How denying Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia's Schengen bid will weaken the EU

[Debithius 6,056]

2 minutes ago, FfFfFfFF said:

I posted some stats above, you can check them out.

It doesn't change the fact that it could be a possible future route but I will read it. Europe can't take any chances right now either way. I don't blame these three countries for blocking them. 

[FfFfFfFF 58,127]

5 minutes ago, Debithius said:

It doesn't change the fact that it could be a possible future route but I will read it. Europe can't take any chances right now either way. I don't blame these three countries for blocking them. 

Well you should given they fulfill the criteria since like 2012 and keep getting postponed because Western countries persuit their own interets. Slovenia, Croatia and Hungary could become routes too, does that mean they should be excluded? Croatia IS already a bigger route for immigrants, yet they will be accepted, proving is not about immigrants to begin with.

[Debithius 6,056]

21 minutes ago, FfFfFfFF said:

Well you should given they fulfill the criteria since like 2012 and keep getting postponed because Western countries persuit their own interets. Slovenia, Croatia and Hungary could become routes too, does that mean they should be excluded? Croatia IS already a bigger route for immigrants, yet they will be accepted, proving is not about immigrants to begin with.

If it poses a risk, yes they should be excluded. I am all for it. About Romania, I am not really too sure why they are worried about them still, even before the immigration if they fulfill everything. But maybe they don't trust that they could uphold the criteria.

[FfFfFfFF 58,127]

5 minutes ago, Debithius said:

If it poses a risk, yes they should be excluded. I am all for it. About Romania, I am not really too sure why they are worried about them still, even before the immigration if they fulfill everything. But maybe they don't trust that they could uphold the criteria.

Italy poses a risk bc of sea migrants, Netherlands poses a risk bc of drug mafia, but I don't think many in the EU would want to exclude them from Schengen. Again, the criteria has been met in its entirety since 2012. The reason for not allowing Romania stems from pragmatic and prejudice reasons such as Netherlands not wanting Constanta to threaten Rotterdam and its other ports, the idea that Easteners are second class citizens. Make no mistake, this is not a matter of genuine concern, but political interests. Austria has no issue deforestating Romania, but is worrying about its corruption? Cmon..

 

[Debithius 6,056]

6 minutes ago, FfFfFfFF said:

Italy poses a risk bc of sea migrants, Netherlands poses a risk bc of drug mafia, but I don't think many in the EU would want to exclude them from Schengen. Again, the criteria has been met in its entirety since 2012. The reason for not allowing Romania stems from pragmatic and prejudice reasons such as Netherlands not wanting Constanta to threaten Rotterdam and its other ports, the idea that Easteners are second class citizens. Make no mistake, this is not a matter of genuine concern, but political interests. Austria has no issue deforestating Romania, but is worrying about its corruption? Cmon..

 

You can't drag Italy and Netherlands into this since they were accepted before the immigration crisis. You can't just kick them out but you can stop countries with a high risk from joining. These are different times and the situation is completely different. So mentioning Italy and Netherlands makes zero sense here.

[FfFfFfFF 58,127]

26 minutes ago, Debithius said:

You can't drag Italy and Netherlands into this since they were accepted before the immigration crisis. You can't just kick them out but you can stop countries with a high risk from joining. These are different times and the situation is completely different. So mentioning Italy and Netherlands makes zero sense here.

Why a certain set of rules applies for Western Europe and others for Eastern Europe? The EU institutions said sound and clear that Romania and Bulgaria are ready to join (to join Schengen is a legal obligation for all EU members, not a favour). You know, you cannot change the rules in the middle of the game, that is called cheating.Mentioning Italy and Netherlands makes sense as you agreed countries that might pose risk should be excluded, and those are two countries that pose risks. 

My exemple also points that Romania is not a ''high risk'' country, if anything Croatia would be closer to a ''high risk country'' in Austria's view, yet tourist heavy Croatia will join as Romania and Bulgaria will keep getting postponed years on end as has been the case since the 2010s. This also proves that is not about illegal immigration or any genuine concern.

[FfFfFfFF 58,127]

I love to have fruitful discussion with people with opposing views. @Lamaris@Biggest Bitch I am genuinely interested to hear your factual takes and stats on the subject that contradict the things I am posting. 

[Guest]

the reasons why they are not voting in favor in Austria is mainly due to populist rhetoric. The Conservative Party (which now holds the position of the chancellor) acts very populist and has just revived the migration agenda in their center of daily attention. They really want to create fear that we live in new crisis of migration and that our asylum system right now is completely flooded with applications and dysfunctional because of it. Yet, they have so much investigation in their own party by the state anti-corruption department going on that they desperately try to find topics to distract which now goes on for nearly three years. It's very frustrating but that party is slowly but surely going to crumble because the allegations are becoming more and more overwhelming to them. I feel like they just want to frame these EU-decisions as a new way to stir the pot and try to mobilize their stem voters  and from the right to solidify their own position which has been becoming very unstable recently

 

[dit 46,738]

13 hours ago, FfFfFfFF said:

would be a strategic mistake that could send euroskepticism flaring across Europe’s sensitive east.

this is the part I agree with most tbh. There was already a lot of euroskepticism rising in the area. Moves like this create a view that Europe does not want the Eastern part not only due to "valid concerns" but based on some potential racism too. Romania and Croatia especially are READY to be admitted. I understand the concerns with Bulgaria because it shares a land crossing with Turkey and tons of refugees from around the world are stuck in Turkey trying to enter Europe through either Greece or Bulgaria so I get the concerns there but come on...Croatia especially has been READY and needs to join already. 

edit: just saw you posted stats which show Croatia is actually a bigger source of potential illegal immigration. I guess the source of the immigration also matters to these nations perhaps? Most immigrants entering through Bulgaria will likely be from the Mid East and Africa whereas those entering through Croatias are probably from local Balkan immigrants hence why they are willing to accept Croatia despite the higher risk. 

[FfFfFfFF 58,127]

7 hours ago, dit said:

I guess the source of the immigration also matters to these nations perhaps? Most immigrants entering through Bulgaria will likely be from the Mid East and Africa whereas those entering through Croatias are probably from local Balkan immigrants hence why they are willing to accept Croatia despite the higher risk. 

They are Middle Eastern immigrants! Frontext.europa https://frontex.europa.eu/we-know/migratory-map/ says the Western Balkan route is transited by

1) migrants from Syria : 68115    
2) Afghanistan : 22274    
3) Unknown : 10967    
4) Türkiye : 8148   
5) Tunisia : 6601 

[FfFfFfFF 58,127]