Three weeks ago, I mentioned that the Visegrád Group wanted to close the Balkan route while Angela Merkel wanted to promote Turkey to the role of the supreme defender of Europe.
These days, these two plans reflect the two dominant and fundamentally different "next moves" that European nations are taking. What has changed? The Balkan route has been de facto closed. Migrants are no longer flowing from Greece to Macedonia. This step was obviously needed, it was straightforward to realize it, and it came true with the help of some Visegrád Group cops and soldiers – although I am sure that Macedonia would have been able to seal its border by itself.
Today, European and Turkish leaders are meeting in Brussels to discuss the role of Turkey in the migration issue. To prove that they spend all their lives in a virtual Lalaland, Angela Merkel and Jean-Claude Juncker want to drop the mere formulation of the fact that the Balkan route has been closed from a statement. The idea that these unhinged idiots have de facto teamed up with the immature Mark Zuckerberg to determine what can be said on the world's largest social network – and who will be censored or banned – is frightening.
These people doing their best to deny reality as a whole should be relocated to a psychiatric asylum. Instead, their nations allow these nuts to play the role of the moderators of the global Internet.
Note that the evolution makes it increasingly obvious to an increasing number of people in the West that the Visegrád Group has been right all along. But don't expect the mainstream Western media to give the proper credit to the Visegrád Group. One reason is that the journalists aren't fair; another reason is that folks in our countries aren't skillful in P.R. so they can't sell their being right even if they're completely right, completely vindicated, and if the question they have been right about is very important.
Sadly, it's people like Angela Merkel who are much more experienced in the modern propaganda warfare.
Now, in November 2015, some European apparatchiks have promised to pay €3 billion to Ankara for some Turkish efforts to help the "refugees" and reduce their influx to the European Union. Most of these apparatchiks haven't earned $100 in their whole lives by doing some actual useful work but they are very effective in wasting billions of their fellow citizens' money.
There exists virtually no conceivable realistic scenario under which this payment of €3 billion could turn to a good investment. Turkey is an extremely problematic prospective ally. The Turkish government fails to respect some basic Western freedoms such as the freedom of press and their government has just seized the top-selling Today's Zaman newspaper. Today's Zeman hasn't been even allowed to be published and sold. ;-)
In the context of its hysterical and unfair war against its Kurdish minority, Turkey didn't hesitate to team up with (the equally Sunni) Daesh. Turkey is buying the oil that Daesh has been stealing and it has been helping Daesh (and Al Qaeda) in various other indirect ways.
Even if you ignore all the recent problematic acts by Ankara, Turkey simply can't be considered a reliable ally of continental European nations. The multi-centennial record of our relationships is extremely bloody and most of the sources of the incompatibility of these two civilizations haven't disappeared as of today.
About 3 million Muslim migrants are located in Turkey, waiting to move further to Europe. Turkey allowed them to enter because it seemed guaranteed that they would only stay in Turkey temporarily. According to the €3 billion contract, these people's visit to Turkey should be more long-lived or Turkey should work to send them back to the original countries.
I think that the idea is that the actual treatment of the migrants is "real work" and the European politicians don't want to do any "real work" which they consider "dirty". So they just want to outsource it to Turkey. It is an extremely dangerous plan to make Europe existentially dependent on Turkey.
To simplify things a little bit, Merkel's plan is to abolish Europe's external borders and encourage Turkey to harbor an army of 3 millions Muslim migrants – potential invaders – who can be sent to flood Europe as soon as Turkey isn't satisfied with something. And indeed, Turkish president Erdogan is already escalating the demands. He wants to get additional €2 billion on top of the previously promised €3 billion.
Czech president Zeman has protested the plan – even the already approved plan – to pay Turkey:
“I am strongly against giving billions of euros to Turkey for it to retain migrants on its territory,” Zeman told Czech Prima TV. “Turkey is not capable and is not willing to do anything with these migrants, except, of course, if it wanted to put them in jail, but it probably won’t do that.”Instead, Zeman proposed to hire Greece and solve two problems at the same moment. Greece should be paid to become Europe's huge deportation center. This is a big piece of work that Greece can do, Europe is willing to pay for, and by doing so, Greece could be repaying its debt that it isn't capable of repaying otherwise.
I obviously like scenarios that solve "two problems at the same time". Except that I don't believe that this Zeman's proposal is an example. There are two main reasons for my disagreement with Zeman (I mostly agree with him on related issues):
- The Greeks have demonstrated a lethal overdose of laziness, even when it comes to the work needed to deal with the migrants. They are parasites who will devour all the money thrown at them – and some additional money – and to do nothing useful in exchange. The work with migrants doesn't seem to be an exception at all.
- Even if Greece were the country that will return all the migrants – several million migrants – to their homeland, this service would still be vastly cheaper than Greece's foreign debt.
Concerning the second point, it is absolutely ludicrous to suggest that the deportation of the migrants would be a job that could repay a big portion of Greece's $350 billion debt. We're talking about the deportation of at most 2 million migrants. The deportation is equivalent to a cheap ticket (because there doesn't need to be any luxury) to a ship or another means of transportation. The price of such a ticket is some $100 per person. Multiply it by 2 million and you will get $200 million, not $350 billion. (You can see that I consider even the €3 billion payment to Ankara to be a clear overpayment as well – but not an insane one. For €3 billion, Turkey would be getting some $1,000 per migrant. That's enough for a ticket plus a few months of feeding and cheap accommodation.) Zeman must have confused millions and billions if he suggested that these two amounts are comparable. Zeman is generally reasonable in foreign policy issues but he probably drank too much last night.
The Greek debt of $350 billion is comparable to the money you need to guarantee a very (or relatively) comfortable life without any work to all the 2015 (or 2015+2016) migrants (some 1 million or 2 million people) – but not their kids – some $175,000-$350,000 per person. It's not hard to see why the counting works in this way: the Greek debt has accumulated because at least 2-3 million Greeks have been fully paid at least 1/2 of their comfortable lives from the borrowed money while doing nothing useful for some 40 years. The money you need to do that is equal to the money needed to feed 1 million Muslim migrants throughout their lives. If you assumed that the European freeloaders only live in Greece, it's several million people and their number will be doubled when the Muslim migrants of 2015 and 2016 are added.
Sorry to say but the protection of the external border is something that every country or empire has to do and should do for itself. If the European Union wants to act as a country or an empire, it must simply do this damn job just like every country or empire in the history did. This job can't be outsourced and it shouldn't be outsourced.
The United States of America have played – and, to some extent, still play – an unusually enhanced role in the preservation of Europe's security and existential interests. Angela Merkel is basically proposing to promote Turkey to the role of a similar "savior of Europe" that the U.S. has repeatedly become in the past. Apologies but unlike America, Turkey isn't sufficiently civilized, credible, and ideologically and morally close to us so it shouldn't be allowed to have this influence and responsibility over Europe. Some amazing blackmail would be an unavoidable result. Erdogan has already done so. If he doesn't get the extra ransom he demands, he will put all the migrants to buses and ship them to Europe (through Bulgaria), we were told in a leaked memo. Do you want to hire this guy as the Old Continent's bodyguard-in-chief? I don't. This plan is similar to tearing the skin off your flesh and placing a colony of pubic lice to replace the skin.
Greece is closer to Europe but we know how Greece behaves and it simply can't be expected to behave responsibly anytime soon, either. It's the countries that are actually threatened that have to protect themselves. They have to perform the basic tasks that are needed for survival or they deserve to die. In the case of the European Union, the death of this empire wouldn't represent any tragic event because the individual European nations will survive the European Union's death and most of them will retake the responsibility for their own protection as soon as the protection is needed.