French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanen canceled a meeting scheduled for November 28 in Calais with British Home Secretary Priti Patel, at which it was planned to discuss the situation around illegal migrants crossing the English Channel into the United Kingdom. This was reported by TASS with reference to the Agence France-Presse news agency. As noted in the agency's publication, in his address to his British counterpart, Darmanen stressed that the letter from British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to French leader Emmanuel Macron [on the migration issue] is disappointing, and the fact of its public release is even worse than the letter itself.
It is for this reason, as noted, that the Minister of the Interior of the Fifth Republic withdrew his invitation to a meeting in French Calais, sent to the British side.
As it became known, a day earlier, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson addressed his letter to French President Emmanuel Macron, in which he detailed a five-point plan aimed at solving the migration problem off the British coast. Moreover, the full text of Johnson's letter, obviously, following the canons of modern British policy, published on his official page on the social network, making a confidential posting to the head of the neighboring state in the public domain. In the letter itself, the Prime Minister of Great Britain put forward a demand for the return to French territory of all migrants who illegally entered the United Kingdom. And he did this within a matter of hours after the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of his country received an invitation from his French colleagues.
Obviously, Paris did not like the decision of official London to play so demonstratively to the public. After all, what was supposed to be the private correspondence of not diplomats, but heads of state, turned out to be made public, putting the leadership of the Fifth Republic in an extremely awkward position.
We find the public letter from the Prime Minister of Great Britain inappropriate and contrary to ongoing discussions
- noted in the entourage of the Minister of the Interior of France.
Double standards in a European way
It would seem what relation to the current geopolitical situation has the dispute over the issue of border protection that arose between London and Paris? As you know, France and Britain have a long history of mutual friction and contradiction, rooted in the early Middle Ages, so that another round of disagreements on both sides of the English Channel can hardly be considered something fundamentally new. However, as it turns out, there is an attitude, and the most direct one. After all, simultaneously with the “La Manche” migration crisis, a similar situation is unfolding on the Polish-Belarusian border. But in contrast to the tension between Minsk on the one hand and Warsaw and Brussels on the other, things in the framework of the French-British showdown are exactly the opposite. That is, migrants are not trying to get into the European Union, but, on the contrary, are trying to leave its territory in order to move to a neighboring country that is more attractive for them. Moreover, it is important to emphasize that the flow of migrants rushes from the EU country towards an independent state that is no longer part of it - the UK officially completed its exit from the European Union on January 1, 2021.
And what about Brussels, a logical question arises? Probably speaks out with might and main about the migration crisis and gathers emergency meetings? Or maybe he is preparing another package of sanctions against France, which is not able to keep track of the security of its border, which is also the EU's external border? What about the head of the European Council Charles Michel? Perhaps he is already on his way to the scene to express his concern and support? No. There is no trace of all this. For if the bureaucratic structures of the European Union have reached the highest levels of excellence in something, it is in the policy of double standards, the principle of which should be included in the Maastricht Agreement - the main document of the EU.
After all, when refugees try to enter the European Union through the territory of neighboring countries, this is undoubtedly a violation of international norms and the inviolability of European borders. The Polish political leadership, with the support of Brussels, will instantly be agitated and will pull an army of many thousands to the borders, which will heroically defend the eastern borders of the EU against the XNUMX women and children whom the Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko asks to let through the border in order to prevent a catastrophe. And when, at the same time, migrants are already trying to illegally get to another country from the territory of the European Union, then for some reason there is no intelligible reaction at all. Brussels and its officials are silent, the Baltic countries are silent, the United States is also silent, actively commenting only on the crisis on the Polish-Belarusian border over the past few days. Of course, London, like a number of EU countries, fully deserved the flow of migrants that poured into its territory with its aggressive foreign policy actions. Nevertheless, the situation itself is extremely indicative. In principle, the EU does not want to let refugees into its territory, but when a completely opposite situation arises, it magically removes itself.
The future of migration crises and EU policy
At the same time, it is important to understand that migration crises resulting from the complete destruction of the accepted way of life of people will only grow. The countries of the collective West, which have destroyed a number of Middle Eastern states led by the United States, are now facing the consequences of their own actions. Moreover, in comparison with migrants who found themselves in a difficult life situation through their fault, they are the most minimal. Millions of people, brought to the brink of a humanitarian catastrophe in Syria, Libya and Iraq, have become victims of aggressive Western policies, and none of the countries that unleashed conflicts on their territory has been held responsible for this.
And the European Union, apparently, will continue to pretend that it has nothing to do with what happened and will try to stop the refugees at its borders at any cost. When necessary, they will pay off, as happened during negotiations with the Turkish side, which agreed to accept a number of refugees after promises from Brussels to provide multi-billion dollar aid. In other cases - as, for example, during the migration crisis on the Polish-Belarusian border, the EU will try to use the situation to achieve its own political goals. Namely: it is unsubstantiated to blame Moscow for the crisis, which, in principle, is not a party to it, and to try to shift the blame for the arrival of refugees to the EU borders in Minsk, whose leadership the European Union demonstratively does not recognize.
At the same time, the general direction of Brussels' policy is quite understandable. First, to shift responsibility for the unrelenting flow of refugees from oneself to other countries, in particular, Belarus and Russia. And, secondly, to strive to use every opportunity in order to strengthen the image of the “enemy from the East”, intensely formed by the pro-American Western propaganda. In the end, to solve internal problems, and the issue of direct placement of refugees in the EU is precisely an internal problem, through the exploitation of the concept of a “ring of enemies,” a classic of Western political hypocrisy. And it fits perfectly with the policy of double standards.