You have the right to know: some in Brussels think your national borders are an unfortunate obstacle to immigration
Have you noticed how the bureaucrats in Brussels talk about “border management” instead of saying “border protection” or “border defense”? It’s not a coincidence. It betrays a fundamental difference in how we approach migration. For those in the pro-migration lobby, immigration is a positive outcome and national borders are the obstacles.
Last week, the Hungarian government launched a public information campaign with the aim of informing citizens about the Brussels agenda. Our communiqué clearly touched a nerve among Brussels eurocrats, and they came out swinging. In this first post, I explained how the European Commission just can’t let go of the idea of a mandatory migrant quota system. But some also have plans that threaten to undermine what remains one of a country’s most sacred areas of authority, the defense of its borders.
While the exact details remain unclear, it was revealed last September that the European Commission plans a “reorganization” of Frontex, the EU’s border and coast guard agency, changes that would infringe on the sovereignty of member states. A few months ago, Commission President Juncker said that “Europe will never be a fortress,” and Migration Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos echoed his statement, adding that the EU must become “more efficient at managing our borders.”
EU citizens should worry when Brussels eurocrats talk about “border management”. It’s never “strengthening” or “defending” borders. It’s always about “managing” them and that’s a euphemism for immigration.
Chancellor Merkel was more direct. Speaking in the Bundestag last September in support of the Commission’s plan, she said, “Jean-Claude Juncker has already put forward a proposal that states that Frontex must be reinforced.”
“However,” she continued, “this also means – and this is what I support, at least – that Member States on the external border of the EU must give up their national competencies in order to give Frontex truly comprehensive competencies.”
Beware when a senior figure says that countries “with external EU borders” should “surrender their national competences”. That should set off warning bells throughout the EU.
It also sounds strikingly similar to another plan we’ve heard. Speaking about his own scheme in promoting migration, George Soros said that “our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle”.
As I said yesterday at a press conference, Brussels has in effect confessed that its concepts of migration would indeed increase migration to Europe. That’s not what we want. That’s not what Europe’s citizens want, and they have a right to know about this.