Pedro Sánchez is in the diplomatic doghouse. The Ceuta migrant crisis last week has prompted an extraordinary diplomatic spat, with EU states calling for Spain to be removed from the Schengen zone. Amid fury at Sánchez’s previous amnesty of 600,000 illegal migrants which they fear has served as a potent pull factor in the latest crisis, the EU has reportedly told Sánchez he must verify the figures his government has provided on removals, given doubts over Spain’s claim that the vast majority of the 60,000 that crossed into the Spanish enclave had been returned.
The hardening of European attitudes means the real diplomatic risk now lies not in uncompromisingly enforcing our border, but in appearing incapable of doing so.
This episode shows how far European attitudes have shifted since the Merkel ‘Wir schaffen das’ (‘We can manage this’) era of 2015. European leaders seem to have belatedly realised that the punishment from their electorates will be brutal and swift if they don’t get a grip of the illegal migration crisis.
European leaders – who for years portrayed robust border enforcement as somehow contrary to European values – now say, in the words of a letter signed by 22 European countries on 1 August: ‘We cannot allow uncontrolled mass crossings… to create the perception that illegal entry into the European Union is possible’. Enfin!
There is an important lesson for the UK here. We have been told repeatedly by progressives that our country would become diplomatically isolated or even an international pariah if we became tough on illegal immigration. We can now unequivocally say that is nonsense. What the Ceuta aftermath is showing is that it is countries that fail to take back control that will experience diplomatic blowback.
The hardening of European attitudes means the real diplomatic risk now lies not in uncompromisingly enforcing our border, but in appearing incapable of doing so. While the UK is outside Schengen, European countries still have a critical interest in migrants not setting out from the Middle East or Africa in an attempt to reach British shores given the potential for them to be held up en route and become a problem for continental Europe to deal with.
We must be ruthless in enforcing a zero tolerance approach. On this depends not just economic prosperity, social cohesion and national security but also diplomatic credibility. We are a country that once ruled the world thanks to our naval superiority. Being now visibly incapable of stopping rubber dinghies from reaching our shores is trashing our international image in foreign chancelleries. As former Australian PM Tony Abbott said this week (where he appeared to voice support for Reform’s plan to use the Navy to send boats back), ‘If you lose control of your borders you lose your sovereignty’. No foreign country respects that. We have spent years trying to demonstrate to the world our compassion. We would do well to now focus on demonstrating competence.
There is in fact a diplomatic opportunity here, should we have a government creative enough to seize it. First we must establish, visibly and beyond dispute, that crossing the Channel illegally no longer provides a route to settlement in Britain. And yes turning back boats should be a central part of that. Once we have demonstrated that zero tolerance works, we can convert control into diplomatic capital.
A country that has solved its own problem can credibly advise others. We could model our approach internationally, disseminating best practice on confronting transnational smuggling networks. Rather than endlessly talking of burden sharing, Britain could export its expertise, delivering Border Force training and upskilling countries on maritime surveillance. A global centre against people smuggling, based in the UK, could be a fitting new chapter in our Navy’s great history. We could even institute an annual border security index, where countries are ranked on turn-backs and removals to give a score on their border strength. Governments hate poor league table scores; if we rank countries according to human rights and happiness, why not also on territorial integrity?
And this is to say nothing of the boon it would be to the other essential track of our diplomacy: the transatlantic relationship. As Trump never tires of pointing out, illegal immigration is existential for the UK, and for Europe, and the State Department has now made clear that defence of the West will be a key pillar of its foreign policy approach. Failing to deal with mass immigration is becoming a thorn in the side of the relationship with our closest ally. It need not be.
The diplomatic dividend then, from turning enforcement success into soft power, could be considerable. But instead of our current diplomacy as displacement activity, we should secure the border first and hold the summit afterwards.
Nineteenth-century ‘gunboat diplomacy’ recognised that the best diplomacy was backed by credible naval power. We should seize this crisis by the horns and no longer allow ourselves to be browbeaten into fearing diplomatic blowback. For the lesson of Ceuta is that border control is no longer merely a case of domestic policy; it is an essential ingredient of national credibility. The first prerequisite for diplomatic influence is demonstrating that you can enforce your own laws. It’s high time we did so.
The post Britain could benefit from the European shift on migration appeared first on The Spectator Australia.
