How Does the EU Plan to Handle Insubordinate Members?

[Commodore]

Just heard Bulgaria has become the latest EU member to reassert its sovereignty against the EU by joining the Visegrad Four and Austria in their calls for the closing of Europe to migrants and a steadfast refusal to accept any migration quotas imposed by Brussels.

So with an increasing number of member states openly stating they will not comply with EU policy regarding migration, it got me thinking: How exactly does the EU plan to deal with rebellious member states? You can't kick them out because as far as I'm aware, there are no provisions for forcibly removing a member from the EU and removing member states also diminishes the EU's power and influence just like removing a state from the US would diminish its power and influence. You can't suspend their voting rights either because, well, what the hell is that going to do to convince a member that already isn't following your rules?

I mean, let's say Brussels tells Bulgaria they MUST take in 50,000 refugees and starts sending migrants their way. In response Bulgaria deploys its army to the border with orders to detain and deport any migrants or refugees that attempt to cross. In such a situation, what precisely could the EU do to force Bulgaria to stand down and comply with EU policy?

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Not need to place any army anywhere since EU will not send any refugees if the country doesnt agree. These are political matters and require political agreements. It could lead to political consequences though if such position goes against a wide european consensus, as usually happens in international relations.

However if EU laws say states must accept a number of refugees or something (which is not the case by now) that is a totally different thing. There are well defined mechanisms to enforce EU legal rules, which implies first an admonition by the EU Commission and ultimately can lead to a case at the EU court with heavy economical sanctions or even membership suspension.

 

[EnglishEdward]

As far as I understand it, if they are not EU citizens (or children of such, or married to such etc),
then the EU has no existing legal right to order its member states to accept non EU citizens.

Of course Angela Merkel /Emmanuel Macron can offer all the refugees or other migrants
German/French citzenshire (or become their wife etc) to give them the right to move to
whichever EU or EEA member state they like under the EU's Freedom of Movement laws.

 

[Hrothbern]

Migration is getting most of the international news attention.
The eroding of the Rule of Law in some country another issue.

The point you bring up is of a more general nature
and the EU construction is imo basically flawed by not having agreed procedures in place for misbehaviour on key EU principles.
this should have been constructed before the expansion into East-Europe.

Too many good intentions blurring good statemanship.

 

[FriendlyFire]

The EU will just do some lip service while quitely passing Bulgaria some money for border security

Germany has strict laws to gain german Citizenship which include learning German at high school level and minimum work history of a full year. Why would they want to travel to the UK to learn a third language and start from the bottom again ? Its not like Germany is deporting some 100-150k refugees per year and looking to accelerate as it sorts through its current refugees.

 

[Silurian]

As Edward states the EU can not force EU states to take in non- EU citizens

That is why Italy and Greece are trying to get agreement to spread the load.
But every country has a veto.

 

[really]

Insubordination implies that they are in breach of something or that the EU has the power to force members to do things they haven't agreed to.

The EU will continue as usual with horse trading, peer pressure, sweeteners etc.

Otherwise the EU can just wait and let Bulgaria's demographic problems focus their mind.

 

[Lexicus]

Otherwise the EU can just wait and let Bulgaria's demographic problems focus their mind.

The whole attitude toward migration is absolutely insane, but that's what racism does to people. We have an aging population, but young people from other countries want to flood into our country? Eh, we'd better militarize the border and set up concentration camps, don't want these parasites consuming our resources.

 

[red_elk]

Canada has lots of migrants, but no problems with riots, car burning and attacks against women. I guess the EU problem is not about legal migration, but rather with uncontrollable flood of refugees.

 

[Lillefix]

Canada has lots of migrants, but no problems with riots, car burning and attacks against women. I guess the EU problem is not about legal migration, but rather with uncontrollable flood of refugees.

Also European attitudes towards religion probably. I think Europeans tend to be more openly hostile towards certain values that people in the 3rd world cherish. Conservative and religious Europeans are probably used to it, but recent immigrants might react negatively.

Canadians and Americans are probably more respectful in that respect.

There are also some who blame welfare system, but I don't know if that's important or not.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Canada has lots of migrants, but no problems with riots, car burning and attacks against women. I guess the EU problem is not about legal migration, but rather with uncontrollable flood of refugees.

Migrants are not refugees, and the numbers and entry routes don't add up that all of the migrants heading into Europe are refugees, especially via Libya and further west. In Bulgaria's case a larger proportion are likely to be refugees, as this is one of the more likely paths for people fleeing Syria.

Even then, the demographics of the people actually arriving are questionable.

There are also some who blame welfare system, but I don't know if that's important or not.

There are countries closer to Libya than Italy or Greece, that don't require a trip across the Mediterranean. If non-citizens don't receive welfare in the near future, there is not much extra incentive to migrate long distances in relatively dangerous travel conditions. When a welfare program offers you more free than minimum wage jobs in alternative countries, the incentive is suddenly large.

Changing incentives is one of the more obvious ways to change behavior.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Canada has lots of migrants, but no problems with riots, car burning and attacks against women. I guess the EU problem is not about legal migration, but rather with uncontrollable flood of refugees.

There is a housing issue, though. Where do you put thousands of people who were already in the homeless shelters - the place of last resort?

We were already having problems with some of the Syrian refugees - where do you put a family of 11 people, that's affordable and doesn't violate half a dozen health and safety codes, not to mention some places won't allow opposite-sex children to share the same bedroom if at least one of them is older than 5?

Also European attitudes towards religion probably. I think Europeans tend to be more openly hostile towards certain values that people in the 3rd world cherish. Conservative and religious Europeans are probably used to it, but recent immigrants might react negatively.

Canadians and Americans are probably more respectful in that respect.

There are, from what I've read, a lot of people in Quebec who are opposed to women wearing niqabs in public (I'll admit that niqabs give me the creeps, since you have no idea who the person is, or if their facial expressions and body language are in tune with what they're saying). Some don't even want it to be legal for Muslim women to wear hijabs... which is going too far. They don't seem to understand that a hijab is basically an overgrown kerchief, which used to be a very common thing for a lot of Canadian women and girls to wear, 50 years ago. I used to wear one, though I was glad to ditch it once I started school (the reason for wearing them was so the hair wouldn't get blown around and messy, and it was considered "ladylike"). My grandmother insisted I wear them when we went into town, and I always hated them.

But the Hutterite women and girls still wear black kerchiefs, and nobody gives it a second thought here. It's normal.

There are also some who blame welfare system, but I don't know if that's important or not.

Some will always blame welfare, no matter what.

 

[Hrothbern]

There is a housing issue, though. Where do you put thousands of people who were already in the homeless shelters - the place of last resort?

The same issue here in EU countries.

It is diabolic.

Migrants in the EU were since WW2 in general fairly balanced with economic growth potential.

But with the refugees on top and the confusing between them... the high news media profile
we are in the weird situation that the turmoil is fitting soooooo nicely the neo-liberal and rightwing-populist agenda.
The right-wing agenda because it is an unendless source for fear-mongering
The neo-liberal agenda because a shortage of housing drives up the prices for housing well beyond what young people can afford, and to the benefit of the people that already own (good) houses (their political base).

And on top
The lack of affordable housing does not lead to young people, that have no rich parents helping out, voting against neo-liberals, but does lead to many voting for populists.
And young people that have parents that can help out, are all the more justified in their neo-liberal thinking.

It is a perfect cocktail to keep leftish parties in disorder.... something that the old social-democrats of just after the WW2 would never have let happen with their simplistic agenda of a job for all and affordable housing for all.

As I started with

it is diabolic

 

[Valka D'Ur]

And it creates a lot of ill will, given that the Syrians were fast-tracked into apartments and a whole list of benefits that Canadian-born homeless people have been on the waitlist for years to receive.

Still, most are, I think, genuinely trying to make good lives here. It's galling to hear some of the frivolous complaints, though, like one man who was whining that the apartment he and his family were given didn't have its own laundry room.

Hello! That's normal in Canada. Only the high-end places have in-suite laundry facilities. In the building where I live, I share the laundry room with 19 other suites. Each floor's laundry room has its own security code (that's thankfully not dependent on the keycard system; since I know the code for the floor I used to live on, I've occasionally used that one when the one on this floor was either occupied or some thing was broken).

 

[EnglishEdward]

Hrothbern:

If I recall correctly, the Netherlands and Belgium are the only sizable
countries that have population densities near that of England.

The economics and political consequences are in many respects similar.

 

[Hrothbern]

Hrothbern:

If I recall correctly, the Netherlands and Belgium are the only sizable
countries that have population densities near that of England.

The economics and political consequences are in many respects similar.

If we skip the dots in Europe
We are the top 3 yes
Roughly NL at 400, Belgium 350, UK 275
EU average 125
ohhh that's per km2

yes ?

 

[EnglishEdward]

I recollect that I previously confused population densities of England and the UK.

https://www.reference.com/world-view/population-density-england-ff80fe7bd6796b75

The population of density of England, as of mid-2013, is 413 people per square kilometer,
according to the Office for National Statistics. By comparison, the population density of Wales is 135
people per square kilometer, and the population density of Scotland is only 68 people per square kilometer.

The point is that neither Belgium, England nor the Netherlands
have the relatively empty spaces of Canada or of Australia.

 

[Hrothbern]

With the Caves of Steel in my mind, and assuming we do not blow ourselves up into oblivion, some day in the future very high population densities will be possible in stability and prosperity, with a culture and socital-poltical systems in allignment with that.

But for now and any foreseeable future, 400 is imo pretty close to max sensible. China and India also around 400. Japan, Vietnam etc a bit lower.
BTW I saw a week or so ago a recent poll published in the Global Times that 98% or so of the Chinese population was solid against immigration. Their main argument: "we did not make our sacrifice with our 1-child per family policy for 35 years for nothing".
And ofc the Global Times is no more than the informal position of the Chinese government, sending its message out in the world, for its own interests.

 

[Commodore]

This thread was supposed to be a discussion on how the EU could possible deal with member states that refuse to obey EU policy. The whole migrant thing was just supposed to be a catalyst for that discussion since that seems to be the most divisive issue in the EU right now.

 

[Lillefix]

This thread was supposed to be a discussion on how the EU could possible deal with member states that refuse to obey EU policy. The whole migrant thing was just supposed to be a catalyst for that discussion since that seems to be the most divisive issue in the EU right now.

Well. Cut voting rights and lose cash. They've threatened to do it with Poland and because of that they have backed off on some of their most controversial policies. Of course, since the EU is a democracy other countries can veto, so it's not that easy.