UI – Part 349 – EU and Immigration
The European Union (EU)
The EU is an attempt to create a unified Europe without borders. There are members more protective of their borders and national identities than others. EU leadership uses rhetoric to inspire commonality over individual identities. It is a progressive, liberal body that is inclined more towards a socialistic order than free markets. Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission wants a EU open to all comers saying it is what people do. Quoting him, “Turning a blind eye to poor and helpless people, that is not Europe.” However the immigration situation is stirring emotions and causing fragmentation threatening social cohesion. Signs that read ‘Enuf is Enuf’, even in America, are signals of discontent. The policy of multiculturalism has failed and voters are now rejecting the concept, yet governments seem to want to impose mass migration on western countries. A large portion of those coming to the EU are not of the culture of any current EU member. It is proper thinking to take in those seeking refuge from oppression. But are there limits; are there reasons to say no, no matter how difficult that may be.
The face of the EU, it is feared by many, will not be a portrait of the historical blend of nationalities, but a past in the shadows of the future of immigrants from the Middle East (mostly Syria), Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Libya, Pakistan, Africa and other predominantly Muslim areas. The basic values of European culture are under attack; they are being denied; they are disappearing. Anti-immigration sentiment is increasing. The belief is countries (members) may become naught but historical reflections of the past as the present becomes an amalgamation of cultures, nationalities and languages with a common thread – English. “Today, the question is not merely in what kind of a Europe we would like to live, but whether everything we understand as Europe will exist at all.” — Viktor Orbán, President of Hungary.
As signs of success and greater acceptance of the immigrants making their way into the EU are reflected in the media more potential emigrants will be encouraged to make their own migration. With the flood gates opened what is now overwhelming will face even greater numbers and intensity – a tsunami of human proportions.
One country (Slovakia) suggested only Christian immigrants be accepted. The reason – they have no mosques. The media spun this into racism, a bias out of the norm, reflective of a facet of a liberal thinking press. Saudi Arabia has done little to open its doors to emigrants; what they might accept will exclude Christians. The media provides no criticism of Saudi Arabia, even Iran, for imposing such restrictions. Why the double standard? But recently Saudi Arabia did offer to build 500 mosques in the EU. What does that suggest? Atheists proclaiming the EU as a haven for their secular thinking, feeling safe, taking shelter, have become concerned that the invasion by Islamists threatens their home.
Juncker warns, “As long as there is war in Syria and terror in Libya, the refugee crisis will not simply go away.”
Concerns Towards Muslim Immigration
Those raising concerns about Muslims are often referred to as bigots, yet consider what many say. “Not everyone who is an Islamist becomes a Jihadi, but everyone who ends up as a Jihadi starts off as an Islamist. No doubt about the path.” – Tarek Fatah. “In every country where Muslims are in the minority, they are obsessed with minority rights. In every country with a Muslim majority, there are NO minority rights.” – Dennis G Hurst. “The term ‘moderate Islam’ is ugly and offensive. There is no moderate Islam. Islam is Islam.” – Recep Erdogan, President of Turkey.
No-Go Zones, for non-Muslims, are proliferating in many EU countries engendering security fears. These micro-states governed by Sharia law are a reflection of the loss of control by Host country authorities. Quoting Soeren Kern, from the Gatestone Institute, “The ‘no-go’ areas are the by-product of multicultural policies that have encouraged Muslim immigrants to create parallel societies and remain segregated rather than become integrated into their European host nations.” These areas exist in Britain, France, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Sweden (referred to by Imam Adly Abu Hajar as, “the best Islamic state).
Open hostility towards host countries continues to grow by factions who have formed ‘no-go’ areas causing a rising aversion towards this social problem becoming bigger and more invasive. With this pressure from non-historically European minorities and modifications being made in the laws restricting freedoms out of a concern for the religious feelings of an immigrant class, a body of citizenry believes the core of the democracy of EU nations is threatened. No longer silent their voices are being heard.
Germany’s Chancellor Merkel has been most accommodating towards the influx noting, “Germany has become a country that many people abroad associate with hope”. However in a a recent statement she says immigrants must assimilate, become German, and not gravitate towards future ‘no-go’ areas. However expectations are low that that will actually happen, given what has transpired over the years.
More or Less Resistance Towards Immigration
Would there be less tension and resistance towards the hoards of immigrants into the EU if there were fewer or no Muslims? Is there money flowing into the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) to induce the EU leaders to be more open and outspoken towards accepting and increasing quotas for immigrants? Is the liberal policy of welcoming all comers being met with justified resistance? Are the demographic challenges too daunting?
Blue Cards are issued applicants for immigration into the EU considered legal, having a valid job offer. How many arrivals qualify? The crisis today may not be one of immigration but a refugee crisis. And a question arises as to the fate of those who do not qualify for immigration and are deported.
What is a Country truly obliged to do? What is their responsibility? Immigrants that cannot support themselves become burdens on the economy. Should they be returned from whence they came? Is the option to build camps for refugees, housing them only until they can return to their homeland? Will they then return or will they cause another problem, such as wanting to stay. If forced to leave the EU, considered illegal, they will be banned for 5 years. When will the area they left stabilize and enable a return? Detention camps have already been constructed for illegals refusing orders to leave.
Concerns and Problems
The concerns are valid yet the problem is real. A heart for the poor, the downtrodden, the displaced is what God proclaims, yet are there no limits to the generosity of others? How many are you willing to take into your home, if asked? How many can you clothe and feed and for how long? What is your obligation? – is the same inquiry of the citizens of the EU? “There is no society that could cope with something like this. The federal government needs a plan here.” – Minister-President Horst Seehofer (Bavaria’s prime minister). It is easy to say (probably politically correct too) ‘it is the only right thing to do’, but doing it and affording it is stirring the pot of discontent. What impact has the presence of Muslim’s in large numbers had on the anti-immigrant expressions?
Grace and Peace.