The controversial deal between the Albanian PM and Italian counterpart is wrong and risky for Albania as well as impractical for Italy.
TIRANA TIMES EDITORIAL
Eureka! At a stroke of a pen, the problem of irregular migration to the EU through Italy from Africa and the Middle East appears solved. Not an easy feat since this is a fundamental problem not only for the EU’s two large southern members, Italy and Spain, but for the entire European Union. The solution offered by Italy: Ship up to 36,000 adults, mostly men, to camps in Albania through a bilateral deal that would see Italy have extraterritorial jurisdiction over parts of northwestern Albania, where refugees who are rescued at sea by the Italian navy and other state vessels can be hosted until asylum cases can be processed, which can take years.
The deal is wrong and risky for Albania as well as impractical for Italy. It is also terrible on the human level for the refugees.
First, an agreement like the one signed by the prime ministers of Albania and Italy in Rome on Nov. 6 does not solve the issue of irregular migration that is coming in through ever larger waves in the Mediterranean Sea. This is a serious and ongoing crisis that belongs to and should be solved by the European Union as a whole, not just Italy or Spain.
The EU’s failure to deal with the crisis cannot be fixed by an agreement with a poor and small non-EU country like Albania. The idea is simply ridiculous and shows lack of seriousness on the part of Italy and the EU on a very serious issue like irregular migration. Instead of the Italian government making all efforts to solve the problem with the contribution of the EU, it finds Albania to place irregular migrants in camps in non-EU territory.
Second, the deal is bad, not just because it does not solve the problem but also because it tries to hide it.
None of the thousands of people risking their lives to reach Europe dream of a future in which they are placed in camps in a small and poor country just outside of the EU’s wall. Moreover, this is also a country that its own citizens are abandoning at high rates due to lack of economic opportunities. For example, in Italy alone Albanians are the second largest non-EU nationality after Moroccans, with approximately 500,000 Albanian people living there.
Italy’s agreement with the Prime Minister of Albania does not save the European Union from a crisis that has the potential to expand, considering the dramatic developments in the Middle East or whole territories in Africa that are no longer governable.
Third, the agreement does not help Italy either. The arguments presented that Albania is helping Italy by repaying its debt are false because that is not the way to help Italy. In this matter, Albania has neither the capacity nor the means to help Italy. This agreement is a deceitful and unsustainable deal precisely because it hides this truth. It is presented as a humanitarian plan, and especially in a context where Albania owes Italy for the Albanians it hosted during the country’s difficult post-communist transition. That’s simply a lie.
The truth is simpler: The agreement is aimed at helping Gergia Meloni with her far-right, anti-migration electoral base and with her internal political struggles in Rome. Let’s remember that Meloni came to power with promises to use drastic measures to address the issue of irregular migration. The Meloni government can present the agreement with Albania as a promising start to deal with the migration crisis, an issue on which she is now losing political support.
However, this is not a practical solution for Italy; and it will be very costly. The refugees that Italy will place in the territory of Albania will be hosted in camps that will have Italian extraterritorial jurisdiction. It is almost like placing them in Italian territory. Moreover, by bringing the migrants to Albania, the Italian state will have to foot the costs for transportation, security, provisions and management, including the costs of Italian police and civilian forces — and this will all be more expensive in Albania than if they were placed in Italy. But if hosting, accommodating and keeping them in camps in Albania is more expensive, then why would Italy use Albanian territory when itself has a lot more room? This is another reason why the agreement is unreasonable.
From what has been made public, the agreement does not specify what will happen to the people hosted in the camps who do not meet the criteria to gain asylum status in Italy or another EU country. If they will be “repatriated” as the details provided show, what will be the formula? Are the migrants to be returned to their first arrival country? Is this written in the agreement? If not, where will they stay? Because repatriating them to their countries of origin requires bilateral agreements with those countries. And many refugees will lack travel documents. In these circumstances, the majority of them will remain in Albania, which is completely unprepared for that type of scenario.
Essentially, Albania gains nothing from this agreement. It’s not just about financial gain, either, although this should not be ruled out. No prime minister or president of a democratic country gives away their territory for free.
Furthermore, this agreement does not help Albania in its relations with Italy. It’s a client-patron relationship, neither liked nor accepted, not in Tirana, and, we believe, not in Rome.
This agreement doesn’t help Albania’s efforts to integrate into the European Union either. In fact becoming host to thousands of irregular migrants might force the EU to tighten those external borders further. If there is more to the agreement on this front, no one has provided details yet.
Look at the relative numbers alone. If Albania receives 36,000 people as the deal prescribes, in proportion to the small country’s population it would be the same as if Germany — the most welcoming state in the EU — taking in 1.4 million migrants. Any German government that would accept such a deal would no doubt not be in power long.
Basically, this agreement is against the interests of Albania. It follows a prominent trend in Albanian politics, with leaders and statesmen willing to enter any agreement to serve their personal interests. In 2013, Rama was willing to allow Albania to be used to destroy Syria’s chemical weapons as a favor to the United States. A massive popular protest prevented the move. Two years later, Albania provided shelter to MEK, a former terrorist organization claiming to represent the political opposition in Iran. They have been a massive headache for Albania ever since. The first 300 MEK members were actually brought over by the center-right Prime Minister Sali Berisha, but the thousands that followed were under Rama’s government. These refugees taken in for “humanitarian reasons” turned their camp in Albanian territory into a cyberattack and propaganda base against Iran. The consequences of this were an unnecessary confrontation with Iran and almost the virtual collapse of the Albanian state services from Iran’s cyberattacks on Albania. The policy continued with the Afghans after the Western-friendly government collapsed — Albania was the only country found to provide them shelter that was supposed to be temporary before they could move to the EU and North America — many of these refugees remain in Albania to this day — and most are desperate to leave.
These decisions have consequences for Albania and the people hosted in this country under these agreements. The will of the Albanian people should be a deciding factor, not the personal benefits or needs of political leaders who make such decisions. So, last but not least, the Prime Minister of Albania essentially signed an agreement without consulting the government, without consulting parliament or the majority of his parliamentary representatives. This speaks loudly, clearly and sufficiently about the state of democracy in Albania.
