WEU: IMPLICATIONS OF OPENING OF BORDERS
01 January 1991
WEU: IMPLICATIONS OF OPENING OF BORDERS
bacdoc February=1996
Source: Western European Union
AM 86
CC/OSCE (95) 4
Original: English
THE SECURITY IMPLICATIONS OF
THE OPENING OF BORDERS
SUB-COMMITTEE ON THE ORGANIZATION FOR SECURITY
AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE
Draft Interim Report
Lord LUCAS of CHILWORTH (United Kingdom)
Acting Rapporteur*
International Secretariat May 1995
--------------------------------------
* Until this document has been approved by the
Civilian Affairs Committee, it represents only
the views of the Rapporteur.
1. The Sub-Committee on the OSCE began its work
in 1995 with a visit to The Hague on 2-3 March
1995. The members carried out in-depth discussions
with Dutch parliamentarians and high-ranking
government officials on a wide range of issues
related to the security consequences of the opening
of borders. They learnt about the specific Dutch
approach to drug consumption and sale from a well-
known professor of criminal law in The
Netherlands. (1) They also met with the co-ordinator
of Europol and director of its Drugs' Unit to
discuss efforts to co-ordinate the fight against
crime at European Union (EU) level. Finally, they
took advantage of their presence in The Hague to
hear about the activities of the international
tribunal on prosecuting war crimes in the former
Yugoslavia from a press spokesman.(2)
2. Two main interrelated but distinct issues were
on the agenda of the meeting: illegal immigration
and the fight against crime - with emphasis on
international organized crime.
3. The discussions with Dutch MPs and government
officials on illegal immigration were an
opportunity for members to exchange information on
their respective national experiences in terms of
the nature of the problem, its scope and the
various approaches in seeking remedies. The
insight provided in the variety of national models
led to the conclusion that the general attitude was
still more one of "beggar thy neighbour" policy
than one of co-operation. Generally speaking, it
was felt that greater mutual information about
illegal immigration as well as asylum policy would
be beneficial. Members suggested that a
questionnaire could be sent to NAA parliaments and
associates to that end.
4. As regards the security implications of
illegal immigration, most speakers were keen to
emphasize that there is generally only a tenuous
link between illegal immigration and the rise in
crime. Illegal immigration does create social
disruption (both among the recipient populations
and the migrants themselves). However, it is only
related to crime in two very specific ways: (i)
since illegal migrants are not allowed to work or
to receive social benefits, they lack resources and
are tempted to commit crime as a matter of
survival; but this is not a majority trend; (ii) an
ever larger share of illegal migration is linked to
organized traffic of people (up to 80% in The
Netherlands) run by criminal organizations; this is
a worrying development but not one under which
crime is usually linked with illegal immigration.
On the other hand, major international criminality
linked to the smuggling of drugs, weapons,
radioactive material, toxic waste, or even cars is
not linked to people's movements. It is a
phenomenon that has to be tackled as such.
5. The relationship between the opening of
borders and the development of organized
international crime was discussed at length.
Contrary to the expectations of several members,
the view of several Dutch officials was that the
opening of borders hardly made crime worse.
Rather, they saw it as an asset for law and order
forces to increase the efficiency of their action
against crime. This is because: (i) sophisticated
criminal organizations are able to operate
worldwide regardless of whether there are border
controls or not; (ii) the abolition of bo