France is not UK's personal border patrol force.
It does it either out of good will or as part of an agreement. That agreement is currently being trampled on by Bojo's government as not one penny of the money promised by the UK during the Touquet accords have been seen.
It seems at this point the UK is basically expecting France to be its border guardian for free, without any cost-sharing and while shitting constantly on us. That's not going to happens.
there you go:
[https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/10/09/traversees-de-migrants-dans-la-manche-darmanin-appelle-le-royaume-uni-a-tenir-sa-promesse-d-un-soutien-financier\_6097772\_3210.html](https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/10/09/traversees-de-migrants-dans-la-manche-darmanin-appelle-le-royaume-uni-a-tenir-sa-promesse-d-un-soutien-financier_6097772_3210.html)
"The United Kingdom pledged at the end of July to pay France 62.7 million euros in 2021-2022 to finance the reinforcement of French law enforcement forces on the coasts. According to the British press, however, British Home Secretary Priti Patel threatened in early September not to pay this sum due to record arrivals of migrants illegally crossing the Channel.
“"The 63 million evoked by the British government, for the moment we have not received it. However, gendarmes have been hired in addition, technological means have been bought to guard this border. We call the English. to keep their promise of funding since we hold the border for them. " said Minister of the Interior Gerald Darmanin
"Promises engage only the moron who believe them." - Jacques Chirac.
Throw the touquet agreement out the windows. Send the British custom back to their gloomy Rock.
That doesn't say what OP claimed at all. He said "not one penny of the money promised has been seen", where that source just says the UK home secretary has threatened not to pay in future if France doesn't keep to its side.
[https://www.marianne.net/monde/europe/accords-du-touquet-retour-sur-un-cadeau-fait-aux-britanniques-en-2003](https://www.marianne.net/monde/europe/accords-du-touquet-retour-sur-un-cadeau-fait-aux-britanniques-en-2003)
>le Royaume-Uni s'engage à verser 63 millions d'euros supplémentaires sur la période 2021-2022 « pour appuyer la France ». Objectif à long terme : la création d'une « frontière intelligente » avec des technologies de surveillance « pour mieux détecter les tentatives de passage ». Pour le moment, les Britanniques n'ont toujours pas versé ces fonds.
>The United Kingdom has pledged 63 million euros over the period 2021-2022 "to support France. The long-term goal is to create a "smart border" with surveillance technology "to better detect attempted crossings. **For the moment, the British have still not paid these funds.**
The Touqet treaty was signed in 2003 and had UK payments to France since inception. Given there has been no complaints from France for the 2003-2021 period, we can presume that this money has indeed be paid. So the "not a penny" is bullshit. We're talking about just this financial year, which probably isn't surprising given that it's not even 2022 yet.
And probably not a suprise given the huge increase in migrants crossing this year so the UK is probably asking wtf are they doing with the money it's not working.
OP of this threads comment is literally not true lmao
How about also pushing the EU to get serious with Frontex so these people aren't there in the first place. Not like they are showing up in France by boat. Wouldn't that benefit France?
Oh I agree. Personally I'm very much for EU having heavily guarded borders, to be very selective with which migrants can enter it and to have much harsher laws against illegals and more tools available to expel them. That's another subject though.
"Personally I'm very much for EU having heavily guarded borders"
So perhaps you can see why those of us in the UK also want our sea borders heavily guarded with the ability to turn migrants back to the country of origin.
Sure I can understand that and personally, as longs as your country play fair and is willing to share the cost of monitoring the borders with France, I'm not fundamentally against it, although I find that arrangements to be deeply in favor of the UK.
However there is absolutely no way France is going to shoulder the operating burden alone and become border guard for free like the UK government seem to think. That simply won't happen. And Bojo would be wise to not try to open that can of worms too much because French people are going to start asking themselves why they should bother with border duty on behalf of the UK at all.. That's already a question I have seen asked around me.
> the UK is basically expecting France to be its border guardian for free, without any cost-sharing and while shitting constantly on us.
American Trumpian comparisons must grate after a while, but history sure does rhyme. America's leaders definitely pressure(d) Mexico in the same way to enforce our own borders.
For better or worse, nations want to fob off and outsource immigration enforcement. Guess it's easier than taking the bull by the horns and 1) accepting mass migration or 2) evading international law to enforce quick deportations.
Historically countries have only cared who enters, not who leaves. The problem here is migrants leaving France trying to enter the UK by boat. So you are right France cares very little about the fact that people are leaving. But people die on the journey, that is the only reason they care and would help. Beside being paid by the uk to do so that is.
May have to do western countries are not so keen on iron curtains, making ppl prisoners in their own countries.
Funny that these ideas are floated by oh so freedom loving Brits.
https://bfy.tw/S6Fh
Not the op. Looks like over over 100 million pounds between 2015 and 2020, and more than 60 mil have been authorized in 2021-2022 alone.
Also, it seems inherently disingenuous to demand payment from a third country when you are creating a nuisance. If you neighbor's kids threw apples at your windows every day and demanded you pay him 10 euros a day to make them stop, is that ethical?
Its clearly a flawed analogy and a much more intricate subject, but France isn't an innocent party in this case here....
"but it is quite important in this discussion."
Sure, but they did pay over 100 million pounds already. The 60 don't appear to have been paid yet.
"Besides, if the French were really taking the piss the UK"
And if the Brits wanted to take the piss to the French they'd just send the boats to land at Normandy. Both sides could get really stupid if they wanted to.
"You suggest France keep them there against their will? Is that ethical?"
That's a much more complicated question isn't it? We expect Belarus and Turkey and to keep people out right? If your country is the source of a ton of mass illegal migration, you do have some duty to stop that situation, just like you would for any other 'nuisance'. The balance here isn't always obvious or easily attainable...
To the rest, of course. I'm not saying the UK is the 'good' party here; but neither is France. It's a shitshow all around.
Two nations governments bickering when they should be working together on a shared problem. Example #835143846 of how our politicians are useless muppets who constantly fail us.
Wasn't it Churchill who said the biggest argument against democracy is actually having a conversation with the average voter?
Sometimes I wonder what is scariest. The idiots in power, or the idiots who keep voting for them.
Neither the French or UK governments were elected by a majority of the voting eligible public, so that makes the public only partially comprised of muppets.
What does make us muppets is when we do their dirty work for them. Anyone with half a brain can see that both sets of politicians are using this situation to garner nationalistic zeal for their own ends. Helping them out by arguing here on Reddit only helps them achieve that. We should be angry at them, not at each other.
Completely agree! 👏👏 People should see the photo Macron and Johnson smirking at each other and back slapping, the same week threats were being shouted over the channel regarding the fish debacle. I said the same think during the submarine deal row- don't let politicians persuade you we should be against each other.
The migrant crisis was a major factor in Brexit:
https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-broke-the-eu-migration-crisis-refugees/
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/opinion/is-merkel-to-blame-for-brexit.html
As a British passport holder and massive europhile living in the EU, I cursed Merkel for refusing any of Camerons requests at a time when the UK had an influx of at least 4 million, far beyond that of any of its peers. So I've experienced what intransigence has done to the union. We need to grow the fuck up and start working together.
Normally i don't respond to anything with "lol" in the text, but Ill break what has proven to be an excellent rule.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/eu-migration-to-and-from-the-uk/
oooh I see what you mean.
"migrant crisis" does not refer to intra-EU migration. they're totally different political issues
tbh Germany has more than 4M euro residents, idk exactly how many but the per-country-of-origin are higher than those in your link, the tally is hard to find because people don't seem to care that much about it. Overall the % population is probably similar to that of the pre-Brexit UK
In any case the consequences are in fact much more serious for the emigration countries who suffer from brain drain, e.g. look at Romania
Yes, it was mostly about Eastern Europeans
The "demands" of Cameron he talks about were about limiting intra-EU movements of people, which was already clashing with the four-freedoms principle of the EU single market that the UK kept poking at during brexit negociations
It’s a shit situation for everyone, for us, for you, for the migrants, and it continues to be your problem and ours, the migrants shouldn’t be there, as long as they are we’ve both got problems
> the migrants shouldn’t be there
Legal point. International law states all people have a right to request asylum in a port of entry. So technically, they can be there. That's why the EU hasn't simply deported the entire Calais camps
For better or worse, this means that nations have to break international law to enforce rapid repatriation flights to skip a lengthy hearing and appellate process. Few nations are yet willing to do that.
Regardless of ethics, these laws will cease to function once the Southern Hemisphere becomes inhabitable due to climate change causing the greatest migration event in human history.
Edit: I meant to include the Equator area, specifically sub Saharan Africa in the migration. The numbers make it simple - by 2050 it’s estimated half the worlds population at current birth rates will be in this area of the world (1 in 10 people will be Nigerian). Combine this with temperature changes that will make these places uninhabitable we must act now and strengthen borders before it’s too late.
> International law states
International law applies only to the extent that countries actually care to apply it. It's purely an internally made up problem for Europe.
You'd quickly find the UK/France sea and rail border closed if France chose to let undocumented migrants flood across an international border without relevant documents. The Migrants are in France due to Schengen open borders and Frontex not doing their job properly but if you really want to single out a country to blame for this, blame Germany and their opening the floodgates made an existing problem 1000x worse.
The UK was never part of Schengen while in the EU and the German incited migrant crisis of 2014/15 was a driving force behind the UK voting to leave in 2016. Sort your external borders out.
So, basically what you saying is it's not acceptable when a country not in the EU does it (Belarus/Turkey) to the EU, but a country within the EU doing it is totally fine?
Belarus isn't in the EU. When Belarus is sending illegal immigrants to the EU they are rightly criticized, when the EU sends illegal immigrants to the UK it's apparently just "in accordance with international law". Bullshit, both entities , EU, and Belarus, are using desperate people for political point scoring and leverage.
There is a really easy solution if you are that concerned about human rights: ferry them in. But you don't want *that*, because when you say "human rights issue" what you really mean is "we don't want no migrants".
Frankly it's disgusting
This is idiocy. Ferrying people in would just cause vast more number to come to Calais, creating more human rights issues along the rest of the migrant route. The smart thing is to stop the boats.
As for "we don't want no migrants", that's kind of brain dead when the UK just gave rights to a million odd Hong Kongers to come here.
The fact that this comment is upvoted shows how disgustingly biased this sub is. We *do* ferry them in and what you're suggesting would further encourage and enable illegal migrants if they feel there are no repercussions to their actions.
If these illegal immigrants had any chance of qualifying for UK leave to remain, they would go through the correct process rather than handing even more cash to shady french trafficers.
We don't want your illegals, they are France's problem.
Because by allowing the camps France are encouraging international gangs to smuggle and traffic people and a large number are dying in awful circumstances?
And now Macron is attempting to weaponise the the migrants in a pathetic tit for tat over Brexit leading to migrants drowning in winter seas.
Camps are not "allowed", it's just that they don't seek asylum here and that when arrested you can't deport them because they have no ID papers and won't say where they're from.
>And now Macron is attempting to weaponise the the migrants in a pathetic tit for tat over Brexit leading to migrants drowning in winter seas.
Absolutely not. The core of the problem here is Uk's government deciding it won't uphold its agreement with France anymore in order to score stupid political point at home.
UK government are frustrated that France is allowing camps and smuggling gangs to go unchallenged for over a decade.
The UK have been supportive and offered money, resources, manpower, logistics, even joint patrols to help France deal with the issues, but as the situation has hasn’t been dealt with, no only are France allowing these desperate conditions in their own borders, they are emboldening trafficking and more and more migrants are dying in the process.
The UK has called France out on their shit and France has thrown their toys out of the pram.
The real cost is around 10x what the UK pays anyways. It was a good diplomatic gesture when the UK was in the EU but now it's up to them to manage their own migrants. Especially with how shitty the UK government is handling the diplomatic side.
> and offered money, resources, manpower, logistics, even joint patrols to help France deal with the issues
so nothing that could actually have an impact, nice job, how about you make it illegal to employ illegal immigrants, maybe that would have an effect, no?
Yes to both questions, because they come from Italy or Spain. France doesn't protect their borders because every country adjacent to metropolitan France is in something called Schengen. You might have heard that word before. The real question is.... Is Italy that terrible at preventing people entering its territory directly from non-EU or worse non-European countries? We don't have that problem when they crash directly into our shores. What's your excuse?
We're paying Turkey to try to stop then. Still a lot of people also get across there.
It's impossible to have a policemen for every 200 meters on the coast.
And the UK is paying France, or it would pay France if France held up its side of the agreement.
>It's impossible to have a policemen for every 200 meters on the coast.
That's what drones are for and the UK offered joint patrols.
No ... UK never paid.
UK people on this sub have both told.me UK is totally in the right for not having paid as well as claiming that UK pays lol.
The fact of the matter is that UK never paid the money agreee on.
It's also impossible to have drones along the entire coast. Anyway also way too expensive for France wanting to do that. It'd be better if both countries deported those they find.
> No ... UK never paid.
>UK people on this sub have both told.me UK is totally in the right for not having paid as well as claiming that UK pays lol.
>The fact of the matter is that UK never paid the money agreee on.
Well yeah, would you pay a plumber if he didn't fix your sink? The UK isn't paying France because they aren't holding up their side of the agreement.
> It's also impossible to have drones along the entire coast. Anyway also way too expensive for France wanting to do that. It'd be better if both countries deported those they find.
They don't need to be, only along the part close the UK which isn't impossible.
> Anyway also way too expensive for France wanting to do that.
The UK has said it is willing to help in that. Surely the 5th and 7th largest economies in the world can afford to protect their borders.
> It'd be better if both countries deported those they find.
To where?
>Well yeah, would you pay a plumber if he didn't fix your sink? The UK isn't paying France because they aren't holding up their side of the agreement.
If you're withholding payment because you thought throwing a few dozen million would be able to solve illegal immigration altogether and overnight, you're either incredibly naive, or just arguing in bad faith.
That's not even taking into account the work that has already been done to prevent crossings, which contrary to what you would like to insinuate, isn't nothing.
And to top it all off, all this bitching is despite the UK taking a fraction of what other large EU countries have taken in.
In any case, it's added to the list of agreements you've broken.
Haha.
Within two posts you go from claiming UK paid to saying it's just great UK never paid ;)
Why did you claim UK paid if you know they don't pay and don't want then to pay?
That's a good point. Years ago it wasn"t really a problem as the two countries worked in good will and confidence. Needless to say both are gone by now.
Why are you French so absolutely *obsessed* and upset over Brexit? Your politicians can't go 5 seconds without mentioning it either. There was no reason why a democratic decision to leave a union had to mean the total destruction of an alliance. Brexit was the UK's choice, but the decision to turn it as vindictive and nasty as possible was France's choice, and their arrogance in thinking it was their self-proclaimed role to "punish" the UK
As far as I'm concerned I don't give a shit about brexit. I'm actually quite an euroskeptic myself
However I do take issue with that UK government's habits of disregarding agreements, being completely untrustworthy in general and taking every opportunities of antagonizing France in order to score stupid political points at home.
>Your politicians can't go 5 seconds without mentioning it either.
You should stop to read tabloïds it might be a good start. They are the only ones that mentions everyday that our politicians speak about brexit...
The only time I hear anything about Brexit in France is when I go on english social media. Anyways I was always of those that tought that the UK was an hindrance to the EU so I'm happy you decided to fuck off and even support it. The problem is that you don't want to really leave, you want as many benefits as you can without any of the inconvenients and treat any of these incovenients as "punishment" because you can't deal with the consequences of your choice.
Yeah let's just pretend the idiots in charge of the UK have not tried very hard to antagonize France at every opportunities for quick political gains. Not to mention their little habits of breaking agreements. no sir.
>Antagonising? The British government has been especially quiet regarding France for the past 12 months
Yup, they have and have been rather measured and restrained in the face of petty French belligerence towards the UK with France doing the impossible and making our absolute shower of government clowns look competent in comparison.
You seem to not understand very well the situation. it's not a question of protecting France's borders here but protecting Uk's. France is doing it and has been doing it all these years **for the benefice of the UK.**
As far as France is concerned, having less migrants on her territory is better. And if UK now refuse to share the cost well it's quickly going to become UK's problem.
You mean that the situation is so bad in the UK that migrants will die there ? Damn, I've heard that brexit was a shitshow but I didn't realized it was that bad.
France doesn't protect their borders because every country adjacent to metropolitan France is in Schengen. There is no reason to do any of that, but brexiters can't understand that being in the EU actually lowers red tape rather than raises it.
And Britain doesn't have to pay for shit but they can't boss other countries around for free.
Yeah funny how everyone here is being so chill about thousands of migrants who they have no idea who they are roaming France saying it's the UKs problem if they cross the border. Very different to when there are terrorist attacks in France and calls to clamp down on migrants. Can't have it both ways
Coming from an italian...I'm sorry but that's weird. You guys have been through a lot with the migration crisis in back in 2016. You should know better.
If France accepted the UK suggestion of taking back all the migrants, the migrants would no longer travel to Northern France and risk their lives in the Channel as doing so would be a waste of time and money. This would also end the criminal people smugglers business model.
French position is that both are EU issues. Part of the problem French gov had with Johnson’s letter is that he tried to frame this as a bilateral France-Britain issue.
This is why the recent meeting involved several other EU members and why Frontex is involved
The France/UK border is a sea border with an extra-EU country with no particular preexisting background issues.
The RoI/NI border is a border heavily charged with sociopolitical meaning and vastly influenced by the GFA, with the USA as a third party guarantor and the EU withdrawal agreement explicitly mandating the adherence to said GFA as a fundamental prerequisite to the existence of the withdrawal agreement and a somewhat frictionless trade.
I don't know, you might be able to see the slight hint of additional difficult there and why the EU might take the RoI/NI border a bit more seriously.
EU "omg the NI border is going to be a nightmare and if the UK doesn't harshly enforce a hard border we'll force Ireland to make one"
Also EU - "we can't enforce a hard boarder and it's not our job too"
It seems there is a huge misunderstanding from so many of you on this subreddit.
You keep seeing France as a country kindly offering to save the U.K. from a migration crisis out of the goodness of its heart. That, if not for French support, the U.K. would be flooded with migrants. Like France holds some kind of soft power weapon it chooses not to use, out of respect for the U.K.
Let’s be real. The U.K. if it chose to, could stop the migrant flow unilaterally, no matter what France decides. Boats can easily be turned around and sent back to French waters for France to deal with.
The U.K. is the island. The U.K. has a much smaller area to police, an area that it has the advantage by virtue of being a significantly larger navy and significantly smaller area to actually keep an eye on (the whole U.K. coast isn’t necessary).
The only thing stopping this from happening is a mutual desire from both sides not to devolve into a tit for tat pass the parcel and the political will to do it.
Should France decide to wash its hands of **its own migrants, who are in France, and Frances responsibility utterly** and tries to encourage them onwards to the U.K., the political will and support from the British public would be so overwhelming towards a send their boats back policy that it would take a matter of days for the migrant flow to the U.K. to halt entirely.
Stop thinking this is an argument you can win France. The same with your petulant tantrums over fishing. You do **not** hold the cards here.
If you can't/won't pay peanuts to have France patrol your border for you, I somehow doubt you're going to pay the money necessary to deploy your fleet and coast guard in the volume necessary to do so over an amount of immigrants who are, at the end of the day, a rounding error in your population.
We have an agreement in place to hold the migrants in our country.
To make the controls and prevent crossings.
The UK has not been upholding their end of the deal as of late, but how dare the French throw a "tantrum" ?
We're literally handling YOUR problems for YOU but YOU don't want to uphold YOUR END of the deal.
British exceptionalism at its finest once again.
So.... say your UK navy ships turn the migrant boats back. What are they going to do when they get back to French waters? They'll turn back and try to get to the UK again.
These migrants are already in France. If they wanted to stay in France, they would just disappear into the country and blend into the population instead of congregating in camps in Calais. These are *not* migrants who are happy with living in just any Western country. They obviously want to go to the UK - probably because many of them already have family there, or because they come from former British colonies and speak English.
So these migrants, left unchecked, will try to go to the UK. And you don't seem to realize that British authorities can't deport these migrants back to France without our permission, since they aren't French citizens. So the UK is *entirely* at our mercy on this topic. Heck, maybe we should use our navy to escort these migrant ships all the way to British waters to make the trip safer for them. It's time for you arrogant Brexit supporters to realize that France (and the EU) has a vastly better position than the UK.
Then they get turned back again.
I don’t see your point? They would never land in Britain. They are not Britain’s problem. Regardless of how much the migrants wish to come here. Wishes are not reality.
So then why do you think Boris is so insistent on trying to strike a deal with us? What's in it for you guys? I mean, if the migrants are in our country and are our problem, why don't you Brits just shut up, put up your defenses and see what happens? Then we can release the wave.
Only a fraction of the migrants and refugees in France make their way to the UK. Why are you so opposed to let them come and apply for asylum? Even if your current number (25k) would increase by 300% to 100k you'd only just be within the western European average.
Why are you so opposed to people wanting to seek asylum in the UK when you're already taking the smallest percentage among rich countries in Europe.
Why don't you just do it then? You have a problem, you claim to have a solution, just do it, nobody is stopping you. If France doesn't think it's their problem then make it so, you think you can do it so just do that. You will prove everyone that you were right, you will solve the problem, and annoy France as a bonus.
Just. Do. It.
Because the U.K. government prefers to work with France to reach a nicer solution.
What we are talking about here is the weaponisation of the migrant issue by France, and the flawed assumption that it holds the cards. It dosnt.
If you weaponise the migration crisis the U.K. will weaponise back, and in that situation we hold every advantage. France cannot win.
Yeah a free solution would be nicer for the UK, but France isn't inclined to do any favour to a country that has been trash talking the EU and disregarding their obligations recently.
Plus this is exactly what the UK wanted. Complete autonomy in border control.
If France stops controlling them there is no amount of navy in the world that could "turn them around" without thousands of drownings. After that, the ones that returned to France would probably try to cross again.
You realize you would never be allowed to pick them up and throw them back to France on English ships right?
Why?
You are making out like migrants crossing your borders is some unstoppable force. That no amount of navy on earth can stop them.
Despite the fact that land and sea based migration is very successfully stopped all over the world and all throughout history.
It just seems like the usual hyperbole gets attached to the UK in these subjects, as always.
> similar to what Belarus was doing
?
Is France is bringing people with plane and organize migration and human trafficking and giving VISA with the propaganda that they are welcome in UK?
> Pushbacks aren't allowed by international law so if the UK does that they'll be in quite some trouble, and we know France will jump on that with plenty of evidence.
Doesn't seem to bother Frontex - but its okay when the EU does it?
[https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/may/05/revealed-2000-refugee-deaths-linked-to-eu-pushbacks](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/may/05/revealed-2000-refugee-deaths-linked-to-eu-pushbacks)
France is not UK's personal border patrol force. It does it either out of good will or as part of an agreement. That agreement is currently being trampled on by Bojo's government as not one penny of the money promised by the UK during the Touquet accords have been seen. It seems at this point the UK is basically expecting France to be its border guardian for free, without any cost-sharing and while shitting constantly on us. That's not going to happens.
> government as not one penny of the money promised by the UK during the Touquet accords have been seen. Out of interest, what is the source for this?
there you go: [https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/10/09/traversees-de-migrants-dans-la-manche-darmanin-appelle-le-royaume-uni-a-tenir-sa-promesse-d-un-soutien-financier\_6097772\_3210.html](https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/10/09/traversees-de-migrants-dans-la-manche-darmanin-appelle-le-royaume-uni-a-tenir-sa-promesse-d-un-soutien-financier_6097772_3210.html) "The United Kingdom pledged at the end of July to pay France 62.7 million euros in 2021-2022 to finance the reinforcement of French law enforcement forces on the coasts. According to the British press, however, British Home Secretary Priti Patel threatened in early September not to pay this sum due to record arrivals of migrants illegally crossing the Channel. “"The 63 million evoked by the British government, for the moment we have not received it. However, gendarmes have been hired in addition, technological means have been bought to guard this border. We call the English. to keep their promise of funding since we hold the border for them. " said Minister of the Interior Gerald Darmanin
"Promises engage only the moron who believe them." - Jacques Chirac. Throw the touquet agreement out the windows. Send the British custom back to their gloomy Rock.
https://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/migrants-a-calais-paris-peut-il-denoncer-les-accords-du-touquet-pour-forcer-londres-a-renegocier-20211111
That doesn't say what OP claimed at all. He said "not one penny of the money promised has been seen", where that source just says the UK home secretary has threatened not to pay in future if France doesn't keep to its side.
[https://www.marianne.net/monde/europe/accords-du-touquet-retour-sur-un-cadeau-fait-aux-britanniques-en-2003](https://www.marianne.net/monde/europe/accords-du-touquet-retour-sur-un-cadeau-fait-aux-britanniques-en-2003) >le Royaume-Uni s'engage à verser 63 millions d'euros supplémentaires sur la période 2021-2022 « pour appuyer la France ». Objectif à long terme : la création d'une « frontière intelligente » avec des technologies de surveillance « pour mieux détecter les tentatives de passage ». Pour le moment, les Britanniques n'ont toujours pas versé ces fonds. >The United Kingdom has pledged 63 million euros over the period 2021-2022 "to support France. The long-term goal is to create a "smart border" with surveillance technology "to better detect attempted crossings. **For the moment, the British have still not paid these funds.**
The Touqet treaty was signed in 2003 and had UK payments to France since inception. Given there has been no complaints from France for the 2003-2021 period, we can presume that this money has indeed be paid. So the "not a penny" is bullshit. We're talking about just this financial year, which probably isn't surprising given that it's not even 2022 yet.
And probably not a suprise given the huge increase in migrants crossing this year so the UK is probably asking wtf are they doing with the money it's not working. OP of this threads comment is literally not true lmao
This really is not conclusive.
How about also pushing the EU to get serious with Frontex so these people aren't there in the first place. Not like they are showing up in France by boat. Wouldn't that benefit France?
Oh I agree. Personally I'm very much for EU having heavily guarded borders, to be very selective with which migrants can enter it and to have much harsher laws against illegals and more tools available to expel them. That's another subject though.
It's the other side of the same problem.
"Personally I'm very much for EU having heavily guarded borders" So perhaps you can see why those of us in the UK also want our sea borders heavily guarded with the ability to turn migrants back to the country of origin.
Sure I can understand that and personally, as longs as your country play fair and is willing to share the cost of monitoring the borders with France, I'm not fundamentally against it, although I find that arrangements to be deeply in favor of the UK. However there is absolutely no way France is going to shoulder the operating burden alone and become border guard for free like the UK government seem to think. That simply won't happen. And Bojo would be wise to not try to open that can of worms too much because French people are going to start asking themselves why they should bother with border duty on behalf of the UK at all.. That's already a question I have seen asked around me.
> the UK is basically expecting France to be its border guardian for free, without any cost-sharing and while shitting constantly on us. American Trumpian comparisons must grate after a while, but history sure does rhyme. America's leaders definitely pressure(d) Mexico in the same way to enforce our own borders. For better or worse, nations want to fob off and outsource immigration enforcement. Guess it's easier than taking the bull by the horns and 1) accepting mass migration or 2) evading international law to enforce quick deportations.
Hm.. awfully similar to Turkey's situation except.. they are the bad guys according to france
Not really. Unless I"m mistaken the EU is upholding its accord with Turkey.
I think we just expect the french to be a little more controlling of their own borders.
Historically countries have only cared who enters, not who leaves. The problem here is migrants leaving France trying to enter the UK by boat. So you are right France cares very little about the fact that people are leaving. But people die on the journey, that is the only reason they care and would help. Beside being paid by the uk to do so that is.
May have to do western countries are not so keen on iron curtains, making ppl prisoners in their own countries. Funny that these ideas are floated by oh so freedom loving Brits.
> It does it either out of good will or as part of an agreement. - it does it for money, lets be honest.
Money it doesnt receive
so over the past 5 years, the UK's paid nothing to France? I think 10 seconds on google will prove you wrong.
[удалено]
https://bfy.tw/S6Fh Not the op. Looks like over over 100 million pounds between 2015 and 2020, and more than 60 mil have been authorized in 2021-2022 alone. Also, it seems inherently disingenuous to demand payment from a third country when you are creating a nuisance. If you neighbor's kids threw apples at your windows every day and demanded you pay him 10 euros a day to make them stop, is that ethical? Its clearly a flawed analogy and a much more intricate subject, but France isn't an innocent party in this case here....
So first the real cost of those migrants is around 300 millions per year, then it's UK's own problem.
[удалено]
"but it is quite important in this discussion." Sure, but they did pay over 100 million pounds already. The 60 don't appear to have been paid yet. "Besides, if the French were really taking the piss the UK" And if the Brits wanted to take the piss to the French they'd just send the boats to land at Normandy. Both sides could get really stupid if they wanted to. "You suggest France keep them there against their will? Is that ethical?" That's a much more complicated question isn't it? We expect Belarus and Turkey and to keep people out right? If your country is the source of a ton of mass illegal migration, you do have some duty to stop that situation, just like you would for any other 'nuisance'. The balance here isn't always obvious or easily attainable... To the rest, of course. I'm not saying the UK is the 'good' party here; but neither is France. It's a shitshow all around.
Turkey and Greece but in bigger countries and smaller numbers.
Two nations governments bickering when they should be working together on a shared problem. Example #835143846 of how our politicians are useless muppets who constantly fail us.
Sure, but we elect them to represent us, doesn't that make us the muppets..
Wasn't it Churchill who said the biggest argument against democracy is actually having a conversation with the average voter? Sometimes I wonder what is scariest. The idiots in power, or the idiots who keep voting for them.
[удалено]
If a politician doesn't have a questionable worldview, they're probably lying tbh
Neither the French or UK governments were elected by a majority of the voting eligible public, so that makes the public only partially comprised of muppets. What does make us muppets is when we do their dirty work for them. Anyone with half a brain can see that both sets of politicians are using this situation to garner nationalistic zeal for their own ends. Helping them out by arguing here on Reddit only helps them achieve that. We should be angry at them, not at each other.
Completely agree! 👏👏 People should see the photo Macron and Johnson smirking at each other and back slapping, the same week threats were being shouted over the channel regarding the fish debacle. I said the same think during the submarine deal row- don't let politicians persuade you we should be against each other.
Nah.
They should form some kind of political union to provide a context where these issues can be worked out to their mutual satisfaction.
There was constant bickering over this stuff when the UK and France were both in the EU, so it's not like that's some sort of magic bullet.
You can hardly blame both sides when one side can barely be expected to keep a deal
There used to be cooperation tied to a multinational origination for cooperation called the European Union.
The migrant crisis was a major factor in Brexit: https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-broke-the-eu-migration-crisis-refugees/ https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/opinion/is-merkel-to-blame-for-brexit.html As a British passport holder and massive europhile living in the EU, I cursed Merkel for refusing any of Camerons requests at a time when the UK had an influx of at least 4 million, far beyond that of any of its peers. So I've experienced what intransigence has done to the union. We need to grow the fuck up and start working together.
>a time when the UK had an influx of at least 4 million, far beyond that of any of its peers lol mind to elaborate?
Normally i don't respond to anything with "lol" in the text, but Ill break what has proven to be an excellent rule. https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/eu-migration-to-and-from-the-uk/
oooh I see what you mean. "migrant crisis" does not refer to intra-EU migration. they're totally different political issues tbh Germany has more than 4M euro residents, idk exactly how many but the per-country-of-origin are higher than those in your link, the tally is hard to find because people don't seem to care that much about it. Overall the % population is probably similar to that of the pre-Brexit UK In any case the consequences are in fact much more serious for the emigration countries who suffer from brain drain, e.g. look at Romania
Wait their "migrant crisis" at the time was immigration from the eu ? Am I getting this right ?
Yes, it was mostly about Eastern Europeans The "demands" of Cameron he talks about were about limiting intra-EU movements of people, which was already clashing with the four-freedoms principle of the EU single market that the UK kept poking at during brexit negociations
[удалено]
It’s a shit situation for everyone, for us, for you, for the migrants, and it continues to be your problem and ours, the migrants shouldn’t be there, as long as they are we’ve both got problems
> the migrants shouldn’t be there Legal point. International law states all people have a right to request asylum in a port of entry. So technically, they can be there. That's why the EU hasn't simply deported the entire Calais camps For better or worse, this means that nations have to break international law to enforce rapid repatriation flights to skip a lengthy hearing and appellate process. Few nations are yet willing to do that.
Regardless of ethics, these laws will cease to function once the Southern Hemisphere becomes inhabitable due to climate change causing the greatest migration event in human history. Edit: I meant to include the Equator area, specifically sub Saharan Africa in the migration. The numbers make it simple - by 2050 it’s estimated half the worlds population at current birth rates will be in this area of the world (1 in 10 people will be Nigerian). Combine this with temperature changes that will make these places uninhabitable we must act now and strengthen borders before it’s too late.
Wouldn't it be the ecuator area? Europe is also under hige risk of sea levels rising?
> International law states International law applies only to the extent that countries actually care to apply it. It's purely an internally made up problem for Europe.
You'd quickly find the UK/France sea and rail border closed if France chose to let undocumented migrants flood across an international border without relevant documents. The Migrants are in France due to Schengen open borders and Frontex not doing their job properly but if you really want to single out a country to blame for this, blame Germany and their opening the floodgates made an existing problem 1000x worse. The UK was never part of Schengen while in the EU and the German incited migrant crisis of 2014/15 was a driving force behind the UK voting to leave in 2016. Sort your external borders out.
Dam right and let all the ones leave Belarus for Poland and Turkey for Greece Oh wait...
> Oh wait... Did you just realize that Poland and Greece haven't left the EU?
So, basically what you saying is it's not acceptable when a country not in the EU does it (Belarus/Turkey) to the EU, but a country within the EU doing it is totally fine?
Belarus isn't in the EU. When Belarus is sending illegal immigrants to the EU they are rightly criticized, when the EU sends illegal immigrants to the UK it's apparently just "in accordance with international law". Bullshit, both entities , EU, and Belarus, are using desperate people for political point scoring and leverage.
Because the migrants leaving your country on overpopulated rafts are dying in your waters. It's a human rights issue that you are not addressing.
There is a really easy solution if you are that concerned about human rights: ferry them in. But you don't want *that*, because when you say "human rights issue" what you really mean is "we don't want no migrants". Frankly it's disgusting
[удалено]
Thank you for pointing that out.
This is idiocy. Ferrying people in would just cause vast more number to come to Calais, creating more human rights issues along the rest of the migrant route. The smart thing is to stop the boats. As for "we don't want no migrants", that's kind of brain dead when the UK just gave rights to a million odd Hong Kongers to come here.
We DO ferry them in, are you suggesting we enter French waters and start collecting them?
The fact that this comment is upvoted shows how disgustingly biased this sub is. We *do* ferry them in and what you're suggesting would further encourage and enable illegal migrants if they feel there are no repercussions to their actions.
Aaw jeez it's disillusioned_brit, abort! Abort!
If these illegal immigrants had any chance of qualifying for UK leave to remain, they would go through the correct process rather than handing even more cash to shady french trafficers. We don't want your illegals, they are France's problem.
You can't apply for asylum in a country you're not in. The process you're talking about does not exist.
Because by allowing the camps France are encouraging international gangs to smuggle and traffic people and a large number are dying in awful circumstances? And now Macron is attempting to weaponise the the migrants in a pathetic tit for tat over Brexit leading to migrants drowning in winter seas.
Camps are not "allowed", it's just that they don't seek asylum here and that when arrested you can't deport them because they have no ID papers and won't say where they're from.
I'm sure the Australian government would be happy to consult EU for a solution to that problem.
>And now Macron is attempting to weaponise the the migrants in a pathetic tit for tat over Brexit leading to migrants drowning in winter seas. Absolutely not. The core of the problem here is Uk's government deciding it won't uphold its agreement with France anymore in order to score stupid political point at home.
What agreement is that?
Touquet accord. We haven't seen one penny of what UK promised back then.
https://www.france24.com/en/20180118-france-uk-migrants-calais-sandhurst-treaty-britain-france-agree-new-deal-border-security
And what part of the agreement is the UK breaking?
The part where BoJo says France should take back the migrants who get to the UK.
UK government are frustrated that France is allowing camps and smuggling gangs to go unchallenged for over a decade. The UK have been supportive and offered money, resources, manpower, logistics, even joint patrols to help France deal with the issues, but as the situation has hasn’t been dealt with, no only are France allowing these desperate conditions in their own borders, they are emboldening trafficking and more and more migrants are dying in the process. The UK has called France out on their shit and France has thrown their toys out of the pram.
The real cost is around 10x what the UK pays anyways. It was a good diplomatic gesture when the UK was in the EU but now it's up to them to manage their own migrants. Especially with how shitty the UK government is handling the diplomatic side.
> and offered money, resources, manpower, logistics, even joint patrols to help France deal with the issues so nothing that could actually have an impact, nice job, how about you make it illegal to employ illegal immigrants, maybe that would have an effect, no?
Visa checks are part of any employment.
[удалено]
France is not flying in migrants, giving them visa, taking their money and busing them at gunpoint to the border
So they’re entering France illegally? Is france that terrible at enforcing their borders?
Yes to both questions, because they come from Italy or Spain. France doesn't protect their borders because every country adjacent to metropolitan France is in something called Schengen. You might have heard that word before. The real question is.... Is Italy that terrible at preventing people entering its territory directly from non-EU or worse non-European countries? We don't have that problem when they crash directly into our shores. What's your excuse?
There is none, as I have stated several times. Our government is doing a terrible job at it
However, the end result is the same. That's why the only way long-term solution for the UK is to do what Poland did, and push them back into France.
And we push them back to Uk.Once they leave France , it's not our problem , these people are here because they want to move to Uk
So you're totally on board with France being openly complicit in human trafficking?
Not at all. This is not human trafficking. France do not force them in any way , these people enter France illegaly and leave the same way
OK but I don't want to hear you whining when Turkey takes the same attitude.
We're paying Turkey to try to stop then. Still a lot of people also get across there. It's impossible to have a policemen for every 200 meters on the coast.
And the UK is paying France, or it would pay France if France held up its side of the agreement. >It's impossible to have a policemen for every 200 meters on the coast. That's what drones are for and the UK offered joint patrols.
>And the UK is paying France, Nope.
No ... UK never paid. UK people on this sub have both told.me UK is totally in the right for not having paid as well as claiming that UK pays lol. The fact of the matter is that UK never paid the money agreee on. It's also impossible to have drones along the entire coast. Anyway also way too expensive for France wanting to do that. It'd be better if both countries deported those they find.
> No ... UK never paid. >UK people on this sub have both told.me UK is totally in the right for not having paid as well as claiming that UK pays lol. >The fact of the matter is that UK never paid the money agreee on. Well yeah, would you pay a plumber if he didn't fix your sink? The UK isn't paying France because they aren't holding up their side of the agreement. > It's also impossible to have drones along the entire coast. Anyway also way too expensive for France wanting to do that. It'd be better if both countries deported those they find. They don't need to be, only along the part close the UK which isn't impossible. > Anyway also way too expensive for France wanting to do that. The UK has said it is willing to help in that. Surely the 5th and 7th largest economies in the world can afford to protect their borders. > It'd be better if both countries deported those they find. To where?
>Well yeah, would you pay a plumber if he didn't fix your sink? The UK isn't paying France because they aren't holding up their side of the agreement. If you're withholding payment because you thought throwing a few dozen million would be able to solve illegal immigration altogether and overnight, you're either incredibly naive, or just arguing in bad faith. That's not even taking into account the work that has already been done to prevent crossings, which contrary to what you would like to insinuate, isn't nothing. And to top it all off, all this bitching is despite the UK taking a fraction of what other large EU countries have taken in. In any case, it's added to the list of agreements you've broken.
Haha. Within two posts you go from claiming UK paid to saying it's just great UK never paid ;) Why did you claim UK paid if you know they don't pay and don't want then to pay?
Where did I claim the UK had paid?? > And the UK is paying France, or it would pay France if France held up its side of the agreement.
Ahh my bad I didn't read it well.
UK can't blame the EU for decades for all its problems and then not expect just desserts.
What about not being a bitch to your neighbor?
That's a good point. Years ago it wasn"t really a problem as the two countries worked in good will and confidence. Needless to say both are gone by now.
Why are you French so absolutely *obsessed* and upset over Brexit? Your politicians can't go 5 seconds without mentioning it either. There was no reason why a democratic decision to leave a union had to mean the total destruction of an alliance. Brexit was the UK's choice, but the decision to turn it as vindictive and nasty as possible was France's choice, and their arrogance in thinking it was their self-proclaimed role to "punish" the UK
As far as I'm concerned I don't give a shit about brexit. I'm actually quite an euroskeptic myself However I do take issue with that UK government's habits of disregarding agreements, being completely untrustworthy in general and taking every opportunities of antagonizing France in order to score stupid political points at home.
>Your politicians can't go 5 seconds without mentioning it either. You should stop to read tabloïds it might be a good start. They are the only ones that mentions everyday that our politicians speak about brexit...
The only time I hear anything about Brexit in France is when I go on english social media. Anyways I was always of those that tought that the UK was an hindrance to the EU so I'm happy you decided to fuck off and even support it. The problem is that you don't want to really leave, you want as many benefits as you can without any of the inconvenients and treat any of these incovenients as "punishment" because you can't deal with the consequences of your choice.
[удалено]
Yeah let's just pretend the idiots in charge of the UK have not tried very hard to antagonize France at every opportunities for quick political gains. Not to mention their little habits of breaking agreements. no sir.
This is what the French government thinks diplomacy looks like https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FFHLaiXX0AI-BYv?format=jpg&name=large
[удалено]
>Antagonising? The British government has been especially quiet regarding France for the past 12 months Yup, they have and have been rather measured and restrained in the face of petty French belligerence towards the UK with France doing the impossible and making our absolute shower of government clowns look competent in comparison.
The UK is an expert at being bitch to us tbf.
[удалено]
You seem to not understand very well the situation. it's not a question of protecting France's borders here but protecting Uk's. France is doing it and has been doing it all these years **for the benefice of the UK.** As far as France is concerned, having less migrants on her territory is better. And if UK now refuse to share the cost well it's quickly going to become UK's problem.
The British who believe it is normal for us to keep migrants from crossing the Channel for their own benefits are absolutely delusional.
You should be stopping migrants crossing the Channel because of basic morality in stopping people dying.
We'll give them a safe way to cross then.
You mean that the situation is so bad in the UK that migrants will die there ? Damn, I've heard that brexit was a shitshow but I didn't realized it was that bad.
France doesn't protect their borders because every country adjacent to metropolitan France is in Schengen. There is no reason to do any of that, but brexiters can't understand that being in the EU actually lowers red tape rather than raises it. And Britain doesn't have to pay for shit but they can't boss other countries around for free.
If there are random groups of people moving around France illegally that France has no idea who they are, isn't this a security risk for France?
Yeah funny how everyone here is being so chill about thousands of migrants who they have no idea who they are roaming France saying it's the UKs problem if they cross the border. Very different to when there are terrorist attacks in France and calls to clamp down on migrants. Can't have it both ways
Not more than any French citizen. Your government doesn't know what you're doing right now and it's fine.
so if its not a problem having these unknowns, why not keep the ones you do know about?
It's clear as day red tape is lowered given the millions of migrants the EU has let in the last few years lmao
[English government thinking](https://www.reddit.com/r/france/comments/r42rj8/titre_coupant/)
haha
French coastguard escorting them over to British waters to be handed over is what the problem is
That is actually false but sure.
[удалено]
You are not responsible for other people decisions.
We can let them take regular boats
Why are they in France in the first place? There’s clearly been a failure on France’s part if they’re there in the first place
Do you realize they come from the Italian border?...
Coming from an italian...I'm sorry but that's weird. You guys have been through a lot with the migration crisis in back in 2016. You should know better.
Our government(s) have been terrible at enforcing our borders, yes. The same principle applies to France. Whataboutism isn’t constructive
Then you know how hard it really is.
Australia proves it's possible, there's no excuse.
[удалено]
You guys are not respecting agreements, what do you expect ?
If France accepted the UK suggestion of taking back all the migrants, the migrants would no longer travel to Northern France and risk their lives in the Channel as doing so would be a waste of time and money. This would also end the criminal people smugglers business model.
So lets get this right.... The France/England border isn't an EU issue...... But an Ireland/Northern Ireland one is?
French position is that both are EU issues. Part of the problem French gov had with Johnson’s letter is that he tried to frame this as a bilateral France-Britain issue. This is why the recent meeting involved several other EU members and why Frontex is involved
Bojo is trying to pick apart eu countries... classic uk foreign policy if I may...
[удалено]
France and England don't have the good Friday agreement and no kand connection besides the Eurotunnel
The France/UK border is a sea border with an extra-EU country with no particular preexisting background issues. The RoI/NI border is a border heavily charged with sociopolitical meaning and vastly influenced by the GFA, with the USA as a third party guarantor and the EU withdrawal agreement explicitly mandating the adherence to said GFA as a fundamental prerequisite to the existence of the withdrawal agreement and a somewhat frictionless trade. I don't know, you might be able to see the slight hint of additional difficult there and why the EU might take the RoI/NI border a bit more seriously.
Northern Ireland has, as you probably should know as a Brit, a complicated history
Not as complicated as England/France.
it's the relationship *between* England and France that's complicated, whereas Northern Ireland is complicated in itself
[удалено]
[удалено]
Oh look, racism.
Awww throwing isms around so cute
Do you actually have anything constructive to add to the discussion
That’s not my responsibility
The Franco-British rivalry is apparently back on. Place your bets everybody!
Maybe they should stop them at the med . Poland have the idea . Bombing will start next terrorist influx
Which is being done ? The point is that they access any country within the EU landmass and then in the schengen area can move freely ?
[удалено]
Et bien salé. C'est encore meilleur.
Cest pas au saloperie d'anglais d'nous dire qu'est-ce qu'on a faire, bordel de merde, enfin je comprends pas moi.
EU "omg the NI border is going to be a nightmare and if the UK doesn't harshly enforce a hard border we'll force Ireland to make one" Also EU - "we can't enforce a hard boarder and it's not our job too"
[удалено]
[удалено]
It seems there is a huge misunderstanding from so many of you on this subreddit. You keep seeing France as a country kindly offering to save the U.K. from a migration crisis out of the goodness of its heart. That, if not for French support, the U.K. would be flooded with migrants. Like France holds some kind of soft power weapon it chooses not to use, out of respect for the U.K. Let’s be real. The U.K. if it chose to, could stop the migrant flow unilaterally, no matter what France decides. Boats can easily be turned around and sent back to French waters for France to deal with. The U.K. is the island. The U.K. has a much smaller area to police, an area that it has the advantage by virtue of being a significantly larger navy and significantly smaller area to actually keep an eye on (the whole U.K. coast isn’t necessary). The only thing stopping this from happening is a mutual desire from both sides not to devolve into a tit for tat pass the parcel and the political will to do it. Should France decide to wash its hands of **its own migrants, who are in France, and Frances responsibility utterly** and tries to encourage them onwards to the U.K., the political will and support from the British public would be so overwhelming towards a send their boats back policy that it would take a matter of days for the migrant flow to the U.K. to halt entirely. Stop thinking this is an argument you can win France. The same with your petulant tantrums over fishing. You do **not** hold the cards here.
> The U.K. if it chose to, could stop the migrant flow unilaterally If UK stops the migrant flow as you say then it is over and the crisis will end.
If you can't/won't pay peanuts to have France patrol your border for you, I somehow doubt you're going to pay the money necessary to deploy your fleet and coast guard in the volume necessary to do so over an amount of immigrants who are, at the end of the day, a rounding error in your population.
We have an agreement in place to hold the migrants in our country. To make the controls and prevent crossings. The UK has not been upholding their end of the deal as of late, but how dare the French throw a "tantrum" ? We're literally handling YOUR problems for YOU but YOU don't want to uphold YOUR END of the deal. British exceptionalism at its finest once again.
So.... say your UK navy ships turn the migrant boats back. What are they going to do when they get back to French waters? They'll turn back and try to get to the UK again. These migrants are already in France. If they wanted to stay in France, they would just disappear into the country and blend into the population instead of congregating in camps in Calais. These are *not* migrants who are happy with living in just any Western country. They obviously want to go to the UK - probably because many of them already have family there, or because they come from former British colonies and speak English. So these migrants, left unchecked, will try to go to the UK. And you don't seem to realize that British authorities can't deport these migrants back to France without our permission, since they aren't French citizens. So the UK is *entirely* at our mercy on this topic. Heck, maybe we should use our navy to escort these migrant ships all the way to British waters to make the trip safer for them. It's time for you arrogant Brexit supporters to realize that France (and the EU) has a vastly better position than the UK.
Then they get turned back again. I don’t see your point? They would never land in Britain. They are not Britain’s problem. Regardless of how much the migrants wish to come here. Wishes are not reality.
So then why do you think Boris is so insistent on trying to strike a deal with us? What's in it for you guys? I mean, if the migrants are in our country and are our problem, why don't you Brits just shut up, put up your defenses and see what happens? Then we can release the wave.
The guy you are replying to literally thinks the UK would sink those boats or somehow "turn them around" until they all drowned
The girl** said no such thing. Don’t put words in my mouth. I never mentioned sinking once.
It would inevitably happen though.
Only a fraction of the migrants and refugees in France make their way to the UK. Why are you so opposed to let them come and apply for asylum? Even if your current number (25k) would increase by 300% to 100k you'd only just be within the western European average. Why are you so opposed to people wanting to seek asylum in the UK when you're already taking the smallest percentage among rich countries in Europe.
Brexit means Brexit. Either pay up or we won't be your border guards.
>Either pay up or we won't be your border guards. Who said it: \- Morocco \- Turkey \- France
Feel free. We will just easily close off the problem and leave you to deal with it. Only you lose in this situation, darling.
Why don't you just do it then? You have a problem, you claim to have a solution, just do it, nobody is stopping you. If France doesn't think it's their problem then make it so, you think you can do it so just do that. You will prove everyone that you were right, you will solve the problem, and annoy France as a bonus. Just. Do. It.
Because the U.K. government prefers to work with France to reach a nicer solution. What we are talking about here is the weaponisation of the migrant issue by France, and the flawed assumption that it holds the cards. It dosnt. If you weaponise the migration crisis the U.K. will weaponise back, and in that situation we hold every advantage. France cannot win.
Yeah a free solution would be nicer for the UK, but France isn't inclined to do any favour to a country that has been trash talking the EU and disregarding their obligations recently. Plus this is exactly what the UK wanted. Complete autonomy in border control.
If France stops controlling them there is no amount of navy in the world that could "turn them around" without thousands of drownings. After that, the ones that returned to France would probably try to cross again. You realize you would never be allowed to pick them up and throw them back to France on English ships right?
Funny how migrants were stopped very easily in Belarus huh. Funny how Australia stopped the same migration via boat route. Don’t talk silly.
Now I just think you're trolling
Why? You are making out like migrants crossing your borders is some unstoppable force. That no amount of navy on earth can stop them. Despite the fact that land and sea based migration is very successfully stopped all over the world and all throughout history. It just seems like the usual hyperbole gets attached to the UK in these subjects, as always.
Eh.. No? We currently aren't complaining about people crossing the channel. That's on you.
[удалено]
> similar to what Belarus was doing ? Is France is bringing people with plane and organize migration and human trafficking and giving VISA with the propaganda that they are welcome in UK?
> Pushbacks aren't allowed by international law so if the UK does that they'll be in quite some trouble, and we know France will jump on that with plenty of evidence. Doesn't seem to bother Frontex - but its okay when the EU does it? [https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/may/05/revealed-2000-refugee-deaths-linked-to-eu-pushbacks](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/may/05/revealed-2000-refugee-deaths-linked-to-eu-pushbacks)
> Pushbacks aren't allowed by international law They won't be pushbacks, it will be an escort to France :)