Defense analysis

Rivers of words and data pour into immigration every day, sometimes conflicting, used more to confirm a political line than to inform correctly.

The trend, voluntary or not, is generally to omit some relevant pieces which should not be ignored if we wanted to present public opinion with a reasonably complete and comprehensible picture of the problems connected to the extraordinary flow of mostly illegal migrants.

The latter are also victims of misinformation as well as of the ruthless methods of human traffickers and their accomplices whether they are organic to criminal organizations or used indirectly by them.

For Italy, for years now, the greatest concerns concern the uncontrolled flows coming by sea and the objective difficulties of managing the crisis on Italian territory once the sacred principle of saving human lives at sea has been fulfilled. Difficulties made even more burdensome by the failure of every attempt to reach pragmatics, fair common European immigration policy and burden-sharing by Member States.

The fact of the matter 2018 it's that Italy, first, Greece and Spain were left alone, except for insufficient disbursements of community funds and useless words of appreciation, by the European institutions and member countries, to manage a crisis well above the receptive and management capabilities of individual states.

In the Italian case it is clear that a part of the press, of intellectuals more inclined to salon debates than to knowledge of the terrain and of politicians uncritically aligned on positions that are now anachronistic, incompetent in the matter, ignoring the repercussions on international credibility and internal security, still prefer to debate demagogically rather than treat a complex issue constructively and realistically as a national priority, high risk intensity.

Against all logic of national interest, legitimate protection of borders, whether maritime or land, it has come to the point of political attack, personally, hypocritically, two interior ministers from opposing sides and opposing governments who have done and are doing their duty to mitigate, minimize the risks of social tensions, repercussions on national security and above all a further debasement of our international role.

Less biased information would often recall the causes that objectively worsened the crisis, such as the inability of the European institutions to propose, produce and execute a common plan shared by member countries also to protect the most exposed countries. Italy added its own, making the crisis more acute, the decision-making delays of past governments, the weakness of our foreign policy action aimed irresponsibly at delegating and blindly placing, inappropriate trust in community and international bodies and in our allied neighbors.

Years of empty words and European mockery have therefore led to accelerated and due concrete action, in order to reduce the landings of mostly illegal migrants, However, it began in an anomalous manner by the Minister of the Interior Minniti, in the absence of a strategy, equal determination and teamwork as my foreign colleague, with plush covering, almost whispered by the previous Prime Minister.

Attacked by his own party and fellow ministers, the previous owner of the interior had to threaten resignation in order to be able to operate pragmatically, leaving aside rhetoric and demagoguery.

The line drawn is simply pursued with greater determination and rigor by the current owner of the interior who follows, net of instrumental criticism or otherwise, a path almost forced by the situation in which our country found itself after years of international shortcomings and serious errors such as allowing almost all landings in Italy with the backing of the EU operations Triton and then Sophia.

Another example of misinformation with respect to a reality very different from the rhetoric of words. The rigid action of the new Interior Minister Matteo Salvini is virulently criticized (or the Italian government) arguing that since landings are drastically reduced it would not be necessary, nor human such a test of strength. Few complete the information by recalling that Italy has already welcomed Dal 2013 circa 700.000 migrants of which less than 9% are entitled to the protections due by international agreements for the categories provided for by the same agreements.

Our country, regardless of the amounts paid, minimally covered by European funds, on the efficiency or otherwise of the reception operators, it is still not able to manage these flows, even administratively, in the absence of European redistribution policies for illegal migrants, of an effective assisted repatriation policy sanctioned by agreements, of international operational strategies to conduct a real fight against human traffickers.

The much more rigid rejection and expulsion policies adopted by France should always be remembered, Germany, Austria, Spain which are not countries belonging to the so-called Visegrad group. In the face of broken promises, of solidarity expressed only in words, of individual action to combat illegal immigration, determined but not in solidarity by the main European countries, what an exposed country like Italy should do to avoid paying costs above its means and the possible onset of social tensions?

Rarely is an objective fact mentioned. Each migrant spends a minimum of 5.000 until 7.000 euros for the various steps that led him illegally to Europe, even risking his life. Well with the same figure in all sub-Saharan African countries, even more so in Eritrea or Somalia you can start, and good, a fruitful independent work activity as a small local restaurant, craftsman's workshop, farmer, fisherman and more, making the family live without problems for several years.

How and from whom do they receive the funding to undertake such a risky journey without even attempting the local job route which such an amount would amply allow? First hypothesis they are financed by criminal organizations who will then blackmail the migrant and the family for years to get back the sum used with interest. In the best case scenario, the migrant is financed by relatives and family members who in turn will demand repayment and financial assistance for a long time and for a large group of family members near and far.

Result: the surviving illegal migrant or asylum seeker waiting for a long time, in order to repay his debt in the absence of honest work he will necessarily have to enter the criminal ring of the country of arrival. Furthermore, to summarize, the traditional African family structure of the villages itself is damaged, uprooting young people and families from the territory and their traditions, much more relevant and important for their lives than ours could be for our future. The loss of the traditional identity of deep Africa in the long term will produce devastating damage to the economic and social fabric, while increasing the unnatural establishment of violent and jihadist minorities, vedi Boko Haram or Aqmi, whose violent fanaticism has never been part of the traditions of those populations.

Libya's ports cannot be considered safe, Libya has not signed the Geneva Convention on Human Rights. Data reiterated several times in recent times to counter the action of the Italian government and yet contradicted by the facts and the same policies implemented by the EU and the United Nations.

There is certainly no desire to deny the abuses suffered by men and women in Libyan camps, however, precisely thanks to political pressure and substantial funding from the EU and Italy in the first place, it was possible to have the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees operate permanently in Libya (UNHCR) and the much more effective International Organization for Migration (OIM) associated with the United Nations for some years, which primarily deals with the relocation of migrants to their countries of origin through assistance and financing for returning migrants to start a job.

The two organizations have access to the infamous camps run by the Libyans to at least identify and resolve the most urgent cases. Until a clear improvement in the situation and the signing of the Geneva Convention by the Libyan side, the outright transfer of illegal immigrants to Libyan camps cannot be hoped for, however, migrants assisted but stopped in the Mediterranean in the Libyan area of ​​competence can be returned to the two international organizations which will provide repatriation with relocation from Tripoli airport or from camps managed and controlled by them.

The reality of the facts attests that the IOM has repatriated people from Libya further 30.000 migrants, UNHCR will have registered and verified refugee status for tens of thousands more. It therefore becomes misinformation not to mention or minimize the success of these operations born and sponsored by the aforementioned unassailable international organizations with the conspicuous political and financial support of countries like Italy.

The supply of patrol boats and technical assistance to Libya on the Italian side are clearly part of this context.

Only in recent times have most partisan politicians, of improvised commentators and a certain press, they evoke negatively, trying to omit the substance and reality of the facts, the operation against illegal landings in Australia called No Way (in short, no possibility of illegal landing on Australian soil). Before the formation of the new government and the declarations on the success of this initiative by Minister Salvini, however, taking into account different contexts, there were no particular critical evocations regarding the civil case, democratic Australia and on Operation No Way launched way back 2013.

Disinformation also deviates from reality with regards to the analysis and impact on host countries of the potential crime rate of uncontrolled migratory flows.

It is well established that the vast majority are economic migrants and not refugees and refugees to be protected, it becomes almost a constant omission, in the Italian case, anything that can impact internal security and therefore fully justify a normal, adequate response action by the State.

Some examples will perhaps clarify the concept better. Among the many nationalities welcomed, it is difficult to understand why so many Nigerians are flocking to Italy (Nigeria, no Niger) country with one of the highest crime rates among African countries. I remember in my almost 15 years spent in sub-Saharan Africa how the Africans themselves said they particularly feared the Nigerians capable of establishing powerful and violent local mafias dedicated to drug trafficking everywhere, to the violent exploitation of prostitution, of human beings.

From recent Italian statistics, in recent years the Nigerian mafia has proliferated so much so that it has also become one of the most violent and powerful in the criminal sectors of its competence.. Even without wanting to make connections, there is no doubt that it is a violent minority. or forced into violence, of illegal Nigerian migrants landed in Italy has strengthened the ranks of organized crime.

Who if not the government has the responsibility to prevent and consequently adopt appropriate responses including rejections, expulsions and repressive actions in order to stem and combat the criminal phenomenon?

Another specific case although not of direct criminal impact. Why our country should welcome so many irregulars from Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangla Desh, perhaps part of those rejected by Australia, clearly not victims of war nor even coming from nearby and depressed countries or areas?

In the absence of community policies, of agreed distributions and massive re-accompaniments in the countries of origin at European level, I don't think we can objectively deny a country the legitimate protection of its primary interests and control and defense of its borders from illegal entries.