European Migration Refugee Crisis Explained | Middle East Crisis | International Relations Analysis

in this video we're going to understand the european migration crisis when it happened how it happened and what are its consequences you can think of this video as a podcast where i will talk about many things related to the main topic so that you have an overall holistic view of the topic i will also make the time stamps available so that if you want to follow up on any individual segment you can do so without having to go through the entire video alright then let's begin the european refugee crisis which is also referred to as the european migration crisis is referred to a time period from 2015 when high number of people arrive to the european union from countries of northern africa and middle east and if you think the crisis is over then the consequences of that crisis is being felt now and that is what we are going to learn and understand in this video here is mediterranean sea people who migrated from western mediterranean route were mostly from countries like morocco algeria guinea ivory coast nigeria senegal and gambia even some of the syrians traveled all the way from the east and entered the european union through the western mediterranean route as you can see by taking the western mediterranean route the refugees had to first enter spain by the way this path has also been the main route used by criminal networks to smuggle drugs into the europe illegal border crossing on the western mediterranean route has increased in numbers since the last decade now coming to the central mediterranean route here the entry point to the european union is through italy people who migrated from this route were mostly from these sub-saharan african countries like eritrea nigeria and many more african country people mostly traveled from one african country to another and this way they reached northern africa from there they moved to italy or spain by crossing the mediterranean sea libya remains the main point of departure for the majority of refugees and migrants from africa who chose the central mediterranean route now coming to the eastern mediterranean region here the entry point to the european union is through greece cyprus and bulgaria most of the syrians iraqis afghans and pakistanis took this route to first travel into turkey from there the refugees travel to europe from istanbul one part of istanbul lies in europe and the other part lies in asia istanbul's european part is separated from its asian part by the bosphorous strait a 31 kilometer long waterway that connects the black sea with the sea of marmara and forms a natural boundary between the two continents this route witnessed heavy border crossing in 2015 and 16. after entering greece and bulgaria the migrants immediately moved to hungary through the balkans route you have to understand this greece is part of the shenzhen area whereas bulgaria is not part of the shenzhen area the shenzhen area is an area comprising of 26 european countries that have abolished their internal borders for the free and unrestricted movements of goods and people bulgaria and romania are part of the european union but they are not part of the shenzhen area therefore it is obvious for the migrants to move to countries like austria slovenia and hungary because these are the nearest shenzhen countries so passing through countries like bulgaria romania and macedonia is referred to as the balkan's route so the migrants took this balkan's route to reach hungary and slovenia it is a popular belief that if you want to gain citizenship of any european country then look for a european country that is also part of the shenzhen area anyhow so these were the main european migration routes that witnessed the arrival of highest number of migrants and refugees to europe these refugees came from countries that are severely affected by ongoing armed conflict like syrian civil war war in afghanistan iraqi conflict war in south sudan somalian civil war and arab spring as you can see most of these armed conflicts are still going on as a result the citizens of these war affected countries do not see any point of staying in war-torn societies and hence have decided to move to the european countries in hope for a better life opportunities majority of the migrants who are seeking asylum in the european union since 2014 are from syria iraq afghanistan nigeria and pakistan please keep in mind i am talking about majority otherwise there are many other countries from where people move to the european union anyhow all these countries are still facing ongoing conflicts now if you notice among these major countries syria and iraq are the two countries that is on top where millions of people have fled to other countries as refugees here is a graph that shows the number of refugees who have applied for asylum in the european union again you will see syria is on top if you look at the causes of migration people migrate from one place to another based on two broad factors push factor and pull factor and always remember people move from one place to another only if there is a value in it in fact this is true with everything that you do in life now what is push factor by the name you can easily figure out these are causes or situations that make people leave a particular area it could be due to lower standard of living lack of job opportunities unhappy life transportation natural disasters war or shortage of food and other basic amenities similarly pull factor means these are causes or situations that attracts people from different places basically the opposite of push factor now if you look at countries like syria and iraq they are war-torn countries in the middle east moments back i told you about the push factors of migration one of them is war so this is the push factor which is making millions of syrians and iraqi people flee from their country of origin now the question is why there is a civil war in syria and iraq you can simply go and read about it and get the answer in few lines the answer will be mostly about overthrowing the dictatorial rule of the respective countries leaders in other words regime change so on and so forth it is similar to arab spring this is the answer that you will get on the surface level but if you go deep and try to analyze and understand the conflict you will realize that it has everything to do with the us foreign policy in the middle east during the cold war u.s foreign policy in the middle east was driven by three main objectives one suppressed the soviet union two securing the petroleum supplies and the third one is ensuring the survival of israel if you all remember the cold war it was a period of geopolitical tension that started after world war ii between the soviet union and the united states and their respective allies which today is known as the european union it roughly lasted till 1991 with the fall of the soviet union in other words the end of the cold war is seen as a victory of western democracy over soviet union's communism if you look at the united states foreign policy under bill clinton's administration from 1993 to 2001 it focused largely on democracy and human rights issues when it came to dealing with countries in the middle east and we all know that bill clinton was a democrat the united states national interest towards the middle east during 90s was driven by a mixture of liberal democratic principles on one hand and on the other hand having a strong political influence for power maximization so this was the united states foreign policy towards the middle east in the 90s you see it was derived from the famous democratic peace theory in international relation there is a famous theory called the democratic peace theory it says democracies are hesitant to engage in armed conflict with other identified democracies a more democratic world would be a safer saner and more prosperous world for the united states democratic countries do not go to war with each other or sponsor terrorism against other democracies or build weapons of mass destruction to threaten one another so this became the popular theory in washington which is also the power center of the united states in simple words the united states wanted to introduce democracy and liberalism in the arab world in fact not just the arab world in the whole world the non-proliferation treaty is a classic example the united states want everyone to sign the npt the npt agreement is again a democratic idea since the beginning of nuclear age u.s leadership has been crucial in developing universal international agreements that oppose the spread of nuclear weapons in the hands of radical states in simple words united states and other veto countries do not want any other country to have nuclear technology only these five countries wants to have monopoly over nuclear technology if you remember the story of pokemon 2 india successfully tested its first nuclear weapons in 1998. that too without letting the american know about it the americans were keeping an eye through a spy satellite indians outsmarted americans and successfully tested its first nuclear weapon in pokhran rajasthan that means now that you have the nuclear technology you cannot sit on it you have to use it you have to sell it and earn money for national interest so at first the americans never wanted india to be a nuclear state but india anyhow developed it that means it was against the united states interests now that india has acquired it obviously the nuclear technology needs to be utilized otherwise what's the point for that you have to be a member of these four big clubs because these groups are responsible for the export and transfer of nuclear biological and chemical weapons and equipments around the world and surprisingly us is a member of all these four clubs to be part of the nsg india has to sign the non-proliferation treaty and you also have to understand this if india becomes the member of the nuclear supplies group it will have greater access to uranium in addition to this india will be able to import uranium from other countries to boost up its energy security however india cannot be a member of nuclear suppliers group until it sanks the non-proliferation treaty and india does not want to sign the npt because as per the npt agreement it allows only five nations to have nuclear weapons who manufactured it and developed it before january 1st 1967. so this is a classic example how america will develop weapons of mass destruction and at the same time it will tell the world no it is bad you should not use it you will not be able to handle it etc etc now this is true in terms of economy as well united states wants to be the biggest economy in the world but it will not cut down on its own carbon emission at the same time it will force or persuade other countries to reduce their carbon emission by using solar panels and wind turbines so this is how united states or if i can say the west uses democracy peace theory by using democracy and liberalism as a tool to achieve maximum power in different parts of the world now you have to understand this every civilization has its own history and pace and it grows in that pace suddenly introducing the idea of liberalism and democracy to a region which is conservative is certainly going to create chaos in fact if you pay attention all these middle eastern countries they may seem conservative from the outside it actually can be quite liberal in their own personal areas after all every civilization has its own history trend pace and fate now if at all the question is why are they conservative maybe they want to be like that it's the way they are they are comfortable that way or maybe or maybe not religion has something to do with it but you will also find many non-muslims who are conservative so it is not only about religion it is about a particular civilization and its space conservative means holding on to traditional values it does not mean opposing to change or innovation that change or innovation will come in its own speed time and trend that's how civilizations grow the consequences of introducing liberalism and democracy to the middle east by the united states gave rise to anti-western islamist movements at one point even in colonial india during the indian independence movement there were anti-western sentiments so it is similar to that then the terrorist attacks of 9 11 happened on united states and that made the united states firm in pushing the idea of liberalism and democracy in the middle east with full throttle immediately after the 9 11 attack as you all must be aware that a popular view which gained global attention was that the islamic terrorism is now threatening the united states things got so messed up after 9 11 attack that the united states actually came up with the new modded interpretation of islam which became the foundation of the american policy in the middle east this ideology became the foundation of the george w bush administration he was the president for eight years from 2001 to 2009 he belongs to the republican party as you may know the republican party in the u.s is known as the conservative now the question is how can one conservative of the western society deal with another conservative culture of the middle east and this gave rise to the new conservative thinking in the west which is often referred to as neoconservatism so the bush administration used democracy as a tool to create order in the middle east creating structure and order has always been associated with conservative ideology george w bush and his republican party in the united states after 9 11 attack became the new conservative who saw introduction of democracy in the middle east as the only tool towards securing western interests anyhow after the 9 11 attack the united states laid out a series of policy initiatives to promote democracy in the middle east one of the most important policy was the u.s middle east partnership initiative of december 2002 the same policy got extended in the form of the broader middle east and north africa partnership initiative which was announced in june 2004 at the g8 summit in atlanta georgia the world broader targeted countries like pakistan and afghanistan in the middle east area it also meant inviting other us allies such as the european countries to become partner in promoting democracy in the middle east the invasion of iraq in 2003 wherein major combat operations took place in which a combined force of troops from the united states the united kingdom australia and poland invaded iraq to overthrow the government of saddam hussein so basically the invasion of iraq in 2003 was justified by the united states in terms of preventing a terrorist threat against the united states and its allies then in 2009 the arrival of the barack obama administration gave rise to the obama middle east policy obama arrived in office with a set of liberal internationalist principles which is of course the ideology of the mainstream democratic party that means the obama administration to some extent picked up where bill clinton had left in 2000 then in march 2011 pro-democracy protest evolved in the city of damascus and dara in syria against the president bashar al-assad as the protest grew more popular the syrian government security forces detained some protesters and opened fire this gave the united states a reason to order sanction against the syrian government for human rights violation then in 2013 the syrian government was accused of using chemical weapons against its own people russia came in for support together russia and syria accused united states of lying about chemical weapons attack in return the united states and the nato alliance together blamed russia and syria by 2014 the united states conducted numerous airstrikes in syria and that is how both iraq and syria became a war-torn country if you notice the arab spring 2003 iraqi conflict 2011 syrian civil war all began in a similar fashion in which initially there were pro-democracy protests against the government with time it turned into massive protests and gave rise to many extremist groups on both the sites the united states and the nato allies then conducted military operations against the extremist group which did not incline with their democratic values the united states even gave financial aid to moderate rebels and gave them weapons so that they could fight against local extremist groups and before anyone knew it the whole country was destabilized united states is often criticized for being a global policeman and getting involved in other countries internal matters many of the middle eastern as well as global thinkers politicians and professors blame the united states in getting involved in the matters of countries like libya to all the way to pakistan and afghanistan in south asia so anyhow this whole situation turned into a push factor for the citizens of these countries and forced people to flee towards the european countries many traveled through land routes and many simply cross the mediterranean sea and went on a dangerous journey in an effort to escape conflict and find a better life but the sudden incoming of so many people sparked a crisis which is both humanitarian and political the impact of this mass migration is still being felt today if you remember in the beginning we learned that the united states and the nato allies together pushed the idea of promoting liberalism and democracy in the middle east as the only way of securing their own political and economic interests they in fact overused this idea which as a result did not end well and turned the whole country into a war zone now that you have destroyed people's homes they are going to come to your home to seek shelter and that is what the entire european migrant crisis is all about after all the americans and the europeans sold the idea of democracy and liberalism to a region which has its own thinking own culture history and pace now that people from these war-torn countries started fleeing towards the european countries europe and north america had no other option to accept them after all they sold the idea of democracy and liberalism so if you see in a way they are compelled to show compassion to the world these are the european countries that accepted the asylum applications from 2014 to 2017. as you can see germany topped the list refugees went as north as sweden to seek asylum although germany received the highest number of refugees but if you look at hungary the inflow of the refugees were highest in the proportion to its population now this created a new problem for the european union because some of the european countries were facing disproportionate burden especially those countries that became the gateway to the european union countries like spain greece italy and hungary plus these refugees also wanted to settle in those european countries that were part of the shenzhen area so that they could move freely within the european countries after they get settled so this kind of disproportionate entry of the migrants in the european countries created a political fallout among the various governments so initially if you remember the governments of the respective european countries were publicly speaking about how they would compassionately welcome the refugees to their respective countries but soon that mood changed it soon turned into compassion fatigue in sweden crime became part of the immigration debate then if you remember in 2016 the berlin christmas market terror attack committed by asylum seekers dominated headlines then on 2015 new year's eve sexual assault in cologne germany made the news headlines then anti-migrant sentiments started emerging in italy and sweden then the terrorist attacks in austria and france in 2020 have collectively served as a brutal reminder that terrorism and migration cannot be separated so overall you will notice that the impact of migration on the european union countries gave rise to nationalistic sentiments from the united kingdom to italy austria and other european countries recent elections has shown that nationalist and populist parties are attracting an increasing number of voters if i have to explain this problem in a simple way the problem is based on insider and outsider theory suppose you stay in this place you are used to the culture and emotion of this place suddenly your place gets flooded with migrants from another place who have different culture and practices at some point there will be rise in anti-migrant sentiments born residents of europe who are also known as the insiders will perceive the migrants as a direct competitors in the labor market they will also look at the outsiders as someone who is eating their welfare system for example pensions and other public resources such as hospitals and schools forced equality is bad for human society the idea of liberalism has failed if you look at the european migration crisis because 99 of these refugees and migrants come from a conservative background the west already destroyed their homes by introducing liberalism and democracy that is why they are coming to the european union to seek shelter even the most liberal and equal country like sweden and norway has faced this problem in america this is what led to the election of donald trump as the president of course a deeper analysis of migration will certainly tell us that there is a difference between the low educated migrants and high-skilled migrants everyone knows that low educated or low skilled migrants give rise to nationalism and that is how conservative political parties get elected similarly high educated and skilled migrants shifts vote away from nationalistic parties to progressive ones such as the socialist and liberal parties in some places it is also the opposite so certainly this kind of effect totally depends on the individual characteristics of voters but in the case of the european migrants simple ordinary people fled from their home country due to war and armed conflict and that too they traveled by foot so let me summarize the european migration crisis this crisis is a direct result of the liberal model introduced by the united states and the nato allies in the middle east in fact they have overdone it for example instead of introducing the model of democracy or liberalism developed countries like the united states and europe could have invested in developing economies agriculture by not interfering in the way they lived their lives by investing you could have helped them to make a living in their own countries and feed their families but the developed countries did not want that now they have migrants they have to accept them after all the west has to show to the world that they are the sole custodian of liberal values they want to show to the world how open they are migration will not stop soon the local population becomes unhappy naturally there will be a rise in extreme point of views you see every civilization has its own history and pace it is multifaceted it has many sides the way a civilization develops is complicated not only middle east even if you look at asian countries their values and culture is different you cannot transfer u.s and european values to asian countries just like that and expect development if you look at the philosophies of the east and the west you will notice that the east believes in virtue in other words what is ethically and morally right and wrong whereas the west believes in utilitarian philosophy in other words the western world believes in the philosophy that says as long as something is beneficial or brings happiness to me i will stick to it otherwise i will replace it it's all about me me and me of course value-oriented people also exist in the west but i'm talking in general sense and if you look at the eastern world it believes in virtue morals and ethics what is right and what is wrong taking everyone along believes in values and traditions you will find this philosophy broadly running across countries like russia china japan india even in the middle east you will find this so what i'm trying to say is that you cannot blindly transfer us and european liberal values on any civilization just like that it will lead to chaos you can see that in libya iraq syria afghanistan ideally iran should also be in the list but u.s cannot afford doing that with iran anyhow that's a topic of another video so basically the west imposed liberal values onto these countries by changing their regime and they overdid it i'm not saying liberal values are totally bad but you cannot blindly impose it wherever you want and that too on an entire civilization the result of that has led to the european migration crisis although it started in 2015 and 2016 the arrival of migrants have now dropped and the european government has stopped the movement of undocumented migrants within the union but if you think what started in 2015 has now ended then you are mistaken the aftermath is still being felt both in social and economic domain i hope you found this video informative let me know your thoughts in the comments section and thanks for watching it

Channel: Amit Sengupta

Views: 157,361

Keywords:

Id: 9zAl_WEMrmo

Length: 25min 7sec (1507 seconds)

Published: Thu Dec 31 2020