When should we wait for the refugees in Moldova?

In March this year, Reuters, citing German media, reported on the plans of the European Commission to persuade the states bordering on the EU to cooperate in hosting and repatriating refugees. According to the media, a special law will help in this situation: the opposing countries will be taken “disciplinary” measures. For example, obtaining visas for their politicians, officials and ordinary citizens will be complicated. Moldova borders with the EU and is also subject to the draft law. European officials hastily denied interpretations of the media. According to them, the European Commission is only planning to reform its visa policy. For citizens who comply with EU legislation, the conditions for issuing visas will become easier, for violators - tougher. In the formal sense, the reform does not concern Moldova at all, which has a visa-free regime with the EU since April 2014. In fact, everything is more complicated: over the past 3.5 years, 1.5 million Moldovans have visited European countries, and one fifth part of them did not return to their homeland. Failure to comply with the conditions of a visa-free agreement provokes dissatisfaction in Europe, which, even without Moldovan illegal immigrants, suffers from an acute migration crisis. In this regard, the initiative of the European Commission looks like an attempt to regulate the migration policy towards the newly associated Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia, and even involve them in the distribution of influx of refugees. Migrants – for a price In the European Union countries there is no joint opinion on how to get out of the migration crisis. In 2015, the European Commission approved a two-year program for the distribution of migrants between EU countries, in order to reduce the burden on Italy and Greece, where most of the illegal immigrants from Africa and the Middle East arrive by sea. However, many EU members adamantly opposed it. First of all, Austria and the countries of the Visegrad Group (Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia) were against “distribution”, claiming that they had already received a huge number of migrants from Ukraine. As a result, the distribution program failed - only a few tens of thousands of refugees from the planned one and a half million were managed to be distributed over it. Since then, all initiatives to resolve the refugee crisis exist only on paper and the situation is gradually deteriorating, remaining an apple of discord for the EU members. Italy, Austria and Bulgaria offer to create camps for refugees outside the EU in Africa. Other countries, like France and Spain, consider it possible to create them in Europe, but only in Mediterranean ports. There is a particular idea in Europe to stop refugees directly at the borders of the EU. To achieve this, there are plans to conclude agreements with transit countries on the model of a successful treaty with Turkey. Thanks to the deal concluded in 2016 between the European Union and Turkey, the Balkan route of illegal immigrants to Europe was blocked, and in September 2018 the success of the agreement was recognized even by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who suggested using it as a model for other countries. To find, or rather appoint those who wish was easy. In Brussels, they believe that applicants for European Union accession should not only enjoy its benefits, but also bear the burden of “common trouble”. It is characteristic that in 2015, European Migration Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos frankly voiced this thought: “Europe is facing the world refugee crisis since the Second World War. It would be right if the countries that signed the Association Agreement took part in solving the problems of the European Union - if they want to become full members of the EU”. Moldova is next in line Moldova borders with the European Union, and Chisinau signed an Association Agreement with the EU 4 years ago. Of course, the idea of accommodating refugees in Moldova has been in the air for many years and has already become one of the phobias for the people of Moldova. The Moldovan authorities have long discouraged themselves from it and said that the status of an associate member does not imply the obligation to accept migrants. However, in reality, everything says the opposite. Here are just a few facts:

• Since 2015, refugee centers projects have appeared in Moldova with the money of the European Union. Their implementation is presented as formally making consistent of Moldova’s material and infrastructural foundations with the requirements of the Convention on the maintenance of refugees. Moreover, in the same year Moldova really accommodated migrants from Syria.
• In July 2016, there was a liberalization of refugee law. The period of validity of travel documents and the period of humanitarian protection of refugees have increased. Moldova also received the right to offer asylum to refugees from other countries, and to establish the number and conditions for their adoption by parliamentary decisions.
• Calls to "show solidarity" with Europe and to shelter some of the refugees can be heard from Moldovan politicians. In the 2016 elections, presidential candidate Maia Sandu, to whom Brussels favours, took a step further and promised Angela Merkel to accept more than 30 thousand Syrian refugees if she carries the election.
• In September 2018, the Moldovan government expanded the list of travel documents for refugees, stateless persons and apatrides. At least ten European countries appeared in the list of countries from which it became easier for refugees to get to Moldova, which made possible the potential “re-export” of migrants from the European Union.
• A Bureau for Migration and Asylum has been established.

In fact, within three years Moldova managed to create the infrastructure and legal base for receiving migrants from Syria, North Africa and the EU. To redirect the influx of migrants into the country, you need only a political decision from Brussels and European funding. When should we wait for the refugees? The migration crisis has become an unprecedented problem for European politicians, since the electorate is clearly tired of uninvited guests and is increasingly going to Eurosceptic. A gun on the stage will definitely let off and Moldova will have to share a “common trouble” with Brussels, otherwise Chisinau would not take any steps in this regard. Before the parliamentary elections, we will not see any migrants in Moldova. The problem of refugees is absolutely toxic for any political force of Moldova and the European Union is unlikely to force it, not wanting to do a favour accidentally to the wrong parties. Brussels openly demonstrates dissatisfaction with the monopolization of power by the Democratic Party of the Republic of Moldova, headed by oligarch Vlad Plahotniuc, and on principle froze the financing of Moldova before the parliamentary elections. The European Union will not start a serious bargaining over migrants with the current government before the elections. The admission of refugees can be an important condition for the resumption of financial assistance to Chisinau after the elections and a likely referendum on introducing the European course to the Constitution. If the referendum succeeds, the newly formed government will not be able to go cynically against the instructions of Brussels, which it has sworn allegiance in the plebiscite. If the vote “for Europe” fails, assistance on the refugees issue will help regain lost confidence. In any case, guests from Asia and Africa will be able to arrive in Moldova by spring. Anyway, going in the direction of the European Union, Chisinau will not be able to avoid common-European problems. And here, strangely enough, there is an element of political justice.