Who is on leave has no residence permit, Germany. But not everyone is doing well: According to the Central register of Foreigners, more than 200,000 people were in the middle of the year in Germany, even though they are actually obliged to leave the country. Germany can’t deport you, because you are diving under or too ill to leave the country. Sometimes, however, simply that’s not why, because the countries of Origin refuse to make the withdrawal.
So around 65,000 people were not able to leave in 2017, the country, because they had no papers from their homeland, as it is called in an internal picture of the situation of the Federal Ministry of the interior, from the “Berliner morning post” in the spring of quoted. Often the countries of origin, corresponding to issue travel documents refused – the Passport is delayed or blocked. The contact to the embassies is sometimes bad. The result is that The rejected asylum seekers remain in the country, because without a passport, no exit.
This is not on a regular basis for outrage in the Federal policy – and for all sorts of demands for sanctions: Why not punish the countries to take back their nationals? At best, through a cut in the development funds that flow in and out regularly by the German side in asylum countries of origin?
The proposal has cross-party supporters. In January 2016, the then Federal Minister of Economics Sigmar Gabriel (SPD), expressed accordingly. Germany was “ready and willing” to help these countries economically, he said at the time, “but only then – and only then to a larger extent, if the governments are so fair to their citizens to enter the country, have no right of asylum”.
at the beginning of 2017, his party colleague Heiko Maas, the then Federal Minister of justice reiterated this requirement. And in may of this year a large-scale removal action in baden-failed württemberg, in Ellwangen, there were similar sounds coming from the Union: “We can’t pay on the one hand, development aid, and on the other hand, these countries do not take back these people”, scolded the Prime Minister of Saxony, Michael Kretschmer (CDU).
the AfD has discovered the topic for themselves. In a current application, the group brought on Thursday in the Bundestag, calls for a corresponding reduction or cancellation of the development services. “States that are not ready for their own state citizens to issue securities, and the repatriation of their own nationals to prevent, must be removed, the development aid”, the AfD in the Bundestag Deputy Markus glad Maier in the debate. The areas of the “common sense”.
But does it really? Or is it rather so that a deletion of the development could prove to be benefits as a boomerang for the Federal Republic of Germany?
So anyway, migration, argue researchers – and warn against a suspension of the medium. This is also in terms of migration policy, “not very useful”, says Benjamin Schraven of the German development Institute. “Development cooperation is supposed to lead also to prevent refugee flows to Europe.” It serves to give people in their home countries, “a decent employment and a perspective”.
Also in the foreign policy of a termination of the development cooperation would be of concern. It could come to a “further alienation between the African societies and Europe”. “The gap would fill other donor countries, for example China.” The people’s Republic have increased their presence in Africa is already “massively,” says Schraven. “A further extension of the sphere of influence is not supposed to be in the interest of the Europeans.”
It was also the “conclusion” to assume that a unilateral cancellation of the development would be good help as a means of pressure. Migration for many countries of origin is an economic factor. “The remittances of migrants to their home countries, are usually significantly higher than what flows in development aid from Germany.” There is no large interest in it, “that these migrants come back, and the remittances dry up”.
to mix Jochen Oltmer, migration expert at the University of Osnabrück, warns of migration policy with development policy. The objectives of the two policies are completely different. “The projects of the development cooperation often take place on a local level: In a city drinking water is promoted, in another in the Expansion of a school is investing,” he says. “One may ask whether it makes sense to cap these projects, a government issued somewhere passes for rejected asylum seekers.” Would be more appropriate to move the States to a stricter visa policy to take back their citizens.
Conceivable is, for example, the issuing of visas for Government officials to restrict. Also, the foreigners would have to be trained authorities in the German municipalities better. “They are the Central Actors when it comes to the procurement of passports,” says Oltmer. “They need to be strengthened in terms of diplomatic intercourse with the foreign embassies.” Finally, the Federal Republic of Germany’s power in the global context, not “Minimal,” says Oltmer. “She uses this Power to move to the countries of origin to take back their nationals.”
the willingness to cooperate improved, at least in some States, shows the example of Morocco. There, the procurement of passports in 2017, could be accelerated. The deportations multiplied, and remained at a low level. Overall, only around 2,000 of the nearly 13,000 deportations took place in the first half of the year in non-European countries.