• Voyager sans prendre l’avion : comme Greta Thunberg, ils ont relevé le défi - Le Parisien
    http://www.leparisien.fr/societe/voyager-sans-prendre-l-avion-comme-greta-thunberg-ils-ont-releve-le-defi-

    En train, en bateau, en vélo ou même à pied : plutôt que de prendre l’avion pour partir en vacances, ils ont préféré voyager autrement. Un petit sacrifice pour améliorer leur empreinte écologique.

    #voyage_terrestre sans #avion

  • Swiss cloue au sol tous ses #Airbus A220, une centaine de vols annulés - rts.ch - Economie
    https://www.rts.ch/info/economie/10787130-swiss-cloue-au-sol-tous-ses-airbus-a220-une-centaine-de-vols-annules.ht

    Swiss a cloué au sol toute sa flotte d’Airbus A220 mardi après un nouvel incident mettant en cause un moteur de ce modèle. Une centaine de vols ont été annulés, laissant des milliers de passagers à l’arrêt, surtout à Genève et Zurich.

    #avions

  • KLM Has a Surprising Request for Passengers: Don’t Fly

    It sounds noble, but what’s the real motive?

    If your company is in business to make money (as pretty much all companies are), how likely are you to launch a huge marketing campaign begging people not to use your product? Probably not very likely. Unless you’re #KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, in which case you’ve already done it.

    That’s right. KLM, the Netherlands’ national airline, just launched a campaign called “#Fly_Responsibly” in which it makes a surprising request of its customers: Fly less. “Do you always have to meet face-to-face?” the promotional video asks. “Could you take the train instead?”

    Wait, what? An airline is asking its passengers not to fly? Yes. Because, as KLM explains in an accompanying statement, air travel accounts for 2 to 3 percent of manmade CO2 emissions worldwide and that number is growing, as more people in more countries are climbing out of poverty and hankering to see the world. The 100-year-old airline says it’s been doing its part. In an accompanying statement, KLM says it has been replacing its fleet with more fuel-efficient planes, using sustainable fuel, and has even created a sustainable fuel plant in the Netherlands. “We work hard to get things right, but all parties involved need to join forces to create a sustainable future.”

    Some critics say this amounts to nothing more than “greenwashing.” After all, the airline still offers special deals and its website invites people to “Book a flight with KLM and visit the most incredible destinations around the world.” And indeed, in the accompanying statement, the airline explains that it won’t stop promoting air travel—after all it wants to stay in business “for our customers and for our 33,000 employees.”
    No carbon tax, please.

    Interestingly, the airline also notes in its statement that it’s opposed to a national carbon tax in the Netherlands since, it claims, passengers would simply drive to Germany or Belgium and fly from there instead. Therefore, KLM says, a carbon tax on aviation should only be imposed if it can be imposed globally—which is pretty disingenuous, because of course that’ll never happen. It also claims that a tax that isn’t invested back into the aviation industry to make it more sustainable “won’t do anything to combat climate change.” This, again, is untrue because the main point of a carbon tax is to make polluting more expensive, which causes people and companies to do less of it.

    All this talk about a carbon tax can give you a big clue as to KLM’s true motivation here. A carbon tax or cap-and-trade law seems like a non-starter in the U.S.—even in the very blue state of Washington, one was roundly defeated last election. But in Europe, the idea is very much alive. France’s huge “yellow vest” demonstrations began as opposition to a planned carbon tax that working people felt they couldn’t afford. (It was withdrawn.) But in the Netherlands, a carbon tax which would increase the price of airline tickets among many other things is in the works. My guess is that KLM hopes that by getting out ahead on this issue, it can push the government toward letting companies take voluntary action rather than writing new laws.

    KLM also says that as part of its sustainability effort it’s sharing information about sustainability with other airlines, beginning in September with a webinar with its sustainable fuel supplier, SkyNRG. Which sounds good, but since SkyNRG is in the business of selling its fuel, the webinar may amount to a big sales pitch. Perhaps more useful, though, KLM says it’s exploring connections with trains. That’s a great idea, because for a lot of passengers, transferring to a train rather than a connecting flight to go a relatively short distance will be appealing, and environmentalists believe short airplane trips in particular can and should be replaced with other forms of transportation. KLM has also been inviting passengers to pay a small extra fee that the airline will use to offset their flight and make their travel carbon neutral. It will share that system with other airlines as well.

    KLM’s motivations may not be as pure as it claims but the fact remains that the airline is taking some positive steps toward reducing its own environmental impact. For that, we should all applaud. And then do what the airline suggested and fly a little bit less.

    https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/klm-fly-responsibly-sustainability-environment-carbon-tax.html
    #fly_shaming #vol #avions #transport_aérien #honte #honte_de_voler #greenwashing #green_washing #taxe_carbone

    –---------

    KLM Fly Responsibly
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4htp2xxhto&feature=youtu.be

    ping @reka

  • The number of EU residence permits issued to Northern and Western African nationals for work purposes fell by 46% and 58% respectively during a period of increasing irregular arrivals on the Central Mediterranean Route

    –-> Evidemment... le lien entre les deux faits (baisse des permis de séjour et augmentation des #arrivées_irrégulières) que l’OIM souligne est très tenu... c’est en réalité le coeur du problème : les personnes passent par des #routes_illégalisées via la #Méditerranée parce qu’ils n’ont pas de possibilités de prendre l’#avion... car l’accès leur est interdit via le non-octroi de #visas...

    #illégalisation #routes_migratoires #routes_illégalisées #permis_de_travail #UE #EU #Afrique_de_l'Ouest #permis_de_séjour #statistiques #chiffres #contextualisation

    Le #rapport d’où l’OIM sort ces chiffres :
    AFRICAN MIGRATION TO THE EU : IRREGULAR MIGRATION IN CONTEXT

    Contrary to common perceptions, migration from Northern and Western Africa to the EU between 2011 and 2017 has been primarily regular. Numbers of African nationals settling legally in the EU – proxied by first residence permits issued for family reunification, education or work purposes – have exceeded irregular sea arrivals for most of the top ten countries of origin of irregular migrants arriving in Italy over the period considered.

    At the same time, both total regular and irregular entries of African nationals to the EU have fallen since 2016, based on available data. First EU residence permits to nationals of countries in Northern and Western Africa have mostly been issued for family reunification over the years. While these have remained stable on average, residence permits granted for work purposes have fallen sharply in the period considered.

    https://gmdac.iom.int/sites/default/files/03_-_residence_permits-bbb.pdf

    #préjugés #regroupement_familial

    ping @reka @isskein @karine4 @_kg_

  • Migranti, stop agli aerei di Sea Watch. “Ennesimo ostacolo al soccorso”

    Enac ha revocato il permesso per l’aeroporto di Lampedusa. La missione di ricognizione aree dei due velivoli #Moonbird e #Colibrì è per ora ferma. Linardi: “Gli occhi della società civile danno fastidio”. Enac: “Previsto dalle regole”.

    Bloccati gli aerei di ricognizione, Moonbird e Colibrì, dell’ong tedesca #Sea_Watch operati insieme all’organizzazione francese #Pilotes_volontaires. Ai due velivoli è stato negato per la prima volta il parcheggio all’aeroporto dell’isola di Lampedusa. L’Enac ha chiesto un permesso per operazioni speciali, un’autorizzazione che in passato non era mai servita per poter utilizzare la pista dell’aeroporto siciliano. Per ora, dunque, in attesa che la situazione si sblocchi, la missione area resta ferma.

    L’Enac contattata da Redattore sociale fa sapere di “non aver concesso l’autorizzazione ai voli Moonbird e Colibrì perché le norme nazionali, così come quelle in vigore negli altri Paesi europei, per questi aeromobili prevedono l’uso solo per le sole attività ricreative e non professionali. Nello specifico, il Colibrì non è un aeromobile certificato secondo standard di sicurezza noti , è in possesso di un permesso di volo speciale che non gode di un riconoscimento su base di reciprocità per condurre operazioni diverse da quelle sopra menzionate, tanto meno condotte in alto mare - sottolinea l’Ente -. Il velivolo, inoltre, è stato inoltre oggetto di modifiche significative di cui non abbiamo tranciabilità”.

    Per Enac le operazioni di Search And Rescue sono “operazioni professionali che nel nostro sistema richiedono un regime autorizzativo non compatibile, peraltro, con gli aeromobili di costruzione amatoriale. Di tutto ciò abbiamo dato informazioni al proprietario esercente del velivolo e all’autorità francese - precisa ancora Enac, specificando che lo stesso vale anche per Moonbird “un aereo svizzero che presenta comunque caratteristiche molto simili a quelle del Colibrì”. “L’attività Enac è finalizzata all’attuazione e al rispetto delle norme di sicurezza che regolano e disciplinano le operazioni di volo” conclude l’Ente.

    Il progetto di ricognizione civile nasce nell’aprile del 2017, per monitorare il Mediterraneo centrale e offrire supporto alle operazioni di salvataggio in mare. L’iniziativa ha il sostegno della Chiesa evangelica tedesca. Negli ultimi anni gli aeroplani delle ong, oltre a segnalare le imbarcazioni in difficoltà, hanno denunciato anche alcuni casi di naufragio. Come il 23 maggio scorso quando da un video realizzato proprio a bordo di Moonbird si vede un uomo sparire tra le onde vicine a un gommone in distress.

    Per Sea Watch il blocco dei velivoli per “complicazioni burocratiche” è l’ennesimo tentativo di ostacolare l’attività di soccorso in mare delle ong. “Le nostre operazioni aeree sono attenzionate perché gli occhi della società civile danno fastidio, sia in cielo che in mare”, sottolinea la portavoce Giorgia Linardi.

    Intanto, secondo quanto rivelato dal quotidiano britannico The Guardian a inizio agosto, proprio il controllo aereo delle frontiere marittime sta diventando uno dei tasselli fondamentali della presente e futura strategia messa in campo dall’Europa per il controllo dei flussi migratori. L’agenzia europea di sorveglianza delle frontiere esterne Frontex oltre a gestire le politiche di rimpatrio degli stati membri dell’Ue è parte anche di un investimento da 103 miliardi di euro in aeromobili a pilotaggio remoto. Droni, telecamere aeree sul Mediterraneo, per controllare i confini e in teoria anche i naufragi che lì avvengono. Tuttavia alla richiesta di inviare copia delle istruzioni che gli operatori dei droni dovrebbero seguire qualora “intercettassero” un’imbarcazione in stato di pericolo, Frontex ha risposto di non poter inviare quei materiali.

    https://www.redattoresociale.it/article/notiziario/migranti_stop_agli_aerei_di_sea_watch_ennesimo_ostacolo_al_soccorso
    #avions #sauvetage #mer #Méditerranée #ONG #asile #migrations #réfugiés

    Ici plus d’info sur la mission Moonbird initiée par des pilotes suisse et #Colibri initiée par des pilotes français:
    https://seenthis.net/messages/485880

    #the_end #la_fin #fin

  • Militarisation des frontières en #Mer_Egée

    En Mer Egée c’est exactement la même stratégie qui se met en place, et notamment à #Samos, où une #zeppelin (#zeppelin_de_surveillance) de #Frontex surveillera le détroit entre l’île et la côte turque, afin de signaler tout départ de bateaux. L’objectif est d’arrêter « à temps » les embarcations des réfugiés en les signalant aux garde-corps turques. Comme l’a dit le vice-ministre de l’immigration Koumoutsakos « on saura l’heure de départ de l’embarcation, on va en informer les turques, on s’approcher du bateau... »
    S’approcher pourquoi faire, sinon, pour le repousser vers la côte turque ?
    Le fonctionnement de la montgolfière sera confié aux garde-cotes et à la police grecque, l’opération restant sous le contrôle de Frontex.

    –-> reçu via la mailing-list de Migreurop, le 30.07.2017

    #militarisation_des_frontières #frontières #contrôles_frontaliers #Turquie #Grèce #migrations #réfugiés #asile #police #gardes-côtes #surveillance

    –-----------

    Commentaire de Martin Clavey sur twitter :

    Cynisme absolu : Frontex utilise des drones pour surveiller les migrants en méditerranée ce qui permet à l’Union européenne de ne pas utiliser de bateau de surveillance et donc ne pas être soumis au #droit_maritime et à avoir à les sauver

    https://twitter.com/mart1oeil/status/1158396604648493058

    • Σε δοκιμαστική λειτουργία το αερόσταστο της FRONTEX

      Σε δοκιμαστική λειτουργία τίθεται από σήμερα για 28 ημέρες το αερόστατο της FRONTEX στη Σάμο, μήκους 35 μέτρων, προσδεμένο στο έδαφος, εξοπλισμένο με ραντάρ, θερμική κάμερα και σύστημα αυτόματης αναγνώρισης, το οποίο θα επιτηρεί αδιάλειπτα και σε πραγματικό χρόνο το θαλάσσιο πεδίο.

      Σύμφωνα με ανακοίνωση του Λιμενικού, στόχος είναι η αστυνόμευση του θαλάσσιου πεδίου και η καταπολέμηση του διασυνοριακού εγκλήματος. Δημιουργείται ωστόσο το ερώτημα αν οι πληροφορίες που θα συλλέγει το αερόστατο θα χρησιμοποιούνται για την αναχαίτιση ή την αποτροπή των πλεούμενων των προσφύγων που ξεκινούν από τα τουρκικά παράλια για να ζητήσουν διεθνή προστασία στην Ευρώπη.

      « Πρώτα απ’ όλα ξέρεις τι ώρα φεύγει από τους διακινητές το σκάφος, ενημερώνεις την τουρκική πλευρά, πηγαίνεις εσύ κοντά, δηλαδή είναι ένα σύνολο ενεργειών » σημείωνε την περασμένη εβδομάδα σε συνέντευξή του στον ΑΝΤ1 ο αναπληρωτής υπουργός Μεταναστευτικής Πολιτικής Γιώργος Κουμουτσάκος, μιλώντας για τα αποτελέσματα που αναμένεται να έχει το αερόστατο στην ενίσχυση της επιτήρησης των συνόρων.

      Το Λιμενικό είναι η πρώτη ακτοφυλακή κράτους-μέλους της Ε.Ε. που χρησιμοποιεί αερόστατο για την επιτήρηση της θάλασσας, δέκα μήνες μετά την πρώτη παρόμοια πανευρωπαϊκή χρήση μη επανδρωμένου αεροσκάφους μεσαίου ύψους μακράς εμβέλειας.

      « Αυτό καταδεικνύει την ισχυρή και ξεκάθαρη βούληση του Λ.Σ.-ΕΛ.ΑΚΤ. να καταβάλει κάθε δυνατή προσπάθεια, χρησιμοποιώντας τη διαθέσιμη τεχνολογία αιχμής, για την αποτελεσματική φύλαξη των εξωτερικών θαλάσσιων συνόρων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενωσης, την πάταξη κάθε μορφής εγκληματικότητας καθώς και την προστασία της ανθρώπινης ζωής στη θάλασσα », σημειώνει το Λιμενικό.

      Η λειτουργία του αερόστατου εντάσσεται στην επιχείρηση « Ποσειδών » που συντονίζουν το Λιμενικό και η ΕΛ.ΑΣ. υπό την επιτήρηση της FRONTEX.

      Παράλληλα, στο νησί θα τεθεί σε λειτουργία φορτηγό εξοπλισμένο με παρόμοια συστήματα, προκειμένου να μπορούν να συγκριθούν τα αποτελέσματα και η λειτουργία του επίγειου και του εναέριου συστήματος.

      https://www.efsyn.gr/ellada/koinonia/205553_se-dokimastiki-leitoyrgia-aerostasto-tis-frontex

    • Zeppelin over the island of Samos to monitor migrants trafficking

      Greek authorities and the Frontex will release a huge surveillance Zeppelin above the island of Samos to monitor migrants who illegally try to reach Greece and Europe. The installation of the ominous balloon will be certainly a grotesque attraction for the tourists who visit the island in the East Aegean Sea.

      Deputy Minister of Migration Policy Giorgos Koumoutsakos told private ANT1 TV that the Zeppelin will go in operation next week.

      “In Samos, at some point, I think it’s a matter of days or a week, a Zeppelin balloon will be installed in cooperation with FRONTEX, which will take a picture of a huge area. What does that mean? First of all, you know what time the ship moves away from the traffickers, inform the Turkish side, you go near, that is a set of actions,” Koumoutsakos said.

      The Zeppelin will be monitored by the GNR radar unit of the Frontext located at the port of Karlovasi, samiakienimerosi notes adding “It will give a picture of movements between the Turkish coast to Samos for the more effective guarding of our maritime borders.”

      The Deputy Minister did not elaborate on what exactly can the Greek Port Authority do when it comes “near” to the refugee and migrants boats.

      According to daily efimerida ton syntakton, the Norwegian NGO, Aegean Boat Report, revealed a video shot on July 17. The video shows how a Greek Coast Guard vessel approaches a boat with 34 people on board and leaves them at the open sea to be “collected” by Turkish authorities, while the passengers, among them 14 children, desperately are shouting “Not to Turkey!”

      It is not clear, whether the Greek Coast Guard vessel is in international waters as such vessels do not enter Turkish territorial waters. According to international law, the passengers ought to be rescued. The Greek Coast Guard has so far not taken position on the issue, saying it will need to evaluate the video first, efsyn notes.

      “There is no push backs. Everything will be done in accordance with the international law. Greece will do nothing beyond the international law,” Koumoutsakos stressed.

      PS I suppose, tourists will be cheered to have their vacation activities monitored by a plastic Big Brother. Not?

      https://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/2019/07/26/zeppelin-samos-migrants-refugees

    • Once migrants on Mediterranean were saved by naval patrols. Now they have to watch as #drones fly over
      https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/8a92adecf247b04c801a67a612766ee753738437/0_109_4332_2599/master/4332.jpg?width=605&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=c0051d5e4fff6aff063c70

      Amid the panicked shouting from the water and the smell of petrol from the sinking dinghy, the noise of an approaching engine briefly raises hope. Dozens of people fighting for their lives in the Mediterranean use their remaining energy to wave frantically for help. Nearly 2,000 miles away in the Polish capital, Warsaw, a drone operator watches their final moments via a live transmission. There is no ship to answer the SOS, just an unmanned aerial vehicle operated by the European border and coast guard agency, Frontex.

      This is not a scene from some nightmarish future on Europe’s maritime borders but a present-day probability. Frontex, which is based in Warsaw, is part of a £95m investment by the EU in unmanned aerial vehicles, the Observer has learned.

      This spending has come as the EU pulls back its naval missions in the Mediterranean and harasses almost all search-and-rescue charity boats out of the water. Frontex’s surveillance drones are flying over waters off Libya where not a single rescue has been carried out by the main EU naval mission since last August, in what is the deadliest stretch of water in the world.

      The replacement of naval vessels, which can conduct rescues, with drones, which cannot, is being condemned as a cynical abrogation of any European role in saving lives.

      “There is no obligation for drones to be equipped with life-saving appliances and to conduct rescue operations,” said a German Green party MEP, Erik Marquardt. “You need ships for that, and ships are exactly what there is a lack of at the moment.” This year the death rate for people attempting the Mediterranean crossing has risen from a historical average of 2% to as high as 14% last month. In total, 567 of the estimated 8,362 people who have attempted it so far this year have died.

      Gabriele Iacovino, director of one of Italy’s leading thinktanks, the Centre for International Studies, said the move into drones was “a way to spend money without having the responsibility to save lives”. Aerial surveillance without ships in the water amounted to a “naval mission without a naval force”, and was about avoiding embarrassing political rows in Europe over what to do with rescued migrants.

      Since March the EU’s main naval mission in the area, Operation Sophia, has withdrawn its ships from waters where the majority of migrant boats have sunk. While Sophia was not primarily a search-and-rescue mission, it was obliged under international and EU law to assist vessels in distress. The switch to drones is part of an apparent effort to monitor the Mediterranean without being pulled into rescue missions that deliver migrants to European shores.

      Marta Foresti, director of the Human Mobility Initiative at the Overseas Development Institute, an influential UK thinktank, said Europe had replaced migration policy with panic, with potentially lethal consequences. “We panicked in 2015 and that panic has turned into security budgets,” she said. “Frontex’s budget has doubled with very little oversight or design. It’s a knee-jerk reaction.”

      The strategy has seen Frontex, based in Warsaw, and its sister agency, the European Maritime Safety Agency, based in Lisbon, invest in pilotless aerial vehicles. The Observer has found three contracts – two under EMSA and one under Frontex – totalling £95m for drones that can supply intelligence to Frontex.

      The models include the Hermes, made by Elbit Systems, Israel’s biggest privately owned arms manufacturer, and the Heron, produced by Israel Aerospace Industries, a state-owned company. Both models were developed for use in combat missions in the occupied Palestinian territory of Gaza. Frontex said its drone suppliers met all “EU procurement rules and guidelines”.

      There is mounting concern both over how Frontex is spending EU taxpayers’ money and how it can be held accountable. The migration panic roiling Europe’s politics has been a boon for a once unfashionable EU outpost that coordinated national coastal and border guards. Ten years ago Frontex’s budget was £79m. In the latest budget cycle it has been awarded £10.4bn.

      Demand from member states for its services have largely been driven by its role in coordinating and carrying out deportations. The expansion of the deportation machine has caused concern among institutions tasked with monitoring the forced returns missions: a group of national ombudsmen, independent watchdogs appointed in all EU member states to safeguard human rights, has announced plans to begin its own independent monitoring group. The move follows frustration with the way their reports on past missions have been handled by Frontex.

      Andreas Pottakis, Greece’s ombudsman, is among those calling for an end to the agency policing itself: “Internal monitoring of Frontex by Frontex cannot substitute for the need for external monitoring by independent bodies. This is the only way the demand for transparency can be met and that the EU administration can effectively be held into account.”
      Acting to extradite helpless civilians to the hands of Libyan militias may amount to criminal liability

      The Frontex Consultative Forum, a body offering strategic advice to Frontex’s management board on how the agency can improve respect for fundamental rights, has also severely criticised it for a sloppy approach to accountability. An online archive of all Frontex operations, which was used by independent researchers, was recently removed.

      The switch to drones in the Mediterranean has also led to Frontex being accused of feeding intelligence on the position of migrant boats to Libya’s coast guards so they can intercept and return them to Libya. Although it receives EU funds, the Libyan coast guard remains a loosely defined outfit that often overlaps with smuggling gangs and detention centre owners.

      “The Libyan coast guard never patrols the sea,” said Tamino Böhm of the German rescue charity Sea-Watch. “They never leave port unless there is a boat to head to for a pullback. This means the information they have comes from the surveillance flights of Italy, Frontex and the EU.”

      A Frontex spokesperson said that incidents related to boats in distress were passed to the “responsible rescue coordination centre and to the neighbouring ones for situational awareness and potential coordination”. Thus the maritime rescue coordination centre in Rome has begun to share information with its Libyan counterpart in Tripoli, under the instructions of Italy’s far-right interior minister, Matteo Salvini.

      The EU is already accused of crimes against humanity in a submission before the International Criminal Court for “orchestrating a policy of forced transfer to concentration camp-like detention facilities [in Libya] where atrocious crimes are committed”.

      The case, brought by lawyers based in Paris, seeks to demonstrate that many of the people intercepted have faced human rights abuses ranging from slavery to torture and murder after being returned to Libya.

      Omer Shatz, an Israeli who teaches at Sciences Po university in Paris, and one of the two lawyers who brought the ICC case, said Frontex drone operators could be criminally liable for aiding pullbacks. “A drone operator that is aware of a migrant boat in distress is obliged to secure fundamental rights to life, body integrity, liberty and dignity. This means she has to take actions intended to search, rescue and disembark those rescued at safe port. Acting to extradite helpless vulnerable civilians to the hands of Libyan militias may amount to criminal liability.”

      Under international law, migrants rescued at sea by European vessels cannot be returned to Libya, where conflict and human rights abuses mean the UN has stated there is no safe port. Under the UN convention on the law of the sea (Unclos) all ships are obliged to report an encounter with a vessel in distress and offer assistance. This is partly why EU naval missions that were not mandated to conduct rescue missions found themselves pitched into them regardless.

      Drones, however, operate in a legal grey zone not covered by Unclos. The situation for private contractors to EU agencies, as in some of the current drone operations, is even less clear.

      Frontex told the Observer that all drone operators, staff or private contractors are subject to EU laws that mandate the protection of human life. The agency said it was unable to share a copy of the mission instructions given to drone operators that would tell them what to do in the event of encountering a boat in distress, asking the Observer to submit a freedom of information request. The agency said drones had encountered boats in distress on only four occasions – all in June this year – in the central Mediterranean, and that none had led to a “serious incident report” – Frontex jargon for a red flag. When EU naval vessels were deployed in similar areas in previous years, multiple serious incidents were reported every month, according to documents seen by the Observer.

      https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/04/drones-replace-patrol-ships-mediterranean-fears-more-migrant-deaths

      #Méditerranée #mer_Méditerranée #Libye

    • L’uso dei droni per guardare i migranti che affogano mette a nudo tutta la disumanità delle pratiche di controllo sui confini

      In troppi crediamo al mito di una frontiera dal volto umano, solo perché ci spaventa guardare in faccia la realtà macchiata di sangue.

      “Se avessi ignorato quelle grida di aiuto, non avrei mai più trovato il coraggio di affrontare il mare”.

      Con queste parole il pescatore siciliano Carlo Giarratano ha commentato la sua decisione di sfidare il “decreto sicurezza” del Governo italiano, che prevede sanzioni o l’arresto nei confronti di chiunque trasporti in Italia migranti soccorsi in mare.

      La sua storia è un esempio della preoccupante tensione che si è creata ai confini della “Fortezza Europa” in materia di leggi e regolamenti. Secondo il diritto internazionale, il capitano di un’imbarcazione in mare è tenuto a fornire assistenza alle persone in difficoltà, “a prescindere dalla nazionalità o dalla cittadinanza delle persone stesse”. Al contempo, molti paesi europei, e la stessa UE, stanno cercando di limitare questo principio e queste attività, malgrado il tragico bilancio di morti nel Mediterraneo, in continua crescita.

      L’Agenzia di Confine e Guardia Costiera Europea, Frontex, sembra aver escogitato una soluzione ingegnosa: i droni. L’obbligo legale di aiutare un’imbarcazione in difficoltà non si applica a un veicolo aereo senza pilota (UAV, unmanned aerial vehicle). Si può aggirare la questione, politicamente calda, su chi sia responsabile di accogliere i migranti soccorsi, se questi semplicemente non vengono proprio soccorsi. Questo principio fa parte di una consolidata tendenza a mettere in atto politiche finalizzate a impedire che i migranti attraversino il Mediterraneo. Visto l’obbligo di soccorrere le persone che ci chiedono aiuto, la soluzione sembra essere questa: fare in modo di non sentire le loro richieste.

      Jean-Claude Juncker sostiene che le politiche europee di presidio ai confini sono concepite per “stroncare il business dei trafficanti”, perché nella moralità egocentrica che ispira la politica di frontiera europea, se non ci fossero trafficanti non ci sarebbero migranti.

      Ma non ci sono trafficanti che si fabbricano migranti in officina. Se le rotte ufficiali sono bloccate, le persone vanno a cercare quelle non ufficiali. Rendere la migrazione più difficile, ha fatto aumentare la richiesta di trafficanti e scafisti, certamente non l’ha fermata. Invece che stroncare il loro business, queste politiche lo hanno creato.

      Secondo la logica della foglia di fico, l’UE sostiene di non limitarsi a lasciare affogare i migranti, ma di fornire supporto alla guardia costiera libica perché intercetti le imbarcazioni che tentano la traversata e riporti le persone nei campi di detenzione in Libia.

      Ma il rapporto del Global Detention Project, a proposito delle condizioni in questi campi, riferisce: “I detenuti sono spesso sottoposti a gravi abusi e violenze, compresi stupri e torture, estorsioni, lavori forzati, schiavitù, condizioni di vita insopportabili, esecuzioni sommarie.” Human Rights Watch, in un rapporto intitolato Senza via di fuga dall’Inferno, descrive situazioni di sovraffollamento e malnutrizione e riporta testimonianze di bambini picchiati dalle guardie.

      L’Irish Times ha riportato accuse secondo cui le milizie associate con il GNA (Governo Libico di Alleanza Nazionale, riconosciuto dall’ONU), starebbero immagazzinando munizioni in questi campi e userebbero i rifugiati come “scudi umani”. Sembra quasi inevitabile, quindi, la notizia che il 3 luglio almeno 53 rifugiati sono stati uccisi durante un attacco dei ribelli appartenenti all’Esercito Nazionale Libico, nel campo di detenzione di Tajura, vicino a Tripoli.

      Secondo una testimonianza riportata dall’Associated Press, a Tajura i migranti erano costretti a pulire le armi delle milizie fedeli al GNA, armi che erano immagazzinate nel campo. Secondo i racconti di testimoni oculari dell’attacco, riportati dalle forze ONU, le guardie del campo avrebbero aperto il fuoco su chi tentava di scappare.

      Nel mondo occidentale, quando parliamo di immigrazione, tendiamo a focalizzarci sul cosiddetto “impatto sulle comunità” causato dai flussi di nuovi arrivati che si muovono da un posto all’altro.

      Nelle nostre discussioni, ci chiediamo se i migranti portino un guadagno per l’economia oppure intacchino risorse già scarse. Raramente ci fermiamo a guardare nella sua cruda e tecnica realtà la concreta applicazione del controllo alle frontiere, quando si traduce davvero in fucili e filo spinato.

      Ci ripetiamo che i costi vanno tutti in un’unica direzione: secondo la nostra narrazione preferita, i controlli di confine sono tutti gratis, è lasciare entrare i migranti la cosa che costa. Ma i costi da pagare ci sono sempre: non solo il tributo di morti che continua a crescere o i budget multimilionari e sempre in aumento delle nostre agenzie di frontiera, ma anche i costi morali e sociali che finiamo con l’estorcere a noi stessi.

      L’ossessione per la sicurezza dei confini deve fare i conti con alcune delle più antiche e radicate convinzioni etiche proprie delle società occidentali. Prendersi cura del più debole, fare agli altri quello che vogliamo sia fatto a noi, aiutare chi possiamo. Molti uomini e donne che lavorano in mare, quando soccorrono dei naufraghi non sono spinti solo da una legge che li obbliga a prestare aiuto, ma anche da un imperativo morale più essenziale. “Lo facciamo perché siamo gente di mare”, ha detto Giarratano al Guardian, “in mare, se ci sono persone in pericolo, le salviamo”.

      Ma i nostri governi hanno deciso che questo non vale per gli europei. Come se fosse una perversa sfida lanciata a istinti morali vecchi di migliaia di anni, nell’Europa moderna un marinaio che salva un migrante mentre sta per affogare, deve essere punito.

      Infrangere queste reti di reciproche responsabilità fra gli esseri umani, ha dei costi: divisioni e tensioni sociali. Ed è un amaro paradosso, perché proprio argomenti di questo genere sono in testa alle nostre preoccupazioni percepite quando si parla di migrazioni. E mentre l’UE fa di tutto per respingere un fronte del confine verso i deserti del Nord Africa, cercando di tenere i corpi dei rifugiati abbastanza lontani da non farceli vedere da vicino, intanto l’altro fronte continua a spingere verso di noi. L’Europa diventa un “ambiente ostile” e quindi noi diventiamo un popolo ostile.

      Ci auto-ingaggiamo come guardie di confine al nostro interno. Padroni di casa, infermiere, insegnanti, manager – ogni relazione sociale deve essere controllata. Il nostro regime di “frontiera quotidiana” crea “comunità sospette” all’interno della nostra società: sono persone sospette per il solo fatto di esistere e, nei loro confronti, si possono chiamare le forze dell’ordine in ogni momento, “giusto per dare un’occhiata”.

      Il confine non è solo un sistema per tenere gli estranei fuori dalla nostra società, ma per marchiare per sempre le persone come estranee, anche all’interno e per legittimare ufficialmente il pregiudizio, per garantire che “l’integrazione” – il Sacro Graal della narrazione progressista sull’immigrazione – resti illusoria e irrealizzabile, uno scherzo crudele giocato sulla pelle di persone destinate a rimanere etichettate come straniere e sospette. La nostra società nel suo insieme si mette al servizio di questo insaziabile confine, fino a definire la sua vera e propria identità nella capacità di respingere le persone.

      Malgrado arrivino continuamente immagini e notizie di tragedie e di morti, i media evitano di collegarle con le campagne di opinione che amplificano le cosiddette “legittime preoccupazioni” della gente e le trasformano in un inattaccabile “comune buon senso”.

      I compromessi che reggono le politiche di controllo dei confini non vengono messi in luce. Questo ci permette di guardare da un’altra parte, non perché siamo crudeli ma perché non possiamo sopportare di vedere quello che stiamo facendo. Ci sono persone e gruppi che, come denuncia Adam Serwer in un articolo su The Atlantic, sono proprio “Focalizzati sulla Crudeltà”. E anche se noi non siamo così, viviamo comunque nel loro stesso mondo, un mondo in cui degli esseri umani annegano e noi li guardiamo dall’alto dei nostri droni senza pilota, mentre lo stato punisce chi cerca di salvarli.

      In troppi crediamo nel mito di una frontiera dal volto umano, solo perché ci spaventa guardare in faccia la tragica e insanguinata realtà del concreto controllo quotidiano sui confini. E comunque, se fosse possibile, non avremmo ormai risolto questa contraddizione? Il fatto che non lo abbiamo fatto dovrebbe portarci a pensare che non ne siamo capaci e che ci si prospetta una cruda e desolante scelta morale per il futuro.

      D’ora in poi, il numero dei migranti non può che aumentare. I cambiamenti climatici saranno determinanti. La scelta di non respingerli non sarà certamente gratis: non c’è modo di condividere le nostre risorse con altri senza sostenere dei costi. Ma se non lo facciamo, scegliamo consapevolmente i naufragi, gli annegamenti, i campi di detenzione, scegliamo di destinare queste persone ad una vita da schiavi in zone di guerra. Scegliamo l’ambiente ostile. Scegliamo di “difendere il nostro stile di vita” semplicemente accettando di vivere a fianco di una popolazione sempre in aumento fatta di rifugiati senza patria, ammassati in baracche di lamiera e depositi soffocanti, sfiniti fino alla disperazione.

      Ma c’è un costo che, alla fine, giudicheremo troppo alto da pagare? Per il momento, sembra di no: ma, … cosa siamo diventati?

      https://dossierlibia.lasciatecientrare.it/luso-dei-droni-per-guardare-i-migranti-che-affogano-m

    • Et aussi... l’utilisation de moins en moins de #bateaux et de plus en plus de #avions a le même effet...

      Sophia : The EU naval mission without any ships

      Launched in 2015 to combat human smuggling in the Mediterranean, the operation has been all but dismantled, symbolizing European division on immigration policy.


      The Italian air base of Sigonella extends its wire fencing across the green and yellow fields of Sicily, 25 kilometers inland from the island’s coastline. Only the enormous cone of Mount Etna, visible in the distance, stands out over this flat land. Posters depicting a sniper taking aim indicate that this is a restricted-access military zone with armed surveillance.

      Inside, there is an enormous city with deserted avenues, runways and hangars. This is the departure point for aircraft patrolling the Central Mediterranean as part of EU Naval Force Mediterranean Operation Sophia, Europe’s military response to the human smuggling rings, launched in 2015. But since March of this year, the planes have been a reflection of a mutilated mission: Sophia is now a naval operation without any ships.

      The Spanish detachment in #Sigonella has just rotated some of its personnel. A group of newly arrived soldiers are being trained in a small room inside one of the makeshift containers where the group of 39 military members work. The aircraft that they use is standing just a few meters away, on a sun-drenched esplanade that smells of fuel. The plane has been designed for round-the-clock maritime surveillance, and it has a spherical infrared camera fitted on its nose that allows it to locate and identify seagoing vessels, as well as to detect illegal trafficking of people, arms and oil.

      If the EU had systematically shown more solidarity with Italy [...] Italian voters would not have made a dramatic swing to the far right

      Juan Fernando López Aguilar, EU Civil Liberties Committee

      This aircraft was also made to assist in sea rescues. But this activity is no longer taking place, now that there are no ships in the mission. Six aircraft are all that remain of Operation Sophia, which has been all but dismantled. Nobody would venture to say whether its mandate will be extended beyond the current deadline of September 30.

      The planes at Sigonella continue to patrol the Central Mediterranean and collect information to meet the ambitious if vague goal that triggered the mission back at the height of the refugee crisis: “To disrupt the business of human and weapons smuggling.” The operation’s most controversial task is still being carried out as well: training Libya’s Coast Guard so they will do the job of intercepting vessels filled with people fleeing Libyan war and chaos, and return them to the point of departure. Even official sources of Europe’s diplomatic service admitted, in a written reply, that the temporary suspension of naval assets “is not optimal,” and that the mission’s ability to fulfill its mandate “is more limited.”

      In these four years, the mission has had some tangible achievements: the arrest of 151 individuals suspected of human trafficking and smuggling, and the destruction of 551 boats used by criminal networks. Operation Sophia has also inspected three ships and seized banned goods; it has made radio contact with 2,462 vessels to check their identity, and made 161 friendly approaches. For European diplomats, the mission has been mainly useful in “significantly reducing smugglers’ ability to operate in high seas” and has generally contributed to “improving maritime safety and stability in the Central Mediterranean.”

      Sophia’s main mission was never to rescue people at sea, yet in these last years it has saved 45,000 lives, following the maritime obligation to aid people in distress. The reason why it has been stripped of its ships – a move that has been strongly criticized by non-profit groups – can be found 800 kilometers north of Sicily, in Rome, and also in the offices of European politicians. Last summer, Italy’s far-right Interior Minister Matteo Salvini began to apply a closed-port policy for ships carrying rescued migrants unless a previous relocation agreement existed with other countries. Salvini first targeted the non-profit groups performing sea rescues, and then he warned his European colleagues that Italy, which is leading the EU mission, would refuse to take in all the rescued migrants without first seeing a change in EU policy. A year later, no European deal has emerged, and every time a rescue is made, the issue of who takes in the migrants is negotiated on an ad hoc basis.

      Operation Sophia has saved 45,000 lives

      Although arrivals through this route have plummeted, Salvini insists that “Italy is not willing to accept all the migrants who arrive in Europe.” Political division among member states has had an effect on the European military mission. “Sophia has not been conducting rescues since August 2018,” says Matteo Villa, a migration expert at Italy’s Institute for International Policy Studies (ISPI). “Nobody in the EU wanted to see a mission ship with migrants on board being refused port entry, so the ‘solution’ was to suspend Sophia’s naval tasks.”

      The decision to maintain the operation without any ships was made at the last minute in March, in a move that prevented the dismantling of the mission just ahead of the European elections. “Operation Sophia has helped save lives, although that was not its main objective. It was a mistake for [the EU] to leave it with nothing but airplanes, without the ships that were able to save lives,” says Matteo de Bellis, a migration and refugee expert at Amnesty International. “What they are doing now, training the Libyans, only serves to empower the forces that intercept refugees and migrants and return them to Libya, where they face arbitrary detention in centers where there is torture, exploitation and rape.”

      Ever since the great maritime rescue operation developed by Italy in 2013, the Mare Nostrum, which saved 150,000 people, its European successors have been less ambitious in scope and their goals more focused on security and border patrolling. This is the case with Sophia, which by training the Libyan Coast Guard is contributing to the increasingly clear strategy of outsourcing EU migratory control, even to a country mired in chaos and war. “If Europe reduces search-and-rescue operations and encourages Libya to conduct them in its place, then it is being an accomplice to the violations taking place in Libya,” says Catherine Wollard, secretary general of the non-profit network integrated in the European Council of Refugees and Exiles (ECRE).

      Training the Libyans only serves to empower the forces that intercept refugees and migrants and return them to Libya, where they face torture, exploitation and rape

      Matteo de Bellis, Amnesty International

      The vision offered by official European sources regarding the training of the Libyan Coast Guard, and about Operation Sophia in general, is very different when it comes to reducing mortality on the Mediterranean’s most deadly migration route. “Operation Sophia was launched to fight criminal human smuggling networks that put lives at risk in the Central Mediterranean,” they say in a written response. European officials are aware of what is going on in Libya, but their response to the accusations of abuse perpetrated by the Libyan Coast Guard and the situation of migrants confined in detention centers in terrible conditions, is the following: “Everything that happens in Libyan territorial waters is Libya’s responsibility, not Europe’s, yet we are not looking the other way. […] Through Operation Sophia we have saved lives, fought traffickers and trained the Libyan Coast Guard […]. We are performing this last task because substantial loss of life at sea is taking place within Libyan territorial waters. That is why it is very important for Libya’s Coast Guard and Navy to know how to assist distressed migrants in line with international law and humanitarian standards. Also, because the contribution of Libya’s Coast Guard in the fight against traffickers operating in their waters is indispensable.”

      Criticism of Operation Sophia is also coming from the European Parliament, which funded the trip that made this feature story possible. Juan Fernando López Aguilar, president of the parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, attacks the decision to strip Sophia of its naval resources. The Socialist Party (PSOE) politician says that this decision was made “in the absolute absence of a global approach to the migration phenomenon that would include cooperative coordination of all the resources at member states’ disposal, such as development aid in Africa, cooperation with origin and transit countries, hirings in countries of origin and the creation of legal ways to access the EU. Now that would dismantle [the mafias’] business model,” he says.

      López Aguilar says that the EU is aware of Italy’s weariness of the situation, considering that “for years it dealt with a migratory pressure that exceeded its response capacity.” Between 2014 and 2017, around 624,000 people landed on Italy’s coasts. “If they EU had systematically shown more solidarity with Italy, if relocation programs for people in hotspots had been observed, very likely Italian voters would not have made a dramatic swing giving victory to the far right, nor would we have reached a point where a xenophobic closed-port narrative is claimed to represent the salvation of Italian interests.”

      Miguel Urbán, a European Member of Parliament for the Spanish leftist party Unidas Podemos, is highly critical of the way the EU has been managing immigration. He talks about a “militarization of the Mediterranean” and describes European policy as bowing to “the far right’s strategy.” He blames Italy’s attitude for turning Sophia into “an operation in the Mediterranean without a naval fleet. What the Italian government gets out of this is to rid itself of its humanitarian responsibility to disembark migrants on its coasts.”

      For now, no progress has been made on the underlying political problem of disembarkation and, by extension, on the long-delayed reform of the Dublin Regulation to balance out frontline states’ responsibility in taking in refugees with solidarity from other countries. Sophia will continue to hobble along until September after being all but given up for dead in March. After that, everything is still up in the air.

      https://elpais.com/elpais/2019/08/29/inenglish/1567088519_215547.html
      #Sophie #Opération_Sophia #Sicile

    • L’uso dei droni per guardare i migranti che affogano mette a nudo tutta la disumanità delle pratiche di controllo sui confini

      In troppi crediamo al mito di una frontiera dal volto umano, solo perché ci spaventa guardare in faccia la realtà macchiata di sangue.

      “Se avessi ignorato quelle grida di aiuto, non avrei mai più trovato il coraggio di affrontare il mare”.

      Con queste parole il pescatore siciliano Carlo Giarratano ha commentato la sua decisione di sfidare il “decreto sicurezza” del Governo italiano, che prevede sanzioni o l’arresto nei confronti di chiunque trasporti in Italia migranti soccorsi in mare.

      La sua storia è un esempio della preoccupante tensione che si è creata ai confini della “Fortezza Europa” in materia di leggi e regolamenti. Secondo il diritto internazionale, il capitano di un’imbarcazione in mare è tenuto a fornire assistenza alle persone in difficoltà, “a prescindere dalla nazionalità o dalla cittadinanza delle persone stesse”. Al contempo, molti paesi europei, e la stessa UE, stanno cercando di limitare questo principio e queste attività, malgrado il tragico bilancio di morti nel Mediterraneo, in continua crescita.

      L’Agenzia di Confine e Guardia Costiera Europea, Frontex, sembra aver escogitato una soluzione ingegnosa: i droni. L’obbligo legale di aiutare un’imbarcazione in difficoltà non si applica a un veicolo aereo senza pilota (UAV, unmanned aerial vehicle). Si può aggirare la questione, politicamente calda, su chi sia responsabile di accogliere i migranti soccorsi, se questi semplicemente non vengono proprio soccorsi. Questo principio fa parte di una consolidata tendenza a mettere in atto politiche finalizzate a impedire che i migranti attraversino il Mediterraneo. Visto l’obbligo di soccorrere le persone che ci chiedono aiuto, la soluzione sembra essere questa: fare in modo di non sentire le loro richieste.

      Jean-Claude Juncker sostiene che le politiche europee di presidio ai confini sono concepite per “stroncare il business dei trafficanti”, perché nella moralità egocentrica che ispira la politica di frontiera europea, se non ci fossero trafficanti non ci sarebbero migranti.

      Ma non ci sono trafficanti che si fabbricano migranti in officina. Se le rotte ufficiali sono bloccate, le persone vanno a cercare quelle non ufficiali. Rendere la migrazione più difficile, ha fatto aumentare la richiesta di trafficanti e scafisti, certamente non l’ha fermata. Invece che stroncare il loro business, queste politiche lo hanno creato.

      Secondo la logica della foglia di fico, l’UE sostiene di non limitarsi a lasciare affogare i migranti, ma di fornire supporto alla guardia costiera libica perché intercetti le imbarcazioni che tentano la traversata e riporti le persone nei campi di detenzione in Libia.

      Ma il rapporto del Global Detention Project, a proposito delle condizioni in questi campi, riferisce: “I detenuti sono spesso sottoposti a gravi abusi e violenze, compresi stupri e torture, estorsioni, lavori forzati, schiavitù, condizioni di vita insopportabili, esecuzioni sommarie.” Human Rights Watch, in un rapporto intitolato Senza via di fuga dall’Inferno, descrive situazioni di sovraffollamento e malnutrizione e riporta testimonianze di bambini picchiati dalle guardie.

      L’Irish Times ha riportato accuse secondo cui le milizie associate con il GNA (Governo Libico di Alleanza Nazionale, riconosciuto dall’ONU), starebbero immagazzinando munizioni in questi campi e userebbero i rifugiati come “scudi umani”. Sembra quasi inevitabile, quindi, la notizia che il 3 luglio almeno 53 rifugiati sono stati uccisi durante un attacco dei ribelli appartenenti all’Esercito Nazionale Libico, nel campo di detenzione di Tajura, vicino a Tripoli.

      Secondo una testimonianza riportata dall’Associated Press, a Tajura i migranti erano costretti a pulire le armi delle milizie fedeli al GNA, armi che erano immagazzinate nel campo. Secondo i racconti di testimoni oculari dell’attacco, riportati dalle forze ONU, le guardie del campo avrebbero aperto il fuoco su chi tentava di scappare.

      Nel mondo occidentale, quando parliamo di immigrazione, tendiamo a focalizzarci sul cosiddetto “impatto sulle comunità” causato dai flussi di nuovi arrivati che si muovono da un posto all’altro.

      Nelle nostre discussioni, ci chiediamo se i migranti portino un guadagno per l’economia oppure intacchino risorse già scarse. Raramente ci fermiamo a guardare nella sua cruda e tecnica realtà la concreta applicazione del controllo alle frontiere, quando si traduce davvero in fucili e filo spinato.

      Ci ripetiamo che i costi vanno tutti in un’unica direzione: secondo la nostra narrazione preferita, i controlli di confine sono tutti gratis, è lasciare entrare i migranti la cosa che costa. Ma i costi da pagare ci sono sempre: non solo il tributo di morti che continua a crescere o i budget multimilionari e sempre in aumento delle nostre agenzie di frontiera, ma anche i costi morali e sociali che finiamo con l’estorcere a noi stessi.

      L’ossessione per la sicurezza dei confini deve fare i conti con alcune delle più antiche e radicate convinzioni etiche proprie delle società occidentali. Prendersi cura del più debole, fare agli altri quello che vogliamo sia fatto a noi, aiutare chi possiamo. Molti uomini e donne che lavorano in mare, quando soccorrono dei naufraghi non sono spinti solo da una legge che li obbliga a prestare aiuto, ma anche da un imperativo morale più essenziale. “Lo facciamo perché siamo gente di mare”, ha detto Giarratano al Guardian, “in mare, se ci sono persone in pericolo, le salviamo”.

      Ma i nostri governi hanno deciso che questo non vale per gli europei. Come se fosse una perversa sfida lanciata a istinti morali vecchi di migliaia di anni, nell’Europa moderna un marinaio che salva un migrante mentre sta per affogare, deve essere punito.

      Infrangere queste reti di reciproche responsabilità fra gli esseri umani, ha dei costi: divisioni e tensioni sociali. Ed è un amaro paradosso, perché proprio argomenti di questo genere sono in testa alle nostre preoccupazioni percepite quando si parla di migrazioni. E mentre l’UE fa di tutto per respingere un fronte del confine verso i deserti del Nord Africa, cercando di tenere i corpi dei rifugiati abbastanza lontani da non farceli vedere da vicino, intanto l’altro fronte continua a spingere verso di noi. L’Europa diventa un “ambiente ostile” e quindi noi diventiamo un popolo ostile.

      Ci auto-ingaggiamo come guardie di confine al nostro interno. Padroni di casa, infermiere, insegnanti, manager – ogni relazione sociale deve essere controllata. Il nostro regime di “frontiera quotidiana” crea “comunità sospette” all’interno della nostra società: sono persone sospette per il solo fatto di esistere e, nei loro confronti, si possono chiamare le forze dell’ordine in ogni momento, “giusto per dare un’occhiata”.

      Il confine non è solo un sistema per tenere gli estranei fuori dalla nostra società, ma per marchiare per sempre le persone come estranee, anche all’interno e per legittimare ufficialmente il pregiudizio, per garantire che “l’integrazione” – il Sacro Graal della narrazione progressista sull’immigrazione – resti illusoria e irrealizzabile, uno scherzo crudele giocato sulla pelle di persone destinate a rimanere etichettate come straniere e sospette. La nostra società nel suo insieme si mette al servizio di questo insaziabile confine, fino a definire la sua vera e propria identità nella capacità di respingere le persone.

      Malgrado arrivino continuamente immagini e notizie di tragedie e di morti, i media evitano di collegarle con le campagne di opinione che amplificano le cosiddette “legittime preoccupazioni” della gente e le trasformano in un inattaccabile “comune buon senso”.

      I compromessi che reggono le politiche di controllo dei confini non vengono messi in luce. Questo ci permette di guardare da un’altra parte, non perché siamo crudeli ma perché non possiamo sopportare di vedere quello che stiamo facendo. Ci sono persone e gruppi che, come denuncia Adam Serwer in un articolo su The Atlantic, sono proprio “Focalizzati sulla Crudeltà”. E anche se noi non siamo così, viviamo comunque nel loro stesso mondo, un mondo in cui degli esseri umani annegano e noi li guardiamo dall’alto dei nostri droni senza pilota, mentre lo stato punisce chi cerca di salvarli.

      In troppi crediamo nel mito di una frontiera dal volto umano, solo perché ci spaventa guardare in faccia la tragica e insanguinata realtà del concreto controllo quotidiano sui confini. E comunque, se fosse possibile, non avremmo ormai risolto questa contraddizione? Il fatto che non lo abbiamo fatto dovrebbe portarci a pensare che non ne siamo capaci e che ci si prospetta una cruda e desolante scelta morale per il futuro.

      D’ora in poi, il numero dei migranti non può che aumentare. I cambiamenti climatici saranno determinanti. La scelta di non respingerli non sarà certamente gratis: non c’è modo di condividere le nostre risorse con altri senza sostenere dei costi. Ma se non lo facciamo, scegliamo consapevolmente i naufragi, gli annegamenti, i campi di detenzione, scegliamo di destinare queste persone ad una vita da schiavi in zone di guerra. Scegliamo l’ambiente ostile. Scegliamo di “difendere il nostro stile di vita” semplicemente accettando di vivere a fianco di una popolazione sempre in aumento fatta di rifugiati senza patria, ammassati in baracche di lamiera e depositi soffocanti, sfiniti fino alla disperazione.

      Ma c’è un costo che, alla fine, giudicheremo troppo alto da pagare? Per il momento, sembra di no: ma, … cosa siamo diventati?

      https://dossierlibia.lasciatecientrare.it/luso-dei-droni-per-guardare-i-migranti-che-affogano-m

    • Grèce : le gouvernement durcit nettement sa position et implique l’armée à la gestion de flux migratoire en Mer Egée

      Après deux conférences intergouvernementales ce we., le gouvernement Mitsotakis a décidé la participation active de l’Armée et des Forces Navales dans des opérations de dissuasion en Mer Egée. En même temps il a décidé de poursuivre les opérations de ’désengorgement’ des îlses, de renfoncer les forces de garde-côte en effectifs et en navires, et de pousser plus loin la coopération avec Frontex et les forces de l’Otan qui opèrent déjà dans la région.

      Le durcissement net de la politique gouvernementale se traduit aussi par le retour en force d’un discours ouvertement xénophobe. Le vice-président du gouvernement grec, Adonis Géorgiadis, connu pour ses positions à l’’extrême-droite de l’échiquier politique, a déclaré que parmi les nouveaux arrivants, il y aurait très peu de réfugiés, la plupart seraient des ‘clandestins’ et il n’a pas manqué de qualifier les flux d’ ‘invasion’.

      source – en grec - Efimerida tôn Syntaktôn : https://www.efsyn.gr/politiki/kybernisi/211786_kybernisi-sklirainei-ti-stasi-tis-sto-prosfygiko

      Il va de soi que cette militarisation de la gestion migratoire laisse craindre le pire dans la mesure où le but évident de l’implication de l’armée ne saurait être que la systématisation des opérations de push-back en pleine mer, ce qui est non seulement illégal mais ouvertement criminel.

      Reçu de Vicky Skoumbi via la mailing-list Migreurop, 23.09.2019

  • Aerei da pattugliamento e #radar. Ecco il piano segreto anti-sbarchi

    Si delinea la strategia del governo per dare supporto alle Guardie costiere di Libia e Tunisia.
    La Marina militare da sola non riesce a tenere sotto controllo il Mediterraneo e perciò si ricorrerà anche all’Aeronautica. Oltre le navi che già presidiano il mare a sud della Sicilia, saranno schierati aerei-radar, droni e aerei da pattugliamento. L’obiettivo sono i soliti barconi e barchini che partono da Libia e Tunisia. Questo il piano segreto di Matteo Salvini, condiviso dall’intero governo, per frenare le partenze dei clandestini e aiutare in maniera sostanziale le due Guardie costiere, quella libica e quella tunisina, le sole che possono operare nelle rispettive acque territoriali, ma non hanno una tecnologia all’altezza, occorre un salto di qualità. E a questo ci penseranno gli italiani con una rete di osservazione dal mare e dal cielo.

    https://www.lastampa.it/topnews/primo-piano/2019/07/09/news/aerei-da-pattugliamento-e-radar-nbsp-ecco-il-piano-segreto-anti-sbarchi-1.3
    #externalisation #asile #migrations #frontières #réfugiés #avions #miltiarisation_des_frontières #Méditerranée #Italie #Libye #gardes-côtes_libyens #gardes-côtes_tunisiens #Tunisie

    –----

    Ajouté à ces métalistes :
    1. Externalisation des contrôles frontaliers en #Libye :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/765324
    2. L’externalisation en #Tunisie (accords avec l’Italie notamment) :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/731749#message765330

    • Commentaire de Sara Prestianni, reçu par email via la mailing-list Migreurop :

      A completer la proposition des 10 motovedette à offrir à la Libye, circulent aujourd’hui autre propositions qui ont été présenté par la presse comme “le secret contre les débarquements” : remplir le ciel de la Méditerranée avec des avion-radar, drones et avions de patrouilles pour aider les Gardes Cotes Libyens Tunisiens pour que ils puissent rejoindre les migrants en mer avant des ong afin que les migrants soient ramenés en Tunisie et Libye et pas en Italie. L’objectif déclaré est que tout bateau soit bloqué avant que il ne rentre en eaux internationales et encore moins nationales italiens.

      Puisque la Marine ne suffirait pas à “garder sous contrôle la mer Méditerranée” le Gouvernement fait appelle donc appelle aussi à l’aéronautique militaire. Seront mis à disposition les avions Atr42 pour le patrouilles maritimes, les drones Predator, les avions radar G550 CAEW. L’ensemble des moyens aériens devront communiquer aux MRCC de compétence (qui dans la tete du Gouvernement sont celui libyen et tunisien”) pour que ils puissent intervenir.
      Selon le Ministre de l’Interieur Italien, Tunisie et Libye ne sont pas suffisamment équipées, elles n’ont pas de technologie à l’hauteur. Technologie qui sera donc fourni par l’Italie.

      Cela explique la grande satisfaction exprimée par Salvini à l’annonce de l’opération de interception mené par les Gardes Cotes Tunisiennes au large de Kerkennah. Mais dans son discours ne manque pas de les accuser “En Tunisie il y a des institutions libres, je ne comprends pas pourquoi ils ne contrôlent par leur frontières” déclare Salvini, ou encore “Puisque en Tunisie il y a un parlement et un Gouvernement qui reçoivent des milliers de euro par l’Europe, il faut que chacun faisse sa part”

      La Ministre de la Defense, Trenta, a donné son feu vert à ce qui a été définis “augmentation de la capacité de surveillance, repérage et intelligence”

      https://www.lastampa.it/topnews/primo-piano/2019/07/09/news/aerei-da-pattugliamento-e-radar-nbsp-ecco-il-piano-segreto-anti-sbarchi-1.3

      Face à un nombre très faible de arrivé (3000 en 6 mois), le constat du contexte libyen qui ne peut être considéré un port sure, la Tunisie non plus, la seule préoccupation du Gouvernement italien semble être celle de “sécher dans le temps” les ong, qui respectent le droit maritime ramèneraient les migrants dans un port sure (donc européen).

      Semblent bien loin le temps que l’Italie utilisait des forces militaires pour une mission de sauvetage, comme a été le cas pour Mare Nostrum en 2014 ….

    • Libia, festa della Marina: l’Italia consegna dieci nuove #motovedette

      Sabato scorso a Tripoli, nella base di #Sitta. Promesse dall’ex ministro Salvini a luglio scorso, i libici ne prendono possesso proprio nel giorno della scadenza del Memorandum

      La Marina libica ha festeggiato il 57esimo anniversario della sua fondazione prendendo possesso delle dieci nuove piccole motovedette fornite dall’Italia. La cerimonia e’ avvenuta nella base di Abu Sitta a Tripoli sabato scorso, il 2 novembre, proprio il giorno in cui scadeva il contestato Memorandum Italia-Libia che il governo italiano ha scelto di rinnovare per j prossimi tre anni chiedendo delle modifiche a garanzia del rispetto dei diritti umani delle migliaia di migranti intercettati dalla guardia costiera libica e riportati nei centri di detenzione in cui vengono tenuti in condizioni disumane e sottoposti ad ogni tipo di violenze.

      La consegna delle motovedette che va cosi’ ad arricchire la flotta della Guardia costiera fornita e addestrata dall’Italia era stata promessa e annunciata per la fine dell’estate dall’ex ministro dell’Interno Matteo Salvini in uno degli ultimi comitati nazionale ordine e sicurezza da lui presieduto. Negli ultimi due anni sono stati quasi 40.000 i migranti intercettati e riportati indietro dai libici con interventi nella zona Sar sotto il controllo di Tripoli ma che, dalle indagini dei pm di Agrigento, risulta di fatto gestita dalla Marina italiana. Le foto delle dieci nuove motovedette consegnate durante la cerimonia sono state diffuse dalla Lybian navy e rilanciate dal sito di osservazione Migrant Rescue watch

      Ieri il ministro degli Esteri libico Mohamed Taher Siala ha ricevuto l’ambasciatore italiano Giuseppe Buccino Grimaldi, latore della nota verbale con cui l’Italia ha chiesto l’insediamento del Comitato italo-libico presieduto dai ministri di Interno ed Esteri di entrambi i Paesi, e ha confermato che la Libia esaminera’ gli emendamenti proposti dall’Italia e «decidera’ se approvarli o meno in linea con gli interessi supremi del governo e del popolo libico». Sulle modifiche al Memorandum il ministro dell’Interno Luciana Lamorgese riferira’ alla Camera mercoledi pomeriggio.

      https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2019/11/04/news/libia_festa_della_marina_l_italia_consegna_dieci_nuove_motovedette-240197

  • Un éclair de franchise - Par Daniel Schneidermann | Arrêt sur images
    https://www.arretsurimages.net/chroniques/le-matinaute/un-eclair-de-franchise

    « Est-ce qu’on a le droit de fumer dans ce studio ? » demande #Ruffin à Demorand et Salamé. Un court instant de silence. « Non ». « Voilà. C’est interdit. Eh bien l’#avion, c’est pareil ». Les deux #journalistes de France Inter viennent de l’interroger sur sa récente proposition de loi, visant à supprimer les liaisons aériennes intérieures, quand elles sont concurrencées par une liaison ferroviaire d’une durée supplémentaire inférieure à deux heures trente. Et en glissant dans leur question les deux mots épouvantail : « #écologie_punitive ».

    Mais Demorand remonte vite à cheval : « Donc vous voulez interdire l’avion pour raison de santé publique ? » "De santé mondiale". Et de poursuivre sa démonstration : « Dans les supermarchés, les gens ont un porte-monnaie à la place du cerveau. On n’a pas supprimé le #travail_des_enfants, parce que les consommateurs ont renoncé à acheter des produits fabriqués dans des usines qui emploient des enfants. On n’a pas supprimé le travail du dimanche parce que les consommateurs ont cessé d’acheter des produits fabriqués le dimanche. On n’a pas fait la semaine de #40_Heures parce que les consommateurs de 1936 ont cessé d’acheter les produits fabriqués dans des usines où les ouvriers dépassent les 40 heures ». Donc, les « #petits_gestes » des #consommateurs ne suffiront pas. Beaucoup l’admettaient secrètement. Aucun politique en vue ne le disait. C’est fait.

  • LU: dimostranti cercano di bloccare rimpatrio nigeriano

    Tensione davanti alla sede della polizia di Lucerna: ieri pomeriggio un gruppo di dimostranti ha cercato di opporsi al rimpatrio di un 41enne nigeriano. Una persona è stata arrestata per impedimento di atti dell’autorità, venendo rilasciata già nella serata di ieri.

    La manifestazione non autorizzata ha bloccato la strada per impedire al veicolo che trasportava il 41enne nigeriano di dirigersi verso l’aeroporto, indica in una nota odierna la polizia cantonale lucernese.

    L’intervento di altre pattuglie ha permesso al convoglio di proseguire: l’espulsione del 41enne verso la Nigeria si è svolta senza ulteriori problemi, precisa la polizia. I circa 25 dimostranti sono stati controllati.

    https://www.tvsvizzera.it/tvs/tutte-le-notizie-in-breve/lu--dimostranti-cercano-di-bloccare-rimpatrio-nigeriano/45020698
    #résistance #asile #migrations #réfugiés #renvois #Suisse #Lucerne #blocage #avion #vol

    ajouté à cette métaliste:
    https://seenthis.net/messages/725457

  • Des députés veulent interdire l’#avion sur les courts trajets en France
    https://www.francetvinfo.fr/economie/transports/des-deputes-veulent-interdire-l-avion-sur-les-courts-trajets-en-france_

    Favoriser le train aux avions trop polluants. Plusieurs députés, notamment l’élu de La France insoumise François Ruffin, ont déposé plusieurs amendements à la Loi d’orientation des #mobilités (#LOM). L’un de ces textes propose d’interdire les #vols_intérieurs sur un parcours faisable en train qui durerait jusqu’à 2h30 de plus que le trajet aérien, précise Le Parisien.

    #assemblée_nationale #train

    Les commentaires de l’article…

    • Dur à ficeler un texte pareil… un avion privé ça peut toujours voler. Ça déporterait le problème vers des services hors du circuit standard. Seraient vraiment touchés ceux n’y auraient pas accès… les « pauvres » encore une fois.
      Le temps de trajet, c’est une chose, mais la relouitude, c’est un meilleur critère. Changer de gare à Paris, c’est court, mais c’est chiant, par exemple.
      Je ne défend pas l’avion, mais ça sent l’excès législatif qui se traduit en une règle formelle dont le sens initial a été perdu.
      Argument marteau : souvent l’avion n’est qu’un segment d’un plus long trajet, c’est donc facile de tomber sous la barre des 2h30, pour beaucoup plus de complications en échange, que juste 2h30 de trajet en plus.
      Lille-Toulouse, par exemple, c’est plus long qui Bruxelles-Berlin, et de bcp.

      Je retiens surtout « favoriser le train » et j’aimerais savoir comment ça va se traduire. Car je lis surtout un interdit.

    • De même je vois mal comment on peut résoudre ce problème par le bout de l’interdit. C’est polluant, mais à la base : ça concernait très peu de monde. La clientèle s’est étoffée tout simplement parce qu’il n’y a plus de trains, et que ceux qui restent sont plus chers que l’avion !

      D’après moi la seule vraie manière de résoudre ça, enfin en tout cas le point prioritaire, c’est avant tout : remettre des trains partout, dont plein qui ne passent PAS par Paris, dans le centre de la France, etc.

      Et imposer des baisses de prix drastiques, et aussi retrouver des prix fixes comme il y a 20 ans (là les prix changent en permanence suivant 50000 params exprès, c’est une technique, on avait vu un article là-dessus).

      Si le commun des mortels a des trains souvent et peu chers, l’intérêt de prendre l’avion baissera déjà fortement. Après qu’on fasse des lois pour les quelques affairistes et politicien⋅nes, pourquoi pas, mais c’est en second plan.

      #transport #mobilité #avion

    • Sur l’avion, Alternatives économiques a sorti ce mois-ci un dossier sur le sujet (avec un plaidoyer pour le ferroviaire) : https://www.alternatives-economiques.fr/faut-arreter-de-prendre-lavion/00089449

      Pour le train, un gros effort serait à faire pour améliorer les dessertes, mais cela passe aussi nécessairement par une « attaque » du secteur aérien qui profite notamment d’avantages fiscaux et de subventions des collectivités.

    • L’interdiction s’appliquera-t-elle aux hommes politiques ? On aimerait assez qu’ils prêchent par l’exemple sur cette affaire mais je parie qu’ils nous expliqueront que leur temps est trop précieux...

    • Des députés veulent interdire l’avion quand le train va aussi vite
      https://reporterre.net/Des-deputes-veulent-interdire-l-avion-quand-le-train-va-aussi-vite

      François Ruffin, avec le soutien des députées Delphine Batho et Mathilde Panot, a présenté hier, lundi 3 juin, une proposition de loi visant à interdire certains vols intérieurs. Le but est de peser sur les débats autour du projet de loi mobilité, et de remettre la question de l’aérien dans un texte qui voulait l’ignorer.

  • BBC - Capital - Why airlines make flights longer on purpose
    http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20190405-the-secret-about-delays-airlines-dont-want-you-to-know

    Ils appellent ça le #padding : même si l’avion ne part pas l’heure, il arrive à temps, parce que la ponctualité (quant à l’arrivée) compte plus que le « bilan carbone »

    Ever wondered why flight times seem to be getting longer? It’s called “padding”, a phenomenon that helps airlines arrive on time – but at a cost.

    Le comble est que même comme ça, l’objectif (inavoué) n’est pas toujours atteint,

    “On average, over 30% of all flights arrive more than 15 minutes late every day despite padding,” says Captain Michael Baiada, president of aviation consultancy ATH Group citing the US Department of Transportation’s Air Travel Consumer Report. The figure used to be 40% but padding – not operational improvements – boosted on-time arrival rates. “By padding, airlines are gaming the system to fool you.”

    #avion #vol

  • En Suède, la « honte de prendre l’avion » pousse les voyageurs à favoriser le train - Geo.fr
    https://www.geo.fr/voyage/en-suede-la-honte-de-prendre-lavion-pousse-les-voyageurs-a-favoriser-le-train-19

    En Suède, la honte de prendre l’avion en raison de son impact sur le climat est devenu un phénomène bien réel, le « flygskam », qui gagne de plus en plus la population. Désormais, les Suédois sont nombreux à préférer le train pour leurs déplacements.

    #environnement #avion #train #Suède

  • Allemagne : des pilotes empêchent les vols de renvoi de migrant·es
    5295 personnes ont été expulsées l’année dernière via les aéroports de la La Rhénanie-du-Nord–Westphalie. 240 expulsions ont échoué parce que les compagnies aériennes ou les pilotes ont refusé de le faire.

    Widerstand gegen Abschiebungen in NRW.
    Piloten verhindern Abschiebeflüge

    2018 sind an nordrhein-westfälischen Flughäfen rund 240 Abschiebungen verhindert worden. Meistens durch den Widerstand von Piloten oder Fluggesellschaften.
    DÜSSELDORF dpa/lnw | Über Flughäfen in Nordrhein-Westfalen wurden im vergangenen Jahr 5295 Menschen abgeschoben. Rund 240 geplante Rückführungen auf dem Luftweg scheiterten in NRW – meistens wegen Widerstands durch Fluggesellschaften oder die jeweiligen Piloten. Das geht aus der Antwort der Bundesregierung auf eine Kleine Anfrage der Linke-Fraktion im Bundestag hervor.

    Bundesweit wurden demnach 2018 deutschlandweit 21.059 Menschen über den Luftweg abgeschoben. 5.008 davon vom Flughafen Düsseldorf aus, 285 über Köln/Bonn, zwei Personen wurden über Dortmund ausgeflogen.

    169 Mal scheiterten Abschiebungen am Flughafen Düsseldorf, weil sich Fluggesellschaft oder der Pilot weigerten, die Personen mitzunehmen. In Köln passierte das sechsmal. Dort wiederum leisteten 30 Menschen so heftigen Widerstand, dass sie nicht abgeschoben werden konnten.

    In Düsseldorf scheiterten acht Abschiebungen an „Widerstandshandlungen“, so die Bundesregierung. In 28 Fällen mussten in Düsseldorf Abschiebungen wegen medizinischer Gründe“ abgebrochen werden, zweimal in Köln.

    Insgesamt hat das Land NRW im vergangenen Jahr 6.603 Menschen abgeschoben. Laut einem Bericht des Flüchtlingsministeriums waren das 5 Prozent mehr als im Jahr zuvor.

    http://www.taz.de/Widerstand-gegen-Abschiebungen-in-NRW/!5577565

    #politiques_migratoires #reconduction #désobéissance #pilotes #Allemagne

  • Indignés par les conditions d’expulsion de sans-papiers, des passagers d’Air France devant la justice - Bondy Blog
    https://www.bondyblog.fr/reportages/bobigny-des-passagers-juges-pour-avoir-proteste-contre-lexpulsion-de-sans-

    Les procès s’enchaînent. Celui de Caroline est directement suivi par le procès de Jean-Luc* et Armand* qui s’avancent à leur tour à la barre. Ils ne se connaissaient pas avant d’embarquer dans le même avion Air France à destination de Dakar, le 31 décembre 2017. Pour leur avocat, Maître Teffo, ces affaires sont liées, il décrit un « mécanisme » : « La personne reconduite à la frontière apparaît, un tissu dans la bouche, un casque sur la tête, les pieds et mains liés, elle est bâillonnée, hurle et se débat, les gens vont réagir et l’administration va choisir des personnes au hasard dans le but de frapper les esprits, et de leur dire : vous ne pouvez plus vous indigner dans ce pays. ».

    Les similitudes entre les deux affaires sont effectivement déroutantes. Tous les trois ont été expulsés de leur vol à cause de leurs protestations. A bord du Paris-Erevan, Caroline interroge les policiers sur l’homme, bâillonné et casqué, qui se débat dans l’avion, un policier affirme qu’il a violé une mineure. Cette affirmation sera par la suite contredite par le dossier de l’homme en question, auquel Me Marcus a eu accès. Comme Caroline l’imaginait dès lors, il est reconduit en Arménie pour sa « situation irrégulière » mais n’a jamais été condamné.

    De la même façon, dans le vol Paris-Dakar, l’homme, maintenu de force sur son siège, est présenté comme « un dangereux criminel » aux passagers, qui ont pour consigne de rester silencieux. La consigne n’a visiblement pas été respectée. Un témoin, qui s’avère être la compagne de Jean-Luc, est appelée à la barre : « Les gens n’ont pas trouvé ça normal, tous les passagers de la cabine se sont levés. » Jean-Luc s’indigne, la tension monte. Sa compagne affirme avoir ensuite été violemment giflée par une policière. Elle perd connaissance et ne peut pas assister à la suite de la scène.

    Ému, Armand se lance face à la juge dans un récit poignant : « Il y avait un homme derrière moi, en chemise molletonnée à carreaux avec un casque, il se débattait, il criait et quand, parfois, il ne faisait plus aucun bruit, il fallait deux neurones pour comprendre qu’il était en train d’être étouffé ! ». En colère, il s’indigne contre un « traitement inhumain », se plaint d’Air France et refuse de prendre cet avion. La même policière de l’escorte lui rétorque : « Eh bien pourquoi vous n’avez pas pris la compagnie de votre pays ? ». C’est la voix chargée d’émotions qu’Armand reprend son récit. « Ça fait mal, affirme-t-il. Est-ce qu’elle savait ce qu’était mon pays ? » Me Teffo, son avocat, souligne devant le tribunal que le dossier comporte également un rapport d’Air France dans lequel une cheffe de cabine dit avoir l’habitude de ce type de vols et conseille aux hôtesses de « ne pas se laisser impressionner par des Sénégalais qui ont la manie de parler fort. »

  • Essonne : vie et mort d’un « soldat de #Dassault » - L’Express
    https://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societe/enquete/essonne-vie-et-mort-d-un-soldat-de-dassault_2056732.html
    #TARTERETS #ESSONNE

    Dans son livre, il précise avoir été contacté « par une adjointe à la mairie ». Un matin, il se lève aux aurores, enfile « une chemise blanche achetée pour l’occasion » et rencontre le premier cercle de l’#avionneur. Kébé est désormais reçu au Clos des Pinsons, la résidence de Dassault. « On nous a contacté [Kébé et ses acolytes, NDLR] parce que nous faisions partie de familles nombreuses, que nous pouvions rapporter des voix, que nous avions une influence », expose l’homme au juge en 2017. 

    Il va pousser des familles à voter pour Serge Dassault ou pour son successeur à la mairie en 2009. A la clef, une promesse d’embauche, une inscription gratuite au permis de conduire, un appui pour un logement social... Pour les récalcitrants, des menaces et intimidations. Son équipe empoche 60 000 euros remis par une intermédiaire dans des enveloppes kraft, écrit-il. Des propos identiques au témoignage qu’il avait auparavant livré à la justice. Plus tard, il négocie un pactole avec Dassault. « Combien faut-il pour calmer les habitants ? », aurait demandé l’industriel. « J’ai souri, assure Kébé, et avant même que je ne réponde, le vieux a dit ’450 000 euros, ça vous suffira ?’ » 

    Dassault promet une enveloppe colossale : 1,7 million d’euros
    L’histoire ne s’arrête pas là. Les élections de 2009 sont également invalidées et les mêmes personnages repartent en campagne en 2010. De petit caporal, voilà Kébé propulsé lieutenant de cette armée particulière. Les enchères montent en même temps que le grade. Cette fois, Serge Dassault lui promet une enveloppe colossale : 1,7 million d’euros. La victoire à nouveau arrachée coûte que coûte, Kébé n’a plus qu’à se rendre au Liban pour récupérer l’argent, en suivant un protocole alambiqué dicté par le « Vieux » qui ne semble avoir peur de rien : « Moi on ne peut pas m’écouter, mon téléphone on ne le met pas sous surveillance, vous savez j’ai des amis », aurait confié Dassault à Kébé avant que leur relation ne dégénère, le premier accusant le second de harcèlement et de racket. 

    Le manuscrit résume le fameux « système Dassault » : "Dans le quartier, tout le monde [le] connaît mais n’y entre pas qui le souhaite. Dans cette mafia le mot d’ordre est l’organisation. Le « Vieux » voulait que tout soit sous contrôle. Serge Dassault est d’une extrême intelligence, il s’est servi de ses qualités de businessman pour mettre en place un système infaillible à #Corbeil et assurer sa longévité municipale." 

    Philippe Poutou qualifie Dassault de « délinquant »
    Olivier Dassault promet « aucune querelle d’héritiers »
    L’industriel de l’armement Serge Dassault est mort
    Le document s’achève dans le luxe du Four Seasons de Beyrouth sur un non-dit. Qu’est-il advenu de l’argent ? A-t-il été redistribué comme convenu, aux complices, aux habitants ? A-t-il été accaparé par le seul Kébé, ce qui aurait éventuellement pu lui coûter la vie ? Mystère. Un signalement Tracfin va lancer cette affaire qui débouchera sur l’instruction des magistrats. Un dossier désormais orphelin de deux de ses protagonistes : Serge Dassault et Mamadou Kébé, passés de vie à trépas à six mois d’intervalle, ne risquent plus de parler.

  • The Administrative Arrangement between Greece and Germany

    The Administrative Arrangement between Ministry of migration Policy of the Hellenic Republic and the Federal Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Germany has been implemented already to four known cases. It has been the product of bilateral negotiations that occurred after German Chancellor Merkel faced another political crisis at home regarding the handling of the refugee issue.

    The document which has been the product of undisclosed negotiations and has not been made public upon its conclusion is a brief description of the cooperation of Greek and German authorities in cases of refusal of entry to persons seeking protection in the context of temporary checks at the internal German-Austrian border, as defined in its title. It essentially is a fast track implementation of return procedures in cases for which Dublin Regulation already lays down specific rules and procedures. The procedures provided in the ‘Arrangement’ skip all legal safeguards and guarantees of European Legislation.

    RSA and PRO ASYL have decided to publicize the document of the Arrangement for the purpose of serving public interest and transparency. The considerable secrecy that the two member states kept on a document of such importance is a scandal itself. There are two first underlying observations which incur/ result from studying the document. First, the Arrangement has the same institutional (or by institutional) features with the EU-Turkey deal, it is the product of negotiations which intend to regulate EU policy procedures without having been the product of an EU level institutional procedure. It circumvents European law (the Dublin regulation) in order to serve the interests of a group of particular member states. As a result its status within the legal apparatus of the EU and international law is obscure.

    Secondly, the ‘Arrangement’ introduces a grey zone (intentionally if not geographically) where a bilateral deal between two countries gains supremacy over European (Dublin regulation) and international legislation (Geneva convention). It is therefore an important document that should be critically and at length studied by all scholars and experts active in the field of refugee protection as it deprives asylum seekers of their rights and is a clear violation of EU law.

    Last but not least as Article 15-ii of the ‘Arrangement’ notes “This Administrative Arrangement will also discontinue upon entry into force of the revised Common European Asylum System”. Still as everyone in Brussels already admits the CEAS reform has been declared dead. So if nothing occurs to reconstitute the defunct CEAS policy and the arrangement remains as the only channel/form of cooperation between Greece and Germany in order to establish responsibility for asylum seekers arriving in Germany after coming through Greece, then could Greece and Germany, in their irregular bilateral efforts to circumvent the European process, have actually produced one of the first post EU legal arrangements?

    https://rsaegean.org/en/the-administrative-arrangement-between-greece-and-germany

    #accord #Allemagne #Grèce #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Dublin #Règlement_Dublin #renvois #expulsions #accord_bilatéral #regroupement_familial #liaison_officers #officiers_de_liaison #Eurodac #refus_d'entrée #renvois #expulsions #frontières #contrôles_frontaliers #Autriche #réadmission #avion #vol

    ping @isskein

    • Germany – Magdeburg Court suspends return of beneficiary of international protection to Greece

      On 13 November 2018, the Administrative Court of Magdeburg granted an interim measure ordering the suspensive effect of the appeal against a deportation order of an international protection beneficiary to Greece.

      The case concerned a Syrian national who applied for international protection in Germany. The Federal Office of Migration and Refugees (BAMF) rejected the application based on the fact that the applicant had already been granted international protection in Greece and ordered his deportation there.

      The Administrative Court held that there were serious doubts regarding the conformity of the BAMF’s conclusion that there were no obstacles to the deportation of the applicant to Greece with national law, which provides that a foreign national cannot be deported if such deportation would be in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Court found that there are substantial grounds to believe that the applicant would face a real risk of inhuman and degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 3 ECHR if returned to Greece.

      The Court based this conclusion, inter alia, on the recent reports highlighting that international protection beneficiaries in Greece had no practical access to accommodation, food distribution and sanitary facilities for extended periods of time after arrival. The Court further observed that access of international protection beneficiaries to education, health care, employment, accommodation and social benefits under the same conditions as Greek nationals is provided in domestic law but is not enforced. Consequently, the ensuing living conditions could not be considered adequate for the purposes of Article 3 ECHR.

      Finally, the Court found that the risk of destitution after return could be excluded in cases where individual assurances are given by the receiving authorities, clarifying, however, that any such guarantees should be specific to the individual concerned. In this respect, guarantees given by the Greek authorities that generally refer to the transposition of the Qualification Directive into Greek law, as a proof that recognised refugees enjoy the respective rights, could not be considered sufficient.

      https://mailchi.mp/ecre/elena-weekly-legal-update-08-february-2019#8

    • Germany Rejects 75% of Greek Requests for Family Reunification

      In 2019, the German Federal Office for Asylum and Migration (BAMF) rejected three quarters of requests for family reunification under the Dublin III regulation from Greece. The high rejection rate draws criticism from NGOs and MPs who say the BAMF imposes exceedingly harsh requirements.

      The government’s response to a parliamentary question by the German left party, Die Linke, revealed that from January until May 2019 the BAMF rejected 472 of 626 requests from Greece. Under the Dublin III Regulation, an EU Member State can file a “take-charge request” to ask another EU member state to process an asylum application, if the person concerned has family there. Data from the Greek Asylum Service shows that in 2018 less than 40% of “take-charge requests” were accepted, a stark proportional decrease from 2017, when over 90% of requests were accepted. The German government did not provide any reasons for the high rejection rate.

      Gökay Akbulut, an MP from Die Linke, noted that often family reunification failed because the BAMF imposes exceedingly strict requirements that have no basis in the regulation. At the same time people affected have limited access to legal advice needed to appeal illegitimate rejections of their requests. For people enduring inhuman conditions on Greek Islands family reunifications were often the last resort from misery, Akbulut commented.

      In 2018, 70% of all Dublin requests from Greece to other EU Member states related to family reunification cases. Germany has been the major country of destination for these request. An estimate of over 15,000 live in refugee camps on Greek islands with a capacity of 9000.

      https://www.ecre.org/germany-rejects-75-of-greek-requests-for-family-reunification

  • Deportation as Air Power

    Guest post by #William_Walters, Professor of political sociology, Carleton University. William directs the Air Deportation Project, a five-year investigation into the aviation / expulsion nexus funded by Canada’s Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. This is the fifth post of Border Criminologies’ themed series ‘Migrant Digitalities and the Politics of Dispersal’, organised by Glenda Garelli and Martina Tazzioli.

    https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/research-subject-groups/centre-criminology/centreborder-criminologies/blog/2018/05/deportation-air
    #renvois #expulsions #avions #asile #migrations #réfugiés #déportation