Schengen skepticism

Let's make Schengen interesting too

Recent Bulgarian governments have made great efforts to join the Schengen area. At the same time, although we have met the nominal criteria for securing the borders to the required standard, our country's candidacy is being used as a tool for conducting domestic policy by some European countries or for pressuring the Bulgarian cabinet to accelerate (start) reforms in the judicial system.

However, should we be in such a hurry to join the Schengen area? According to our “old” custom, we have blindly rushed into yet another European project without much, much thought about our own interests. The events of the last year clearly show that unreserved faith in the usefulness and correctness of the policies developed on the continent can be dangerous. The course of history shows us that it is high time to stop banging our foreheads on the ground at every word from Brussels, and instead to think about our priorities.

Following the logic that reflection on one's own interests is necessary, we must look at the consequences of our admission to Schengen. The most important change that will occur as a result of our entry into the zone is the elimination of police control from the borders with Greece and Romania. There will be a shift in checks from the furrow itself to those inside the country. This method of security is undoubtedly faster and more convenient for travelers, but it turns the country into an open home for anyone who has crossed the external borders of Schengen.

If anyone has any illusions that these borders are well-guarded, it would be good to remember the events of this summer, when hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Maghreb rushed to southern Europe. Our would-be partners found a palette of sneaky ways to shift the problem to each other – like the Italians with their temporary passes that allowed foreigners to get to France. Many of the countries in the north considered a “temporary” exit from the agreement and the return of border controls. So much for cooperation and common goals.

If we return to the eastern front, the only country with bigger immigration problems than Italy and Spain is Greece. According to statistics from The Economist, in 2010, 80% of those caught(!) illegally crossing the Schengen borders tried their luck right through our southern neighbor. A walk through the streets of Athens or Thessaloniki speaks volumes about how successful they are in the endeavor. To the refugees, we can also add cigarette smuggling, which in the absence of border control would have reached monstrous proportions.

The many islands, the poor organization of the services and the decreasing funding only complicate the problem of the Greeks. A large part of the flow of African and Asian (economic) refugees is also directed to our country, but the majority are stopped by our functioning border control system. While it still exists. Police practice has shown that preventing such waves of immigrants is most successful at the border itself. If we were part of Schengen, it would be empty. Law enforcement agencies had to hunt these people inside the country, AFTER they brought their problems to our soil.

It turned out that we had a much calmer summer because we relied on ourselves and on systems that clearly function better than the European ones. The accumulating evidence suggests that Schengen is yet another example of an ill-conceived and hastily declared success project that may be suitable for the Franco-German border, but is not suitable for quick, direct export to the south or east.

Events on the continent are setting a new, more moderate (even skeptical) European agenda. The headlong rush towards “common” models and policies has brought hard times for the unwary. It is time to pause and consider where our interests lie – they clearly cannot be found in much of what is being offered by Paris, Brussels or Schengen.

Did you like it? Take a minute to support the EKIP on Patreon!