How has the European refugee and migration crisis impacted Central Europe and how have countries from the region sought to influence refugee and asylum policy at the EU level? Based on the data from the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights the number of displaced people around the world is steadily growing from the period of the Arab Spring in 2011. Millions are escaping their home countries as a result of warfare, instability, poverty and the lack of political coherence to resolve the crisis. A significant number of those people have resettled in European countries. However, the situation was not critical until the period of 2015, when, according to Eurostat, EU member states received over 1.2 million asylum applications, which was twice as many than the amount of the previous year. The current European refugee and migration crisis is defined as a specific situation faced by the European Union receiving a growing number of migrants and refugees fleeing the war in Syria. (Toygür; 2016) This process is usually described as the largest movement of people since the end of World War Two. People who applied for asylum status in Europe are those who escape from war and persecution in their home countries in Africa, the Western Balkans, and the Middle East. Some of those who move to Europe are trying to improve their economic position or quality of life while avoiding legal migration channels which makes the process of defining the crisis and formulating a common solution even more complicated. In 2014, the top three countries were Syria (29%), Afghanistan (14%) and Iraq (10%). In addition, there are economic migrants from Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia. In 2014 the main refugee routes were largely from Libya to Italy and from Turkey to Greece. (Joris, d’Haenens, Van Gorp and Mertens; 2016)The migration and refugee crisis is happening during an uneasy time for Europe. The EU was already dealing with the number of domestic challenges, such as the consequences of the Greek crisis, the rise of right-wing populism, and the uncertainties regarding the UK’s place in the Union. Some argue that the growing number of asylum seekers have become a fuel for these challenges as well as brought new security choices regarding the Middle East conflict. (Heisbourge; 2015)Refugee policyOn the international level the European policy regarding the status of refugee originates in the Geneva Convention of 1951 together with the New York Protocol of 1967. These documents defined the ‘basic rules and principles of refugee protection’ whith the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees ‘acting as a guardian of the treaty.’ (Havlova and Tamchynova; 2016) However from the early 1980s the regional system of cooperation regarding the refugee issues begun to emerge. The core element of it was a creation of the Schengen area, the borderless zone between five out of ten countries of the European Community. As a part of the Schengen Agreement, the EU adopted Dublin convention – ‘the basis of the common asylum policy.’ (Havlova and Tamchynova; 2016) The Dublin protocol provides the important regulatory framework and states that asylum seekers apply for asylum in the first country of entering the EU; the country should take care of them, if they move to a different country they should be returned, and so forth. Thus, during the current refugee crisis, the Dublin regulation put an additional pressure for the border states, such as Italy, Greece, or Bulgaria, which not necessarily have a capacity to handle the increasing flow people crossing the border of the EU.Moreover, some statesare failing to adopt and apply standards of the Common European Asylum Systemthat ‘comprises common refugee law in number of interlocking legislativeinstruments.’ (Guild, Costello,and others; 2015)In order to strengthen the common asylum policy of the EU, revise andimprove the Dublin system, the European Asylum Support Office was establishedin 2010. This organization together with the Asylum, Migration and IntegrationFund provide  financial support and helpsin implementing the EU regulation on a member state level and make sure that‘the EU states which are most affected by migration and asylum flows can counton solidarity from other EU states.’ (Havlova and Tamchynova; 2016)Despite the effort to promote and improve the common asylum and refugeepolicy, there is a certain level of resistance from some member states toimplement regulation and coordinate their policies within the EU. This isespecially relevant towards Central and Eastern European states. Their stronganti-migration rhetoric is a clear evidence of unwillingness to cooperate andlack of solidarity within European states.Central European response on refugee and migration crisisIn recent times thelevel of Euroscepticism, if not euro-phobia, has risen. Central European stateshave made a clear point that they are not ready to accept a large number ofrefugees in their countries. They are turning towards a pro-national orientedpolicy and idea of closed and secure borders, which in a way brings xenophobiaback to Europe. Quite often the countries of Central Europe — Poland, the CzechRepublic, Hungary and Slovakia — and the Baltics refer to the lack of financialcapacities to accommodate migrants as well as unpreparedness of the society towelcome outsiders. ‘In Slovakia, we don’t havemosques, we only want to choose the Christians.’ Jaroslaw Kaczynsky, the leader of the Law andJustice Party in Poland, once said that migrants carry ‘various types ofparasites, which could be dangerous here’. (Heisbourge;2015)Countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic states,frequently adopt restrictive regulation and reject asylum applications whichmake it harder for asylum seekers to enter and settle in the country. ‘Accordingto Eurostat some countries such as Estonia, Lithuania and Portugal declined allof the asylum applications in 2015, while Latvia, Hungary and Poland recordedfirst instance rejection rate above 80 %.’ (Havlova and Tamchynova; 2016) In Hungary, the governor Viktor Orban has stated that ‘Hungary wouldlike to remain a homogenous culture and illegal immigrants from outside Europewould endanger such a situation.’ (CITE) He also announced a plan to build a fence across Hungariansouthern border with Serbia in order to stop further refugee flow. (Matthee;2015)A political debate is supported by the public opinion towards refugeesin Eastern European countries which is predominantly negative. In Slovakia,migration became a more prominent issue in the media, reflecting publicconcerns regarding security, economic cost, and cultural integration ofrefugees from Muslim countries. (Slovakia Questions) Anti-Muslim arguments are also supported byrepresentatives from the religious community. For instance, Hungarian catholicbishop Laszlo Kiss-Rigostated that ‘They’re not refugees. This is an invasion. They comehere with cries of ‘Allahu Akbar’. They want to take over.’(CITE) The catholic cardinal Dominik Duka fromCzech Republic spoke in a similar way, saying ‘the right to life and security of Czechfamilies and citizens are superior to all other rights.’ (Culik; 2015)In Poland, the ruling Law and Justice Party voted to keep immigrationpolicy in the hands of Polish state, opposing the creation of the common EUmechanism of refugee relocation. Some politicians claimed that refugees fromthe Middle East create social tension and represent a security threat for someEuropean countries, therefore Poland should keep the asylum and refugee policyin its own hands. National politicians made several anti-migration statements,claiming that some of the migrants are affiliated with international terroristorganizations. Poland is in favor of accepting Christians and grants asylumstatus to so called ‘religious minority’ representatives which refers mainly toArab Christians from the Middle East. (CITE) The country is stated to accept at least 6,500refugees from Greece and Italy over the next two years. (Rettman; 2016) Most of the arguments against accepting refugees from Eastern Europeanstates rise concerns regarding ‘culturalincompatibility, racial and religious difference, security threats, inabilityto distinguish genuine refugees from economic migrants, negative experiencewith integration in other European Union member states and localities, lastingsocialist legacies of population resettlement that continued to underminepost-socialist polities, poor economies, impoverished populations and imposedsolidarity by Europe that invoked memories of directives from Moscow.’ (Dzenovska; 2016) It resulted in therise of conservative, nationalistic and, quite often, xenophobic rhetoric andleaded to the lack of coherence and solidarity among European Union memberstates. Role of central European states in refugee and migration crisisEven though countriessuch as Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia or Baltic states have not been greatlyaffected by the refugee crisis, they have a capacity to shape agenda within theEU and influence asylum seeker policy of the Union. In 2015, the EuropeanCommission drafted the ‘EU agenda on Migration’ —setting ‘political priorities’and elaborating on a common response on the refugee and migration crisis. Themost sensitive issues of the agenda were the proposal of ‘Relocation system’ and‘Resettlement System’. The Council agreed to redistribute around 160,000 Syrianrefugees from Greece, Italy and Hungary to other member states over a span oftwo years. This proposal sparkled an open conflict during the Justice and HomeAffairs Council. (Toygür;2016) In response Slovakia filed alawsuit to the European Court of justice against proposed ‘quota policy’. Theauthorities of the country disagree with the idea to settle hundreds southernof refugees within 28 member states. But, even more they disagree with the waythe decision was reached – by QMV. The representatives of the country insistedthat such important decision should be adopted by a consensus. Slovakia is consideredto be a transit country for refugees – on their way to more desirabledestinations in Germany, France, and Sweden. Therefore, the country has nocapacity to make them stay. Currently the country is accepting preferablyChristian refugee families keeping the number low – the asylum status wasgranted to approximately 150 people in total in 2015. (Slovakia Questions)Poland was initially supportive of the ‘quota policy’, however after theParis terrorist attack the country changed its position. The President ofLatvia, similarly stated that ‘Latvia will not accept any more refugees untilEurope’s border security can be assured.’ (Dzenovska; 2016)Several EU states,including Germany, Sweden and some other ‘target countries’ stoppedimplementing the Dublin regulations, meaning that they stopped sending refugeesback to the border countries. However, Central European countries insist onsending their refugees back to the countries where they entered the EU borderand refuse to ratify the quota policy that was introduced by the EU. Austria,for instance, was trying to limit the number of people reaching the country byblocking their border. These measures are supported by the rise of anti-refugeesentiments. In 2010 the Czech Republic received less than 1000 refugeeapplications however the common attitude between citizens older 15 was againstaccepting refugees from Syria and African countries. (Havlova and Tamchynova; 2016)Some scholars argue that the current refugee crisis draws a clear linebetween ‘old’ and ‘new’ member states. ‘Old EU member states tend to be farmore open towards the refugees and receive a larger number of refugees comparedto the former Communist countries which are now members of the EU.’ (Havlova and Tamchynova; 2016) Onthe European level the Central European countries form a coalition that opposethe welcoming approach of ‘old’ member states. The most illustrative example ofit — a dispute between Visegrad 4 countries and Germany. V4 countries are ‘finallyfinding a common voice’ based on the similar approach on the EU refugee policyand frequently criticizing a system of re-distribution of refugees(pre-allocated quotas). During the 25th Visegrad Ministerial meetingthe representatives were focused on the European response on migration. ‘In thejoint declaration the prime ministers claimed their support for EU decisions,yet called for stronger and stricter control of EU’s outer border and alsoasked for a Plan B to be ready in case of failure of the agreement with Turkeyto keep the migrants there.’ (Havlova and Tamchynova; 2016) After the long periodof integration, Europe is turning towards ‘instinctive national sentiments.’ Themost vocal opponent to German’s policy is Hungary. Prime Minister Viktor Orbanrefused any coopetition and strengthen the border which ‘triggered the collapseof the Balkan’s border.’ Hungarian and Austrian leaders are also promised toprotect their borders from refugees. (Postelnicescu; 2016)The current refugeeand migration crisis turned into a lack of solidarity and a political crisis.Leaders of the EU member states have failed to formulate a common position andelaborate on a common response to this issue. The voices from Central and EasternEuropean states demonstrate the rise of nationalism rhetoric is drawing adividing line between this region and Western Europe. The migration and refugeecrisis has demonstrated once again that ‘in pushing for enlargement as a symbolic act tore-unify the continent, Western decision-makers underestimated the strength ofcultural and political differences between the CEE region and the old EU.’ (Gyori; 2016) Never the less, consolidated Central European stateshave a capacity to influence the EU-level policy-making, which implies a greaterrisk for further integration.List of references Culik, J. (2015, September). Fencing off the east: how the refugee crisis is dividing the European Union. In Conversation (p. 16). The Conversation Trust.Dzenovska, D. (2016). Eastern Europe, the Moral Subject of the Migration/Refugee Crisis, and Political Futures1. Near Futures Online, (1).Guild, E., Costello, C., Garlick, M., & Moreno-Lax, V. (2015). The 2015 refugee crisis in the European Union. CEPS Policy Brief, 332.Gyori G. (2016) The Political Communication of the refugee crisis in Central and Eastern Europe / Foundation for European Progressive Studies, URL: http://www.feps-europe.eu/en/publications/details/399Heisbourg, F. (2015). The Strategic Implications of the Syrian Refugee Crisis. Survival, 57(6), 7-20.Havlová, R., & Tamchynová, K. (2016). The Uncertain Role of the EU Countries in the Syrian Refugee Crisis 1. Insight Turkey, 18(2), 85.Joris, W., d’Haenens, L., Van Gorp, B., & Mertens, S. (2016). The Refugee Crisis in Europe: A Frame Analysis of European Newspapers.Matthee, H. (2015). Europe’s migration policies in crisis. Al Jazeera Center for Studies.Postelnicescu, C. (2016). Europe’s New Identity: The Refugee Crisis and the Rise of Nationalism. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 12(2), 203.Rettman A. (2016) Poland: Middle East migrants cause EU ‘tensions’ / EU Observer, URL: https://euobserver.com/migration/132881 Slovakia Questions the EU’sApproach to the Migrant Crisis / World Politics Review, UPR: http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/17654/slovakia-questions-the-eu-s-approach-to-the-migrant-crisis Toygür I (2016). The European Persponseto the Refugee Crisis: Angela Merkel on the Move / Istanbul Policy Center, URL: http://ipc.sabanciuniv.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/IlkeToygur_BiancaBenvenuti_FINAL.pdf Get Help With Your EssayIf you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!Find out more