Atal, M.

Salomon, S.

English

The protection of Afghans should not be limited to those directly employed by European governments

International Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion online publications

UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl)UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)Why at-risk Afghans have a right of admission to EU member statesAtal, M.; Salomon, S.Publication date2021Document VersionFinal published versionLicenseCC BY-NCLink to publicationCitation for published version (APA):Atal, M. (Author), & Salomon, S. (Author). (2021). Why at-risk Afghans have a right ofadmission to EU member states. Web publication or website, OpenDemocracy.https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/can-europe-make-it/why-risk-afghans-have-right-admission-eu-member-states/General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s)and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an opencontent license (like Creative Commons).Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, pleaselet the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the materialinaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letterto: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Youwill be contacted as soon as possible.Download date:26 Oct 2023C A N  E U R O P E  M A K E  I T ? :   A N A L Y S I SWhy at-risk Afghans have a right of admission to EUmember statesThe protection of Afghans should not be limited to those directlyemployed by European governmentsMojib Atal Stefan Salomon30 August 2021, 2.04pmDONATEEvacuating Afghan civilians at Kabul airport, following the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, 17 August | US Marines Photo /AlamyReactions across European states to the takeover of power by the Taliban inAfghanistan are markedly ambivalent. Politicians admit failing to speedilyprocess admission for those Afghan employees who worked directly for Europeangovernments, while warning against irregular migration  ows from Afghanistan and arepeat of the so-called 'open-door' policies seen in 2015.The fact that people  ee military interventions and wars is unavoidable. What must beavoided, however, is the collapse of the asylum systems of EU member states and theshameful lack of  nancial support to third countries catering for refugees. Indeed, themore than 10,000 drowned refugees in the Mediterranean since 2015 must not berepeated – and there is an obvious solution: the establishment of legal and safepathways to Europe for Afghans in need of protection.Entangled sovereigntyPerhaps even more clearly than in other con icts, the war in Afghanistandemonstrates how closely the exercise of sovereign powers by European states isentangled with the lives of the local population. Military intervention by one state inanother state is the exercise of a state’s sovereign powers, irrespective of whether thatintervention is contrary to or in accordance with international law.Essentially in pursuit of speci c security interests, EU member states, after the USA,provided by far the largest part of military troops in Afghanistan. In his speech at theGerman parliament in 2002, for example, Peter Struck, former German minister ofdefence, justi ed the mandate for the deployment of the German army with theassertion that “Germany's security today is also being defended in the Hindu Kush”.Help us uncover the truth aboutCovid-19The Covid-19 public inquiry is a historic chance to  nd out what reallyhappened.MAKE A DONATIONEntanglement on several levelsWhen the Western coalition bombed Kabul on the basis of a Security Council mandatein September 2001 and subsequently invaded with ground troops, the number ofAfghan refugees increased signi cantly.On another, more complex level, the employment of European military personnelwould have been “impossible and hopeless from the outset” without the support ofAfghans. European military o cers relied on Afghan interpreters to communicate withthe population, Afghan security forces and local politicians. Likewise, the maintenanceof infrastructure and food supply depended on Afghan merchants, cleaning workersand craftsmen. It is not only di cult to wage war on an empty stomach, but also whenlatrines are not emptied by local employees.Moreover, the security interests of European states in Afghanistan were not onlyenforced by tanks. Struck made it clear in the same 2002 speech that “the creation ofconditions for economic development and societal democratisation is essential forsucceeding in the  ght against international terrorism.” The European Union wasengaged directly in nation-building processes through its military and civilian missions,and the European Union Police Mission was one of the largest police missionsdeployed to Afghanistan. These missions might also have been promoting Europe’svalues through ‘democratization’ beyond European borders. The work of the variousEuropean development organizations also depended on the cooperation and labour oftens of thousands of Afghan employees. In addition to those Afghans directlyemployed, there were many who worked on projects  nanced by Europeandevelopment funds, also aimed at realising European security interests.Employment of European military personnel would have been‘impossible’ without Afghans’ supportBy persecuting individuals who collaborated with Western governments, the Talibanare essentially attacking the link between the exercise of sovereign powers byEuropean states and the Afghan population. These various and assortedentanglements put many Afghan lives at risk. The Taliban often persecute thoseAfghans who play a central role in building civil society and state structures, such asjournalists, human rights activists, especially women's rights activists.After their takeover of Kabul earlier this month, the Taliban announced a generalamnesty for former employees of Western governments. But activists and journalistsare less likely to be prioritized in the current evacuation process, and reports of theirpersecution and executions are gathering momentum.Admission for former Afghan employeesEuropean governments have been reluctant to think about the future of their Afghanemployees after the withdrawal of their military troops. Afghan employees realisedthis and started organising protests. When Germany’s then defence and foreign a airsministers visited camp Kunduz in 2013, shortly before Germany's withdrawal from thatcamp, around 25 translators protested at being left behind.That year, the German government duly set up the ‘local forces’ (Ortskräfte) procedure,designed to resettle Afghans who worked directly for German federal departmentsand their families. Former employees were divided into several categories based onthe alleged risk posed to them. Many other EU member states put in place similaradmission schemes, with the UK establishing a resettlement scheme for Afghanemployees who had worked in “particularly dangerous and challenging roles” in thesouthern province of Helmand or had faced threats to their lives, irrespective of theirparticular role. After announcing its withdrawal in 2012, France introduced anadmission procedure for former Afghan interpreters working for the French army.These schemes were essentially a recognition of the entanglement of the exercise ofsovereign powers with the Afghan population. Afghan employees are resettledbecause they face serious threats to their safety due to their work for Europeangovernments. In his 2015 annual report, Germany’s then-commissioner for the armedforces argued that if former employees were not given the opportunity to  ndprotection in Germany, the danger would arise that “the willingness of the localpopulation to support the German army in current and future missions would bemassively reduced.”Geographies of di erenceOn the other hand, the very design of these entry schemes constructs a geography ofdi erence. As interpreter and PhD student Nerges Azizi points out, the notion of ‘localemployee’ suggests that these persons are bound to that place, while their Europeancolleagues can  y in and out of Afghanistan without much responsibility. Theresettlement scheme binds a few persons to those with whom they cooperated,namely Europeans that enacted sovereign powers in Afghanistan, and thus blurs thosegeographies of di erence.At the same time, the practice of these entry procedures also showed up their severelimitations. The criteria of eligibility and for the assessment of the existence ofindividual risk are often opaque and arbitrary. For instance, eligibility criteria inGermany’s ‘local forces’ procedure are classi ed as con dential, and criteria forresettlement to the UK were criticised by MPs and military sta  as “arbitrary”.The French admission procedure divided Afghan employees into two categories: onthe one hand, former Afghan employees for whom admission to French territory wasexcluded “for reasons of insu cient risk or possible di culties to integrate (problemsof assimilation or security)” and, on the other, those who faced imminent risk to theirsafety or life and, especially, if they had “a sociological pro le of a person capable ofbeing integrated or assimilated in France”. (Although this admission procedure wasamended in 2015, such eligibility criteria remained.)The Taliban do not distinguish between di erent types of cooperationwith European governmentsOther admission procedures include cut-o  dates instead of an assessment of thelevel of threat. For example, the UK scheme excluded former Afghan employees whoquit before 19 December 2012 and the German entry scheme excluded those who quitmore than two years ago prior to their application for entry. Decision-makingprocesses were also often deadly slow, and the personal scope of entry schemeslimited to persons who directly worked for a government department.Since in principle only the core family (spouse and minor children) are grantedadmission to European countries, former Afghan employees are forced to choosebetween security and leaving their adult children behind. While adult daughters aresometimes granted an entry visa, former Afghan employees are denied visas for theiradult sons.Unlike European bureaucrats, however, the Taliban do not distinguish whether thecooperation with European governments was based on a direct employment contractor only a sub-contractual relationship. Nor do they distinguish whether Europeanmedia constitute government bodies under, say, French, Italian or Germanconstitutional law.Autonomous decisions of European states?The entanglement of sovereign powers with parts of the Afghan population includes abroader circle of persons beyond former Afghan employees. These obligations alsohave concrete legal content. Like all sovereign decisions, decisions on the entry andadmission of non-nationals must comply with human rights.Related storyIn M.N. and others vs Belgium, the European Court of Human Rights assessed whetherthe refusal of a humanitarian visa to a Syrian family by the Belgian embassy in Beirutfell within the jurisdiction of the Belgian authorities and thus triggered the humanrights responsibility of the Belgian state. In principle, the European Convention onHuman Rights (ECHR) applies only in the territories of the contracting parties, but if acontracting state exercises e ective authority or control over an individual outside itsterritory, the ECHR also applies extraterritorially.A disgraceful stab in the back of Afghans27 August 2021 | Anonymous .Our writer, a Western-Afghan scholar and government o cial, re ects on the pain and fury he feelswatching the scenes unfolding in Kabul, and explains how we got hereWhether a state exercises e ective controls or authority depends, as the court held inthis case, on the speci c link between an individual and a state, while the nature ofthat link depends on the concrete facts that constitute that link. The court assessed,among others, whether the applicants resided or had family connections in Belgium,and held that the only connection between the applicants and the Belgian state wouldconsist in the applicants entering the embassy to lodge their visa application, whichwould be insu cient to amount to an exercise of e ective control or authority.The essential point here is that human rights responsibility under the ECHR dependson the various factual links that exist between the exercise of sovereign power and anindividual. If the actual exercise of sovereign powers by European states depends onthe concrete labour of Afghan individuals, the manifold links between the exercise ofsovereign power and Afghan labour cannot simply be dismissed as legally irrelevantwhen a state decides on the admission of Afghans.Establishing regular pathwaysOf course, the military intervention by Western states in Afghanistan a ected theentire population of that country. However, the extent to which the exercise ofsovereign powers by European states in Afghanistan is entangled with individual livesdi ers between groups of people.What is essential is that the circle of Afghans who are entangled with the maintenanceof the security interests of European states in Afghanistan should be drawn broadlyand not limited to those who were directly employed by European governments. If thecreation of stable civil society and state structures in Afghanistan was an essential partof European security interests, it is only logical to o er protection to Afghans who areendangered by the Taliban due to their labour in developing these structures.O ering protection to Afghans should not be limited to the current evacuation  ights.Rather, regular possibilities of entry will be especially necessary once the Taliban haveconsolidated their power in the coming months, and Afghans who are at risk of beingpersecuted by the Taliban either go into hiding domestically or seek protection inneighbouring countries. As Afghan refugees in these neighbouring countries are oftensaddled with a precarious legal status and have few rights,  nancial support andhumanitarian assistance alone are unlikely to su ciently repair the situation of Afghanrefugees in these countries.O ering protection to Afghans should not be limited to the currentevacuation  ightsIndeed, the European Commission has called for the establishment of regularpathways of entering EU member states. After the extraordinary council meeting ofinterior ministers on 16 August 2021, the EU commissioner for home a airs, YlvaJohansson, urged member states to o er "legal, safe and organised routes to the EU"and to increase the resettlement of Afghan refugees. Already in its 2015 migrationstrategy and in its recent New Pact on Migration of September 2020, the EuropeanCommission recommended an enhancement of the regular means of entry andadmission to the EU for persons seeking protection.Yet, apart from the current engagement in evacuation  ights, there has not been onesigni cant action by European governments to establish regular and safe entrypossibilities for Afghans, despite the broad popular support for providing protection toat-risk Afghans in some member states. A few civil society organisations have launchedevacuation programs and in a recent poll in Germany, for example, two-thirds of therespondents answered that Afghans at risk should be provided with protection inGermany.This support for creating pathways for legal and safe entry is partly also re ected atthe Länder (state) level in Germany. On 17 August, the Berlin Senate decided to adopt astate law that would grant admission to particular groups of Afghans, including thosewho are chronically ill or pregnant. This was con rmed by the Berlin senator of theinterior, Andreas Geisel, on 19 August in the Berlin House of Representatives. In asimilar vein, Dirk Adams, the migration minister of the German state of Thuringia, hasalso spoken out in favour of a state-level admission scheme for Afghans who are atrisk.Although the e ectiveness of these state-admission schemes requires consent by theFederal Ministry of Interior, these initiatives for creating regular entry schemes atsupra-national (European Commission) and state-level may be an e ective legalstrategy to counter the reluctance of federal governments in EU member states toestablish legal means of entry for Afghans in need of protection.The coordinated creation of regular entry opportunities for ultimately all Afghans inneed of protection in and outside Afghanistan in the coming months is an obvioussolution if we are to prevent the mistakes of 2015 from being repeated.RelatedF R A N C E R E F U G E E S A F G H A N I S T A N G E R M A N Y U K E U R O P EW A R A S Y L U M M I G R A T I O N T A L I B A N E U C O N F L I C T  &  S E C U R I T YE U R O P E M I G R A T I O N U N I T E D  K I N G D O MThis article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. If you have anyqueries about republishing please contact us. Please check individual images for licensing details.All our projects© openDemocracy 2023About

Why at-risk Afghans have a right of admission to EU member states

https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/136454404/Why_at_risk_Afghans_have_a_right_of_admission_to_EU_member_states_openDemocracy.pdf

Why at-risk Afghans have a right of admission to EU member states

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

International Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion online publications