News | Sunday, 30 August 2009

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

Behind Italy’s demands for the SAR lies its dangerous immigration policy

Malta’s SAR gives it legitimacy in the immigration debate that Italy and Libya want to smother

Matthew Vella
Home affairs minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici and Italian foreign minister Franco Frattini locked horns last week in a radio debate over Malta’s alleged inability to handle the rescue missions in its vast search and rescue zone (SAR).
The questions surrounding the rescue of five Eritrean migrants last week, reportedly the sole survivors of a tragedy that took the lives of 75 other migrants, has reopened the debate over Italy’s decade-long demand to take over a part of Malta’s SAR area.
Frattini, formerly the European Commissioner for Freedom, Security and Justice, says Malta should hand over a part its SAR area to Italy. It’s so extensive (250,000 square kilometres stretching from Tunisia to Cyprus) that Malta – a “spittle in the Mediterranean” says his colleague Umberto Bossi, head of the far-right separatist Northern League – cannot handle the challenge of illegal immigration, Frattini argues.
Mifsud Bonnici disagrees. Malta’s SAR zone is not up for sale. The two countries already disagree on the interpretation of international maritime law on rescue missions. Malta says that its primary obligation is to coordinate the rescue missions in the area: the responsibility to take in rescued asylum seekers falls on military and merchant vessels and aircraft in the area, and then the nearest, safest port of call.
Only recently however, Italy upped the ante, claiming that Malta should take in all asylum seekers saved in its SAR. Otherwise, it should cede control of the area. But why should Italy want to take on the added responsibility of rescuing migrants it has so far forcefully repatriated?

Iron-fisted policy
It seems hard to believe that Italy might be interested in the handful of millions that Malta reaps in air traffic tariffs from its Flight Information Region, the airspace that mirrors the SAR.
But judging from the silence of government officials, who are wary of any un-diplomatic comments that could sour relations, Italy is more intent on taking greater control over the way rescue missions are coordinated inside the Mediterranean. In a scenario where Italy suddenly takes control over the rescue missions in the SAR – what Malta’s army currently does – this would give Italy the power to change the landscape of humanitarian rescue in the region.
Malta’s need to control its vast SAR is not only key to its humanitarian responsibility, a factor that gives it moral legitimacy in the immigration debate. It’s this vast geographical area over which it is its guardian, that makes Malta a key player in the immigration landscape.
The recent altercations between Malta and Italy have proved as much. The Pinar E and tuna pen standoffs surely betrayed the countries’ disdain for the value of human life at sea when it comes to asylum seekers. But Italy went a step further this year, when its interior minister Roberto Maroni (of Bossi’s Northern League) blockaded Lampedusa with army boats to prevent a Maltese patrol boat from effecting the safe landing of migrants it had saved near the island – the nearest, safest port of call.
Added to that is Italy’s internationally-criticised forceful repatriation of asylum seekers back to Libya while at sea. It is a unilateral, illegal action that punishes asylum seekers with a rightful claim for refugee protection. But Italy, which earlier this month made illegal immigration a crime, is intent on taking its right-wing immigration policy further.
That’s why it’s more than likely that taking control of rescue missions within the central Mediterranean’s search and rescue area would only enhance Italy’s iron-fisted approach. It would give Italy the power to direct asylum seekers closer to Malta; or even effect covert forceful repatriations of incoming boats.

Coastguard for the Med
In the midst of this war of words between the Malta and Italy, questions arise on the role of Frontex, the European Union’s agency for the control of its external borders. At the end of the day, the effectiveness of Frontex depends on the military assets that EU member states voluntarily contribute to its missions in the Mediterranean sea. But even the existence of this agency has not prevented Italy from taking matters into its own hands with its forceful repatriation of migrants.
International relations analyst Stephen Calleya says it is time the EU and its Mediterranean neighbours look into a more coherent approach to this challenge. Calleya had proposed the setting up of a Euro-Med coast guard that would take on not just illegal immigration, but also organised crime, fisheries issues, and search and rescue missions.
“It seems to me all the more clear that coordinating security challenges in this context is through a Euro-Mediterranean coast guard. Italy has gone about this whole matter the wrong way. It makes much more sense for the Maltese, Italy and Libya to coordinate their approach – rather than reinvent the SAR wheel,” Calleya says.
Calleya calls for Frontex to be revisited. Was it a prototype for a Mediterranean coast guard? If so, how can the Mediterranean countries rethink Frontex’s mission to finally deliver the necessary resources to deal with illegal immigration?
“Playing the blame game will only lead to more hype and humanitarian tragedy in the process. Let’s revisit Frontex’s political programme and modus operandi. Malta has an excellent track record in assessing what works and doesn’t. Let’s go back to the corridors of power, lobby together with the other parties, and finally come to terms with what Frontex should be doing in the Mediterranean. Everything points towards the need of an EU coast guard.”
Despite the latest influx of migrant arrivals, the number of asylum seekers in Malta this year is at levels far lower than in previous years. Key to this appears to be Italy’s long-term compensation grant of €5 billion to Libya, in reparation for its colonial dues. Libya responded with a better control of its coasts, preventing the departure of African migrants from its shores.
But this perhaps only confirms Libya’s madcap style of how it gets what it wants, and when it wants it – a style inimitably personified by the unpredictable Muammar Gaddafi. Unmatched in their financial and political clout, Italy and oil-rich Libya straddle the immigration motorway and lay down the rules.
But spittle though it may be, Malta has to hold on tight to its SAR if is to retain its influence on the immigration debate. Otherwise, it will turn into the spittoon of these Mediterranean giants.

mvella@mediatoday.com.mt

Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below.
Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.

All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.

EDITORIAL


A tragedy foretold