The cynics behind Schengen

 Schengen enlargement with Romania and Bulgaria represents the fear Western Europe will be overflowed. Today Schengen is used to win elections but is also a denied area because of street turmoil that took down a government without a plan on what to do further. 

The Schengen Treaty is an agreement, meant to contribute to borderless Europe - gradual abolition of border checks, which allows vehicles and citizens  to cross without stopping on fixed checkpoints (as described in Articles 2,6 and 7). It currently includes 25 states. Yes, correct, the ones excluded are Romania and Bulgaria.

Why do I mention it? Because today Schengen is no longer just an agreement. It’s a cynicism way beyond the actual meaning of the document. It’s a tool in the hands of politicians and governments to push and enforce in different directions – everyone on its own, depending on the perspective. Today Schengen enlargement with Romania and Bulgaria represents the fear Western Europe will be overflowed with citizens from the two states looking for better life and taking over this life from the locals. Today Schengen is used to win elections. Today Schengen is a denied area because of street turmoil that took down a government without a plan on what to do further.  Let me tell you why.

How the EU older members see it

When Bulgaria and Romania joined EU in 2007, they expected to enjoy full rights as members – much like the ten other countries, joining the area in 2004 all together. Instead, they had to wait a long transitional period for two things – no borders and the right to work without permit in other EU states. Countries like Germany, Austria, Belgium tend to integrate new members more openly, encourage positive changes in their policies and law reforms without making it look like expectations but like achievements. States like Netherlands or the UK are exactly on the other side – whether it is government or mentality, both countries tend to expect and require without getting into details what exactly. This is surprising behaviour from two former world empires with still existing overseas territories which are supposed to be fluent in integration of foreigners or immigrants. True, and that’s exactly the key to it!

After the decolonization processes, both Netherlands and the UK took responsibility and offered help to citizens of former colonies– by help I mean British and Dutch citizenship in its full range. That’s how many Indians and Pakistani ended up on the British island and how many Indonesian and Surinamese now live in all Dutch provinces. As citizens they enjoy the rights of social support and welfare. After the enlargement in 2004, a lot of people from the 10 new members also decided for Western Europe, including UK or Netherlands. The EU older members were surprised how many newly admitted Europeans want a better life. It turned out that Britain and Netherlands couldn’t really take over all these people, together with former colonies citizens, in their economic and social life – the job market shrink, the social welfare was abused further. What now?

The older members decided for political move and said “enough” to the last two new members – Bulgaria and Romania, blocking them from Schengen and extending to maximum the opening of the working markets. This for sure gave politicians like the British Nigel Farage and the Dutch Geert Wilders a flying start for political populism – Bulgarians and Romanians will take over our jobs, the moment we accept them in a borderless community, millions of them will come here, they are poor, but we cannot take them as we endanger our own citizens. More or less logical and certainly economically backed up, the governments of the older EU members also saw the danger behind and stepped back.  But they had one problem – the maximum period to keep job markets closed is for 7 years, until 2014. Politicians and governments needed excuse that will last for as long as they decide – and they found it in Schengen.

Romania and Bulgaria were supported for membership in the agreement by all EU states, except for Netherlands, holding the process back for 5 years voting constantly against and explaining their vote with insufficient achievements without being concrete. Meantime, for 5 years, the Eurozone faced financial crisis and collapse of economies - because of that many states started doubting their very own EU membership. Process of European disintegration started raising head. In a nutshell, the EU founding and older members couldn't give up the community – this will cause costs that may lead to bankrupt, but at the same time they can't afford more newcomers. The job markets can not be closed for forever, but the borders can! Today, in united Europe.

How the new members see it

I won’t be going over the top if I say that the candidate members didn’t make it any easier. Unfortunately, both Bulgaria and Romania are victims of a double standard which is partially their own fault. Among the issues which block the Schengen membership are corruption and doubts in the ability to keep outside borders. And I must say these concerns are quite accurate! But the new members see it differently – we are able to do that, more and more often we stop drug, gun and human trafficking, we go more European with every single day. It seems that they present normal, expected regulations as achievements to prove how stable their states are. Restricting gun, drugs and human trafficking through better police and government control is not a success, but a basic sign of stable state.

And when it comes to corruption, there’s still so much more to be done ! I guess Bulgaria and Romania are puzzled why EU puts this vice together with Schengen – I will tell you why. It is very much possible for any non-European to obtain Bulgarian and Romanian passport through bribing. Once having it and if the two states are in Schengen, the travel within EU will be unlimited and mostly, not checked. This is a clear advantage – for criminals, individuals with travel restrictions, terrorists. Neither the Romanian nor the Bulgarian governments managed to exterminate corruption and bribing on a state level for the last 20 years. Instead, they brag about restricted drug and gun trafficking! Cynical, isn’t it?

The biggest issue was, however, the political instability – massive protests in Romania, most recently the resignation of the Bulgarian PM in February 2013.  Accession to Schengen was part of the agenda of the European Commission for March 2013, the Dutch minister for immigration, after 5 years, finally said Bulgaria is ready to join the borderless area, the state enjoyed strong support and lobby from Germany. And then resignation! Which equals no government and state. 

Three days after it, Schengen enlargement was taken off the agenda, the German internal minister, Friedrich stated his country will use the right to veto for serious doubts in the political stability – simply, there was nobody to negotiate with and nobody to ensure Bulgaria will continue develop common European security. This was one of the results of the nationwide protests in the country, which started as resistance against the monopoly of energy companies. The nation, one of the poorest in the EU, for sure had enough to be mesmerized by its own government, and thought the resignation means that now people rule again. What the nation didn’t realize are the long-term shots - when a country doesn’t have parliament and a PM, there is no state. The protesters were too intoxicated by (supposedly) their victory to continue and replace the bad government with a better one. They failed to understand EU is not interested who exactly governs a member state, they want to see stability and development, they negotiate with national governments with full mandate. The opposition haven’t brought anything better, instead dragged the country 10 years behind with no clear plan for the future and no understanding of basic democratic principles. This is what the whole world saw – in this situation is quite unlikely to have the chance to keep and maintain the outside borders of the entire EU… in the next 10 years! 

At least they all agree on something…

After the political crisis in Bulgaria, state by state, EU members declared they have concerns if the two countries in question join. Strangely, their concerns refer to problems they seem to be comfortable with before (given their full support just two months ago) Finland and Poland expressed disagreement with the enlargement -  there is really no explanation why gun, drug and human trafficking, criminals and terrorists will spread through Bulgaria and Romania to Finland and Poland since there are far more attractive destinations like Berlin, London, Amsterdam... Shouldn’t Bulgarians and Romanians be more concerned then Polish or Finnish because if they eventually join Schengen, smuggling channels that have been abolished, will come back? Is this an attempt to by certain countries to stay with the strong of the day or is it as well an attempt to become strong, but only over the weakest ones? After all, its all about politics – I get you back to the beginning of my letter – Schengen is not an agreement, it’s a phantom and a tool. A well known truth is there are upcoming elections in Germany, UK… A well-known truth is that there is social tension in many EU member states’ societies over financial instability and budget cuts. It is also a well-known truth from the time of the Roman senate that the closer you are to the people, the closer you are to be elected for a next mandate. People of the UK, Netherlands, Germany may not see a problem in having many foreign workers, may not even think about the possibility criminality to rise due to Schengen enlargement – then, it is in their leaders' hands to show them the trouble makers. When the actual ones are not convenient, a scapegoat can be found  in other European nations. In the scope of the freedoms, rights and values of a common European idea, I think this is the most cynical of them all!