Social strife in Arab and Islamic countries is a regular feature in the news and the silent ‘biblical’ movement of people from Africa to Europe continues. The social turbulence in the Arab and Middle Eastern Islamic countries however cannot be equated with that prevailing in sub-Saharan countries and in particular with that in the Horn of Africa. The two situations should therefore be treated differently. In both instances there are aspects of a transition to a different way of life but whereas the democratic transition to civil society is majoritarian in certain Arab and Islamic countries, the same cannot be said to the sub-Saharan African countries in the Horn of Africa where traditional values still prevail. The situation in the Horn of Africa has become intolerable and has assumed the proportions of a human tragedy for tens of thousands who travel from their homes in Somalia, Eritrea and Ethiopia each year to North Africa to board a ship and cross the Mediterranean Sea to reach a European port during the summer months – where they request asylum as irregular immigrants. This clearly shows that these migrants are minoritarian in their countries of origin and so have to move out of these countries since the majority in these countries has rejected the European model of civil society. It is a question of attitude – European countries dominated these countries for decades so the majority are still influenced by an anti-colonial ideology rather than the reality of civil society created in Europe since the war. Europe has changed, but in the minds of the majority in the Horn of Africa, Europe is still the Europe of colonial times rather the Europe of today.

Restoring communication with the majority in these countries without resorting to war is difficult if not impossible, so the only way forward for the European countries is to assess the problem and see how the displaced population can be accommodated in Europe. Thus, it is intolerable that certain EU countries continue to shirk their responsibilities by simply negating entry to nationals from the Horn of Africa to their countries and letting a few countries, namely Italy, Greece and Malta assume responsibility for these migrants. This is the short term solution to the problem, but in the long term the countries in the Horn of Africa have to change and so a Development Plan for the region commensurate with the problems involved must be devised in the manner the Americans launched the Marshall Plan for the European countries after the war – which at the same time lays the foundation for democratic parties to assume leadership in these countries. The EU must insist on the democratic credentials of the political leadership in these countries to ensure that the resources made available do not finish lining the pockets of the elite but are utilised for the development of these countries. This is taxpayers’ money and should be allocated to bring about development.

For this to be realised, political action is required in European countries to defeat the policy of indifference at home that has prevailed in recent years. It is not on to simply dismiss the problem as people looking for a better future; it is a human tragedy rooted in the contradictions prevalent in the African countries and has to be addressed. We have to win the battle of minds in our own countries against racism and xenophobia. 

This after all is the result of the breaking-up of the colonial empires in the decades after the end of the last war and the granting of independence to scores of countries – big and small. In Malta’s case, the pre-independence travail gave way to progressive change leading to Malta joining the European Union in 2004, making the transition from colony to member state of the European Union. We can contribute for a similar transition to be effected in the Horn of Africa by assuming the role of Commissioner for Development Assistance in the next appointment of Commissioners.

This also in view that we are paying a price for membership, considered onerous by a section of the Maltese population since they consider that in the problem of illegal immigration, we were left alone and no Burden Sharing Scheme has been devised as an adequate response which of course would be the responsibility of the Commissioner for Internal Affairs.

I am sure that it is not beyond the EU Commission to formulate a plan where the number of people landing on our shores seeking asylum can be housed in Malta in adequate facilities for a period of time say 12 months by which time they would be re-located to another EU member state. At the same time, Malta would integrate with its population a number of refugees commensurate with its size and population so that the characteristics of the Maltese community are safeguarded.

Mario Mifsud