countries, and Mahgreb Banks should risk investments and should support young entrepreneurs.

Georgia Papagianni provides an overview of the historical development and the institutional framework of the migration agenda within the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership. She provides a critical appraisal of recent policy developments within the stricto sensu Euro-Mediterranean Partnership framework and at a more general EU level.

Fatih Tayfur calls attention to how current strategic and political events in Afghanistan and Iraq may affect the Mediterranean migratory flows. A new dialogue strategy is needed to implement proposals of Turkish foreign policy.

Abdel Moughit Tredano envisions migrations as a geopolitical question. It should encourage a mutual cultural enrichment and it should not block the development of receiving countries. Security needs better controls achieved through a multiplication of agreements between the EU and sending countries.

Jean Claude Monod defines secularization as a generic separation between state and religion, but according to variable formulae. The USA prefers the civil religion model, France the laicité model. Muslim migrants are able to dialogue and integrate in both kinds of models.

Alami Houria argues that integration must be approached as a two-level process. As South Mediterranean individuals are supposed to become integrated in European societies, South Mediterranean countries should also be co-opted by the Western processes of modernity and secularization.

For Inacio Steinhardt, in spite of growing divisions in Israel, the socialist impulse of the Founding Fathers of the country morphed into the solidarity impulse in present Israeli civil society.

To Sidney Shipton Islam phobia and anti-Semitism have the same source; to counteract them, much can be achieved through interfaith dialogue. In spite of strong identity and differentiation, persons of different heritage, faith and religion, may work together and originate beneficial effects, as practiced by the Three Faiths Forum.

According to Jean Yves Camus, political pressures of far-right parties, in the post 9/11 context, challenge the immigration policies of Western Europe countries; up to a point, they became part of the mainstream parties' agenda. As countries call for tougher immigration policies, they base them upon a biased understanding of the relationship between immigration from Southern Mediterranean countries, Islam and Islamic radicalism.

Lorenza Sebesta argues that, most of all, Security Studies need non-deductive paradigms of analysis. State security is one thing; migrants' security is another. In between stands the necessity to build a new concept of European identity which must be not be biased by organicism neither laicism.

To Jude Wanniski, as the US stands at the top of the pyramid of world powers, because of its undisputed technological, economical and military power, it misuses its hegemony since 1991; a Cold War attitude is maintained instead of a new management of multilateral global institutions.

According to William S. Lind, in the 21st century, there is an increasing variety of actors engaged in conflict – tribes, regions, religions, sectarians, and enterprises. As war is no more an exclusive of interstate conflict, the state must distance itself from sources of disorder as a precondition to collective security.

Ely Karmon argues that Radical Islamic Movements like Hezbollah consider a liberated fundamentalist territory as their legitimate basis to attack Israel, the only Jewish state amidst a sea of Islamic countries.

For Paula Pereira, the Barcelona Process is not the only model for the Mediterranean dialogue. Economical and cultural disparities between North and South and demographic pressure should propel more innovative policies.

To Massimo de Leonardis, the dialogue between North and South Mediterranean countries and NATO improved after the traumatic changes of September 11. Misunder-standings were somehow subdued as North and South united against common terrorist threats.

Mónica Silva and Maria do Rosário Vaz enhance how Portugal, unhindered by recent colonial issues in the Euro Mediterranean and profiting from a strategic position, has strengthened his role of partner in the region, particularly in the Maghreb, in areas such as tourism and energy.

We would, finally, like to express our gratitude to providers, presenters, moderators and participants in the Workshop for their insights and contributions.

We would single out Lieutenant-General Garcia Leandro, Director of IDN, Portugal, until September 2004 and Professor Marques de Almeida, currently Director of IDN, both gave full support for this initiative. Manuel Pechirra, Chairman of the Luso-Arabian Institute for Cooperation, Portugal, was a key player of this Workshop.

Professors Antonio Marquina, Helder Santos Costa and Major-General Mohamed Kadry Said who, for various reasons, could not send their papers, made most valuable presentations.

We are particularly grateful to the moderators, who did a wonderful job: José Lamego, Professor and Parliament Member, Portugal; Ramtane Lamamra Ambassador of Algeria in Portugal; Lahzar Bououny, Ambassador of the Tunisian Republic in Portugal; Ângelo Correia, Portugal; General Garcia Leandro, Portugal; and Ambassador Manuel Amante, Cape Vert.

To all other participants in the Workshop, listed in Annex II, we express our thanks.

We are particularly indebted to António Paradelo, Antonio Baranita, Paula Pereira, Vanda Santos and Delgado da Rocha as well as other IDN staff who made all the arrangements to enable the smooth functioning of the Workshop.

Antonio Baranita further worked in the preparation of this book with IDN trainees Filipe Romão, Olinda Costa, Elias Bene, Marta Boavida, André Chagas, Amália Martins and Licínia Simão. Without his and their professionalism, this book would not be possible.

Last but not least, we express a word of regret for the loss of Jude Wanniski (1936–2005), the celebrated author of The Way the World Works, who so much enjoyed coming to Portugal and spread his good news that the democratic global electorate should have the last word in international relations.

Mendo Castro Henriques, Mohamed Khachani

The history of Mediterranean societies is a crossroads of exchange within the basin. Until the second half of the 20th century we can observe that migratory flows are mainly North-South, as Europeans had been a people of emigration since the great discoveries. The 1960s represents the turning point when Europe became a big centre of immigration, as people from the Southern shore dreamt of better jobs and a better life on the North shore. Due to restrictive laws on immigration, smuggling flourished, and nowadays it is a large-scale phenomenon that concerns both shores, and is boosted by world economic inequities.

Natural right is a foremost factor of the dialogue in the Euro-Mediterranean World, a great regulator for building the democratic state, international relations and respect for human rights in general, and penal law. Secular and religious allegiances converge in acknowledging it as the key factor for acknowledging human rights and ensuring social pluralism; for sustaining the law's primacy in the state-building process; for maintaining the counterbalance of civic duties and rights, without which no political leadership can be sustained; for promoting the supremacy of international law; and for legitimising the power of supranational organizations.

Although migrants are much needed to fill the labour gap and generate entrepreneurial energy in an ageing Europe, many right-wing parties refuse to recognize this as they promote anti-immigration policies. A choice has to be made between European partnership and national sovereignty, given that we are dealing with old prejudices and new fears. Islam is treated in the media as a terrorist and an economic threat. However, representation and non-discrimination are the best route to integration.

Issues of migrations are bilaterally and regionally debated as a key element in the framework of Euro-Mediterranean relations. The Communitisation of asylum and immigration issues, and the emergence of the Schengen Space imposed common policies on border controls against illegal immigration. Migration by sea needs cooperation with third countries in order to achieve joint management and control, and tailor-made approaches to each country. As dialogue between cultures urges us to struggle against racism and xenophobia, the request for immigrants' social integration and rights to equal treatment in employment and occupation, we hope this cooperation will be enhanced.

Turkey, due to its geographical location, surrounded on one side by unstable locations, on the other by the EU, has long given a strong emphasis on hard security, that is, on military power. However it is gradually becoming more sensitive to soft security issues, which it considers a way of conflict prevention, a way to avoid hard security matters. Its geographical location makes it also not only a transit country to migrants seeking access to the EU, but also a destination one, which has led Turks to consider migrations as a soft security issue, given that uncontrolled illegal migration may have serious repercussions for Turkey, be it as a destination country or a transit one. Turkey is now negotiating a number of migration management policies with the EU and with migration source countries.

Islam is the second religion in many European countries, not as a religion of immigrants, but as the religion of European-born citizens. We can even speak of an European Islam. This was an unforeseen situation, not only to European countries, but also to Islamic ones. However, with the aid and promotion of European governments, Islamism in Europe is becoming “secularized”, adjusting itself to take part in European societies and to have a political voice. In spite of attacks like 9/11, generally speaking we can say that the radical Islamism of the seventies has given way to a more integrationist one. Islam has already become a part of Europe.

Migration is a central issue in Euro-Mediterranean relationships: Europe needs a qualified labour force and risks not being able to replace its population; North African countries are facing the “brain drain” phenomenon. Debating migrations is imperative if it is to be seen as a stabilisation factor and not as a cause of the deterioration of European identity. A security policy of border controls is not enough and has reached its limits; instead, a cultural revolution should occur on both shores and the migration/crime/terrorism/Islamism equation should vanish from discourse. A global geopolitical approach is needed, in which co-development and burden-sharing are the matrices.

With regard to migration and integration in Europe, Islam is the centre of attention. Islam is no longer distant: it is a part of Europe. Nowadays, integration for Muslims occurs in a difficult context. Migrations lead to cultural confrontation, due to a process of negotiation and transformation of ideas. This conflict then becomes a challenge to culture, with a bearing on security.

The State of Israel could easily have been classed as a “civil society”, long before the expression assumed its present meaning. The kibbutz was perhaps the precursor of a civil society in its authenticity. In the past 30 years, Israeli society has split into sectors and has diversified. Israeli cultural-spiritual, socio-economic and political institutions are undergoing a deep structural change. The socio-cultural stew that is Israeli society has cooled considerably. To a growing extent it has solidified and fragmentation has set in. Gradually, the Israelis are taking part in the creation of a new public space, which they did not know before – “civil society”. 69% of the respondents to a 2002 survey declared that they belonged to civil society organizations. Palestinian society is also learning from the Israeli experience in making its first steps into a civil society of its own. The various components of civil society in Israel are still lacking structural links between them. This will probably be the next stage in the ongoing development process of civil society in Israel.

The Three Faiths Forum is an interfaith initiative established in January 1997 to bring Muslims, Christians and Jews together at all levels (and especially at grass roots level) in a spirit of understanding and mutual respect through dialogue between the three Abrahamic monotheistic religious communities.

After 9/11 the French attitude towards Mediterranean countries experienced some change. Racism against Muslims and violent racist incidents increased, and Islamophobia is spreading among the French, including the intellectual elite. Despite the Front National not being particularly strong, its anti-Islam ideology is spreading, making people see Islam as a threat to the French modus vivendi. The idea of a “clash of civilizations” that sees all Islam as terrorist and fundamentalist, and also the new trends of cooperation with Eastern Europe, have endangered the historic ties between France and the Mediterranean countries.

Migrations are closely linked with security. Migrants that want to escape the lack of security in their origin countries, may find new problems in their countries of destination. Neither the realistic nor the liberal approach provide satisfactory answers to this question. A third approach is possible, as shown by official EU strategy, but it is complicated. This third approach deals with a new concept of security, differentiating state and societal security and analysing the root causes of migrations. A dynamic concept aimed at coping with the change that characterizes the international system.

The end of the Cold War represented the victory of capitalist democracies over the socialist model, which meant the extension of USA influence and example. The only superpower faces now the role of leading an unbalanced world, and reducing the chance of conflict with other world powers that might challenge its dominant position. The national security concept implies defining the questions of jurisdiction within its empire and it is somewhat undermined by the Wilsonian idea of self-determination. Although this new world needs a benevolent America, the steps taken by the Bush administration seem to drive the superpower in an opposite direction.

Adding to permanent tensions in the Middle East, the Hizballah movement and its strategy of international terrorism provide the Islamic insurrection in the Palestinian territories with the means to its political objectives. Since September 11^th 2001, this organization has taken the lead in the fight against Israel and its allies, particularly the U.S.A. Recent events have galvanised Hizballah towards the intensification of its violent strategy, gathering support in other Islamic organisations outside its main area of action.

The United States faces a world in which the Westphalia order is no longer observed; the state is vulnerable, suffering from a legitimacy crisis, which can only be overcome by a policy that distances it from centres of disorder and moves it closer to centres of order. The actors of this new scenario are not only states, but also ideological movements. As Islam can be a source of disorder, it is advisable to isolate oneself from it (and let it fold back on itself). The advisable grand strategy should be a military strategic defensive coupled with a powerful strategic and tactical counter-offensive; the offensive strategy, undertaken by the current Administration, is a mistake. Instead of a closed political system and a model of multiculturalism within the USA, there should be a pursuit of an open political system and Americanization should be encouraged in order to prevent domestic chaos.

After the Second World War the Mediterranean gained a new importance in the context of a broader concept of security. NATO decided to play a role in the southern Mediterranean countries since the stability of this region, so different from the northern part, proved to be vital to the security of the alliance. Having this in mind, NATO created a dialogue initiative, the Mediterranean Dialogue, with the objective of contributing to “security and stability in the Mediterranean (…) to achieve a better mutual understanding and to correct any misunderstandings of the Alliance's purposes…”. It is not only the history behind this dialogue initiative - not yet a partnership - but also its successful development, that is addressed in this text.

Despite tensions and conflicts, the Mediterranean can be considered an area of cooperation, where European states have long provided financial support, particularly in the Maghreb region. The special relationships that have developed are founded on a common history and colonial ties between both shores of the Mediterranean. In this context, Portugal has taken up a privileged position as a partner for the region, since relations with some European states remain strained due to old disputes and conflicts. However, since the 1990s, several initiatives have led to a strengthening of cooperation and significant development in the Maghreb countries. However, some black spots persist in their political, economic and social situations.