500 MILLION ARE IN DANGER AND WILL HAVE TO CONSIDER MOVING OUT OF HARM'S WAY OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT 10 TO 30 YEARS.
"More than 500 million residents living in the Middle East and North Africa would need to move away from this hostile terrain."
FROM SOURCES SUCH AS THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS (CFR), TO THE U.N. STATS, TO PEW RESEARCH AND EUROPE'S TRACKING OF IMMIGRATION FROM AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST, EVEN A GRADE SCHOOL STUDENT CAN SEE THE TREND.
THERE IS SIMPLY NO DENYING IT.
AGAIN AND AGAIN, HOWEVER, NO MATTER WHERE WE READ, WE CAN SEE THE SUGGESTIONS OF THE ONLY PLAUSIBLE, LOGICAL REMEDIES TO THIS MASS EXODUS THAT IS TAXING EUROPEAN NATIONS (MAINLY) TO THE MAXIMUM THEY CAN WITHSTAND....
~ SOLUTION #1...STOP THE DAMNED WARS!
STOP MEDDLING IN OVERSEAS, ALL FOREIGN POWERS!
SUPER-POWERS, GO HOME, LEAVE THE MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICA ALONE AND STOP VYING FOR THEIR NATURAL RESOURCES AND FOR POLITICAL CLOUT IN THOSE NATIONS!
WHICH LEADS TO ...
~SOLUTION #2, WHICH MUST, REALLY MUST FOLLOW:
SPEND JUST PART OF WHAT WAS BEING SPENT ON WARS (TRILLIONS IN JUST AMERICAN DOLLARS) TO HELP THE POORER NATIONS ESTABLISH FOOD AND WATER SUSTAINABILITY.
INSTEAD OF TOSSING THEM A RARE FISH HERE AND THERE AND CALLING IT "FOREIGN AID", TEACH THEM HOW TO RAISE AND MANAGE THEIR OWN FISH!
SHOW THEM HOW TO FIND AND MAINTAIN SAFE WATER SUPPLIES.
OFFER WAYS IN WHICH THEIR OWN PEOPLE CAN OBTAIN THE NECESSARY EDUCATION AND TRAINING TO DO THINGS LIKE TREAT ILLNESS, CREATE BETTER ECONOMIES, RAISE MORE FOOD ON LESS LAND, ADDRESS POPULATION PROBLEMS, STOP VIOLENCE, PROVIDE JOBS, OFFER HOPE.
OFFER HOPE, NOT WEAPONS!
INSTEAD OF MAKING THEM SUBSERVIENT TO SUPER-POWERS, TEACH THEM INDEPENDENCE AND SHOW THEM HOW TO ATTAIN THAT!
IF THOSE TWO SOLUTIONS ARE NOT IMPLEMENTED, ALL OF EUROPE, AND, EVENTUALLY, AMERICA AS WELL WILL SUFFER ECONOMIC ARMAGEDDON.
EUROPE IS ALREADY REELING FROM THIS EXODUS, AND IT WILL ONLY WORSEN AS WARS RAGE.
THOUGH MANY FEWER MIGRANTS FROM THAT AREA OF THE WORLD ARE FLOCKING TO AMERICA, FEW MAY BE AWARE HOW MANY ARE ALREADY HERE:
"As of 2013, approximately 1.02 million immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region resided in the United States, representing 2.5 percent of the nation’s 41.3 million immigrants.
Close to two-fifths of MENA immigrants obtain lawful permanent residence in the United States (also known as receiving a “green card”) as immediate relatives of U.S. citizens.
70 percent come from the Middle East.
SAUDI ARABIAN IMMIGRANTS PREFER THE U.S.
64 percent of immigrants from Saudi Arabia have entered the United States since 2010.
[NOTE: These statistics are for NEW immigrants, and does not include children born here to 'MENA' immigrants from any time period.]
France (2.8 million), the United States (904,000), Spain (825,000), and Italy (703,000) are the top destinations for INTENTIONAL, NON-REFUGEE 'MENA' IMMIGRANTS, according to mid-2013 estimates by the United Nations Population Division.
JUNE 18, 2015
~ UNHCR’s 2014 Global Trends report (PDF) finds forced displacement at a nineteen-year high worldwide.
PART OF THAT PDF READS:
"Wars, conflict and persecution have forced more people than at any other time since records began to flee their homes and seek refuge and safety elsewhere.
Globally, one in every 122 humans is now either a refugee, internally displaced, or seeking asylum. If this were the population of a country, it would be the world's 24th biggest.
The increase represents the biggest leap ever seen in a single year.
Half of all refugees are children.
Moreover, the report said the situation was likely to worsen still further."
~ FROM CFR, SEPT. 23, 2015
"Migrants and refugees streaming into Europe from Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia have presented European leaders and policymakers with their greatest challenge since the debt crisis. The International Organization for Migration calls Europe the most dangerous destination for irregular migration in the world, and the Mediterranean the world's most dangerous border crossing.
THE DUBLIN REGULATION AND EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS
"Entry-point states bear unilateral responsibility for migrants under the Dublin Regulation.
Revised in 2013, this EU law stipulates that asylum seekers must remain in the first European country they enter and that country is solely responsible for examining migrants' asylum applications.
Migrants who travel to other EU states face deportation back to the EU country they originally entered.
EUROPE WILL BEAR THE BRUNT
Entry-point states bear unilateral responsibility for migrants under the Dublin Regulation. Revised in 2013, this EU law stipulates that asylum seekers must remain in the first European country they enter and that country is solely responsible for examining migrants' asylum applications. Migrants who travel to other EU states face deportation back to the EU country they originally entered.
THE SCHENGEN ZONE, TEMPORARY BORDER CONTROLS IN EMERGENCIES
The secondary movements of migrants who
evade their first country of entry, in clear violation of the Dublin
Regulation, have put enormous strain on the EU's visa-free Schengen
zone, which eliminated border controls among twenty-six European
countries.
Considered one of the signature achievements of European integration, it has come under heightened scrutiny in light of the current migrant influx and attendant security concerns.
(Fissures first surfaced in April 2011, when France briefly reintroduced border controls in response to the influx of thousands of Tunisian and Libyan refugees from neighboring Italy. Denmark followed suit in May 2011 by reintroducing temporary controls on its shared borders with Sweden and Germany.)
In August 2015, Germany announced that it was suspending Dublin for Syrian asylum seekers, which effectively stopped deportations of Syrians back to their European country of entry.
This move by the bloc's largest and wealthiest member country was seen as an important gesture of solidarity with entry-point states.
However, German Chancellor Angela Merkel also warned that the future of Schengen was at risk unless all EU member states did their part to find a more equitable distribution of migrants.
Germany reinstated border controls along its border with Austria in September 2015, after receiving an estimated forty thousand migrants over one weekend.
Implemented on the eve of an emergency migration summit, this move was seen by many experts as a signal to other EU member states about the pressing need for an EU-wide quota system.
Austria, the Netherlands, and Slovakia soon followed with their own border controls. These developments have been called the greatest blow to Schengen in its twenty-year existence.
While Schengen rules allow member countries to erect temporary border controls under extenuating "public policy or national security" circumstances, CSIS' Conley fears that a sustained influx of migrants could spur more member states to suspend borderless travel for longer stretches of time.
"I suspect if the politics surrounding migration really start getting messy, you'll see countries reintroducing internal borders with greater frequency, which means they would have chiseled away at one of the main pillars of Europe, which is the free movement of people," she says.
Considered one of the signature achievements of European integration, it has come under heightened scrutiny in light of the current migrant influx and attendant security concerns.
(Fissures first surfaced in April 2011, when France briefly reintroduced border controls in response to the influx of thousands of Tunisian and Libyan refugees from neighboring Italy. Denmark followed suit in May 2011 by reintroducing temporary controls on its shared borders with Sweden and Germany.)
In August 2015, Germany announced that it was suspending Dublin for Syrian asylum seekers, which effectively stopped deportations of Syrians back to their European country of entry.
This move by the bloc's largest and wealthiest member country was seen as an important gesture of solidarity with entry-point states.
However, German Chancellor Angela Merkel also warned that the future of Schengen was at risk unless all EU member states did their part to find a more equitable distribution of migrants.
Germany reinstated border controls along its border with Austria in September 2015, after receiving an estimated forty thousand migrants over one weekend.
Implemented on the eve of an emergency migration summit, this move was seen by many experts as a signal to other EU member states about the pressing need for an EU-wide quota system.
Austria, the Netherlands, and Slovakia soon followed with their own border controls. These developments have been called the greatest blow to Schengen in its twenty-year existence.
While Schengen rules allow member countries to erect temporary border controls under extenuating "public policy or national security" circumstances, CSIS' Conley fears that a sustained influx of migrants could spur more member states to suspend borderless travel for longer stretches of time.
"I suspect if the politics surrounding migration really start getting messy, you'll see countries reintroducing internal borders with greater frequency, which means they would have chiseled away at one of the main pillars of Europe, which is the free movement of people," she says.
NO REAL, LASTING SOLUTION IF WARS CONTINUE.
In September 2015, EU ministers agreed to resettle 120,000 migrants—a small fraction of those seeking asylum in Europe—from Greece and Italy across twenty-three member states.
(Greece and Italy will not be required to resettle more migrants, and Denmark, Ireland, and the UK are exempt from EU asylum policies under provisions laid out in the 2009 Lisbon Treaty.)
This plan was approved despite the vocal objections of the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia.
This agreement builds upon a previous voluntary quota system that called on member states to resettle forty thousand migrants from Greece and Italy over a two-year period. Critics of this approach argue that free movement inside the Schengen zone effectively nullifies national resettlement quotas.
In addition to taking in larger numbers of asylum seekers, many experts say the EU and global powers must also provide more aid to Middle Eastern countries like Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan, which have borne the primary responsibility for Syrian refugees.
According to the UNHCR, 1.9 million Syrians have taken refuge in Turkey, 1.1 million in Lebanon, and 630,000 in Jordan since the start of the conflict in 2011.
This influx has altered the demographics and economies of these host countries, which are now struggling to provide basic food and shelter due to funding shortages.
(Since 2011, the United States has spent more than $4 billion on Syria humanitarian assistance, but has only given refuge to 1,500 Syrians. In September 2015, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry announced that the United States would accept an additional ten thousand Syrians in 2016, and an additional thirty thousand global refugees over the next two years.)
Some policymakers, like European Council President Donald Tusk, have called for asylum centers to be built in North Africa and the Middle East to enable refugees to apply for asylum without undertaking perilous journeys across the Mediterranean, as well as cutting down on the number of irregular migrants arriving on European shores.
However, critics of this plan argue that the sheer number of applicants expected at such "hotspots" could further destabilize already fragile states.
BE SEEN AS CALLOUS OR KEEP ACCEPTING REFUGEES AND BE UNABLE TO FEED AND HOUSE SO MANY?
"The political response of countries pushing migrants out or incarcerating them for long stretches runs counter to the very values that the EU promotes, like protecting human life and the right to asylum."—Heather Conley, Center for Strategic and International Studies.
European leaders must address the root causes of migration: helping to broker an end to Syria's civil war, restoring stability to Libya, and upping aid to sub-Saharan Africa. Barring a political solution to these regional crises, Europe will continue to struggle with migrant inflows."
THEN EUROPE WILL CONTINUE TO STRUGGLE WITH THIS CRISIS BECAUSE NONE OF THE MAJOR PLAYERS IN THE WAR FOR CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENTS AND NATURAL RESOURCES OF THOSE NATIONS WILL BACK DOWN AN INCH.
IT'S A POWER PLAY BETWEEN THE WORLD'S BIG POWERS, PERIOD.
TOO MUCH OIL AND OTHER DESIRED MATERIALS AS WELL AS POLITICAL CONTROL ARE AT STAKE.
NO MAJOR PLAYER WILL EVER BACK OFF AND ALLOW THE MIDDLE EAST TO TAKE CARE OF ITS OWN PROBLEMS, FACE IT.
~ FROM PEW RESEARCH, AN ABSOLUTELY EXHAUSTIVE STUDY FROM 2011
"On average, more people are leaving countries in the Middle East-North Africa region than migrating to them. From 2010 to 2015, these countries LOST an annual average of 66 people per 100,000 in the general population.
During the same period, Muslim-majority countries in North Africa were expected to have an annual net loss of 67 people per 100,000, which works out to be more than 142,000 people per year.
The sub-region is projected to lose 56 people per 100,000 annually in 2030-35, or more than 156,000 people per year.
The Middle East was projected to have an annual net loss of 80 people per 100,000 in 2010-15, or more than 80,000 people per year.
This loss reflects the impact of the recent world economic downturn, which has reduced immigration to the Gulf states, and the continuing conflict in Iraq, which has increased migration in the region as a whole.
However, Iraq is excluded from the migration trend projections after 2005 because the ongoing conflict there makes projections regarding migration from the country unreliable.
The Middle East includes 13 countries and territories:
Bahrain, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Palestinian territories, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.
North Africa includes seven countries and territories:
Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, and Western Sahara. "
THAT ADDS UP TO OVER 350,000 PEOPLE ANNUALLY LEAVING THESE REGIONS...NOW...TODAY, AND DOES NOT INCLUDE IRAQ STATISTICS, AS THE ARTICLE STATES..
I ALSO SEE NO STATS FOR AFGHANISTAN, ANOTHER WAR-TORN NATION, OR FROM PAKISTAN OR TURKEY.
AND NOT ALL OF AFRICA WAS INCLUDED.
~ FROM MIT, BACK IN 2012
HIGHER TEMPS MEAN WORSE ECONOMIES FOR ALREADY POOR NATIONS
(FORCING MIGRATION)
"The potential impacts of an increase in temperature on poor countries are much larger than existing estimates have suggested," Olken says. "Although historical estimates don't necessarily predict the future, our results suggest that one should be particularly attentive to the potential impact of climate on poorer countries."
Olken's analysis is contained in "Climate Shocks and Economic Growth: Evidence from the Last Half Century," a paper co-authored by MIT economics graduate student Melissa Dell and Benjamin F. Jones, associate management professor at Northwestern University.
Olken, who has been researching issues of growth and temperature for about two years, presented some of the findings at a recent conference of the American Economic Association."
WHETHER ONE AGREES WITH "CLIMATE CHANGE" OR NOT, FACTS ARE FACTS AND ECONOMISTS HAVE GATHERED FACTS FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
CLIMATE DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT 1 + 1 = 2!
PEOPLE IN THE POOREST NATIONS HAVE ONLY TWO CHOICES:
(1) STAY AND DIE, OR
(2) TRY TO GET OUT ANY WAY THEY CAN AND GO ANYWHERE THEY HOPE THEY CAN SURVIVE
AFTER ALL, WHAT WOULD ANY OF US DO, FACED WITH THAT CHOICE?
TO WATCH A VIDEO OR READ THE TRANSCRIPT OF A RECENT ASSESSMENT OF THIS "IMMIGRATION CRISIS IN EUROPE" , SEE http://www.cfr.org/migration/migrant-crisis-europe/p37028
IT HAS STRAINED INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS BETWEEN COUNTRIES, CHANGED THE DOMESTIC POLITICS WITHIN NATIONS AND ERASED THE WEALTH MANY ENJOYED IN MIDDLE EAST NATIONS AS THEY USE UP FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO ESCAPE BEFORE THE CONTINUED ONSLAUGHT OF WARS.
ONCE FINANCIALLY SECURE, MANY ARE NOW ENTIRELY DEPENDENT ON THE CHARITY OF HOST NATIONS TO FEED, CLOTHE AND SHELTER THEM.
IF THIS INCREASING EXODUS CANNOT BE CHANGED, ALL OF US, AS WELL AS THE IMMIGRANTS, FACE ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL UNCERTAINTY.
QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL OF US CAN'T HELP BUT DETERIORATE.
WE MUST LOOK HARD AT THE ONLY TWO LOGICAL SOLUTIONS AND IMPLEMENT THEM BEFORE "ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE".
THE ENTIRE WORLD TOGETHER IS NOT EQUIPPED TO HANDLE 500 MILLION PEOPLE EXITING AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST.
TOO MANY AGREE THAT, OF THOSE ATTEMPTING SUCH AN EXODUS, MOST WOULD PERISH.
----------------------------------------
FOR AN IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF THE RISE IN IMMIGRANT/REFUGEE DEATHS AND THE SECURITY CRISIS SO MANY FLEEING CREATES, SEE
http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2015073100
No comments:
Post a Comment