EU Citizens Don’t Want More Migrants – But How Can the Flow of Asylum Seekers Be Slowed?

As many as seven out of ten citizens of the European Union believe that their country receives too many immigrants. In addition, 85 percent of respondents think that the European Union should do more to combat illegal immigration. In contrast, only 39 percent believe that Europe needs more immigrants.

This reflects the will of the people, but at the same time, part of the political elite—detached from the public—such as the former chairperson of Finland’s Green Party, Maria Ohisalo, would like to open more legal pathways into Europe for migrants.

In this regard, it was interesting to note that Finland’s Minister of the Interior, Mari Rantanen (Finns Party), has proposed a solution in the form of a so-called "three-basket model." In this model, asylum seekers would be categorized into different baskets based on their actual motives.

The first basket would be for international protection and would include people with a genuine need for asylum—something the applicant themselves must demonstrate. The second basket would include those applying for asylum for other reasons, such as studying, working, or generally seeking a better life. The third basket would be for those seeking asylum as part of a hostile state’s hybrid warfare tactics targeting the EU.

Different approaches and regulatory frameworks should be applied to these different baskets, instead of placing all asylum seekers into one and the same category. According to Rantanen, the current one-size-fits-all system has not worked so far and will not work in the future either.

It remains to be seen whether Finland's Minister of the Interior will gain support for her proposal in other EU countries. And of course, whether the system she proposes could actually work in practice.

In my view, a key factor in regulating the number of asylum seekers is the pull factors in EU countries. The better the conditions and benefits offered to newcomers, the more people will try to cross borders for reasons other than a genuine need for asylum. For this reason, it is extremely important that EU politicians stick to offering only the minimum benefits to asylum seekers.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
EU Commission Should Take Migration and Related Crime Seriously
Hope For a Better Life Is Not an Acceptable Basis for Asylum
Finland to Tighten Citizenship Requirements Further

Correct minister, ridiculous facts

The Finnish parliamentary elections were held last summer. As a result, the country's government switched from a red-green coalition to a political right-wing one in the summer.

Among the politicians of the previous government, Maria Ohisalo of the Greens first served as the Minister of the Interior and later as the Minister of the Environment and Climate. Therefore, it was interesting to note her criticism of the current government on messaging service X, stating that Finland's ranking had dropped by a whopping 11 places according to the latest Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI) ranking.

The situation became amusing when it was revealed that the former minister had not noticed that CCPI used two-year-old data for statistics, precisely from Maria Ohisalo's ministerial term. In other words, she blamed the current government for her own achievements.

It is clear that Ohisalo made herself appear ridiculous. What is less clear, however, is why she rushed to politicize the new information before verifying its accuracy.

If this behavior was typical for Ohisalo and the previous female-led government, it is no wonder that the previous government term was, especially in terms of the economy, downright catastrophic for Finland. For example, during the four-year period (2019-2022), the state debt increased by a whopping 33 percent, leaving the budget permanently about seven percent in deficit.

Hopefully, the current government will familiarize itself better with the facts before decision-making and succeed in revitalizing Finland's economy to make it comparable again to other Nordic countries.

Previous thoughts on the same topic: Advice to participants of the COP27 climate implementation summit 175 happy winners Minister Maria Ohisalo panicked

175 happy winners

It is in interests of all children in developing countries to move to Finland or other western countries. The same is, of course, also true for adults who, from the poverty of a low standard of living, would have access to the welfare guaranteed by the Finnish social security.

Yesterday, as a result of active efforts of our government's Minister of Internal Affairs, Maria Ohisalo (Greens), the government of Finland decided to bring to our country - with taxpayers money - a total of 175 children or their single mothers from Afghanistan, Syria or other countries but residing now in refugee camps in Greece. The useful idiot of the left wing government, the Finnish Center Party, was apparently persuaded to accept the decision by a promise that failed asylum seekers illegally staying in our country would get an ankle tag to keep track of their movements.

The government's decision was probably no surprise to anyone in Finland, except for the case of single mothers. That is because prior to yesterday´s decision, the government had only spoken of children.

Actually I would not have written about this topic if the decision on these Muslim single parents would not have been included. However, that raised in my mind the question about the truthfulness of their marital status.

That was because we know from a long time ago that the official single parent status of Somali women is so common in Finland, that they cannot in any way be real single parents. Instead, these "single parents" are second or third wives of their men - according to Islamic law.

Thus, in connection with this decision, we have to ask from the Minister of the Interior how Finland will ensure that women who are now claimed to be single parents - and to be brought to our country at the expense of the Taxpayer - will not later turn out to be second or third wives, through whom their husbands can later apply for family reunification? And in due course, to bring their first wife and her children to be further maintained by working Finns?

At the same time, of course, one must bear in mind the common suspicion that some of the "children" may actually not turn out to be real children, but late teenagers or even adult men who have been sent to their journey as anchors for the parents. That is, as persons who, once having been granted an asylum, are able to reunite their families in Finland, thus further increasing the cost burden for the Finnish taxpayer.

The original blog text in Finnish

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Are we going to allow ISIS women to ride on their children?
Minister Maria Ohisalo panicked
Reapplications for asylum are made to prolong seeker´s stay

Minister Maria Ohisalo panicked

Finland was found guilty by the European Court of Human Rights, because an Iraqi asylum seeker returned voluntarily back to Iraq after a negative decision, and got killed there. That drove the Interior minister of Finland, Maria Ohisalo (greens), to panic, and she promised to increase further money to asylum business, although she understood, that the Iraqi had returned voluntarily.

Naturally it is a pity and unfortunate that the Iraqi got dead. And it is true, that he would not have died if he had been given an refugee status. But it also is untenable that the court decision indicates us Finns to have eternal responsibility on everyone who has asked asylum from us even if we did not find basis for a refugee position.

Actually, it is logically clear, that the only way be sure that none of the asylum seekers (on which we are eternally responsible) will not get dead in their home countries is to give a refugee position to them all. That is because all humans make mistakes sometimes - including those who make decisions on asylum seekers.

Unfortunately it is equally clear that in Finland - or anywhere in Europe - it is not possible to give refugee position and life-lasting economic support to all asylum seekers. That is because of negative reactions of ethnic Finns, due to economic reasons and since the attraction among poor people in developing countries that would results from such a decision. That is why we need other types of solutions.

One option would be to establish asylum camps to all those who do not deserve a refugee status, although that would not solve the problem of those returning to their home countries voluntarily. However, it would remove the responsibility from ethnic Finns as no pressure to leave the country would be put on anyone.

That is why I propose our Interior minister Ohisalo, that instead of her expensive and poorly working ideas she would be active in establishing an asylum camp, where all asylum seekers lacking an acknowledged need for a refugee status could live and obtain minimum requirements for living by working. The results of that work could be used to cover part of the costs by e.g. selling subcontracting services to the Finnish Industry.

Because only people who are in Finland illegally (i.e. without residence permit) would be placed in asylum camps, they should be kept out of touch from the ordinary people. The best solution would be to rent the place from e.g. Russia, but if that is not possible, also remote areas in Finland would do. In any case, the camp should be surrounded by fences and be controlled by guards. The latter would also provide working possibilities as guards for people living in the area.

Anyone in the asylum camp should have a right to leave, but only out of the country. That should be controlled so, that no misuse of this option would occur. In the worst case, all asylum seekers leaving could be accompanied by a police to the plane.

Establishing such an asylum camp would naturally be expensive - easily more than ten million euros. It should be noted, however, that even such a big sums would be cheaper than the costs due to illegally residing (and growing) group of people, which is prone to crime and violence.

In time, the savings would be even bigger, as such asylum camps would reduce the number of people who are seeking higher status of living via seeking for a refugee status. There the scale is vast taken that the annual costs of humanitarian immigration in Finland exceed annually three billion euros.

Based on this, I put my hope on minister Ohisalo, that she would recognize asylum camps as highly producing investments. Therefore the only thing she needs is courage to make a decision to solve the problem of eternal responsibility of asylum seekers. And to start building asylum camps as soon as possible.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
IL:n haastattelu paljasti, ettei Maria Ohisalo ole tehtäviensä tasalla
Turvapaikka ehkäisisi laittomaan oleskeluun liittyviä negatiivisia ilmiöitä
Kielteisen päätöksen saaneille on rakennettava turvapaikka