25 years of Schengen – are the nationalists winning?
On 14 June 1985, on board the Moselle riverboat “MS Marie-Astrid”, leading European politicians signed the Schengen Agreement, providing for the abolition of checks at shared borders and the introduction of the free movement of persons and goods. A milestone in a Europe that was still divided at the time. A commentary by Stefan Haböck, international officer of the Paneuropa Movement Austria.
On 26 March 1995, almost exactly 25 years ago, seven countries of the European Community opened their internal borders and abolished border controls. Today, Schengen is once again under fire. Nationalists and centralists want to maintain the border closures (which are sensible during the corona pandemic!) even after the (correct) measures have ended.
The borders between most regions are fluid – not legally, but historically. Anyone who claims that people in Kehl are superior to those in Strasbourg because they are on the “right side” can only be an ignoramus or a national chauvinist. While irresponsible populists want to keep EU borders closed forever, reality is striking back: in Germany, a debate has erupted over who is supposed to harvest the fields if Eastern European seasonal workers are missing.
In Austria, attempts are being made to find a solution, as 60,000 Eastern European carers can no longer enter the country because the borders with Hungary and Slovakia are closed. This would, incidentally, be a good occasion to reflect on how some in wealthy Central Europe behaved towards Eastern Europeans in good times, when people working hard there – far away from their families – were disgustingly referred to as a “flood of Eastern workers”.
And in Brussels, states must urgently negotiate a corridor solution, otherwise deliveries of goods – including medical supplies – will get stuck at the border.
Free internal market instead of protectionism
Until 1918, there was an internal market in Central Europe that stretched from Ukraine to the Adriatic. This was fragmented by national customs barriers. National protectionism made the economic situation worse. After the Second World War, the goal was to enable the free exchange of goods within the EEC. The internal market became the core element of European integration.
European cooperation strengthens states
It is a myth that Schengen means everyone can do anything uncontrolled. Schengen is part of the “Area of Freedom, Security and Justice”. Judicial work in the EU has been strengthened, as has cooperation in the field of security. Schengen also includes the Schengen Information System (SIS), which contains entry requirements. Citizens from outside the Schengen area require a visa. Entry bans are recorded throughout the entire Schengen area.
The agreement and all associated regulations relieve the burden on states. It facilitates searches, rejections, and entry bans, creates opportunities for cross-border surveillance, and improves the exchange of information.
A Europe that protects
Security is a basic human need. The state has the task of providing security. The fact that these powers of the state are limited by fundamental rights and freedoms is one of the most important achievements in a free Europe. Regardless of the criticism of state measures, it is clear that “the state” has an interest in knowing who is present on its territory.
The freedoms of EU citizens and residents of the Schengen area go hand in hand with a comprehensive set of rules and data collection on citizens. This plays a significant role in the topic of migration to Europe and its control. The Schengen system and the freedoms associated with it have been under attack long before the events of 2015. 2015 revealed the fragility of freedoms in Europe.
Schengen – and this is not often mentioned – contains an important condition: the abolition of controls at the internal borders of participating states mandates improved protection of the external borders! Every state with an external border must control it. For years, states have abandoned one another in this regard.
In 2015, the system practised until then crumbled. Nationalists sensed an opportunity. While the dirty work was outsourced to poorer states at the south-eastern external border, borders were erected at the Walserberg. This is possible because the Schengen system allows border controls in critical situations. Temporarily. Controls in the middle of Europe are justified by the claim that external border protection is not guaranteed. One wonders, of course, why 34 years after Schengen-1, the external border is still not protected.
It is not the EU that has failed
It was a failure, due to national egoisms, not to build up a common border guard. Although an agency was created with Frontex, it was not fully equipped. While the Commission and the European Parliament campaigned for an increase in Frontex staff and a robust mandate, some blocked this logical development. “No foreign officials on our soil.” By “foreign”, they incidentally meant nationals of friendly EU states. At the same time, countries like Luxembourg constantly criticised those states that fulfilled their border protection obligations.
Yet even 2015 could not bring all states to act together. Frontex was supposed to be expanded by 2027 (now 2024). The reason: no money. No staff. That is how important the issue of border protection was. Until now. Because Turkey’s threat to no longer provide for refugees and migrants in Turkey, but to bring them to Europe (Greece), put more pressure on the states.
Sovereign into Brexit
The issue of sovereignty also played an important role before the debate surrounding Brexit. Nationalists loudly lamented the loss of sovereignty of the alleged Empire. Schengen and the associated freedoms often had to serve as examples for this. One does not even need to go into the racist campaigns against “Eastern workers” (in the form of Polish plumbers).
The United Kingdom was not actually a full member of the Schengen system. It participated in a limited capacity, in the form of police and judicial cooperation. Naturally, the UK also controlled its borders during its EU membership. Theresa May was responsible for the Kingdom’s borders from 2010 to 2016. After 51 per cent in a referendum felt that, among other things, the UK’s border protection was not perfect, she became the new Prime Minister.
European border protection is the principle of subsidiarity
Organising border protection at the European level would be a sensible implementation of the principle of subsidiarity. Small-scale internal borders are, in any case, a contradiction to fundamental freedoms. These fundamental freedoms, however, are the basis for success, prosperity, and freedom in a democratic, peacefully united Europe. Anyone who attacks fundamental freedoms is attacking the very foundation of the peaceful unification of Europe.
