Frau Merkel : who is the “wir” in your “WIR SCHAFFEN DAS” ?


You said recently about the 800.000 refugees you expected to come to Germany :

“We can manage that : Wir schaffen das !”

May we ask whom you have in mind, when you say “WIR”?
If you meant: the German people then you should in honesty also offer to close Germany’s borders with other countries so as to protect the other countries from the overflow which would most probably happen.
If however in your “Wir” you include other European nations we must with respect ask you who authorized you to speak for the European people ?
Looking for possible reasons for your abrupt and unexplained decisions in the last few weeks, two elements were in the press prominently mentioned. Both of them however must be rejected as a solid basis.

    The first element: an old national guilt:

We, the Dutch, the French the Swiss, the Norwegian. Italians and all the other Europeans, we do not think present German people are morally responsible for Hitler and his regime nearly a century ago. If such an unneeded feeling of guilt had any bearing on your decision, please reject it thoroughly and tell you good German people that any such feeling would hamper our common discussion. Any action built on collective guilt would render solutions more difficult.

    The second element : demographic implosion would need massive import of foreign workers for Germany’s industry.

The press gave also much weight to a need of German industrial leaders to get younger population in great numbers from outside Europe as workers, because of continued  demographic implosion in your country.
If that is really the declared position of your employer organizations, one would ask in amazement whether they had not followed the expert discussions in other countries on the slim chances that mass immigration could ever bring lasting alleviation of such labor scarcity .
In France authors like Gourevitch, and more in detail Michele Tribalat have demonstrated that admitting big volumes of immigrants would not bring lasting relief , would not save European social security and pension funds. Since incoming migrants would have lower skills and adapt to the social habits they find in Europe the vast immigration campaigns would have to be repeated over and over again with scarce results and on the other hand high costs in civic disunity and disruption. (note 1)
We in European countries outside Germany have been over that discussion in great detail when we reacted to the folly of a United Nations (Population Division) paper very early in this century. Has that discussion of experts completely bypassed Germany’s industrial leaders? Then the old discussion should urgently be taken up again..One may also ask whether such a position is ethically a valid one (note2 ):

What is missing in the Chancelor’s too summary presentation are measures going ahead  securing the E.U.’s outside borders, re-securing EU’s inside borders and the inclusion  of other components like wide political and military outreach with regions bordering Europe.
Standing arrangements which our nations could accept in more quiet times like giving assurance that any refugee would be guaranteed permanent stay after a certain number of years cannot be maintained now.

The desirability of ultimate return of the refugees to their home countries must be kept as a guiding star in our policies. Many of the young male migrants cannot be considered real refugees.They have their place in the defense and the economic development of their own country.  Many of the true refugees belonging to minorities (like the christian Syrians, Chaldaeans a.o.) have traditions and abilities which cannot be missed forever in their home countries. For those minority groups an official facility to constitute and register files on their properties left behind may give them conviction that theaim of their future return is realized by European people. Working right now on such property files would be important also as a psychological lift to those refugees;and it would our own local populations that the aim of a return is maintained. The example of the return of jewish refugees to their properties in Poland and elsewhere may be an example to follow. (note3 ) :
Are our European populations entitled an early answer, Frau Bundeskanzler?

For Readers of “Voices-of-Europe”‘’

Anton Smitsendonk

    NOTE 1 see Michele Tribalat “les yeux grands fermes. L’immigration en France, Denoel.
    NOTE 2 on this for instance the german and other european labor organizations, and the religious entrepreneuriak groups may have insights. For Germany the BKU (Bund Katholischer Unternehmer),at the  international level entrepreneurial bodies like the ICC the International Chamber of Comemrce,- the World Business Organization, and for the religious side bodies like UNIAPAC).
    NOTE 3 in case refugees would not be able to return to their original locasion, the example of Beyrout under the leadership of the great statesman Hariri may offer guidance: he arranged that property claims could be mutually exchanged. Taking care of temporary occupants in the absence of owners should be the responsibility of of the present or new governments in the Near Eastern countries).

About dutasia

Former Ambassador of the Netherlands, presently National Commissioner for Thailand and for Indonesia in the ICC, the International Chamber of Commerce, the World Business Organization. Chairman of China Carbon Forum in Beijing, China.
This entry was posted in diplomacy, EUROPE, Europe's relations with other continents, EUROPEAN UNION, Immigration into Europe, Migration issues and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s