歐洲各國面臨兩大移民危機

Europe is facing its most serious migration crisis since the end of the second world war. It is more serious even than the Bosnian crisis of the 1990s, when close to 2m refugees fled west, for although the numbers now are smaller the nature of the outflow is different. Those refugees were granted temporary asylum and required to return to their place of origin when the conflict subsided. No such outcome is in prospect today.

歐洲正面臨二戰結束以來最嚴重的移民危機。這次的危機比上世紀90年代的波斯尼亞危機（當時有近200萬難民逃往西方）還要嚴重。之所以這麼說，是因爲儘管這次危機涉及的移民數量少於那次，但這次人口外流的性質卻與那次截然不同。那一次，難民們得到了臨時的庇護，待到衝突平息後被要求返回原籍國。這一次卻無望得到這樣的結果。

Legally speaking, a refugee is a person outside his or her country of origin who had to flee to seek refuge from persecution or open warfare. It is understood that asylum will be sought in the first safe country reached; someone who leaves a country where there is no threat of persecution is no longer motivated by a quest for safety.

從法律上講，難民是指一個爲躲避迫害或公開交戰而被迫逃離了原籍國的人。這些人在其抵達的首個安全國家尋求避難是可以理解的；如果某個人離開的是個不存在迫害威脅的國家，其動機就不再是尋求安全。

If you adopt this perspective, it is odd to say that Europe is on the receiving end of a massive refugee flow. Europe, as such, does not exist. On the one hand there are the countries of entry, namely Spain, Italy and Greece, which are quite content to let the arrivals land and discreetly move on to central and northern Europe. There are the likes of Bulgaria, Romania, Poland and the Baltic states, to which few people wish to emigrate, which are neither part of the problem nor of the solution. Finally there are the countries of destination such as Germany, the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Switzerland and Austria, to which many of the arrivals find their way.

如果你認可這個觀點、卻還說歐洲應當忍受大批難民流入，那就太奇怪了。這樣的歐洲並不存在。首先，歐洲國家中存在一些移民的入境國，即西班牙、意大利和希臘，這些國家很樂意讓移民登陸、然後神不知鬼不覺地繼續向中歐和北歐前進。另外還存在像保加利亞、羅馬尼亞、波蘭和波羅的海諸國這樣的國家，沒什麼人願意移民到這些國家，所以這些國家既不屬於麻煩的製造者，也不是屬於解決方案的提供者。最後是像德國、荷蘭、斯堪的納維亞國家、瑞士和奧地利這樣的移民目的國，許多移民會想方設法來到這些國家。

Clearly these latter countries do not have unlimited capacity to absorb new arrivals and cannot realistically be required to integrate, over the next decades, an unending flow of migrants from Africa and the Middle East. And, while these countries need migrants, it is up to them to choose whom to accept.

顯然，最後一類國家沒有無限接納新移民的能力，從現實角度講也不能要求它們在未來幾十年里納入不斷涌來的非洲和中東移民。此外，即便這些國家需要移民，選擇接受什麼樣的移民也取決於它們自己。

What to do? Perhaps inspiration can be found in the case of the Vietnamese boat people, about 70,000 of whom arrived on the shores of various southeast Asian countries in 1989 alone. The situation seemed hopeless, and yet that year an honourable solution was found through dialogue and negotiation. Ultimately it worked. But it required imagination, creativity and political will.

那怎麼辦？也許可以從越南船民的例子中找到靈感。僅1989年一年，就有約7萬越南船民抵達東南亞各國的海岸。當時的形勢似乎是毫無希望的，但就在那一年，各方通過對話和談判找到了一個體面的解決方案。最終，問題解決了。但是，這需要想象力、創造力以及政治意願。

In Europe, the key is to distinguish between two separate crises. The first is rooted in Syria’s civil war. It requires primarily an Arab solution, yet none is in the making. Tens of thousands of Syrian refugees have been resettled, but not one of the countries that have offered permanent asylum is from the Arab world. It is clear that many of the Syrians who have been given temporary asylum in camps in Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Iraq will never be able to return. It would be reasonable for the wealthy countries of the Gulf to receive a quota of at least 1m refugees.

在歐洲，關鍵是要區分兩個不同的危機。第一個危機根源於敘利亞內戰。它主要需要一個阿拉伯解決方案，但這樣的方案尚未制定。數以萬計的敘利亞難民已得到重新安置，但提供永久性庇護的國家沒有一個來自阿拉伯世界。顯然，很多在黎巴嫩、約旦、土耳其和伊拉克難民營中得到臨時庇護的敘利亞難民，將再也不能回到敘利亞。讓海灣富國接收一定數量（至少100萬）的難民是合乎情理的。

The second crisis is the influx of migrants from Africa arriving on Mediterranean shores. While the obligation to save lives is not negotiable, the question of what to do with the people whose lives are saved is not a point of detail. This obviously escaped the Italian authorities when they launched Mare Nostrum, a well-meaning effort to save drowning migrants, which played into the hands of smugglers and encouraged further departures.

第二個危機是從非洲涌向地中海海岸的移民潮。儘管拯救生命是沒得商量的責任，但該如何處置這些被拯救的生命可不是什麼細枝末節的問題。意大利當局在啓動“我們的海”(Mare Nostrum)行動時，顯然忽視了這一點。該行動本是一項拯救落水移民的善意之舉，結果卻幫了人口販子的忙，鼓勵了更多人離開非洲。

Arrivals will continue until an adequate deterrent is put in place: the landing of every single migrant not on European soil but in a transit centre in Tunisia or Egypt, from where opportunistic migrants can be separated from genuine refugees and repatriated.

移民潮還將繼續下去，直到出臺有力的遏止措施：即讓每個移民不在歐洲的土地、而是在突尼斯或埃及的中轉中心登陸，在那裏甄別出投機性質的移民並把他們遣返。

Both of these crises require international action of the kind best brokered by the European Commission or the UN. Neither of these bodies has shown the vision, intelligence and leadership needed. If a solution is to be found, it seems, it will have to be at the initiative of the handful of European countries directly concerned.

這兩個危機均需要以國際行動加以應對，最好是那種由歐盟委員會(European Commission)或聯合國(UN)斡旋而成的行動。但這兩家機構均未表現出解決危機所需的視野、智慧和領導力。如果想找到一個解決方案，似乎只能靠少數幾個直接相關的歐洲國家來發起努力了。