Disputes over immigration threaten the unity of Europe.
The Sunday episode of the program "Das Gespräch" featured a heated discussion on the issue of immigration and asylum and the future of the European Union, with the participation of two prominent researchers in immigration affairs alongside the European Commissioner for Migration, Magnus Brunner.
The researcher specializing in asylum issues, Gerald Knaus, did not hide his displeasure with the repeated promises made over the years that have not been realized in practice. He emphasized that this situation could turn into an existential crisis for the European Union, especially with countries like Hungary that prefer to pay fines rather than comply with European asylum laws. He stated clearly: "As long as one country does this, the EU can deal with it, but if three, four, or five countries ignore the laws, the principle of the rule of law will collapse, and the existence of the EU could be threatened."
Magnus Brunner, who was previously the Minister of Finance, completely agreed with this proposal, emphasizing the need for effective practical action and providing tangible solutions. However, his statements during the episode were characterized by a lot of diplomatic clarifications and general phrases, especially when discussing the topic of "Return Hubs," which are centers for housing individuals who have been issued deportation orders but cannot be returned to their home countries due to the absence of agreements with those countries.
The introduction Susan Schnabel asked him a direct question: Why doesn't the European Commission negotiate with those countries instead of leaving it to the member states individually? However, Brunner preferred a lengthy and vague answer, returning the ball to the member states, and emphasizing that contracts with third countries must first be presented to Brussels, which complicates implementation. On the other hand, researcher Judith Kohlenberger from WU Wien viewed things differently, considering that the fears of migration pressure on Austria are exaggerated. She confirmed that many social problems, such as those in schools, are unfairly attributed to migrants. She also defended the right to family reunification, describing it as "a controllable tool," because countries precisely determine who comes and when.
The discussion clearly revealed the extent of the divergence between the parties and brought back to the forefront fundamental questions about the European Union's ability to reach balanced and effective solutions on the migration issue, before the crisis turns into a threat to its existence.