at About the same time as the coronan broke through in march, opened on Turkey's border to Greece to refugees from Syria.
the Greeks turned them away, and with the support of the EUROPEAN union and of the Swedish parliamentary parties, including the C.
the consensus was that the turks were flexed the muscles of the face of the restructuring of the flyktingavtalet in 2015. The EU justified its position that it does not intend to make the refugees into pawns in a storpolitiskt the game.
Fair and correct, but it is not necessarily a superlogisk position, if you hold the right to the sacred, and believe that there is ”no other logical position is” the EUROPEAN union's freedom of movement be extended to the whole of the world, in which the Centre writes on their website.
the Basics first.
All of which are seeking refuge from war and oppression, and the right to seek asylum according to the geneva convention. However, it has to be done on the spot, or at the very least in this world. It is difficult, if not across the border but it is easier if the boundary consists of the north), and the embassy did not receive one.
(C) are not the only ones that put out smoke screens. The S-line in the asylum no one understands. M pretends to be tougher than they really are.
migrationsforskaren Joakim Ruist has pointed out, the EUROPEAN union and in Sweden in different ways, made it difficult for refugees to seek asylum is, in practice, since the beginning of the end of the 1980s, a few years after that, the growth rate decreased, and the large strukturkriserna started.
the Man has made it a requirement for the visa, which will make it easier to judge if the person would like to get to do that in order to apply for asylum.
You've made it through the transportörsansvar, which means that flights and ferries need to check the passenger's passports and visas.
And they are doing it now by paying, for example, in Turkey, in order to keep the refugees away.
You can't put a cap on asylum-seekers, but take a very physical approach to the limit.
It is not easy to understand if you follow the debate in sweden, particularly at a time when the migrationsuppgörelsen a crack, and the rhetoric is ratcheted up to the max.
”the Right of asylum is sacred to us. There are no compromises, we are not at all on”, asserted the C's ledarvikarie Anders W Jonsson, the other day. Or, to put it bluntly: you can't put a theoretical ceiling on asylum-seekers, but take a very physical approach to the limit.
It is true that advocates of more legal ways into the EU, and in Sweden (in practice, more and more refugees), but those issues will be determined, in all material respects, in Brussels, and there is centerpartisterna in the wrong committee.
It is also true, that is hardly the only company to put out smoke screens. The S-line in the asylum no one understands. M pretends to be tougher than they really are. Their ”alliance oil targets to” for the idea of a cap, but it is actually a signal of deterrent to the actions to be taken in more asylum-seekers will come. It should not be limited to the right to asylum, but to make it less attractive to apply here.
If anything, they have in fact limited the right of asylum, the self-evident facts like visa requirements, and the liability as carrier.
Where did you hear C or a as MP to criticize them later?
READ MORE: , So it can move to Sweden to be tightened to the READ MORE: Rödgrönt the chaos of the migration again