Mediaboss Marketing

What are the main routes used by migrants and refugees from Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia attempting to reach the European Union? Here's a quick look at the four main routes.

What are the most frequented routes used by migrants and refugees hoping to reach the European Union? Here's an overview, based on data from Frontex, the border agency of the European Union (EU).

Migrants attempting to reach the European Union from Libya and Tunisia travel across the Central Mediterranean, hoping to reach primarily Italy but also Malta.

Between January and October 2021, almost 55,000 migrants arrived irregularly via the Central Mediterranean. The largest group -- over 15,000 -- were Tunisian nationals, followed by Bangladeshi and Egyptian citizens.

Hundreds of thousands of people have used the Central Mediterranean Route in recent years, but the number of crossings has fallen significantly since 2016, when a record number of people -- more than 180,000 -- irregularly crossed the sea border to Italy and Malta.

Libya in particular has become a transit country for migrants from many African and even some Asian countries. The political instability of the country has given room to vast human trafficking networks; many migrants are blackmailed and suffer abuse in Libya. Inspite of this, the European Union and Italy are supporting Libyan coast guards, who regularly intercept and return migrant boats in the Mediterranean.

The Eastern Mediterranean Route leads from Turkey to Greece.

This route saw the largest number of arrivals in 2015, when 885,000 people -- most of them Syrian refugees escaping their countries civil war -- used it to reach in the European Union, according to Frontex. Today, it is much less frequented.

Since the beginning of 2021, just over 15,000 have arrived using this route, most of whom are Syrian nationals.

The drastic decrease in arrivals along this route is likely in part due to the controversial EU-Turkey deal, an agreement between the EU and Turkey that was heavily criticized by NGOs and that essentially blocked off the Aegean coast. But Greece has also been accused of pushing back migrants and refugees in the Aegean -- the sea between Greece and Turkey.

Spain is among the European countries that have seen the largest number of migrant and refugee arrivals. There are two sea crossings migrants can attempt to reach Spain: The Western Mediterranean -- mostly from eastern Morocco to the Spanish mainland -- and the Atlantic -- from western Morocco/Western Sahara and other northwestern African countries to the Canaries, a Spanish island group located off the coast of northwestern Africa. A smaller number of people have also attempted to reach Spain via the land or sea route to Ceuta and Melilla, two Spanish enclaves located in Morocco.

Frontex counted roughly 33,000 border crossings on these routes so far in 2021 -- nearly 16,400 in the Western Mediterranean (mostly Algerians and Moroccans), more than 16,700 on the Atlantic (mostly people from Sub-Saharan countries and Morrocans).

This route has drawn a great deal of attention in recent days, as thousands of migrants and refugees have been stuck at the border between Belarus and eastern EU member countries -- primarily Poland -- amid growing tension between the EU and Belarus' autocratic president Alexander Lukashenko.

From January until October, Frontex reportedly registered nearly 6,600 attempts to irregularly cross the EU border from its Eastern European neighbors, primarily Belarus. More than half the registered migrants and refugees were Iraqis, followed by Afghans, Syrians and Congolese.

[Not mentioned in this article are routes that migrants use after they first arrive in the European Union -- the Balkan Route in particular is not listed because most migrants and refugees using this route have travelled through Greece or Bulgaria. Nearly 50,000 irregular border crossings were detected in Balkan EU countries between January and October 2021 -- most of them Syrian nationals.]

Continue reading here:
The main migration routes to the European Union - InfoMigrants

CHAMPAIGN, Ill. An annual campus event focused on the European Union will feature a former Canadian political leader turned academic speaking about threats to intellectual freedom in Europe.

History professor Michael Ignatieff, a rector emeritus of Central European University, Budapest, Hungary, and the author of On Consolation: Finding Solace in Hard Times, will deliver the keynote address at this years European Union Day at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

History professor Michael Ignatieff, a rector emeritus of Central European University, Budapest, Hungary.

Photo courtesy the European Union Center

Edit embedded media in the Files Tab and re-insert as needed.

The 20th annual EU Day keynote, titled Academic Freedom in Europe: Threats Within and Without, will be presented via Zoom on Thursday, Nov. 18 at noon.

EU Day is free and open to the public, but registration is required. Register here: https://go.illinois.edu/EUDayKeynote.

Ignatieffs talk will explore how university autonomy and freedom of thought are under attack in Eastern Europe, and how authoritarian resurgence has affected universities in Western Europe. Ignatieff also will discuss the lessons those trends portend for intellectual freedom in the U.S.

Ignatieff, whos had a long and varied career as a writer, historian, professor and politician, served as a member of the Canadian Parliament from 2006-11, and then as leader of the Liberal Party of Canada and leader of the Official Opposition.

Ignatieff was a faculty member at the Harvard Kelly School of Government, where he also directed the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy. In 2016, he was named a Member of the Order of Canada.

EU Day is an annual event to provide an opportunity to learn about the EU, its relationship with the U.S. and its role in promoting international relations.

More information is available on the EU Day webpage.

EU Day is sponsored by the European Union Center at Illinois.

Read the rest here:
Canadian historian, writer Michael Ignatieff to speak Nov. 18 as part of EU Day at Illinois | Illinois - University of Illinois News

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.

The European Commission is fond of declaring its commitment to the free and open internet. As recently as February, in answer to a question tabled at the European Parliament, a Commission spokesperson declared: The European Union supports a vision of the internet as a single and unfragmented, open, neutral, free, and secure network, supporting permissionless innovation, privacy and user empowerment, where human rights and fundamental freedom fully apply.

But in practice, things arent looking quite so certain.

New EU cybersecurity rules are on track to enter a phase of interinstitutional negotiations in the coming weeks. If adopted in the form proposed by the Council, they will threaten to undermine key properties of the global internet.

The revised Directive on Security of Network and Information Systems, commonly referred to as NIS 2, will replace the EU's existing cybersecurity Directive with the stated aim of responding to the rapidly changing threat landscape.

The Directive seeks, among other things, to increase cohesion between member states' cybersecurity mechanisms and strengthen security in new sectors, particularly for digital infrastructure and digital providers. So far, so reasonable.

But implicated in the proposed new rules are a range of digital providers that form the backbone of the internets architecture. These are governed through a set of collaborative rules that work to ensure infrastructure and services are optimised for the benefit of users.

A number of European and international technology sector leaders including the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), Rseaux IP Europens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC), and the Council of European National Top-Level Domain Registries (CENTR) have voiced their concerns as to how the proposed Directive would impede their respective areas of work.

In a recent impact brief, the Internet Society joined these voices by examining how the broad scope of the proposed EU cybersecurity rules would upend the existing system and replace it with a rigid top-down approach that created a regional Splinternet, far from the European vision of a single, neutral, free, secure, and unfragmented network.

Top-down regulation at the European or any regional level simply does not work for internet infrastructure. Most providers are global in nature, operating across national boundaries and providing services to users all over the world.

For example, the country code top level domain .tv is used throughout Europe and the world for broadcast entertainment, despite formally being designated to the island country of Tuvalu.

The boundary between European and global internet infrastructure providers is often blurry, if it is there at all. Imagine how quickly the internet would fragment if every region or country defined its own rules for how global services should be governed.

The potential for damage is real: global internet infrastructure providers including domain name system services and certificate authorities may opt to leave the European market to avoid the complications NIS2 rules would create, reducing the number of suppliers.

Those that do choose to stay but become non-compliant may suddenly find that they are barred from the European market, and their customers may find a service they depend on is no longer available.

This could also lead to market consolidation and impede the growth and availability of internet infrastructure - much of which is currently provided for free by non-profits.

Businesses in Europe may quickly find it difficult to compete with foreign competitors who continue to enjoy a wider selection of alternative providers in their supply chain.

Squeezing digital European businesses at exactly the moment where economic recovery is most needed is counterproductive to larger European goals for digital prosperity.

The loss of internet infrastructure providers also hurts European users, who will experience an internet that is less reliable, less trustworthy, and potentially even less secure than that experienced by users elsewhere in the world.

When services from internet infrastructure providers are lost, links to websites may become outdated or inaccurate and could be exploited by criminals to gain access to private data for use in fraud or other scams.

NIS 2 will also have implications for the EU's reputation in global internet governance. Due to the global nature of internet architecture, it's not possible to regulate it in one region without issues of extraterritoriality arising in other regions. This could lead to unintended clashes between different laws, resulting in unpredictability and a lack of clarity.

Politically speaking, the EUs actions will embolden other countries or regions to impose their own visions of a top-down approach on governance systems, as they have done in the past. When this occurs, the EU will no longer have credibility to challenge these actions.

Put simply, NIS2 would give carte blanche to other countries to shape the internet as they see fit, including for domestic censorship, surveillance or control objectives.

The vision of a single internet, that the EU has committed to support, will give way to a collection of domestic intranets that are largely disconnected from each other.

What we will be left with is something very different from the internet that has allowed cross-border commerce and communications to flourish for the past decades.

As NIS 2 reaches the final negotiation phase, it is essential that European policymakers prevent the harmful impact the Councils iteration of the Directive will have on European internet users, European businesses, and Europe's self-proclaimed position as protector of the single, global internet.

Read the original here:
Why is the European Union trying to break the Internet? | View - Euronews

The EU condemns Turkish illegal drilling activities

Following the review of the framework for restrictive measures in response to Turkeys unauthorised drilling activities in the Eastern Mediterranean, the Council today adopted a decision extending the regime for one year,until 12 November 2022.

The European Union will remain able to impose targeted restrictive measures on persons or entities responsible for or involved in unauthorised drilling activities relating to hydrocarbons in the Eastern Mediterranean. Such restrictive measures consist of anasset freezefor listed persons and entities as well as aban on travelto the EU for listed persons. In addition, EU persons and entities are forbidden from making funds available to those listed.

Currently,two individualsare subject to sanctions.

The decision will enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the EuropeanUnion.

The sanctions regime against unauthorised drilling activities in the Eastern Mediterranean is a direct follow-up to the Council conclusions of 14 October 2019, which were endorsed by the European Council on 17-18 October 2019, when the EU reaffirmed its full solidarity with Cyprus regarding respect for its sovereignty and sovereign rights in accordance with international law and invited the High Representative and the Commission to submit proposals for a framework for restrictive measures.

The decision will be kept under constant review; it will be renewed or amended, as appropriate, if the Council deems that its objectives have not been met.

More:
Unauthorised drilling activities in the Eastern Mediterranean: Council prolongs the sanctions regime by one year - EU News

Nowhere is that mistrust more palpable, diplomats said, than between Mr. Macron, a 43-year-old former banker, and Mr. Johnson, a 57-year-old onetime journalist. In both London and Paris, there is a sense that the relationship will not get fixed as long as Macron is in the lyse Palace and Johnson is in No. 10, said Peter Westmacott, who preceded Mr. Ricketts as Britains ambassador to France.

Britains departure from the European Union was a particular blow to Mr. Macron because it upset the power balance that had existed between the blocs three big states: Britain, France, and Germany. Now Mr. Macron is struggling to assert Frances leadership in a Europe dominated by Germany.

France and Macron have made the E.U. such a central pillar of their domestic and foreign policy, said Georgina Wright, a British expert on relations between France and Britain at the Institut Montaigne, a research organization in Paris. It is very difficult for him to cooperate with the U.K. government which continues to have a very antagonistic tone toward the E.U.

At home, Mr. Macron is leading in the polls but faces a robust challenge from the right. His main rivals all express skepticism about the European Union, though none argue for a split from the union. ric Zemmour, a provocative far-right TV star and writer who has shot up to second place in most polls, has said that Britain won the battle of Brexit and argues for a stronger France within Europe. So does Marine Le Pen, the leader of the National Rally, who is polling third.

Confronted with these challenges, Emmanuel Macrons message is to assert that being a member of the union entails obligations and rights, and that France takes part in all aspects of European politics, said Thibaud Harrois, an expert on French-British relations at the University of Sorbonne Nouvelle.

Unlike in Britain, however, where tensions with France preoccupy Downing Street and supply grist for headlines in pro-Conservative tabloids, Mr. Macrons hard line toward Britain is mainly a political calculation. There is little evidence that anti-British sentiment galvanizes the broader population.

For London, however, the fights over fish augur a much larger battle over its relationship with the European Union. Britain is now expected to upend its agreement with Brussels over how to treat Northern Ireland, which awkwardly straddles the trading systems of Britain and the union.

Go here to see the original:
With Fish, Trucks and Submarines, U.K. and France Bicker Over Brexit - The New York Times