Niccolo Machiavelli stated that the “way people actually live in Europe is different than the way they should live”. Migration policies in Europe is not a spark of decency and the world has been anxiously saw European elections where populist have been resurgent. The most common group in Europe called Visegrad States or V4 States- Hungry, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia have stringent policy primitive to immigration and migration policies and V4 states are taking harsh steps against the policy enact by European Union for migration and people seeking asylum in their national media. Italy, Hungry and Austria have won sets at the elections based on anti-migration policies and followed aberrant policies regarding sealing of the boarders or allowing someone outside of Europe to take the responsibility of the asylum seekers. On the other hand, Netherlands and France has witnessed second round of the presidential elections without any of its traditional political parties in the race. Thus, it is evident that injection more people into the country could cause flooded economy, higher unemployment and inflation with regards indulgent migration policies. Populism voices are considered to be brave voices as oppose to elites who perceives the problem of migration is indifferent to the problem that ordinary people face.
In May 2017, European Commission purported migration policy for the people seeking place in Europe or needed protection as asylum from Italy and Greece. The European Commission infringement proceedings against V4 States for not abiding or following the European Commission laws on migration. The V4 states neglected the laws on migration and accepted people based on strict preference, which was against the policies of European Commission. However, the policy enacted by European Commission was also refuted by Italy, Hungry and Czech Republic based on the agenda that they do not want any refugee in their country which would predominately change their cultural identity. The V4 states purported a pre-determination strategy that would assess the reason for asylum seeker, whether he or she is genuine asylum seeker or economic asylum seeker, and such determination should be made outside the territories of Europe. This strategy of determination was followed by former French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen’s policy platform. There are various pros and cons to such strategy of determining the eligibility of the asylum seeker, for instance, an asylum seeker could be a refugee or economic migrant. But the issue is no country in Europe determines the viability that asylum seeker that came to Europe, did came for the purpose of reuniting with the family or to seek better life opportunity.
Moreover, the adverse impact of such determination policy is that assessment of people outside the territory of European Union. It is evident that International law does not forbids a state to grant asylum from a distance outside their territory. But the subsequent impact would be “only way” of granting asylum, which means ‘Sequencing is crucial’ that allows the state to bound themselves to accept refugees who applied within the territory. Once the application of refugees accepted, then the waiting period of the refugees commences, which leads to the possibility of facing death. Thus, all V4 countries have signed both 1951 Convention and its 1967 protocol, which bind the countries to accept the application of the refugees rather “refouling people”. The reason for astringent policies executed because V4 countries does not want any people to enter their territory on the basis that it would flood their market, rampant violence might prevail in their country and followed by some manipulation of the culture. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates that more than 1,011,700 migrants arrived by sea in 2015, and almost 34,900 by land. According to euro stat almost 2 million people have migrated to Europe in the year of 2016 and various terrorist activities took place in Brussels, Paris and Spain. With implementation of harsh policies towards refugees and not allowing their members to cross boarder would result in upheavals.
The impediments of volatile policies in Europeans elections are impulsive because policies purported by the candidates during elections are futile policies against the refugees that are willingly to enter the territories of Europe. Human torture, violation of Human Rights and deaths are filthy acts that are carried out by the European countries. The impact of election would result nothing more than ashes of phoenix because people won’t accept such discriminatory acts.
Furthermore, an idea to aid the developmental projects of V4 group and other European countries has ended up to be unproven concept because it’s been pushed back by Jean Luc Melenchon in France and Mark Rutte in the Netherlands. The discontent with such aid process is that European Union has spent billions of dollars in aid development for the people vulnerable to persecution and war. Also, the pecuniary amounts did not unified families in Europe. Nevertheless, if aid is indeed aimed at improving living conditions and not at preventing people from leaving their country (as everyone is entitled to) then it is difficult to see major shortcomings to ramping it up. There is always a room to enhance the aid development program in order to furnish the people that are trying to enter the territories of Europe. For instance, European Union has instigated to aid developing countries in Europe known as “Official Development Assistant” (ODA) which would ultimately enhance the economy and infrastructure of the developing countries that could accommodate future refugees to enter the territories of Europe. Unfortunately, the collective goal of Europe is apple-of-discord and Gross National Income (GNI) is 7 % for development aid.
In pith and marrow, there are some fruitful ways that European Union could work together to achieve their best policies towards migration. The essential factor to enhance the migration policy is to increase development aid programs to the people that are striving hard to enter the Europe’s territory in order to have better life opportunities. Another factor is to protect Europeans boarder while supplying assistance for the registration and identification of the asylum seekers. Lastly, provide extra means to apply for asylum from outside EU boarder. It is evident that allowing strangers into the countries could be fatal but allowing them to have a better opportunities in life and flourish education for the purpose of good life can lead to prosperity in the European Union countries. Also, having stringent policy would impact other countries in surroundings, for instance, people would develop hatred against the European counties and would end up in upheavals and fatal. Under the Law, it is illegal to torture human beings and it would disadvantage Europe.