#PINOR – “Migrations in the European Union” by Damián Marcelo Dellaqueva

Damián Marcelo Dellaqueva

Dr. Damián Marcelo Dellaqueva – Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Argentina.

Observing the migration phenomenon from the Middle East and North Africa to the European Union from the perspective of the categories of tridimensionalist integrativism of the Trialist Theory of the legal world.

Considering the events (without a specific purpose) as the objective purpose and from the perspective of the conception of Trialist Political World, considered as coexistence acts understood through rules and assessed through the coexistence value and its relation to the specific nature of space, time and people and in turn, these, with the value dynamics.

Deconstruction of the migration phenomenon as an event without purpose would fall within the Trialist category Objective Purpose. This is located in the sociological dimension with Economics and History in relation to space, time and people. The main cause of migrations, but not at the level of nature causation, but as objective purpose, is the civil wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Siria.‐ The conflict in the 80s before the fall of the Berlin Wall, between Afghanistan and the USSR causes the emergence of Bin Laden with the US influence in Afghanistan, turning then into Al Qaeda, entering Iraq then, when the US armed forces abandoned that country, after its recent invasion. Al Qaeda, as a centrifugal and destabilizing organization, is almost replaced by the Islamic State, which, on the contrary, would constitute a centripetal organization having sovereign claims, which expands from a territorial enclave over which it seeks to achieve its government, and using emotional impact methods and that would denote that the coexistence with the rest of the world is no longer possible.‐

This I.S. organization expanding from Iraq to Syria and Libya is one of the main causes and critical factor of migrations to the European Union together with the civil war in Syria.‐

1916 Sykes‐Picot agreement would have been a deal that did not respect the ethnic space, its time course in historical retrospective of ethnic communities and people’s religious map, cutting its self‐determination and paradoxically, the unfair partition triggered a series of events that today bring into play the disintegration of another great deal that was the constitution of the European Union, established mostly by almost the same supreme partitioners of 1916, which did not respect the different economic and cultural communities of the Catholic southern Europe and Protestant northern Europe and their different types of economies: subsidised and domesticity targeted in the south and the other one being a savings one and export targeted in the north.‐

Intercommunal tensions for 100 years among Kurds, Turks, Armenians, Jews, Palestinians, as well as among religious communities, mainly Shiites and Sunnis, would denote that perhaps there is no possibility of solution via military means to violent conflicts related to proximity, destabilization, sovereign and geopolitical claims. In decisions and tensions the security value would assume the freedom and auto‐determination substance.‐

The same applies in the European Union, where countries like England claim the Brexit or self‐determination to establish policies for admission of immigrants and create conflicts with France over refugees in Calais. As well as the countries of southern Europe demand self‐determination in monetary policy and their exit from the euro system.

Supreme partitioners in 1916 of Sykes‐Picot partition are those who today ‐‐ after 100 years ‐‐ constitute one of the destabilizing forces in the region as foreign military intervention forces, together with other two main critical factors, vernacular Dictatorships and Jihadism.

Anglo‐American military action in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and actions of France and NATO in Syria and Libya have caused migrations to Germany, the only beneficiary from the monetary policy in the European Union and due to their economic policies of Ordoliberalism of Ludwig Erhard and the Christian Democratic Union. People’s migrations, despite their historical cause, in their temporal relationship, are attracted to the economically prosperous space, imitating this category of objective purpose what happens in nature, with the swallows’ migration, which was popularly used to refer to the immigration movements that arrived in Argentina at the beginning of the last century.

This phenomenon allows us to materially envision how Law and Political Law are inserted in nature, diffuse human influences and the objective purpose, which are categories of the Trialist Theory of the legal world. It also brings us close to the complexity, the pantonomy of justice and the limits, due to the infeasibility of the possibilities, which creates the need for partition.

Today in Libya, the delegate of the United Nations Security Council is trying to reach an agreement with hearing process between the two representative sides of the main ethnic communities, dispersed after the fall of Kadafy, under the auspices of Algeria and Egypt, mainly because of fear of the spread of the Islamic State in their territories. The stabilization of the region and opening of a humanitarian corridor of shared governance should be set as a priority for the collective security and balance of the continents.

As damaged recipient, perhaps we could place the Italian Republic, as it was not “benefitted” from the colonial partition of 1916 neither was it benefited from the establishment of the single currency in the Agreement of the European Union and yet it has always performed the rescue of migrants in Lampedusa, which would have to be erected as a Landmark to be declared by the United Nations as a messenger of Peace. The rescue was made with its own resources and proceeded to the distribution of migrants in its territory while other ‘beneficiary’ countries of the colonial partition and that take intervention military action, close their borders to the entry of migrants to Europe, even encouraging the seizure of their property and eviction from their wretched settlements.‐

The coexistence in the aggregation of love would not have been achieved by both agreements, the one settled in 1916 by the English and French foreign ministers or the one through which the European Union was formed.

History teaches us that the “deluge of Napalm” above the 38th parallel in North Korea has produced as a result the fact that currently North Korea is a medium strength nuclear power, when it could have used the military budget for economic development as its neighbour brother South Korea did. Interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq and Libya led to the emergence of the Islamic State, also due to the failure of the popular revolutions of the Arab Spring, which by virtue of not being able to articulate a democratic self‐ management system, made it possible the emergence of authoritarianisms as recurrence as the vernacular Dictatorships, terror organizations, and foreign interventions, in a heavily militarized region, and with three language and religion families. When an emerging force does not find a dynamic opportunity, it can contribute to the opposition with its strength, des‐adding. To combat the Islamic State that has a strong military potential, foreign forces have to find support on dictatorships to combat these organizations rather than finding support on a weak emerging democratic movement, not having armed resources to combat it. Perhaps for that reason local dictatorships do not combat the Islamic State with determination because they use Jihadism as a pressure element to justify their intervention and stay on power taking process. The problem is socio‐political, legal and sociological‐political, that is to say, the objective purpose driven by Economy and History, in the sociological dimension, does not find opportunities in the rules of a restrictive political system. The inter‐category relations of the legal world, essentially the objective purpose with the subjective purpose and the possibility, surpass the legal moulds and forms. For that reason, the colonial partition forms in 1916 and the treaty leading to the European Union have been surpassed by the objective events.

In the Middle East, in North Africa as well as in Central Asia and Europe, sovereignty and self‐determination are requested from the supreme partitioners of the colonial partition pacts and of the partition of the European single space. The migration issue is an axis in which the decisive variable geometry forces converge as to migrant partition, economy and military actions. Those who decide the European economy are mainly France and Germany and those who decide the NATO military actions are England and the United States. The decision mechanism is not structured in a unified way.

The teaching that this century offers to us is that the Machiavellian conception of politics as well as the military interventions perhaps are not the right strategy but room should be left for love and humanity so that communal living can be added and not just coexistence. There are no rules for the use of that opportunity because after a century and nearly fifty years of operation the treaty rules, which produced the partition of both regions, could be declared as unfair and the need for change appears, but considering the peaceful communal living for the integral development of diversities and not for the security of the supreme partitioner’ interests.

By Damián Marcelo Dellaqueva
Argentina. Rosario, February 29, 2016

Share This: