Melitón Cardona
Former Ambassador of Spain to Denmark
It is likely that the issue of immigration will condition the results of the upcoming European elections; it would not be surprising because it is a problem that threatens to burst the seams of the Union; the countries of the Visegrad group, Austria and, recently, Italy do not seem willing to continue tolerating a state of things that they perceive as a threat to their identity. Something that, in my opinion, is at the heart of the matter, because thinking such a massive arrival of people belonging to another cultural circle will have no impact on the future of a country is to think about what is needless to say.
It is good to keep some basic ideas in mind. To begin with, general international law does not contain any rule that obliges States to admit foreign citizens into their territory. This is something to keep in mind. To continue, no one emigrates if they do not have an incentive that encourages them to do so, as Hans Magnus Enzensberger has accurately pointed out. And that explains the fact that illegal inmigrant boats do not reach the Portuguese coasts or Gibraltar.
The Australian case is significant: for years, up to 30,000 people a year reached the Australian coast; a sensible government decided that anyone who entered irregularly into its territory would be immediately forwarded to certain islands in the Pacific. The result was conclusive: it went from 30,000 illegal entries to none.
[hr style=»single»]
«A policy of open borders is incompatible with the welfare state»
[hr style=»single»]
Leaving aside the do-gooders contributions to the debate, which arise from what Max Weber categorized as Gesinnungsethik or ethics of principles, the fact is that whoever tries to settle in Europe at all costs is someone who wants to benefit from a welfare state to which expensive maintenance has not contributed through the payment of taxes and social contributions. That is why, in the face of this do-good attitude, arises the Verantwortungsethik or ethics of responsibility that any self-respecting ruler, whether or not he has read Weber, should bear in mind.
The citizens can be governed by the ethics of principles. The politician must do it for the ethics of responsibility as long as its do-good attitude can have devastating and counterproductive social consequences. And one thing is clear, namely that a policy of open borders is incompatible with the welfare state: Milton Friedman said it when he wrote that «You can have open borders or you can have a welfare-state, but you can’t have both».
20/07/2018. © All rights reserved
