This chapter investigates how the EU’s externalisation of migration policy relates to the efforts at the global level to strengthen solidarity in the protection of refugees. Where the New York Declaration of 2016 stressed the need for a more equitable sharing of the responsibility for hosting and supporting refugees, the chapter questions whether the EU policies develop in this direction. The overview of the impact of migration deals with third countries, focusing on the human rights risks for migrants stuck in transit countries or returned there. The chapter describes how these risks will increase with the watering down of the safe third country concepts in EU legislation. Based on the consequences of the EU-Turkey deal, the author argues that extending similar deals with African countries would not only threat the protection standards of refugees, but also affect the responsibility taken for refugees by transit countries. Those countries tend to adopt the externalisation policy of the EU, including a restricted visa policy, readmission agreements and avoiding and allocating responsibility for refugees with, as an ultimate consequence, refugees facing obstacles in fleeing their country. This copying behaviour also has serious implications for African regional relations and mobility schemes, which can be seen as an unintended side-effect of the EU’s policies. The author therefore argues that while the EU externalisation policy neglects the long-term and global effects, it risks to affect the aim of the draft UN Global Compact on the refugees to strengthen solidarity on the global level.
Sergio Carrera, Juan Santos Vara and Tineke Strik
In this introduction to the book, the editors explain the relevance of analysing the constitutional aspects of the external dimension of EU migration and asylum policies. They argue that the labelling of the large arrival of refugees in 2015 as a crisis has severely affected the principles of the rule of law and the interinstitutional balance, which were just established with the Lisbon Treaty in 2009. The authors substantiate that the contributions in the book move beyond the state of the art in the literature by connecting the internal and external dimensions of EU migration and asylum policy and by analysing old and new patterns of external cooperation on migration. Through that lens, they identify a tendency of informalisation of the external cooperation, leading to ‘de-constitutionalisation’ of the EU decision-making in this field. This process raises questions on the EU’s legitimacy of the external cooperation on migration, which are dealt with in the book. The third part of the introductory chapter summarises the contributions in the book.