Migrants are seen before being rescued by "Save the Children" NGO crew from the ship Vos Hestia in the Mediterranean sea off Libya coast, June 15, 2017. Picture by STEFANO RELLANDINI/Reuters/PA Images. All rights reserved.The debate around migration in the Mediterranean suffers from a puzzling amnesia, particularly from critics of Europe’s dealings in Libya. For example, recently Refugees Deeply published a piece stating the EU “must not fuel” the hellish situation there. While moral outrage about outsourcing human rights abuses is justified and indeed crucial, critics would do well to understand its historical and political context if they are to offer alternatives.
Cutting deals with transit states to stop migrants has always been central to EU policy. Irregular migration was a top concern as Europe developed its open border regime and foreign policy in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Foreign policy was driven by domestic political distaste for asylum and uncontrolled migration given new South-North migration dynamics, wars in the former Yugoslavia, and EU enlargement to Central and Eastern Europe.
In Libya, Europe faced a confluence of two major strategic concerns: controlling migration and diversifying energy supplies away from Russia.1 Then as now, Italy took the lead. The focus allowed Qaddafi to leverage his geopolitical position and rehabilitate his reputation through what the ICMPD describes as Italy’s “increased and calculated pro-Libya advocacy.”
