Tag Archives: immigration quotas

What are Soros’s solutions to the refugee crisis? Not what Orbán claims

Most people will be surprised to hear that until now no one bothered to publish a Hungarian translation of George Soros’s article “This is Europe’s Last Chance to Fix Its Refugee Policy,” which appeared in Foreign Policy. This is especially surprising since it was on the basis of this article that the Orbán government declared Soros to be the devil incarnate who wants to abolish nation states, destroy European culture, and inundate Hungary with migrants.

The article was written a year ago, shortly after the Brexit vote and before the rerun of the Austrian presidential election, the Hungarian referendum on refugee policy, and naturally all the national elections in Europe that took place in 2017. Soros looked upon the refugee crisis and Brexit as threats to the very existence of the European Union. He was naturally concerned over the growth of xenophobia and nationalism, with the accompanying rise of far-right parties and ideologies. Under these circumstances, he felt that a “comprehensive policy ought to remain the highest priority for European leaders; the union cannot survive without it.” What followed were his own recommendations for such a comprehensive approach, which would be built on “seven pillars.”

Before he outlined his “seven pillars,” Soros stressed that “the refugee crisis is not a one-off event.” The world must expect high migration pressures in the coming years, and therefore the European Union and other western countries must together work out an orderly and humane immigration policy.

The seven pillars are:

  1. The European Union, like the United States or Canada, should set a limit of legal immigration of 300,000 people a year from countries where most of these refugees and economic migrants are currently. The rest of the world could also take in the same number of people. This would be a high enough number that it would discourage illegal border crossings. Moreover, once this guaranteed quota is in place, those people illegally crossing the border of the European Union would be disqualified from being admitted as legal immigrants.
  2. The European Union must regain control of its borders. The chaos that exists now alienates and scares the public. The remedy is to provide Greece and Italy with sufficient funds to care for the asylum-seekers temporarily.
  3. Funds are necessary for the long-term challenges connected to the refugee crisis, which at the moment are not available. In 2014 the member states and the European Parliament reduced and capped the EU budget at 1.23 percent of the sum of its members’ GDP, which is simply inadequate. Soros thinks that 30 billion euros a year will be needed to carry out a comprehensive asylum plan, which is a lot of money but still less than the political, human, and economic cost of a protracted crisis. How should the EU get the money? “By raising a substantial amount of debt backed by the EU’s relatively small budget.” The EU has a low amount of debt, and “it should therefore leverage this budget like all sovereign governments in the world do.”
  4. The EU must build common mechanisms for protecting borders, determining asylum claims, and relocating refugees.
  5. Soros is against the stillborn resettlement and relocation programs. “The union cannot coerce either member states or refugees to participate in these programs. They must be voluntary.” He suggests a program based on public-private initiatives in which small groups of individuals, community organizations, and companies support the integration of the newcomers. He brings up the example of Canada, which in four months admitted 25,000 Syrian refugees before the summer of 2016 and promised to settle 10,000 more by the end of the year. That number for Canada would be the equivalent of the EU allowing the settlement of 4.5 million immigrants annually.
  6. The European Union and the international community in general should be much more generous in their support of the refugee-hosting countries and African nations which at the moment receive financial aid only in exchange for migration control.
  7. Soros shares the general view that, given the EU’s aging population, it “must eventually create an environment in which economic migration is welcome.” Merkel’s generous act “was not well thought through” because such great numbers couldn’t be properly handled. Nonetheless, in his opinion “the benefits brought by migration far outweigh the costs of integrating immigrants.”

Soros is convinced that “pursuing these seven principles is essential in order to calm public fears, reduce chaotic flows of asylum seekers, ensure that newcomers are fully integrated, establish mutually beneficial relations with countries in the Middle East and Africa, and meet Europe’s international humanitarian obligations.”

©AP / Anja Niedringhaus

It is this article that is the basis of the Orbán government’s accusations against George Soros as the evil manipulator who wants to flood Europe with millions of non-European, non-Christian people, as a result of which Europe would lose its character. But as we can see, Soros agrees with Viktor Orbán on many issues. He thinks that the compulsory settlement of refugees is outright wrong. It is unfair to the local population as well as to the refugees. He also puts a great deal of emphasis on the effective defense of the European Union’s borders, just like Orbán. He, like Orbán, also wants to give more money to countries outside of Europe which are the first stations in the migrants’ journey to Europe.

Viktor Orbán may agree with many of George Soros’s ideas, but when it comes to the immigration of non-Europeans to the continent the Hungarian prime minister is adamant. He refuses to acknowledge the continuing migration pressures that force the EU to find solutions. Orbán’s answer of total exclusion is unrealistic. There is no way of preventing millions of people from entering the territory of the European Union.  For one country to erect a fence is a useless exercise. His boasting about his own fence on the Serbian-Hungarian border, which allegedly defends the whole of Europe from millions of illegal immigrants, is outright ridiculous. The only thing he managed to achieve with the fence was to prevent the asylum-seekers and economic migrants from traveling through Hungary toward their final destination.

Orbán also disagrees with Soros on the beneficial effects of immigration. First of all, he believes that current demographic trends can be solved from within, which, as the trends over the last 30-40 years show, is simply not true. No matter what the Orbán government does to promote higher birthrates, a serious turnabout is most unlikely. But for economic growth you need a robust internal market and a vibrant work force. In Hungary not only is the birthrate very low, but emigration is high. According to the latest statistics, every seventh Hungarian child is born abroad.

What is disgusting about the anti-Soros campaign, in addition to its anti-Semitic undertones, is that the government propaganda accuses Soros of things he doesn’t advocate. Most important, he doesn’t support the forcible settlement of refugees in Hungary against the will of the people, as the Orbán government claims. Thus, the whole anti-Soros campaign rests on a lie.

It is high time for Hungarians to read the complete text of Soros’s article which was published in HVG shortly after its publication. I just hope that people will take the time to read it. If they do, they will realize that the Orbán government concocted a whopper of a lie about Soros’s designs on Hungary.

July 9, 2017