EU IMUN 2014 STUDY GUIDE

0
Greetings from the Board of Directors

1
Dear delegates,
My name is Irfan Prawiradinata, and as the director of the European Union, it is with the
most joyous of pleasure and deepest of honor that I welcome each and every one of you to
the 2014 Indonesia Model United Nations!
Before getting to know all of you during the conference, I’d like to share a little about
myself. I’m a senior Economics student at Universitas Indonesia, with a double
concentration in Industrial and Regional Development. I’m currently finishing my thesis on
assessing Indonesia’s Human Development and Poverty Alleviation efforts, from which I’ve
learned, amongst other things, that creating even the smallest of changes for people, often
require the largest of efforts from governments; such beliefs from which the United Nations
itself was built upon - and uphold till this day.
Prior to my career in Model United Nations, I have been active in debating, where in high
school, I was given the honor to represent Indonesia in the 2010 World Schools Debating
Championship and the 2009 Asian Schools Debating Championship. In my junior year in
college I made one of the best decisions of my life to immerse myself in the world of MUN.
My most memorable experiences include joining IMUN 2013 in the World Health
Organization, and representing UI at the 2014 Harvard National Model United Nations,
where I had the honor of being the only Indonesian delegate to present a draft resolution.
Now, the honor is yours to be not only a delegate, but also, if not importantly, an agent of
change in communally discovering a solution for the daunting topic of Europe’s Crisis of
Migration in the European Union. It is through such topics that I believe we are able to learn
the true meaning of freedom in the modern world, when we uncover how, ironically,
sometimes it is not from the absolution of freedom that we experience the best or most
realistic form of it. Such freedom, particularly that of movement, has been left vague in the
midst of such crises in the European Union. And with that said:
The floor is yours.
Sincerely,
Board of Directors

2
EUROPEAN UNION INDONESIA MUN 2014
HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE
I. The Rise of the European Union
World War II and its huge impact had
deteriorated Europe and weakened its
economic power to the lowest point. It shifted
the international politics to be no longer
Eurocentric but it drove Europe to become
the object of power struggle between the
United States of America (USA) and the Soviet
Union. Perceiving the threat from Soviet
Union’s expansion, in September 1946,
Winston Churchill urged the idea of European
integration through reconciliation of France-
Germany within a kind of “United States of
Europe”. He believed that such reconciliation
would strengthen France and Germany
economies and lead the more steady political
and security in Europe expected to
counterbalance the received threat.
In the following year, this idea came
into reality as the Marshall Plan Aid treaty was
signed by Western Europe, which required
the establishment of an organization
purposed to administer the aid, namely
Organization for European Economic
Cooperation. Subsequently, European Coal
and Steel Community (ECSC) was also
proposed by Robert Schuman in 1950.
Comprising of Belgium, France, Italy,
Luxembourg, West Germany, and the
Netherlands, this community sought to pool
their coal and steel resources by providing a
unified market, lifting restrictions on imports
and exports, as well as creating a unified labor
market. In other words, the main platform of
ECSC’s establishment was to build a common
market. As a result, those initial countries
tightened their cooperation by signing Treaty
of Rome (1957) to form the European
Economic Community (EEC) and the European
Atomic Energy Committee (Euratom), in
addition to the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) and
the European Fair Trade Association (EFTA)
which then united them on economic
grounds.
Bringing them closer to an integrated
market, the Single European Act was passed
by European leaders to eradicate all barriers
that potentially hinder the flow of goods and
capital. Seeing that this act had been
inadequate to answer the fears and concerns
about the future of European integration,
Maastricht Treaty was approved in 1992 and
the European Community (EC) has officially
become the European Union (EU). The treaty
proposed that the member states should join
together in a political and economic union,
adopt a single common currency, share the
same set of policies on social and domestic
issues, and have a common foreign and

3
defense policy.
II. The European Union Democracy
EU and its institutions cling to
democracy as its underlying value to undergo
all administrative activity, ranging from
member states recruitment to decision-
making process. To be part of EU, a state has
to implement a non-communist system in
running its country. In other words, the
identity as a democratic country is essentially
required. It is proven, along with the
increasing level of cooperation, that EU’s
membership was gradually expanded from
originally six to twenty-seven member states,
which consists of Belgium, Germany, France,
Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Denmark,
Republic of Ireland, United Kingdom, Greece,
Portugal, Spain, Austria, Finland, Sweden,
Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia,
Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta,
Slovenia, Bulgaria and Romania, states which
proceed their government in a democratic
way. Departing from Immanuel Kant’s
proposal of ‘perpetual peace’, EU believes
that democracy would ease the cooperation
among states within the Union for it is
assumed that each state has understood basic
values of democracy in which peaceful way is
prioritized, especially in conflict resolution. It
is imperative to maintain the unity of the
Union.
To administer this organization,
European Union Council holds a vital position
in EU’s hierarchy because it produces key
policy decisions and leaves it to other EU
institutions to be elaborated and
implemented. Generally, it arranges
resolutions towards the issues of internal
economy, foreign policy, budget disputes,
treaty revisions, new member applications, as
well as institutional reforms. This Council
comprises of head of governments and
foreign ministers of EU member states, along
with the president and vice president of
European Com- mission itself. It works with
Council of Ministers to prepare an agenda
that is usually set according to delegations’
proposed issues, continuation of previous
summit, or an emergency that urges a quick
decision. Based on one of its goals ruled in
Solemn Declaration on European Union 1983,
to release an ultimate decision, the Council
strives to reach unanimity or consensus.
Nevertheless, the mechanism of the decision-
making is usually appropriated with the
situation. When a unanimity or consensus is
impossible to be achieved, a formal vote
system would be highly suggested. However,
all taken decisions have to accommodate the
citizens’ needs as Maastricht Treaty stated the
Union, “In which decisions are taken as closely
as possible to the citizen”.
III. European Union Immigration
Europe’s history has been shaped by
migration. For centuries, merchants,
craftsmen and intellectuals crossed the
continent to practice their trades or start new

4
lives. Millions emigrated from Europe, first to
the colonies and later to the Americas and the
Antipodes. Europe also has a long history of
forced migration: from the expulsion of the
Jews from Spain to the population shifts in
southeast Europe caused by the many wars
between the Russian, Austro-Hungarian and
Ottoman empires.
Large-scale immigration into Western
Europe is more recent. From 1960 to 1973,
the number of foreign workers in Western
Europe doubled from 3 to 6% of the
workforce. It was highest in places like the UK
and France, with relatively open access for
citizens of their former colonies; in Germany,
too, the number of foreigners rose 4 million in
the 25 years after 1960, although they seldom
became citizens.i
The foreign-born population
has continued to grow, not least because
most countries still issue tens of thousands of
residence permits each year for the purposes
of family reunification. EU countries also issue
thousands of work permits each year. Despite
so, the proportion of foreign-born residents in
the EU remains low, ranging from 9% in
Austria, Belgium and Germany, to under 2% in
Spain.ii
Since the late 1980s, the number of
people applying for asylum has increased
sharply. In 1984 there were only 104,000
applications in Western Europe. This figure
grew to 692,000 in 1992 and then declined
during much of the 1990s. Numbers grew
again to 350,000 in 1998, and about 400,000
in 1999. Thus asylum has become one of the
principal means of immigration into the EU.iii
This has yet to change until now. The
European Union is experiencing ever-growing
influxes of both usual and usual immigration
amongst its member states, as well as from
neighboring countries. Regional conflicts that
surround the European Union area
exacerbate this issue, driving certain countries
to its limits. For this very reason, the
European Union at Indonesia Model United
Nations 2014 rises the topic of this very issue,
to be discussed, as an effective and
comprehensive solution has evidently been
long overdue.

5
THE EUROPEAN CRISIS OF MIGRATION : THE DRAMATIC IMPACT OF REGIONAL
CONFLICT AND FINANCIAL COLLAPSE ON INTERNATIONAL BORDERS
HISTORY AND DISCUSSION OF THE
PROBLEM
I. The Overarching Crisis of Migration in
Europe
The unprecedented crisis in global financial
markets that hit the world economy in mid-
2008 has led to the most severe recession
since the Second World War. This crisis has
affected the wider global economy and
increasingly had an impact on the labour
markets of European countries. After many
years of relatively high economic and
employment growth, the global economic
crisis is taking Europe back to growth levels
not seen for decades. Annual GDP growth
dropped from 2.9 per cent in 2007 to 0.9 per
cent in 2008 in the EU. By the end of 2008
over half of the economies of EU Member
States were either in recession or in the
process of entering one. From 2008 to 2009
the average unemployment rate for the EU
rose from 7.0 per cent to 9.9 per cent.
Although growth in the euro area resumed in
the third quarter of 2009, the labour market is
expected to remain weak.iv
As a result, citizens of European countries
suffering from economic decline have begun
migrating and seeking employment within
more prosperous EU countries. Germany in
particular has experienced a huge surge of
migrating European Union citizens from other
countries, with an increase of 73% from Greek
immigrants, an almost 50% growth from Spain
and Portuguese, and a 35% increase from Italy
from 2011 to 2012.v
By August 2013, the
number of Spanish citizens registering for a
national Insurance number for the United
Kingdom had increased to 45,500 from 30,000
in 2012. There was also a 35% increase of
citizens from Italy and 43% increase from the
citizens of Portugal attempting to obtain work
in the United Kingdom.vi
Political upheavals in the Middle East and
North Africa have also begun reshaping
migration trends in Europe. In 2011, the
number of illegal border-crossing detections
in the EU jumped by nearly 35 percent from
the previous two years to 141,000 as
thousands of Tunisians started to arrive at the
Italian island of Lampedusa, off the coast of
Sicily, following the onset of the Arab Spring,
and Sub-Saharan Africans fleeing unrest in
Libya in 2011–2012. In 2013, European border
agency Frontex reported another spike of
detections along the EU's maritime borders
due to the growing numbers of Syrian
refugees. The EU also received more than

6
350,000 applications for international
protection in 2013, the highest number since
data collection began in 2008.vii
With ever more migrants and asylum seekers
fleeing turmoil in Africa and the Middle East
and from economic collapse in Southern
European countries, European policymakers
still reeling from the political consequences of
the Eurozone Crisis faces complex challenges.
To date, Europe's collective response to its
growing migration crisis has been ad hoc and
more focused on securing the bloc's borders
than on protecting the rights of migrants and
refugees. Many European Union countries
struggling with high levels of unemployment
and reduced government services have also
seen a rise in political extremism and
xenophobia. These developments have raised
concerns about a reduction of critical EU core
values like human rights and freedom of
travel that were opened under the Schengen
Agreement. While the new European Union
leadership brings hope for new beginnings, it
remains unclear if political headwinds will
facilitate a new climate of immigration
reform.
II. Definitions
To fully understand the arguments and
discussions on the Migration Crisis in Europe,
it is necessary to understand the exact
definitions of various important
terminologies. According to Amnesty
Internationalviii
:
Migrant: A migrant is a person who moves
from one place to another to live, and usually
Picture 1 :As there are international treaties that compel governments to save and allow entry for anybody
who is in trouble in the country’s territorial water, the migrants many a times put their boats in trouble.

7
to work, either temporarily or permanently.
They may be forced to leave because they do
not have access to adequate food, water or
shelter, or in order to ensure the safety and
security of themselves and their families.
Refugee: The 1951 Convention relating to the
Status of Refugees defines “refugee” as a
person who:
Owing to well-founded fear of being
persecuted for reasons of race, religion,
nationality, membership of a particular social
group or political opinion, is outside the
country of his nationality and is unable or,
owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself
of the protection of that country; or who, not
having a nationality and being outside the
country of his former habitual residence as a
result of such events, is unable or, owing to
such fear, is unwilling to return to it.
The Convention, however, limited this
definition to only those people displaced due
to events occurring before 1 January 1951.
Because events after the Convention
continued to result in an increasing number of
refugees, the United Nations General
Assembly decided to expand the scope of the
definition and of their responsibility. The 1967
Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees
maintained the definition of refugees but
removed the date limitation.
Asylum Seeker: A term used most often in
reference any refugee or displaced person in
need of protection and assistance. Official
organizations use the term “asylum seeker” to
refer specifically to a person “in transit who is
applying for sanctuary in some other place
than” his or her original place of residence.
In addition, according to UNHCRix
:
Refoulement: The act of forcibly returning an
asylum seeker to the location in which his or
her freedoms are threatened. The 1951
Convention takes a strong stance of non-
refoulement.
Repatriation: The act of returning refugees to
their home nation. To achieve voluntary
repatriation is one of the United Nation’s
paramount goals in addressing the refugee
problem and the ideal solution in most
situations. A complete and thorough process
of repatriation includes key steps known as
the 4Rs: repatriation, reintegration,
rehabilitation, and reconstruction.
Migration has often been, and is likely to
continue to be, an important catalyst of
advancement. But refugees and migrants are
fundamentally different, and for that reason
are treated very differently under modern
international law. Economic migrants who
choose to move in order to improve the
future prospects of themselves and their

8
families are different from those who were
forced to leave due to a crisis which bars
them from adequate living. On the other
hand, refugees are people who have to move
if they are to save their lives or preserve their
freedom. It is this difference in motivation
that led to their different status in law.
However, at the end of the day, these
distinctions are not as clear-cut in the eyes of
international law, as rules and regulations are
unique to important to assess carefully the
impact of the economic crisis on migrants and
migration policy in the European Union,
especially at this time when Europe has
recognized the importance of migration for
the future competitiveness of the Union.
The figure below shows that water
management is the least uncertainty and
impact on migration while the key factor
which could alter the migration trend and has
the greatest uncertainty within the European
Union is its own economic growth.
Furthermore, migrants are especially affected
by changes in the economic situation in
Europe, which explains why their situation
worsened due to the Eurozone Crisis.
Conversely, while highly political and often
projected factors, such as xenophobia or
conflict, also have an impact on migration, it is
not important as the economic situation in
the EU.each country and it goes without
saying that such instances, let alone crises,
such as migration, refugee and asylum
seeking are that of which involve multiple
Picture 2: Key Uncertainties for Migration in Europe in 2035: Relative Impact and
Knowledge.

9
parties with their own distinct laws. This
confusion of jurisdiction is what pushes
supranational organizations such as the
European Union to clarify and act upon.
III. Impacts on Migration
In order to create policies concerning
migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers, it is
In essence, this figure highlights the
interrelated connection between the
economics of the EU and the patterns of
migration. Therefore, how the EU and its
Member States continue to respond to the
economic crisis and recovery is of particular
relevance to the success of many initiatives,
such as EU’s Stockholm Programme and
Europe 2020 Agenda, which gives renewed
emphasis to migration as a priority area in the
European Union and highlights the
importance of migration for the
competitiveness of the EU.
IV. Humanitarian Situation
The number of irregular migrants crossing –
and dying in – the Mediterranean Sea has
surged in recent years, fueled by conflict and
instability on the Sea’s southern shores. Since
January 2014, an estimated 124,380 have
landed in Europe; the majority in Italy
(108,172), followed by Greece, Spain and
Malta; an incredible increase from 2013
(60,000), 2012 (22,500) and 2011 (69,000).
While the European Union (EU) attempts to
secure its borders against this influx of
irregular migration, a humanitarian crisis is
unfolding at its border. In August 2014,
UNHCR reported that 1,889 Europe-bound
migrants have drowned in 2014; this is a
dramatic difference from 2012 (500 people)
and 2013 (600 people).x
The main departure point for migrants
crossing the Mediterranean to Europe is
Libya, which according to UNHCR, “where the
worsening security situation has fostered the
growth of people smuggling operations, but
also prompted refugees and migrants living
there to decide to risk the sea rather than
remain in a zone of conflict.” Human
traffickers have taken advantage of this
political instability and ongoing conflict,
establishing Libya as a transit point for
migrants from Africa and the Middle East. xi

10
The result is a complex humanitarian crisis,
often overshadowed by talk of immigration
enforcement and border security. UNHCR has
called for “urgent and concerted European
action including strengthened search and
rescue operations in the Mediterranean.”xii
The staggering number of deaths in 2014
alone highlights the dangers of this journey,
where smugglers often crowd large numbers
of people onto unseaworthy boats. After 366
people drowned off the coast of the Italian
island Lampedusa when their boat capsized in
October 2014, the Italian Navy and
coastguard launched the “Mare Nostrum”
(Our Sea) mission to patrol Mediterranean
waters for migrants; in September of the
same year, the European Commission
announced that it will eventually take over.
Regrettably, such enforcement missions often
neglect humanitarian and human rights
considerations.xiii
Picture 3 : Rescue workers recover bodies on the beach in the Sicilian village of Sampieri, Italy.

11
These missions can and do save the lives of
thousands of imperiled migrants, yet their
primary mission is border control. xiv
That
often means turning back migrants before
they reach Europe’s shores. Before the Libyan
Revolution, Italy and other European
countries cooperated with the Gaddafi regime
to enforce EU border controls – through deals
that enriched Gaddafi while raising serious
accusations of human rights abuses on both
sides.xv
For one, the wave of irregular migrants
crossing the Mediterranean includes many
potential asylum seekers – people with
recognizable grounds for temporary or
permanent refugee protection. xvi
Many of
those risking their lives at sea in their attempt
to find safety in Europe are refugees fleeing
war, conflict, violence and persecution. Many
come from countries ravaged by extended
civil wars, such as Syria, Mali and Somalia.
Under international law, refugees have a right
to protection, and cannot be forcibly returned
to places where they fear violence or
persecution – a foundational principle of
international refugee law known as non-
refoulement.xvii
While states have a sovereign right to control
immigration to their territories, the EU cannot
simply turn away irregular migrants from the
Middle East and North Africa, as many have
legitimate claims to protection under
international law. xviii
Beyond a border
enforcement approach, states must also
address the humanitarian and protection
needs of migrants and asylum-seekers on
their borders.xix
This includes rescue from
dangerous conditions on the high seas,
registration, food and shelter, medical and
Picture 4 : An airport hangar in Lampedusa contains the bodies of more than 300 migrants who drowned
trying to cross the Mediterranean in October 2013. Photograph: Roberto Salomone/EPA

12
psychological services, and access to fair and
efficient asylum procedures. Often,
compliance with the principle of non-
refoulement requires at least temporary
admission for asylum-seekers. There is also
need for greater international efforts to
combat human trafficking and smuggling,
international crimes that prey on vulnerable
would-be migrants and refugees. xx
More
broadly, addressing the surge in irregular
migration will ultimately require getting at its
root causes: conflict, violence, persecution,
instability and extreme poverty in many
regions of the world.xxi
V. Impact on Social Protection and Access to
Welfare
A current issue has been a lack of a welfare
safety net for migrants. Workers from certain
countries need to work and register under the
Workers Registration Scheme for 12 months
before they are granted social supports. Due
to the difficulties of achieving this
requirement, many workers cannot gain
welfare support and thus have very limited
access to social benefits. Additionally, even
after being eligible, many migrants are still
reluctant to claim the welfare benefits, as
claiming such benefits may negatively impact
on their residence status. In some countries,
such as Ireland and the Czech Republic,
migrant workers who register as unemployed
have to find new employment within a certain
period, or they lose their permission to stay.
The emphasis on EU migrants and their access
to benefits is symptomatic of at least two sets
of issues. On one hand, there is the economic
crisis and the need for governments to be
seen as delivering protections to their
domestic constituencies. xxii
On the other
hand, the question of individual member
states’ sovereignty in relation to EU-level
governance, as well as domestic perceptions
of this issue, serves to frame domestic
politics. In the case of benefits, there are
concerns about lack of state control over an
essential policy area such as migration.xxiii
In
the U.K., the inability to control EU migration
has led to discussions limiting EU migrants,
which would require a renegotiation of free
movement provisions with the EU. This option
is portrayed as a way of regaining sovereignty
back from Brussels, regardless of whether it
would actually be possible to backtrack on
free movement. xxiv
The EU as a system of
governance, together with the saliency of
migration policy, allow for the exploitation of
discrepancies and tensions to cultivate
domestic political agendas. xxv

13
VI. Public Opinion and Xenophobia
As unemployment among the general
population increased and job competition
became fiercer during the economic
downturn and surrounding regional conflicts,
it was expected that public attitudes towards
migration would become more negative
compared to what they had been before the
crisis, and that xenophobic and racist
incidents would increase in this period.
Even before such crises, violent racism have
shown a rising trend in Germany, with
reported incidents of racist violence and crime
increasing by 14 percent between 2005 and
2006, going up from 15,914 incidents in 2005
to 18,142 in 2006. xxvi
Some British media
outlets have labelled migrants from the
Romania and Bulgaria as unskilled or potential
"benefit tourists". And British police have sent
a team to Romania to try to discourage
jobless Romanians from coming to Britain.
xxvii
Romanians already living in England are
upset by negative stereotypes that have risen
from the anticipated January 1 lifting of work
restrictions.xxviii
If the emergence of nationalist and
xenophobic right – wing political parties in
Europe – is a signal of a larger trend towards
increasing xenophobia in the future, it is
Picture 5 : A picture of demonstration on xenophobia.1

14
possible that there may be more restrictive
and selective immigration policies. There may
be more evidence of this trend in the ‘culture
of denial,’ which currently exists in asylum
processing and bilateral migration
agreements with North African states, for
such process and agreements assume
migrants are not legally entitled to refugee
protection.xxix
However, it is highly uncertain
whether and to what degree these trends will
occur. Future improvements in the integration
of immigrant groups might cause a decline in
xenophobia or Islam phobia. Moreover,
Europe’s commitment on international legal
norms and principles and multicultural
aspirations may suggest a future in which,
despite incidences of xenophobia, most
migrants will be welcomed and incorporated
into society. Consequently, the future of
xenophobia, racism, and identity politics in
Europe remains highly uncertain.
VII. Organizations Related to the Issue
The United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was
created in 1951 to assist in the international
protection of refugees. The organization’s
primary objective is to ensure that all persons
can exercise the right to seek asylum and find
safe refuge in another state, and to return
home voluntarily. One of the agency’s
pressing tasks is to encourage governments to
adopt fair and flexible processes to promote
just and effective refugee law. When UNHCR
was first established, material aspects of
refugee relief (e.g., housing, food) were seen
to be the responsibility of the government
that had granted asylum. As many of the
world’s more recent major refugee flows have
occurred in less developed countries,
however, UNHCR has acquired the additional
role of coordinating material assistance for
refugees and returnees. Although this was not
UNHCR's original mandate, coordination of
material assistance has become one of its
principal functions alongside protection and
the promotion of solutions.
The International Organization of
Migration (IOM) assists with the return of
rejected asylum seekers and refugees referred
by UNHCR.
The International Committee of the
Red Cross (ICRC) is an independent
humanitarian organization that acts as a
neutral entity in assisting and protecting
victims of war, from providing medical care to
victims to arranging exchanges of family
messages. As members of the civilian
population, displaced persons benefit from
ICRC protection and assistance activities
including the protection of civilians; visits to
detainees; medical assistance; food aid; and
restoration of family links between persons
separated by war. The ICRC does not have a
general mandate to provide protection and
assistance to internally displaced persons.
Over the years, however, it has provided
limited assistance to certain groups of

15
internally displaced persons. The ICRC is
considered well placed to provide such help
given its experience in humanitarian and crisis
situate
CURRENT SITUATION
The European Union has both of its hands tied
with migrations within EU member states and
political refugees from outside EU. It is to be
understood that the ongoing Eurozone Crisis,
an offshoot of the Great Recessionxxx
, started
several months after the previous Parliament
Election in June 2009 –with the 2014’s result
being vastly different –, has affected most EU
member states, with the hardest-hit
economies were those of southern Europe:
Greece, Cyprus, Italy, Spain, and Portugal,
along with Ireland. Among other reasons,
harsh austerity measures significantly affected
the public approval of EU leadership. The
percentage of Greeks approving the EU
leadership decreased from 32% in 2010 to
19% in 2013, while in Spain, the approval
dwindled more than a half from 59% in 2008
to 27% in 2013. Overall, only four of the 27
members countries approved the EU
leadership, suggesting that distrust about the
treaties and conventions that hold together
modern Europe appear at an all-time high.xxxi
With the euro zone’s economy sputtering,
countries simply cannot cope with a surge of
migrants and asylum seekers. xxxii
Yet the
European Union is dragging its feet on forging
a more unified approach to migration that
would distribute the financial and social costs
of coping with refugees more fairly.xxxiii
Part of the problem is the European Union’s
Dublin Regulation, which makes the country
on which an asylum seeker first sets foot
responsible for processing that person’s claim.
xxxiv
Southern European countries are on the
front lines, forced to deal with a
disproportionate number of migrants arriving
from North Africa. xxxv
Another problem is a
treaty between Britain and France that allows
British border guards to check passports in
France. With Britain as prime destination for
many migrants, Calais, the French port city,
has found itself overwhelmed with new
arrivals, mostly from Sudan and Eritrea.xxxvi
The continuing mounting surge of political
turmoil in Africa and the Middle East brings
on the tide of migrants and asylum seekers
fleeing in distress towards the European
Union border, challenging European
policymakers in taking action while balancing
every move taken with the political fallout
and outburst of recent economic upheaval.
The current ad hoc response from European
leaders is mostly due to the Eurozone Crisis
happening since 2008, which in itself creating
huge shift of economic migrants of labors
from Southern part of Europe to its more
stable counterpart in the North. Until 2014,
Many of European Union countries struggling
with being succumbed to a new level of high

16
unemployment rate and reduced government
services due to political extremism shift (e.g.
French, United Kingdom) and xenophobia
inside each EU’s members’ states. These
developments have raised concerns about an
erosion of EU exemplary core values like
human rights and travel freedoms voiced up
under the Schengen Agreementxxxvii
. With
most of the nationalist parties projected to
make big gains in the May 2014, the results
actually prove that more conflicts and debates
within the countries of EU were to take place,
even after the European Parliament Election
2014. With September passing – along with
the election –, results shows that in total,
roughly a quarter of all seats went to parties
skeptical of the EU or protest parties. Thus,
the election was seen as far as anti-
establishment. In the wake of the election,
several prominent political figures said the EU
needed to realign its priorities in a hurry.
Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte called for
"fewer rules and less fuss", while British Prime
Minister David Cameron said "Europe should
concentrate on what matters, on growth and
jobs, and not try to do so much.xxxviii
Violent turmoil in Libya, a major departure
point for migrants attempting to reach Europe
across the Mediterranean, is causing panic,
and traffickers are overloading boats. On
August 29, 2013, 19 migrants were rescued
from a boat that sank off the coast of Libya
and had been carrying 270 people.
xxxix
Meanwhile, Spain is blaming Morocco for a
surge of some 1,000 migrants that made it
across the Strait of Gibraltar on calm seas
within a single 48-hour period in July 2014.
Morocco is reeling from its role as a staging
ground for people attempting to reach
Europe, many by climbing the razor-wire
topped fences that surround Spain’s North
African territories of Ceuta and Melilla. xl
Italy
is at the breaking point. More than 100,000
people have arrived in Italy from North Africa
since the beginning of this 2014. Italy says it
has rescued 4,000 migrants over one
weekend in August alone.xli
Only an end to terror and conflict in Syria, Iraq
and Libya and a significant improvement in
African living standards would stem the flow
Picture 6 : The migration crisis needs to be
tackled at European Level.

17
of desperate people from Africa and the
Middle East who are reaching Europe.xlii
That,
unfortunately, is not likely to happen in the
immediate future. Europe has a crisis on its
hands that is feeding the rise of populist anti-
immigration parties and ugly xenophobia
across the Continent.xliii
Unfair Burden Sharing
The Southern European governments have
begun to demand, in their perspective, a
fairer sharing of the burden of dealing with
the crisis with northern European states and
an increase in EU funding. The countries on
the frontline of the migration crisis, due to
their close proximity with the Mediterranean
route, are also among the hardest hit by
Europe's financial crisis, leaving them with
little financial flexibility to deal with the mass
migration. More than 32,000 migrants from
Africa and the Middle arrived in Italy and
Malta in 2013, which according to the United
Nations, and made a hazardous crossing of
the Mediterranean in rickety boats. Italian
navy and coast guard ships rescued more than
700 migrants between Sicily and North Africa
overnight as the immigration crisis showed no
signs of abating. xliv
However, the governments in wealthy
northern countries, wary of opinion polls
showing a surge in anti-immigration
sentiment and rising support for far-right
parties that are proven to do well in May's
European Parliament elections, resist
increasing their responsibility for handling the
problem.
EU leaders have proposed no specific new
steps to counter the crisis, beyond composing
an EU task force to examine more effective
migration methods. They have yet to mention
any increase in resources for the EU's
FRONTEX border control agency.
The common European immigration policy
needs to provide a flexible framework that
takes into account European Union (EU)
countries’ particular situations and is
implemented in partnership between the EU
countries and institutions. xlv
Proper
communication will provide principles on
which the common policy will be built upon
and the necessary actions for implementing
these principles. EU countries will also need to
aim at ensuring that legal immigration
contributes to EU’s socio-economic
development, EU countries’ acts are
coordinated, cooperation with non-EU
countries is developed further and illegal
immigration and trafficking in human beings
are tackled effectively. xlvi
The European Union
needs to reform a migration policy that clearly
is not working. Besides more and faster
search-and-rescue operations at sea, Europe
must provide legal avenues to safety, lest
more migrants lose their lives on deadly
journeys.xlvii

18
PAST INTERNATIONAL ACTIONS
I. European Convention on Human
Rights
The European Convention on Human Rights
was created to protect human rights and
fundamental freedoms in Europe. Drafted in
1950 by the now defunct Council of Europe, it
was officially entered into force on 1953.
Through this convention, the European Court
of Human Rights was established, which
enabled violations of human rights to be
trialed and convicted.
Within this convention, the important articles
regarding refugees are articles 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9,
10, 13, 14, and 16. It is important to note that
the European Convention on Human Rights
does not contain any right to asylum and
makes no direct references to asylum seekers
or refugees.xlviii
However, a very important
case by the European Court of Human Rights
established that states were indeed
responsible, in certain instances, for the
wellbeing of individuals in other countries.
xlix
The concerned case is in article 3 of the
European Convention, where it states that
"No one shall be subjected to torture or
inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment".
In recent years the European Court has again
stressed the unconditional nature of the
prohibition against ill-treatment and
established the principle that a state wishing
to deport even an individual found guilty of a
serious criminal offence or constituting a
threat to national security must first make an
independent evaluation of the circumstances
the individual would face in the country of
return. Although article 3 is most often called
upon to protect asylum seekers and refugees,
other articles may also be invoked to ensure
that their human rights are respected. In
particular article 4 (prohibition of forced or
compulsory labor), article 5 (deprivation of
liberty), article 6 (right to a fair and impartial
hearing "within a reasonable time"), article 8
(respect for private and family life), article 9
(right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion), article 10 (right to freedom of
expression), article 13 (right to the grant of an
effective remedy before a national authority)
and article 16 (no restrictions on political
activity of aliens) can offer substantial
protection.l
II. Stockholme Programme and Action
Plan
The Stockholm Programme was adopted in
2009 to set out priorities in the area of justice,
freedom, and security for the period 2010-
2014. The program signifies the priority given
to migration issues in Europe, issues that
range from migration and development to
labour migration, to irregular migration and
integration. The Stockholm Programme differs
from previous programmes in its migration

19
priorities, in that its top priority is the The
Global Approach to Migration, or the external
dimension of the EU’s migration policy based
on partnership with third countries. A weak
point of the Stockholm Programme is that it
does not discuss how to develop a common
labor migration strategy. Fortunately, the
Stockholm Programme does emphasize equal
rights between third-country nationals and EU
nationals and places greater emphasis on
integration.
Although, in April 2010, the European Council
issued an Action Plan for the implementation
of the Stockholm Programme between 2010
and 2014, the Plan is yet to be endorsed by
the European Parliament and the Council. In
particular, the EC communication states that
the economic crisis should not prevent the EU
from “consolidating a genuine common
immigration and asylum policy... with
ambition and resolve.” In this respect, the EC
intends to focus on developing community
legislation in the field of seasonal
employment and admission of third-country
nationals in the framework of intra-corporate
transfer. Moreover, the EC intends to foster
debate on specific areas of migration policy by
issuing communications on increased
coherence between immigration policy and
other relevant EU policies, in particular on
how to strengthen the link between the
development of migration policy and the
Europe 2020 strategy and address labour
shortages through migration in EU Member
States, and on an EU agenda for integration,
including the development of a coordination
mechanism.li
III. Europe 2020 Strategy
The Europe 2020 Strategy is a 10-year
strategy proposed by the European
Commission in 2010 which aims to provide
smart, sustainable, inclusive growth of the EU
using greater coordination or national and
European policies. Europe 2020 identifies
several strategic priorities, namely,
developing a knowledge and innovation-
based economy, promoting sustainable
growth and inclusive societies characterized
by high employment, social and territorial
cohesion, and setting related headline targets.
In particular, the new strategy includes
reinforced references to migration in the
context of raising employment levels and
combating poverty by removing barriers to
labour market participation.
The strategy puts forward seven flagship
initiatives, including an “Agenda for New Skills
and New Jobs” that strengthens the
importance of this joint policy initiative by the
EC and the EU Member States launched at the
end of 2008. The “New Skills for New Jobs”
initiative wishes to modernize labour markets
through faciliting labour mobility and the
development of skills and forecast future
needs for new skills in the EU labour markets.

20
Guideline 7 calls for “increasing labour market
participation and reducing structural
unemployment”, including through promotion
of labour market integration of legal migrants.
The EU headline target is “to bring by 2020 to
75 per cent the employment rate for women
and men aged 20–64.” Furthermore,
Guideline 8 refers to “developing a skilled
workforce responding to labour market
needs, promoting job quality and lifelong
learning”, specifically stating that “quality
initial education and attractive vocational
training must be complemented ... by
targeted migration and integration policies.”
Overall, the Europe 2020 Strategy supports
migrants through the provision of jobs in the
EU labor markets, providing the education
and training required for those jobs, and
promotes the integration of legal migrants to
labor markets.
IV. Admissions Restrictions
Countries of destination, in particular, have
adopted various measures such as admissions
restrictions, which tend to focus on low-
skilled sectors, prioritizing nationals, reducing
quotas, and changing visa and admissions
requirements such as those pertaining to the
minimum salary required. Many of these
measures were mainly adjustments to existing
policies rather than changes to overarching
frameworks.
In Italy, quotas for migrant workers were
almost completely cancelled in 2009, with
only seasonal agricultural workers and
workers in the tourism sector admitted.
However, with 2010 decree on immigration
flows and quotas has been published by the
Corte dei Conti (State Auditors Department),
there was no quota for regular workers and
only 80,000 seasonal workers (in the
agricultural and tourism sectors), which also
included 4,000 self-employed workers. In its
2009 immigration law, Italy has also made
illegal entry and stays a criminal offence,
leading to immediate deportation and high
fines. In addition, the total number of work
permits issued by the Hungarian government
decreased by 33.5 per cent in 2009 compared
to 2008. Similarly, Portugal had also reduced
its quota for foreign workers to 3,800 in 2009
from 8,600 in 2008.lii
Spain and the UK have reduced admissions
based on limiting the skills requested on
labour shortage lists, while Ireland changed its
visa requirements for entry, including new
provisions such as minimum salary
requirements. In February 2008, the UK
government introduced a civil penalty system,
which has substantially increased penalties
(up to GBP 10,000 or two years in prison) for
employers who hire irregular workers. Since
the introduction of this new system, the UK
Border Agency has issued more than 1,000
fines totalling more than GBP 10 million. This
is a considerable tightening, considering that

21
between 1997 and 2006, only 37 employers
were found guilty of offences under a
previous legislation relating to illegal work. In
Austria and Germany, restrictions on
admissions of nationals of Member States
that joined the EU in 2004 continue.liii
V. Timeline of Significant Events
1948 – Universal Declaration of Human
Rights,
1949 – European Convention on Human
Rights,
1951 – UN Refugee Convention, ‘The Creation
of United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees’
1967 – Protocol Relating to Status of Refugees
(geographic restrictions removed from
1951 Refugee Convention),
1969 – Convention Governing the Specific
Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa
1984 – Cartagena Declaration on Refugees by
Organization of American States
1989 – Convention on the Rights of the Child
1994 – Declaration on the Elimination of
Violence against Women
1999 – Tampere Programme
2004 – Hague Programme
2009 – Stockholm Programme and Action Plan
2010 – Europe 2020 Strategy
BLOC POSITIONS
Tensions between state policies and
disparities in the diverse financial health of
European States – in particular, the difficulties
facing countries like Greece, Ireland, Portugal,
and Spain in managing their primary deficits –
reveal challenges to the economic and
political cohesion of the European Union.
While it is unlikely that EU and Eurozone will
completely fragment by 2035, the future
strength of EU cohesion, the position of the
less prosperous member states in the Union,
and the future of the process of EU expansion
remain highly uncertain. liv
If cohesion
weakens on an economic level, whether or
not states withdraw from the Eurozone, and
markets become increasingly depressed in the
weakest European states while others remain
stable or even experiencing growth, a process
of economic divergence will occur and the EU
may experience troubles in the future. lv
General international consensus agrees fully
that the migration situation requires
immediate and full attention, yet states are
less enthusiastic to offer refugees asylum or
to provide the much-needed financial support
to United Nations refugee organizations. The
debate then becomes a question of how to
achieve a solution, which involved every party
to take on the burden, and how to manage
the allocation of limited resources.
The division of viewpoints on the subject of

22
refugees rest primarily in a nation’s
geographic location, economic strength, and
their experience in dealing with migration in
the past. Each nation, therefore, has a specific
perspective to bring to the migration debate,
but there are opinions associated with certain
blocs of nations that share similar general
characteristics.
As with the sovereign-debt crisis, national
interests have consistently trumped European
ones in the areas of migration and asylum. lvi
This was illustrated in 2011, when France
briefly reintroduced border controls in the
free – movement Schengen area, a
cornerstone of the European project, in
response to the influx of thousands of
Tunisian and Libyan refugees in neighboring
Italy.lvii
The adoption of "fortress" lviii
policies by
several EU member states has come at a high
cost. In Greece, the implementation of stricter
border-control operations, like its Aspida
(Shield program, to bar illegal migrants from
entering Greece) program, has taken
precedence over reforming their
dysfunctional asylum system and while Aspida
has successfully lowered the numbers of
migrants entering the EU via the Greek-
Turkish border, many rights activists believe
that fortified land borders have simply pushed
refugees and migrants to risk more dangerous
sea passages.lix
Host Countries in EU
Nations in the Northern parts of the EU
region, such as the United Kingdom, France
and Germany, as well as nations that neighbor
key sources of refugees, such as Spain and
Italy, often serve as either voluntary or
involuntary host nations to asylum seeker.
The more economically stable countries of the
Picture 7 : Caricature depicting EU's policy towards migrants

23
north have continued to offer more inclusive
migration and asylum policies. In September
2013, Sweden announced that it would offer
permanent residency to all Syrian refugees.
Germany has also committed to offer ten
thousand Syrian refugees temporary
residency. However, some experts says these
policies run counter to the trend of anti-
immigrant sentiment that is gaining hold in
both countries as well as across Europe.
These nations are generally characterized by a
stronger economy with better-off conditions
from the financial crisis, reflected in their
relatively low (hence appealing)
unemployment rate. These nations are also
relatively seen as a safer and secure
sanctuary, both in terms of geographic and
politics. This bloc of EU member states must
deal with the influx of sometimes millions of
people into their land and society, which pose
pressing security, economic, and political
uncertainties for that nation’s government.
These nations ask that other, more southern
nations increase their involvement and
undertake a greater share of the burden. In
many discussions, donor states show a
reluctance to offer any additional assistance,
while in other discussions, host nations
sometimes are not even included. In a
resolution, these host nations states seek
stronger demands of donor states’
governance that commit them to a larger
financial contribution to help expand the host
nations’ capacity for refugees.
One of the greatest concerns of these host
nations is the security risk that refugees bring.
The immigration of new and diverse peoples
puts a strain on national identity and often
leads to conflicts of culture, language, and
resource availability. Furthermore, unless
refugees have a full and successful
acclimation into productive society, their
presence could lead to an increase in
violence, crime, and poverty.
Though, host nations are not all economically
more stable; some, such as Spain, require
other European Union member states and
organizations to provide aid in the
assimilation process. This aid often comes at a
high price tag for donor states. In cases of
violence and conflict between natives and
refugees, a nation might also require
peacekeeping or external military assistance
so as to prevent the conflict from escalating.
Southern Sending Countries in EU
Economically less stable member states
residing in the southern parts of the EU
region, such as Romania and Bulgaria, are just
2 examples of a bloc of EU nations that are
continuously donating an influx of migrants to
fellow EU host nations. Such countries, which
namely migrate to nations such as UK, are in
the process creating friction with these host
nations. In the past, host EU countries such as

24
the UK and France have shown reluctance to
become fully open towards the free-
mobilization of EU citizens from particular
newly joined member states, as these
migrants are seen to potentially become
burdens to the economy. Now, Romanian and
Bulgarian migrants are experiencing
discrimination in both the workforce and
general society in these host nations. This
puts this bloc of southern nations in a tricky
position as they are not as well equipped to
maintain their economy, hence causing the
migration, while on the other hand
continuation of such outflows of citizens is not
seen to be healthy for a nation’s sovereignty
either.
Key Sending Countries Outside of EU
Sending countries mainly include nations in
heavily conflicted regions surrounding the EU
as previously discussed, such as Syria, Lybia,
Iraq, Egypt and other Northern African
countries. This bloc of sending countries also
include surrounding nations facing economic
instability such as Morocco, namely having
resulting a surge of over 1,000 migrants
crossing the Gibraltar strait to Spain in a mere
48 hour period in early August. Such
countries, namely those in the northern
African region, have resulted in a massive
refuge of more than 100,000 people to Italy
since the beginning of 2014. Italy says it has
rescued 4,000 migrants over one weekend in
August alone.lx
PROPOSED SOLUTIONS
The question remains: with limited manpower
and resources, how should the European
Union allocate and prioritize the resources
they do have in order to solve the world’s
continuing refugee crisis? With causes such as
euro-crisis (which affect intra-EU migrations)
and political turmoil outside of EU (which
affect inter-EU migrations), EU needs to take a
stance that adheres to its mandate, while also
promoting international safety. While a
refugee’s situation depends on innovative and
thorough practices on the ground, the greater
solution rests in determining an
organizational structure and division of
responsibility amongst the relevant United
Nations agencies and NGOs to efficiently and
effectively achieves a solution.
EU Communication and Burden-Sharing
One of the most obvious obstacles to a
refugee solution in recent years involves a
lack of cooperation and agreement amongst
member states. Host states that neighbor
refugee conflicts feel abandoned and
overwhelmed with the number of refugees
crossing into their borders. In comparison,
wealthy and developed states, with the
financial capability to enforce immigration
policies and provide assistance, fear the
security risk of taking in asylum seekers.
These, mostly northern, nations prefer a
solution that emphasizes local assimilation or
repatriation, rather than asylum.

25
A past United Nations approach that may be
worthy of recognition by the EU entitled
development through local integration (DLI) –
directs funds and efforts towards facilitating
integration between refugees and the host
countries, so as to make refugees a benefit to
the economy and society of their host nation,
by contributing to agricultural production or
to the local economies. To attract an increase
in financial and other contributions, the
United Nations and the UNHCR, while
themselves remaining a non-political body,
can use the international political
environment to “hook” member nations into
increasing donations.
Although the willingness of member nations
may be limited, the European Union has a
fundamental responsibility to uphold an
institutional framework designed to regulate
the behavior of its member states.
Definition & Organization
There is a great amount of focus and
attention on how the European Union is
perceived as having a lack of a unified stance
on refugees, asylum seekers as well as
migrants. This hinders the possibility of any
organized efforts towards solving such
influxes of irregular migration stemming from
both internal and external crises. In the world,
one of the major current discussions
surrounding the refugee situation involves an
expansion of the 1951 Convention, the
definition of the word refugee, and the
people under the domain of the UNHCR.
Pointing to documents such as the UDHR
mandate, supporters of an expanded role
suggest that the United Nations has a role as a
protector, and that role should not be limited
to only those covered under the current
definition of refugee and IDP.
A 2006 UNHCR report highlights the public
tendency to confuse “economic migrants and
asylum-seekers fleeing persecution” and
emphasizes the need to prioritize those in
desperate situations because “Protection is at
the core of the Office’s humanitarian
mandate.” Although the 1951 Convention
mandates assistance in cases of “fear of
persecution,” many argue that it should be
expanded to include a fear of sexual
exploitation, poverty, generalized
persecution, or violence.
However, the concern over expanding the
definition of people receiving protection
under the 1951 Convention poses a risk to the
UNHCR and similar agencies that handle the
vast majority of the refugee burden. In an
organization that already has a strain on
resources and capacity, expanding the
mandate might force the relevant agencies to
become involved in and spend resources on
situations of low emergency priority, while on
the other hand, the creation of new agency
will also need a lot more resources. It seems it
is better to gain more resources and empower

26
the existing organizations.
Long Term Assistance
During times of limited offerings of asylum,
quick action projects that focus on achieving
repatriation as swiftly as possible become
popular solutions to refugee problems,
especially after refugees have spent long
periods of time in displacement camps,
improper repatriation could lead to further
civil strife or economic troubles. A full and
thorough repatriation process involves
“practical help with money grants, skills
teaching, and rebuilding of homes, schools
and infrastructure.” A collaboration of various
European as well as United Nations agencies
with specialties in many of these areas,
therefore, provides a crucial player in helping
refugees re-acclimate to life at home.
A key aspect to providing local integration
assistance is making the asylum seekers an
active, beneficial, and productive part of local
society. The measures call for assistance and
cooperation between the UNHCR and host
nations to actively work towards providing
new migrants with the training and skills
needed to make a productive transition.
Improving Law on Refugees and its
Enforcement
Concerted action is required to prevent the
exploitation of refugees and asylum seekers
by unscrupulous human smugglers. Even if
this has the effect of closing one of the few
means by which they can enter Europe, it will
also prevent many desperate people from
losing their money and their lives in the
process. At the same time, more vigorous
efforts are required to inform prospective
asylum seekers of the potential risks when
they place themselves in the hands of
smugglers and gangs who are motivated only
by profit. The countries of Europe, which
generally enjoy high levels of democracy,
human rights, stability and prosperity, must
use every asset at their disposal to ensure
that people in other countries are able to
benefit from the same conditions.
SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER
RESEARCH
Reflecting on how complex the
migration issue in the European Union is,
delegates are expected to do further research
to enhance their understanding. This study
will be able to give background analysis, but in
order to get deeper understanding, delegates
can try to utilize access to news outlet,UNHCR
and IOM publication, EU policy brief and
international journal.
To understand the complexity, one can start
to understand migration from development-
security nexus (Sørensen:2012,
Hillifield:2004). There has been many writings
that discuss how migration can contribute to
development (Skeldon : 2008, EU
Communication on Maximising the

27
Development Impact of Migration: 2013) as
well as the security issue it brings with
(Lohrmann:2000, Choucri :2002,
Huysmans:2000).
Normatively, delegates should aim to create
fairer burden sharing and an open region for
humanitarian reason, but delegates should
also consider its country history of migration
and analyze its government-society position
towards migration. Many European countries
which used to be sending countries are
becoming hosting countries as well and
creating a shift in sentiment and policy.
Delegates should also refer to recent news
publication in order to keep their research
relevant to current condition.
QUESTIONS A RESOLUTION MUST
ANSWER
1. How could EU deal with underlying
forces that are causing the continuous
flow of migrants, refugees and asylum
seekers from surrounding regions as
well as within the EU itself? Also, how
could EU promote stability and
prosperity to avoid unbearable influx
of these people?
2. With the world eyes on EU stance on
the ad hoc borders action, should the
EU alter or expand its own definition
of “refugee”, “asylum seeker” and
“migrant”? Should the EU only
protect those fleeing armed conflict
or do other causes merit refugee
status?
3. To what extent should EU member
states have the responsibility to admit
and accommodate such refugees,
asylum seekers and migrants? How
should the EU allocate responsibility
of this complex issue amongst
member states? Should a solution
provide mandates for individual
member states or outline general
guidelines for the entirety of the
European Union?
4. How should the European Union
address the resulting issue of
xenophobia?
5. How should the European Union
involve relevant NGOs and INGOs as
well as other concerned parties?

28
REFERENCES
i
Ben Hall, Immigration in the European
Union: problem or solution?,
accessed from
http://www.oecdobserver.org/ne
ws/archivestory.php/aid/337/Imm
igration_in_the_European_Union:
_problem_or_solution_.html#stha
sh.q1Ise20H.dpuf at September 9th
2014
ii
Ibid.
iii
Ibid.
iv
International Organization for
Migration, “Migration and the
Economic Crisis in the European
Union: Implications for Policy”,
Migration, 2010
v
Mathilde Hamel, “Europe’s Economic
Crisis Prompting Huge South-to-
North Migration Within EU,
http://www.ibtimes.com/europes-
economic-crisis-prompting-huge-
south-north-migration-within-eu-
1330257, 2013
vi
David Barrett, “Immigration Surge driven
by Eurozone Crisis”, accesed from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news
/uknews/immigration/10274266/I
mmigration-surge-driven-by-
eurozone-crisis.html at September
1st 2014
vii
Jeanne Park, “Europe’s Migration
Crisis”, accesed from
http://www.cfr.org/migration/eur
opes-migration-crisis/p32874,
2014 at September1st 2014
viii
Amnesty International, “Refugee and
Migrant Rights”, accesed from
http://www.amnestyusa.org/, at
1st
September 2014
ix
Kate Jastram and Marilyn Achiron,
“Refugee Protection: A Guide to
International Refugee Law”,
UNHCR, 2001
x
UNHCR, “Three boat tragedies in five
days on the Mediterranean”,
accesed from
http://www.unhcr.org/53fc5e491c
3.html at 1st September 2014
xi
Julia Brooks, Conflict Migration on the
Mediterranean: An Overshadowed
Humanitarian Crisis, accessed from
http://www.atha.se/blog/conflict-
migration-mediterranean-
overshadowed-humanitarian-crisis
at 1st September 2014
xii
Ibid.
xiii
Ibid.
xiv
Ibid.
xv
Ibid.
xvi
Ibid.
xvii
Ibid.
xviii
Ibid.
xix
Ibid.
xx
Ibid.
xxi
Ibid.
xxii
Nur Abdelkhaliq , EU Migrants Caught
Between Economic Crisis and
Domestic Politics,accesed from
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.c
om/articles/13807/eu-migrants-
caught-between-economic-crisis-
and-domestic-politics, 2014
xxiii
Ibid.
xxiv
Ibid.
xxv
Ibid.
xxvi
EU Xenophobia Report: Racism On the
Rise in Germany,accesed from
http://www.spiegel.de/internation
al/germany/eu-xenophobia-
report-racism-on-the-rise-in-
germany-a-502471.html
xxvii
Change in EU migrant law stirs
xenophobia , accesed from
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/e
urope/2013/12/change-eu-
migrant-law-stirs-xenophobia-
2013122261849205586.html, 2014

29
xxviii
European Union Agency for
Fundamental Rights, “Report on
Racism and Xenophobia in the
Member States of the EU”, 2007
xxix
J. Souter (2011) ‘ A Culture of Disbelief
or Denial? Critiquing Refugee
Status Determination’, Oxford
Monitor of Forced Migration.
xxx
The Great Recession (also referred to as
the Lesser Depression, the Long
Recession, or the global recession
of 2009) was a global economic
decline in the late 2000s decade.
xxxi
Simons, Ned. “Skepticism And
Contempt Color Upcoming
European Parliament Elections”.
January 21, 2014.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.
xxxii
Europe’s Migration Crisis, accesed
from
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09
/01/opinion/europes-migration-
crisis.html?_r=0, 2014
xxxiii
Ibid.
xxxiv
Ibid.
xxxv
Ibid.
xxxvi
Ibid.
xxxvii
The Schengen Agreement led to the
creation of Europe's borderless
Schengen Area in 1995. The treaty
was signed on 14 June 1985
between five of the then ten
member states of the European
Economic Community near the
town of Schengen in Luxembourg.
It proposed the gradual abolition
of border checks at the signatories'
common borders.
xxxviii
Paul Taylor; Luke Baker, "After
seismic elections, EU leaders
assess damage". Reuters.
Retrieved 27 May 2014.
xxxix
The Editorial Board. Europe’s
Migration Crisis. Accesed from
crisis.html, August 31, 2014.
xl
Ibid.
xli
Ibid.
xlii
Ibid.
xliii
Ibid.
xliv
Nami O’ Leary, Hundreds of migrants
rescued in sea off Italy , accesed
from
http://www.reuters.com/article/2
013/10/25/us-italy-migrants-
idUSBRE99O0BP20131025, 2014
xlv
A common immigration policy for
Europe, accesed from
http://europa.eu/legislation_sum
maries/justice_freedom_security/f
ree_movement_of_persons_asylu
m_immigration/jl0001_en.htm
xlvi
Ibid.
xlvii
The Editorial Board. Europe’s Migration
Crisis. Accessed from
xlviii
The Study Guide : The Rights of
Refugees, accesed from
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/
edumat/studyguides/refugees.htm
,
xlix
Ibid.
l
Ibid.
li
International Organization for Migration,
“Migration and the Economic Crisis
in the European Union:
Implications for Policy”,
Migration, 2010
lii
Ibid.
liii
Ibid.
liv
Ibid.
lv
Ibid.
lvi
Crisis.

30
lvii
Ibid.
lviii
Fortress Europe: How the EU Turns Its
Back on Refugees, accessed from
http://www.spiegel.de/internation
al/europe/asylum-policy-and-
treatment-of-refugees-in-the-
european-union-a-926939.html at
September 1st 2014
lix
Jeanne Park, “Europe’s Migration
Crisis”, accesed from
http://www.cfr.org, 2014
lx
Crisis, accesed from

EU IMUN 2014 STUDY GUIDE

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (19)

Similar to EU IMUN 2014 STUDY GUIDE

Similar to EU IMUN 2014 STUDY GUIDE (12)

EU IMUN 2014 STUDY GUIDE