The EU and Turkey recently reached a deal on the migrants arriving in Europe. All migrants now crossing the Aegean into Europe from Turkey will be returned. The migrant crisis is over. Or is it?
Last year, the arrival of some 1.8 million migrants — many from war-torn Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, mostly Muslim — revealed fundamental weaknesses in the architecture of European cooperation. Greece, where most arrived, contrary to European law, failed to process them. Instead, they were allowed to travel to northern Europe. In response, many Schengen countries reinstated border controls and, in some cases, erected razor-wire fences. Now the flow from Turkey has been stemmed and perhaps the border controls and razor-wire fences will disappear until the next migrant, probably from Libya.
But, fundamentally, the challenge for Europe is not practical but cultural. The migrants’ arrival has stoked atavistic fears: Deep in the European psyche is the historical memory of repelling Muslim invasion by Moors and Turks. It has also raised a difficult question: What is it to be European? How Europe answers that question will determine its long-term response to the migrants. But answering it will not be easy. The three major themes in European identity — Christianity, the Enlightenment and welfarism — are each internally conflicted.
Although their underlying values have been grotesquely betrayed on many occasions, they still inform the European identity. Not all Europeans are Christian, but Christian tradition has been inextricably woven into the fabric of European culture for over 1,500 years. Yet, Christianity contains an inconsistency. The Christian doctrine pretends to universality: Charity and forgiveness are to be extended to non-Christians. The structure, however, is exclusive: To be Christian is to adhere to a Christian church.
The migrants’ arrival has highlighted this contradiction. Angela Merkel, the German chancellor and daughter of a Protestant pastor, initially claimed welcoming the refugees was a moral duty. In contrast, Victor Orban, the Hungarian prime minister — incidentally also from a Protestant background — talked of Christian Europe being taken over by a Muslim invasion. Many Europeans are torn: How to preserve Europe’s Christian culture, yet show charity and generosity to migrants?
Enlightenment values have been a powerful force since the 18th century. They were the impetus behind the revolutions that destroyed ecclesiastical authority and ultimately led to European democracy. Enlightenment values also pretend to universality. Reason, liberty and tolerance are supposed to be culture-blind. But they can be exclusive too. Should liberty extend to religious minorities who deny that men and women are equal? Should those opposed to the Enlightenment values be “forced to be free”?
These questions are not new, but the migrants’ arrival raises them again with urgency. In Cologne, on New Year’s Eve, gangs of young men of North African and Arab origin, some asylum-seekers, sexually assaulted young German women: More fodder for the stereotype of the migrant as a predatory male with scant respect for European womanhood and the European way of life.
Since 1945, European countries have created welfare systems in which benefits for the poorest are funded out of general taxation. The systems are universal, but also exclusive. Their legitimacy depends on a sense of social cohesion and homogeneity. Crudely, European citizens are only willing to contribute if they feel welfare recipients to be deserving and people like them. Where those sentiments cease to hold, the systems break down. The migrants’ arrival tests their resilience. Many Europeans fear their welfare systems are being exploited by undeserving economic migrants posing as refugees. In response, Denmark and some German states recently began confiscating arrivals’ valuables to cover the expense of providing for them. Others watch with interest.
Europe then is at a fork. One way leads to fortress Europe. Within its ramparts Christian charity, Enlightenment values and welfarism will rule; but for Europeans only. The other way leads to a new sense of what it is to be European: One respectful of European traditions and values but flexible enough to incorporate those from different cultures. That way is uncharted and uncertain but if not taken, one can only ask, what is the point of Europe?
