Majorityrights News > Category: War on Terror

When jokes threaten to become reality

A long time ago at the beginning of this ‘refugee crisis’, people used to make a joke and say, “If this keeps up, liberals might start asking for a bridge to be built so that no one would need to smuggle humans across water any more”. Who could have known that this joke would become a jinx?

Watch this:

Youtube: The Bridge (28 Sep 2013)

Austria’s refugee coordinator Christian Konrad has called for the construction of a 200km long bridge from Al Huwariyah in Tunisia to Agrigento in Sicily. This is after Konrad had previously called for housing solutions to be constructed in Austria as hundreds of asylum seekers currently staying at the Traiskirchen reception centre in Lower Austria are sleeping in tents due to overcrowding there.

Education Minister Gabriele Heinisch-Hosek is tasked with devising proposals on how to integrate refugee into Austrian schools. This integration will likely be of the sort that parents of non-Muslim children will have no ability to veto. Integration of school systems never seems to come ‘organically’.

Social Minister Rudolf Hundstorfer will be looking for ways to ease the strictures of employment laws, so as to make it easier for big businesses to employ refugees, and for the purpose of lowering the standards that govern social bargaining at the enterprise and state level, the standards which Austria actually would have had to agree to have upheld upon joining the ERM back in March 1979. So now they have come full circle, and have ended up considering imposing a very ‘American’ form of social bargaining and employment laws, even though the European approach was supposed to have some significant differences.

Under the so-called emergency, the crisis that ‘demands’ compromise, one of the supposed prized qualities of the European labour market, will be dismantled for the benefit of a certain cross section of large companies which see it as being in their interest to use these migrants as a battering ram against any attempts to have any kind of organised labour movement in the continent. It is against this backdrop of the tendencies within the Austrian ruling class, that this bridge proposal is set.

Construction companies

The construction company STRABAG AG would get the contract for the bridge. STRABAG AG is a company that was created through the merger of ILBAU and STRABAG in the 1930s, both being founded by Anton Lerchbaumer. It acquired Deutsche Asphalt Group in 2002, Waltr Bau Group in 2005, it took on a majority stake in Ed Züblin in 2005, Adanti SpA, KIRCHNER Holding GmbH, F. Kirchhoff AG and Deutsche Telekom Immobilien und Service GmbH in 2008.

In 2013 the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic stated that it believed that one of the companies of the STRABAG Group participated in bid rigging cartel of construction companies in that country. Amongst the companies involved in that cartel, was a company called Doprastav a.s., which is part of Doprastav Group. The illegal conduct centred around the D1 Highway which was constructed from 2004 and continued to have work done on it and its surroundings up to at least 2010.

STRABAG is managed by CEO Thomas Birtel. The Chairman of the supervisory board at STRABAG is Alfred Gusenbauer. Alfred Gusenbauer is an Austrian politician who until 2008 had spent his entire professional life as an employee of the Social Democratic Party of Austria or as a parliamentary representative. He headed the Social Democratic Party of Austria from 2000 to 2008, and served as Chancellor of Austria from January 2007 to December 2008. Since then he has positioned himself as a consultant and lecturer, and as a member of supervisory boards of Austrian companies, STRABAG being one of these.

Gusenbauer is known for having exploited the occurrence of the BAWAG Scandal, in which BAWAG—the bank of the Austrian Trade Union Federation—engaged in failed bets using risky undocumented derivative instruments held off-balance-sheet. After the losses became unmanageable, Fritz Verzetnitsch resigned from the Austrian Trade Union Federation in disgrace, and Gusenbauer used this opportunity to exclude all of the Trade Union leaders from the ballot lists of the Social Democratic Party, an action which moved the party to the right structurally.

STRABAG’s Gusenbauer and Austria’s refugee coordinator Christian Konrad obviously are not strangers to each other, seeing as they come from the same party and travel in the same social circles. In the world of business and politics, it’s quite often about who you know and who you’ve worked with. Aside from the fact that STRABAG is one of the largest construction companies in Austria, there is also the political connection that would exist between persons within the state and within that company’s structure.

Russian-Jewish Mafia involvement

A notable stakeholder in STRABAG is Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska, a extremely wealthy Russian oligarch, who—when he is not exploiting the mineral and energy resources of impoverished Asians in Siberia—also has for some reason cultivated over the years a very amicable relationship with people who may or may not be associated with former Russian soldiers who had been veterans in Afghanistan who may be part of the presently existing heroin smuggling operations which have been occurring at an ever-heightening rate since the year 2005.

Additionally, Deripaska has a good relationship with the Russian-Israeli Mafia, which helped him with the purchase of Sayansk aluminium plant in Siberia when he was first starting up as a businessperson in the 1990s. He has a especially tight relationship with the Israeli business and crime figure known as Michael Cherney, who personally assessed Deripaska and pulled the necessary strings on his behalf. Deripaska has since operated in the debt of Cherney and the Russian-Israeli Mafia. Cherney also operates security think tank groups, which may or may not be actually just front groups which allow him and his criminal networks to plug into the stream of intelligence exchanges that go on in the War on Terror, so that he can smuggle contraband through conflict zones with less risk of detection. Cherney also publishes anti-fascist publications through the Michael Cherney Foundation which is registered as a ‘charitable foundation’.

Interfacing with activist groups

The proposal for this Africa-to-Europe 200km long bridge, whose construction contract sits at the centre of all of these groups and individuals, also is associated with a local Austrian ‘anti-racist’ activist group. That group is named Zentrum für Politische Schönheit, which in English is ‘Centre for Political Beauty’.

The Centre for Political Beauty refers to itself as a group that “makes art” for the purpose of encouraging the European peoples to adopt a more liberal-humanitarian outlook on the world. Much of what they do is done for the sake of “not rendering void of the legacy of the Holocaust”. One of their members, Massimo Sestini, is perhaps known to Majorityrights readers because he is one of the persons who has consistently been providing ‘humanistic’ photography of the migrants to various media outlets including the British Newspaper, the Guardian, since at least mid-2014. The power of images cannot be underestimated.

The Centre for Political Beauty takes its activism beyond simply creating static pieces of art, and in fact, merges art with political action while invoking shadows of past events which they believe hold immense sway over the European psyche.

Here are four relevant examples of them merging art with political action:

• They have removed sections of the Berlin Wall monument, the sections that contain Christian cross logos with names on them. They have removed some of these because they have transferred those crosses to the outer border fences of the European Union, and affixed them there. In some images African migrants are posing with the crosses for photographs. This is a kind of art creation that is apparently supposed to symbolise the idea that the internal wall between the West Germany and East Germany that was removed after the fall of the Berlin Wall, is ontologically the same as the border between Europe and Africa which they believe would be removed after the fall of racially cohesive European identity.


• They plan to actually cut holes into some segments of the EU border fences on 09 November 2015, during the commemoration of the 25th Anniversary of the collapse of the Berlin Wall. This would allow migrants to break through the fences at the precise timing of the celebrations, so that they can link the celebration of one thing, with the celebration of another thing that they plan to superimpose onto it.


• Since the idea for the creation of a bridge between Africa and Europe is a project that would take them until the year 2030 to complete if it gets started on time and isn’t thwarted in some way, they want to call on Austria to supply state funding for 1,000 rescue platforms to be permanently installed into international waters between North Africa and Italy. The first one of these platforms will be unveiled in the water on 01 October 2015, in Licata Harbour. The press will be invited at 0630 on that day.


• Dead African and Middle Eastern bodies will be exhumed and transported from the sea and into the capital city of Germany. The bodies will be displayed and placed into open shallow graves in plain view, so that persons running the media operation can then talk about the ongoing crisis in terms that have allusions to the narratives of the Jewish Holocaust.

They are absolutely serious. It would not be hyperbolic to say that the intention behind these actors who have come together to make these things happen, is that they would like to inflict extreme demographic damage onto the European Union.

The resources being allocated to these plans, and all such operations, stand in stark contrast to the fact that countries in the South of Europe have been placed under austerity policies so harsh that civil society in countries like Greece are breaking down, and money allocated to even basic state functions like national defence have been so low that the topic of whether enough counties are meeting the basic NATO obligations is often raised.

Yet, mysteriously, certain richer state governments of north-western and south-central Europe seem to be very capable of sourcing funds for extravagant migrant rescue operations and even funds for building a 200km long bridge. Where is it coming from? It’s coming from your bank account via taxation.

Some were calling it ‘good news’ others were calling it ‘activism’

The Baitul Futuh Mosque in London caught fire. Half of its ground floor and first floor are in flames. Seventy firefighters and 10 fire engines are reported to be tackling the blaze.

A fire has broken out at the mosque located in London Road in Morden, in the south of the British capital, a London Fire Brigade (LFB) spokesman said on Saturday, according to local media.

Baitul Futuh mosque was completed in 2003, and its construction reportedly cost £5.5million ($83.5 million). It is believed to be the largest in Western Europe with a capacity to house up to 10,000 people.

                oops.

The YKW clamp down to silence self defense of the ancient, native peoples of Europe..

France’s obscene legislation against its own national defense forces Marine Le Pen to court:

Marine Le Pen, the president of France’s far-right Front National party, is to appear in court for allegedly inciting racial hatred over comments in which she compared Muslims praying in the streets to the Nazi occupation.

The FN leader made the comments in a speech during a party rally in Lyon in 2010. Asked on Tuesday about being summoned to appear in court on 20 October, Le Pen told Agence France-Presse: “Of course, I’m not going to miss such an occasion.”

Later, she told Europe 1 it was “scandalous to be prosecuted for having a political opinion in the country of freedom of expression.”                                               
                             

At the time she made the remarks, Le Pen was campaigning to become FN president, succeeding her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, himself no stranger to charges of provoking racial hatred.

At the rally, Le Pen made reference to “street prayers” after reports of Muslims praying in public in three French cities, including Paris, because of a lack of mosques or a lack of space in local prayer rooms. The French government later clamped down on the “illegal” use of the public space for prayers.

“I’m sorry, but for those who really like to talk about the second world war, if we’re talking about occupation, we can also talk about this while we’re at it, because this is an occupation of territory,” she told supporters, prompting waves of applause.

“It’s an occupation of swaths of territory, of areas in which religious laws apply … for sure, there are no tanks, no soldiers, but it’s an occupation all the same and it weighs on people.”

Despite numerous complaints from anti-racist organisations, a preliminary inquiry by the authorities in Lyon was dropped in 2011. However, one association pursued the legal complaint, and when the European parliament lifted Le Pen’s parliamentary immunity in July 2013, a preliminary inquiry was opened. In September 2014, the prosecutor’s office announced she would be sent before a judge.

As of 2011, Jean-Marie Le Pen’s speeches had led to 18 convictions, five for repeating that the Holocaust was a mere “point of detail” of the second world war.

Marine Le Pen has been credited with “de-demonising” the FN and throwing out its more xenophobic and extremist elements since taking control of the party in January 2011. Critics accused her of swapping the FN’s historic antisemitism for Islamophobia.

Le Pen’s deputy, Florian Philippot, reacted angrily on Twitter to her summons. “The only people who should be sent before the court are those who allow prayers in the street that are illegal and against the principle of secularism!” he wrote.

Philippot accused the French authorities of trying to smear Le Pen before regional elections to be held in December.

Le Pen also expressed her anger on Twitter. “We’re quicker to prosecute those who denounce the illegal behaviour of fundamentalists … than to prosecute the fundamentalists behaving illegally,” she wrote.

The penalty for inciting racial hatred in France is up to a year in prison and a €45,000 fine.

* France’s Front National has also been charged with fraud in an election finance inquiry.

To draw the lines of friends and enemies properly this time and then to find the martial spirit which knows no compassion for an enemy that will not comply with the requirements of our existence and well being.

To lose compassion, to lose anti-racism, which is anti - viz. against - social classification (and group discrimination accordingly), to find the will to “other” even their fairly benign individuals, classifying them as being of the mortal group pattern and finding the will to smash them, as need be, on our behalf, anything to drive them away from any imposition upon us - but most of all, losing compassion for those who would bring them upon us.

On African population explosion,
Steve Sailer, September 19, 2015

African Population Explosion: The Graph That Explains the 2015 Migrant Crisis:

Population-1950-2015

The demographers of the United Nation’s Population Division have quietly released their World Population Prospects: 2015 Revision report.

Above is a graph I put together from their new data that explains much about the “Migrant Crisis” of 2015.

As you can see, way back in 1950, the population of the Middle East was only 18% as great as the population of Europe, while Sub-Saharan Africa was only 33% as large. Even in 2000, the Middle East had only 49% of the population of Europe, while Africa had almost caught up to Europe with 88% of its population.

But from 2000 to 2015, the Middle East added 124 million people, making it now 65% as populous as Europe.

In this century alone, Sub-Saharan Africa has added 320 million people, making it 130% as populated as Europe.

Some of this information about the past is new. For example, the U.N.’s estimate of the population of the continent of Africa back in 2010 has grown by 13 million people, or over 1% between the 2012 Revision and the 2015 Revision. When it comes to population, the past just isn’t what it used to be.

But what about the future?

As a general pattern, the U.N. has found, the completeness of the counts tends to be worse in the fastest growing countries. Thus, the harder the U.N. has looked at Africa in this decade, the more people and more new babies it keeps uncovering.

It turns out that while the total fertility rate in Africa is falling, it’s falling quite a bit more slowly than the U.N. had expected as recently as back in the previous decade. Sub-Saharan Africa simply isn’t behaving like the rest of the world.

The upward adjustment in Africa’s population projections in the 2012 Revision of World Population Prospects came as a shock. But the 2015 Revision forecasts Africa’s population in 2100, about one lifetime from now, to be another 5% higher than the U.N. projected just back in 2012.

Here’s my graph of the 2015 numbers:

Population-1950-2100

Wow.

The U.N. now projects that, despite lower fertility in some Muslim countries such as Iran, the population of the Middle East will surpass that of Europe in 2045 and reach 937 million by 2100.

As for Sub-Saharan Africa, the U.N. foresees the population growing to 3,935,000,000 (3.9 billion and change) by 2100. (The total population of Africa and the Middle East will be 4,872,000,000.)

That’s probably not going to happen due to some combination of (A) intelligent self-restraint, (B) mass migration, and (C) Malthusian Nightmares (war, famine, disease, etc. etc.) keeping the population of Sub-Saharan Africa in 2100 from being more than six times as great as Europe, which would be an 18-fold increase in 150 years.

Keep in mind that there’s not a one to one relationship between population growth and emigration. In general, people try to assess whether the future at home looks brighter than the present. But people in Africa and the Middle East can see their countries’ futures will be more crowded and constrained.

Personally, I hope the reason that this graph doesn’t prove accurate is largely (A) intelligent self-restraint. But at present, white people don’t seem to be making much of an effort to facilitate and encourage reasonable family planning in Africa. Because that would be, you know, racist.

Which is the worst thing in the world, much worse than the U.N.’s population forecast.

READ MORE...

All of the Croats have been arrested, and the migrant trains have been stopped.

Independent.ie, ‘Hungary seizes migrant train from Croatia, disarms 40 Croatian police and arrests train driver’, 18 Sep 2015:

Hungarian authorities seized a train bringing migrants into the country from Croatia, disarmed 40 police on board and detained the driver after over 4,000 migrants arrived across their border, the head of the Hungarian disaster unit said.

Gyorgy Bakondi told reporters the Croatian train that shipped the refugees and migrants to Magyarboly came without any prior notice, like the rest of the new arrivals coming on other trains and on buses.

Hungary registered and disarmed the 40 police who escorted the train, he said according to a video posted on M1 state television’s website.

[...]

The row between the two countries and their respective handling of the migration crisis has deepened as Hungary’s foreign minister on Friday accused Croatia of pushing migrants to break the law by “illegally” breaching Hungarian borders.

“Rather than respecting the laws in place in the EU, they (Croatia), are encouraging the masses to break the law, because illegally crossing a border is breaking the law,” said Peter Szijjarto, speaking in Belgrade following talks with his Serbian counterpart. [...]

It seems to be a matter of incentives here. The Croats are trying to avoid having to deal with the problem by sending the migrants deeper into the European Union, because they don’t want to have to keep and process the migrants that have already entered Croatia. Hungary’s way of dealing with the migrants is to block entry with a ‘fast solution fence’ along all the areas that are not separated from other countries by a river.

If Hungary continues to maintain its position, they may create a domino effect of incentives whereby all other countries will have to erect fences that face outward, and move migrants outward after processing and declining their refugee applications, rather than just passing the buck ever deeper into the continent.

Providing that this continues, Hungary may be seen as having done a lot to save Europe from disaster.

Word has it that Juncker is socially conservative and therefore does not relish the migrant crisis; but he is a businessman who is looking after business interests for himself, business constituents and to maintain his position as an EU representative of those interests.
                           
That is why he felt constrained to put across a plan to try to preserve the Schengen zone by diffusing responsibility among its members and (in his theory) that might dilute the impact of the migrants. 

An additional aspect to the psychology of his position is that he is from Luxembourg, one of the smallest European nations. One can imagine business persons from small countries finding the delay and tedium of having to go through border controls as they move in and out of a Luxembourg every 15 minutes an insufferable handicap.

Nevertheless, from a WN/ethnonationalist perspective, particularly until such time as the borders of the entire zone are secure from non-European imposition and those who are already here are drastically reduced in number by means of repatriation, the Schengen zone will have to give way to tighter national border controls.

From an ethnonationalist point of view, in any event, there has to be more national accountability to their own and to European people as a whole.

Is this the end of Schengen?

         

Sep 16 2015: In last week’s State of the Union speech, European Commission President Jean-Claude Junker referred to the Schengen Area – a border-free travel zone made up of 26 European countries – as “a unique symbol of European integration”. After Germany’s recent announcement that it would be “temporarily reintroducing border controls”, some say that unique symbol is in jeopardy.

A look back at the past 30 years since the agreement was signed can help clarify what exactly is at risk.

What is Schengen?

The Schengen Area is made up of 26 European countries that have removed border controls at their shared crossings. The agreement was signed in 1985 by five members of the EU, and came into force 10 years later. Following the 1997 Amsterdam Treaty, the Schengen agreement became part of European law. That meant all new EU members had to sign up to it, although Britain and Ireland had already been given the right to opt out. As the map below shows, four non-EU countries – Switzerland, Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein – are also members of the area.

Why are people talking about the end of Schengen?

We are experiencing a global refugee crisis. Around the world, 60 million people have been forced to flee war, violence and human rights abuse – levels not seen since World War II. Hundreds and thousands of those people have attempted the often perilous journey to Europe in search of a better, safer life.

Some of them haven’t made it – while the image of Aylan Kurdi’s lifeless body on a beach in Turkey shocked the world, many more have died trying to get to Europe. According to figures from the International Organization for Migration, 2015 could end up being the deadliest on record.

Of those who do make it over, the majority have been heading to Germany. The country expects to take in 1 million asylum seekers by the end of the year, more than all other EU countries collectively received in 2014. It is in response to these huge numbers that Germany decided to re-impose its internal border controls. The country’s interior minister said the move aimed to “limit the current inflows to Germany and to return to orderly procedures when people enter the country”.

Some have been quick to emphasize the temporary nature of this decision. But with countries such as Austria and the Netherlands now following suit, others think Schengen’s days are numbered.

Has anything like this happened before?

The option for a country to temporarily reinstate border controls was actually built into the original agreement, as the European Commission pointed out last weekend: “The temporary reintroduction of border controls between member states is an exceptional possibility explicitly foreseen in and regulated by the Schengen Borders Code.”

In the past, countries have chosen to exercise that right. For example, in 2006 Germany reinstated border controls when it hosted the FIFA World Cup. France did the same in 2005, following the terrorist attacks in London. In what was perhaps a precursor of the troubles to come, during the post-Arab Spring mass migration of 2011, politicians in France and Italy called for deep reforms to the agreement.

So what’s different this time?

Even in Schengen’s early days, critics pointed to one big flaw: freedom of movement within the Schengen area only works if the common external borders are fortified. With many frontline countries such as Greece already experiencing crises of their own, the task of strengthening those external borders has become even tougher.

The stakes were raised this summer after a heavily armed terrorist suspect was apprehended on board a train travelling between three Schengen countries. The ease with which he had moved around the area prompted some to refer to Europe’s open-border policy as a terrorist’s paradise.

Perhaps more importantly, people’s attitudes within the area are starting to change. This recent crisis is just one in a long line of turbulent events for Europe these past months and years. Whether they are right to do so, some blame the union for these developments. While Schengen and the free movement of people might be at the core of the European project, for some that no longer seems worth fighting for. A poll back in July showed that the majority of western Europeans would like to see Schengen scrapped, and last year former French President Nicolas Sarkozy called for it to be “immediately suspended”.

But with so many people now displaced by conflict and violence, others argue that the European project – which has brought peace to a continent previously locked in war – has never been more important.

As plans to share out asylum seekers more equitably across the European Union make little progress, many will be closely watching the developments for hints of what it means for Schengen.

In a development that should not surprise anyone at all, virtually none of the ‘moderate rebels’ that American liberals had hoped to use against ISIL are still active in the field:

BBC News, ‘Syria crisis: ‘Only four or five’ US-trained Syrian rebels are still fighting’, 17 Sep 2015:

A US scheme to train Syrian rebels to fight Islamic State (IS) militants has been branded a total failure after a US general admitted only four or five were still fighting.

Congress approved $500m (£323m) to train and equip around 5,000 rebels as a key plank of US strategy against IS.

But the first 54 graduates were routed by an al-Qaeda affiliate, Gen Lloyd Austin told lawmakers.

Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte said the number remaining was a “joke”.

“We have to acknowledge this is a total failure. I wish it weren’t so, but that’s the fact,” said another Republican Senator, Jeff Sessions.

‘Small number’

Gen Austin, who heads the US military’s Central Command (Centcom) was appearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Asked how many US trained rebels were fighting he said: “It’s a small number… we’re talking four or five.”

He said there was clearly no way of meeting the goal of 5,000 recruits a year, but urged patience.

“It is taking a bit longer to get things done, but it must be this way if we are to achieve lasting and positive effects.”

Appearing alongside him, Christine Wormuth, Undersecretary of Defence for Policy, said around 100 more rebels were currently in training.

She said the reason for the low numbers was the vetting process used, with the US only recruiting rebels wanting to fight IS rather than Syrian government forces.

It is not clear what happened to all of the initial group attacked in northern Syria - some were killed, others captured, while the rest scattered.

Gen Austin also promised “appropriate actions” if an investigation found than senior defence officials doctored intelligence to downplay IS and al-Qaeda strength in Syria.

The allegations that intelligence analysts’ reports were being manipulated first emerged in the Daily Beast earlier this month.

How long will it take people to accept that if something cannot be done by proxy, that you may have to actually go in there and do it yourself?

While E.U. skepticism is more than valid in terms of its extant structure, operation, backing and representatives, can there be any doubt that European nations are better off coordinating their efforts if not cooperating with regard to their mutual interests and concerns?

That unity of effort is what we are calling a union, a European Union of sorts. Let this crisis shake trust in authority to its core and provide an opportunity for ethnonationalists. For we are operating of virtual, parallel nations (4th generation warfare). With that, we can seize this crisis to begin to determine the means and extent of our cooperation in a sovereign reconstruction of our national rule structures and their coordination - but again, who can argue that we have common interest in turning would-be non-European migrants away and repatriating a large percentage of the ones that are here?

Not only are we better off aligned against migrants as opposed to each other, but also aligned against those who are responsible for the pejorative rule structures as they presently exist and the implementation of those rules which brings invading migrants here.

There can be little dispute that European nations are better off with less conflict with one another and more aligned against non-European antagonists and European traitors.

The obvious fact of our allied interests accepted, attention then turns to a balance to be struck somewhere between cooperation and coordination.

With these ideas and the idea of sharing the reconstruction of our rules in our service we have an amazing opportunity to learn from the mistakes of World War II and do things correctly this time.  That is, unlike World War II, where we were fighting one another European Nations, we have an opportunity to do what should have been done then: respect one another ethno-nationalist sovereignties and coordinate the blockage, deportation and repatriation of non-Europeans and disproportionate non-native nationals.

This will require something like Frontex. The question is, how much cooperation or coordination do Europeans want to negotiate?

EU Observer, ‘Frontex in dire need of border guards’, 15 Sep 2015:

As Europe’s refugee crisis intensifies, the EU border agency, Frontex, is suffering from a drastic shortage of border guards on the Greek islands, on the land border between Greece and Turkey, between Bulgaria and Turkey, and along the Hungarian border with Serbia, according to an investigation by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (BIJ).

Five months after EU leaders increased Frontex’s budget by €26.8 million to cope with the refugee crisis, EU member states have not fully responded to repeated requests by Frontex for border guards and equipment to help tackle the problems on Europe’s external borders.

The revelation comes as Frontex’s executive director, Fabrice Leggeri, prepares to be grilled on Tuesday (15 September) by the European Parliament’s civil liberties, justice and home affairs committee.

Committee chairman, Claude Moraes, to whom Frontex reports, described member states’ failure to provide the agency with the necessary resources at this “critical moment” as “scandalous”.

“Frontex is a crucial tool in the response to this crisis and people will therefore be astonished that despite funds being available it’s not adequately resourced so that it can carry out the first-tier response,” Moraes said.

Plea for help

Last April, EU heads of state signed off on the €26.8 million emergency grant at a high-level summit in what was portrayed as Europe uniting in its response to mass tragedies in the Mediterranean.

The money was supposed to allow Frontex to lease border guards and equipment from member states who would then be compensated by Frontex with the extra funds.

Last month, EU migration, home affairs and citizenship commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos wrote to all 28 interior ministers urging them to help.

But even that demand from the commissioner for migration to senior interior ministers across Europe has not delivered enough border guards and equipment.

As chaos continues to grip key migration routes, Frontex officials have admitted that they “badly need border guards on the Greek islands, border guards and technical equipment on the land border between Greece and Turkey, Bulgaria and Turkey and, crucially, along the Hungarian border with Serbia.”

Offers of key personnel and equipment from member states “are still very scarce”, said a Frontex spokeswoman.

This concluding part of Guillaume Faye’s article [The Migratory Invasion, Part 1: A Terrifying Diagnosis] hits upon the matter critically:

“this [crisis] could lead to fundamentally questioning the architecture and functioning of the European Union”

The matter is, if cooperation and coordination among European nations is necessary - and as we have said, of course it is, more or less - how are the blue prints of that (more or less) unionization to be redrawn and its manifest “architecture” to “function” and be managed?

Theoretically, “more” is characterized by more “cooperation” as distinguished from “less” which is characterized more like “coordination”, but it is still a necessary unionized effort to some extent.

More, coordination has more to do with non-interference with fellow ethnonationalists and acting without centralized directive, but rather autonomously and at the discretion of the parallel nation.

It will do no good to say that no level of cooperation or coordination is necessary as European nations will be impacted by what happens in other European nations.