The far right is gaining ground throughout Europe. In the Netherlands, Geert Wilders’ far-right party won, while anti-immigration parties are doing very well in the opinion polls in Austria, France, Spain, Italy and Sweden. The Germans have even got two parties critical of immigration. Seen from the outside, it can appear as if large masses of voters in all European countries have lost their minds. I don’t think it’s that simple. The anti-immigration parties that are emerging in different countries are very different. Nevertheless, all the parties are a symptom of increased division and polarization in a constantly weakened Europe. It makes us vulnerable to undemocratic forces. We have already seen in Poland and Hungary how parties and movements can destroy the rule of law and democracy. The development must therefore be stopped. But then we are dependent on making the correct diagnosis. And rather than labeling parties – and not least those who vote for them – we must ask the right question: What is it about these parties that makes them attractive to voters? I think the answer is quite simple. Even if it’s uncomfortable. Over time, Western European countries have pursued an immigration policy that has not been sufficiently democratically anchored. And politicians have made promises to tighten the policy, without this having produced results. In several countries, skepticism towards such a policy has been suppressed. The consequence is that when the immigration issue again becomes decisive, voters look to the parties that have addressed the voters’ concerns. There are many factors that play into the choice of party, and we see a general increase in dissatisfaction in Europe. Against the age of animals, welfare policy and climate policy. Nevertheless, I think the immigration issue is extra important. Both because politics polarises to a greater extent. But also because we know that the breeding ground for dissatisfaction is greater when society otherwise stagnates. Which is precisely the situation Europe finds itself in. And in a Europe in decline, it is nice for many to have something to blame. Immigration from the south and southeast will in all probability increase. Forecasts for Africa’s demographics vary. Conservative analyzes suggest that several millions will emigrate from Africa alone, with Europe as the target. The most common route from the African continent runs through the Sahara and the Sahel. African areas where Russia and China are gaining increasing influence. Russia uses migration as a means of pressure against Europe to this day. As they also did against Norway in 2015. They will in all probability continue to do so, as long as we stick with the current immigration policy. In other words, politicians who fear the emergence of parties from the far right cannot close their eyes and pretend that the pressure on Europe will decrease. If the right-wing and labor parties in Europe do not reorient themselves in immigration policy, support for parties on the far right will increase. There is no indication that the current immigration policy is working. The asylum system appears as a lottery and an incentive to flee. Where people first have to embark on a dangerous journey from their home country – probably with the use of people smugglers – to then settle in Europe, if they are granted residence. We should instead provide protection in nearby areas and in third countries, to ensure that migration across the Mediterranean ceases. It will remove the incentives for similar waves of refugees we saw in 2015. Nor will we escape internal conditions in European homelands. Cultural conflicts and increased alienation have developed over time. Also called “Swedish conditions”, if you like. The inequality between majority and minority is not exclusively economic. In connection with the war in Gaza, it has become obvious to many that integration has not been able to give us a community of ideas. There is an abyss between the world view of the majority and minority in Europe. It is a huge challenge. And we should not underestimate the long-term consequences. We should do what we can to have peace in our own house. Among other things, integrating and including those who are outside European societies now, before we make the task even bigger. This also applies to Norway. So far, the domestic discussion is characterized by a certain self-glorification. Where we pat ourselves on the back that we are not like Sweden after all. But we can’t know that yet. The discussion we have today in Norway was held in Sweden in 2014. Large parts of the unrest we now see in Sweden are not a consequence of the immigration and integration policy from 2015. They are consequences of the policy pursued in the early 2000s. We have not yet seen the consequences of the immigration policy from 2015. We don’t notice the consequences until several years have passed. We will not see whether we get Swedish – or Dutch, French or German – conditions in Norway based on immigration policy today until 2035. And then the question of immigration policy is really quite fundamental. Whether it concerns integration, Swedish conditions or the fear of increased polarization and extreme parties: Are you willing to take the chance? I am not.
ttn-69
Europe cannot tolerate a new refugee crisis – Statement
