Stop NATO 2017 : NATO and EU border security in the Mediterranean

Workshops II : B.2. NATO, militarisation in the Mediterranean & the refugee crisis

The response of the EU to the increasing number of refugees trying to reach Europe since the spring of 2015 has been a rapid expansion of its long standing policies of trying to keep or get refugees out of Europe. This has resulted in a further militarisation of the borders: the use of military means and/or personnel for border security. It includes the deployment of soldiers for border security, which has happened in several European countries, mostly in Southeastern ones such as Hungary and Bulgaria, and the erection of security fences at several borders. And on the other hand it is about the use of military equipment by police and paramilitary forces, including drones and helicopters. Because the EU’s border security policies are predicated on stopping people entering Europe through the most common migration routes, people seek to undertake ever more dangerous routes. Hence, the refugee toll in 2016, over 5000 known people have died crossing the Mediterranean sea, was higher than in 2015 even though the total number of refugees entering Europe fell with some 60%². As many experts had predicted, for example, one of the consequences of the deal with Turkey, and the related attempt to shut off the so-called ‘Western Balkan migration route’, has been a shifting of migration routes. More refugees have tried to cross the Mediterranean from Egypt and Libya, facing a more dangerous journey and resulting in higher numbers of migrant deaths. The majority of people arriving in the EU come from the war-torn countries of Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq, where European and broader western interventions and policies, including the arms trade, have added to violence and chaos. EU arms exports to the Middle East and North Africa, worth over 80 billion euros in the last decade, are fuelling war (Yemen, Syria), armed conflicts (Iraq, Turkey, Libya) and human rights violations (Egypt, Saudi Arabia)³.  NATO patrol ships in the Mediterranean initially played a low key role in assisting Frontex border security missions. Two Standing Naval Forces did some border security work on the sideline of their main task, patrolling in the context of the counter-terrorism Operation Active Endeavour. ⁴In 2006, for example, NATO ships assisted the Hellenic Coast Guard in intercepting a ship with refugees heading for Greece.⁵ In 2011 two refugees surviving a shipwreck between Libya and the Italian island Lampedusa claimed a NATO ship was among the number of military assets ignoring their cries for help. Only nine out of the 72 passengers survived after their vessel was left to drift in open water for 16 days.⁶Since the start of the so called ‘refugee crisis’ in April 2015, when hundreds of refugees drowned in the Mediterranean, NATO has stepped up its support for EU border security.In February 2016, responding to a joint request by Germany, Greece and Turkey, it decided that its Standing Maritime Group number 2, already active in the region, would start conducting reconnaissance, monitoring and surveillance in the Aegean Sea, directly coordinating with Frontex.⁷ One month later, five ships from various NATO member states expanded their patrolling mission into Turkish and Greek waters, sharing information with the Turkish and Greek Coast Guards and Frontex.⁸NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on one occasion claimed that

NATO ships are not in the Aegean Sea to stop or push back boats with migrants and refugees

NATO and Operation Sophia In July 2016 NATO announced support to Tunisia, including giving advice to the Tunisian authorities on the development of a Tunisian Intelligence Fusion Centre and providing training to Tunisian Special Operations Forces ²⁶. This was a result of an « Individual Partnership and Cooperation Programme » Tunisia and NATO agreed in 2014, promising cooperation across a range of areas, including border security²⁷. In March 2017 NATO also announced it would strengthen its ties with Egypt. Egyptian Minister of Foreign Affairs Shoukry discussed several topics with Stoltenberg, including the possibility of NATO providing Egypt’s Naval Forces with weapons and equipment to counter migration²⁸.

The increasing militarisation of EU border policies has benefited the arms and security industry. Since the start of the twenty first century, the EU has provided billions of euros for border security and control measures in both member states and neighbouring countries, creating huge profits for large European arms companies, including Airbus, Leonardo-Finmeccanica and Thales. Among the main beneficiaries of border security contracts are some of the biggest arms sellers to the Middle East and North Africa, who fuel the conflicts that force many people from their home countries in the first place.

The military and security industry is not only a beneficiary, it increasingly shapes European border policy with persistent lobbying on border security and control policies, and calls for more funding for research and purchases in this field. What has emerged is a European border security industrial complex where the interests of European securocrats and the profits of military companies are increasingly aligned²⁹. NATO itself is not a big spender in the field of border security purchases. However, at the NATO summit in Warsaw in July 2016, the Alliance Ground Surveillance (AGS) was showcased for the first time. It is a system that can be used for border control assistance, among other uses. US arms producer Northrop Grumman is the main contractor for AGS, Italian company Leonardo-Finmeccanica contributed “the operational control centre ground station, two transportable ground stations and communications technology for the transmission of data and imagery between the remotely piloted aircraft and the ground segment and mission support facilities.” AGS will be in use from this year or next, at the Italian air force base Sigonella on Sicily ³⁰.

Conclusion

Human rights organisations and experts have repeatedly warned that the EU’s current response to the refugee crisis will only lead to more suffering and violence against refugees, who will be forced to use even more dangerous routes to safety. Yet the EU remains deaf to such criticism, just as it denies its responsibility for the drivers of migration: the role played by the West, including NATO, in causing chaos, violence and poverty in the Middle East and Africa.

In EU border security rhetoric human traffickers are now the primary enemies, who must be combated, with increasing use of military means. Success is measured on the number of intercepted ships and refugees, and the extent to which the number of refugees reaching Europe is reduced. There is no attention for the well-being of refugees who are looking for safety and a viable future. They are met by pushbacks to unsafe countries, including Libya, violence by border and coast guards, detention and the prospect of deportation or living a hard life as an ‘illegal’ in Europe. The increasing role of NATO, a military alliance with no humanitarian mandate, in EU border security is exemplary for the militarization of these policies. It also raises questions about accountability, since NATO falls outside EU parliamentary control and complaint mechanisms.

---

Mark Akkerman – May 2017