Homework 1 Europe. Due October 9th Minimum 1 Full Page Doub ✓ Solved

Homework #1 Europe. Due October 9th Minimum 1 full page double

Read the articles on the Schengen Agreement and migration issues in Europe. Answer the following questions in the form of an essay:

  1. What is the Schengen Agreement, when did it come into force, and which group of countries adhere to it? (Do not list all who do, but list those of the group who do not.)
  2. What are the ramifications of this agreement? Why did some countries not join, and why might some countries leave? What are the advantages and disadvantages of implementing this agreement?
  3. Explain what is happening between the UK and the Romanians and Bulgarians, between the Swiss and Portuguese, and between people coming from Africa to Europe. Why is the UK different? What makes Switzerland different? Explain the situation of people from Africa wanting to get to Melilla.
  4. What do you think about this immigration policy? Should Europe keep it or discard it? Explain your reasoning.

Paper For Above Instructions

The Shengen Agreement, which came into force in 1995, was designed to establish a borderless zone in Europe allowing free movement between member countries. Currently, it includes 26 European nations, while notable countries like the United Kingdom, Ireland, Romania, Bulgaria, and Croatia have opted out. The rationale behind these exclusions varies, including concerns about border control, immigration, and national security. For instance, the United Kingdom has maintained its own immigration policies, focusing on national sovereignty and flexibility, particularly highlighted in its negotiations surrounding Brexit.

The Schengen Agreement has had profound implications on European migration. It was designed to facilitate travel and trade among member states, bringing economic benefits. However, it has also contributed to increased migration pressures, as the absence of internal borders may encourage unauthorized immigration from non-EU countries. Some members, particularly those in Southern Europe, have expressed concerns about the migratory flow of individuals seeking asylum in wealthier EU nations. Consequently, countries either opt out or consider leaving Schengen due to fears regarding the impact on their domestic affairs or social systems.

Moreover, the advantages of the Schengen Agreement include the freedom of movement, with substantial benefits for tourism and commerce. Conversely, disadvantages encompass the risk of a significant influx of immigrants within a limited timeframe, leading to strains on public services, housing, and local economies. Countries like Switzerland, which are not EU members but are part of Schengen, experience a more controlled immigration process, enjoying economic growth while managing labor requirements effectively.

Examining the relationship between the UK and Romania and Bulgaria, it becomes clear that the situation is particularly contentious. When Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU in 2007, they faced restrictions imposed by the UK, aimed at limiting migration. The UK chose to implement a transitional period, restricting access to labor markets to mitigate the immediate impact of immigration. This decision illustrates how the dynamic nature of EU membership and various national interests can shape immigration policies, especially in light of perceived risks of cultural and economic disruption.

Switzerland is viewed differently within this framework, largely due to its wealth and stable economy. The Swiss are known for welcoming skilled immigrants, particularly those from Portugal, who contribute to labor in sectors experiencing shortages. The cooperation between these countries often results in a beneficial exchange of labor, fostering social relations and economic ties.

Meanwhile, migration pressures stemming from Africa have increasingly focused on points such as Melilla, a Spanish enclave in North Africa. For many Africans, Melilla represents one of the few pathways into Europe, propelled by the hope for better economic conditions and opportunities. Driven by poverty, persecution, and conflict in their home countries, individuals brave treacherous journeys seeking safety and improved living standards. The importance of this situation cannot be overstated, as it shapes European immigration policy and ignites debates on humanitarian obligations versus national security.

In terms of Europe’s immigration policy, opinions on whether to maintain or discard the Schengen Agreement diverge among member states. Proponents argue for retaining the agreement, citing benefits like economic cooperation and cultural exchange, while detractors express concerns over the capacity to manage immigration effectively. Personally, I believe that Europe should adapt Schengen to address contemporary concerns rather than discard it outright. The shifting immigration landscape necessitates a reevaluation of policies to ensure the balance between security and the humanitarian principles that have long served as the foundation of European integration.

This adjusted approach could involve increasing cooperation among member states regarding managing migration pressures, developing robust border control mechanisms while ensuring safe and legal pathways for individuals seeking asylum. In this way, Europe could cultivate an immigration policy that reflects both its commitment to humanitarian values and the need for national security.

References

  • Boswell, C. (2003). The ‘External Dimension’ of EU Immigration and Asylum Policy. International Affairs, 79(3), 619-634.
  • Castles, S., & Miller, M. J. (2010). The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Düvell, F. (2011). Irregular Migration in Europe: An Overview. Migration Policy Institute.
  • Gordon, I. R. (2015). The Immigration Debate in Europe: Parliamentary Governance and the Transnational Flow of Migrants. European Political Science, 14(1), 143-159.
  • Guiraudon, V. (2000). Diversity in National Migration Policies: A Political and Historical Overview. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 26(1), 3-20.
  • Howell, T. (2013). The Schengen Agreement and Free Movement of EU Nationals. Journal of European Integration, 35(1), 1-12.
  • Landau, L. B. (2012). A Land of Milk and Honey? The Paradox of Migration Policy in South Africa. International Journal of Migration and Border Studies, 1(1), 25-45.
  • Scholten, P. (2010). The Influence of the European Union on National Immigration Policies: A Critical Analysis. European Journal of Migration and Law, 12(3), 253-274.
  • Vermeulen, H. (2015). The Role of Immigration Policy in the Economic Development of EU Countries. European Economic Review, 75, 1-24.
  • Wessendorf, S. (2011). Migration, Super-Diversity, and the Role of the EU. Journal of European Migration and Law, 13(2), 145-160.

Related Assignments