The European Parliament elections are just two months away. The big question is how Europe’s alliance of far-right populists will fare. Their strategy is clear. In a speech in July, Viktor Orban, the prime minister of Hungary and a figurehead of the far right, belligerently declared that “the time has come for the European elections to be about a great, important, common European issue: the issue of immigration, and the future related to it.” The right wing is organized and confident. Mr. Orban concluded, “We believe we are that future.”
Is Mr. Orban correct? The conventional wisdom in Europe these days says that the far right has peaked. This view is based largely on the idea that the “refugee crisis” is over. If the populist surge was fueled by a real problem in 2015, when over a million refugees and migrants entered Europe, there is no such problem today.
It’s true that the numbers have come down — to under 150,000 irregular arrivals last year, which is still above, but not too far from, the pre-2014 average of about 100,000 a year. This analysis leads to the comforting but dangerous conclusion that the tremors still rippling through the European political landscape will subside once public perception has caught up with reality.
The ubiquity of this view may account for the inertia of mainstream political parties. They appear to have given up on any serious efforts to reform asylum and migration policies. The proposals that do still emerge are either irrelevant (10,000 more European Union border guards), undeliverable (“regional disembarkation platforms” in Africa) or empty slogans (“controlled centers” within the E.U.’s borders). None are put forward with much conviction.
This is unwise. If mainstream leaders — on both the left and the right — are hoping that the declining number of migrant arrivals will, on its own, halt the far-right populist insurgency, they are going to be disappointed come May.
That’s in large part because the populist narrative on migration is number-proof. The story illiberal leaders tell is simple, emotional and powerful: Europe faces a barbarian invasion, and only the right has the will to stop it. High numbers of arrivals prove their premise, while low numbers prove the effectiveness of their remedies. No matter that their heartless policies are largely irrelevant. Mr. Orban’s fences in Hungary and the Italian government’s hounding of rescue boats are highly visible, but the real work is being done in Libya and Turkey and by the increasingly appalling conditions on the Greek islands — policies and failures for which Europe’s leaders share a collective responsibility.
The point, though, is this: Populists propose, carry out and advertise policies that are consistent with their story. Mainstream parties should copy this approach.
What they need, first and foremost, is a different story. The populist narrative of a migrant invasion took hold at the height of the refugee crisis. The reality, however, is that the events of 2015 were exceptional, the product of the near simultaneous implosion of two close-by countries — Syria, which generated some five million refugees, and Libya, which opened a previously closed passage to Europe. Migration catastrophists typically focus on Africa, but even in 2016, the peak year for Central Mediterranean crossings, only 165,000 came from the continent. This is a large and unsustainable number, but it is not uncontrollable — and it is certainly not an invasion.
The story to counter the populist narrative should start like this: There is no invasion; migration is controllable and must be controlled. But that is not enough. How migrant flows are managed and reduced matters, too. Populists say they will stop everyone. Principled politicians must instead say: We will control our borders humanely; we will not stop everyone, but we will discourage those with no claim to protection from setting out and send back those who come; we will respect human rights and refugee law; we will welcome the persecuted; we will rescue those adrift at sea; we will work with and invest in neighboring countries (like Turkey) to expand the space in which refugees can live (and be returned to) in dignity; and we will offer migrants the opportunity to come and work regularly, in proportion to our needs and capacity.
They don’t just need to say these things; they also need to show that they are doing them. They need policies that match their story. Much touted “European” values are at the heart of this story. They are important, they are popular, they are what distinguish democrats from demagogues — and they are, for the most part, conspicuously absent from the practices Europe has employed to reduce the pressure on its borders.
This, in the end, is the crucial question: How do governments deliver humane, effective border control? The honest answer must be: with difficulty, at cost and through significant administrative, and some legislative, reforms.
It is possible, however, and necessary. The broad outlines are already clear. A coalition of willing European governments should come together to ensure quick but fair processing of all asylum applications in reception centers in frontier states and to return those with no claim to protection to their countries of origin. For this, they reach agreements with these countries that speak to their actual interests; where possible, they return refugees to transit countries willing to receive them, but only if their rights are fully respected there, which requires investment and monitoring. Finally, they distribute recognized refugees from these centers across other participating European Union states.
Mainstream European politicians and parties should endorse such a plan immediately, and then begin figuring out the details. That will be hard work, but less costly — and less dangerous — than not coming up with a plan. Doing nothing, or doing many things ineffectively, is not going to convince voters and certainly won’t win back those seduced by populist fear-mongerers. Democrats can beat populists this May by telling a better story and carrying out better policies. They have just two months to prove it.
John Dalhuisen (@DalhuisenJJ) is a senior fellow at the European Stability Initiative, a think tank.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: email@example.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.B:
刘伯温玄机资料www13776com【如】【果】【隐】【身】【偷】【袭】【被】【敌】【对】【看】【破】，【那】【他】【们】【优】【势】【荡】【然】【无】【存】【了】，【不】【过】【还】【好】【的】【是】【敌】【对】【并】【不】【是】【所】【有】【人】【能】【看】【到】【他】【们】。 【现】【在】【他】【们】【处】【于】【被】【动】，【只】【能】【掉】【头】【往】【里】【面】【走】，【也】【许】【就】【能】【看】【到】【仇】【敌】【队】【伍】【了】，【左】【右】【绕】【路】【当】【来】【到】【一】【处】【要】【上】【山】【波】【路】【的】【位】【置】【时】，【皇】【二】【停】【下】【了】【脚】【步】【一】【挥】【手】【说】【道】。 “【皇】【十】【和】【皇】【七】【去】【前】【面】【观】【察】【一】【下】，【我】【总】【感】【觉】【那】【边】【前】【面】【有】【人】。”
【阴】【女】【荀】【甚】【至】【还】【有】【些】【幸】【灾】【乐】【祸】【地】【想】，【有】【了】【竟】【陵】【公】【主】【的】【人】【在】，【只】【怕】【澧】【兰】【翻】【不】【出】【什】【么】【大】【浪】【来】，【何】【先】【生】【要】【失】【望】【了】。 【竟】【陵】【公】【主】【又】【看】【了】【一】【眼】【澧】【兰】，【笑】【道】：“【澧】【兰】，【日】【后】【你】【主】【子】【在】【大】【溱】【宫】【中】【过】【活】，【也】【要】【看】【你】【的】，【大】【溱】【比】【不】【得】【东】【越】，【受】【了】【委】【屈】【可】【以】【找】【太】【后】【做】【主】，【很】【多】【事】【都】【要】【自】【己】【往】【肚】【子】【里】【咽】，【你】【可】【明】【白】？” 【澧】【兰】【躬】【身】【答】【道】：“【多】【谢】
【詹】【青】【墨】【急】【忙】【放】【开】【拉】【着】【东】【青】【的】【手】【朝】【着】【厨】【房】【而】【去】，【东】【青】【听】【着】【鑫】【叔】【同】【意】【大】【家】【一】【块】【吃】【个】【饭】，【眼】【眶】【里】【面】【的】【泪】【水】【彻】【底】【忍】【不】【住】【了】，【径】【直】【落】【了】【下】【来】。【也】【随】【着】【詹】【青】【墨】【的】【身】【影】【朝】【着】【厨】【房】【冲】【去】。 【只】【见】【鑫】【叔】【蹲】【下】【个】【身】【子】，【那】【枯】【槁】【的】【老】【手】【不】【断】【发】【抖】【的】【一】【片】【一】【片】【捡】【起】【刚】【才】【摔】【碎】【的】【个】【瓷】【碗】，【神】【情】【落】【寞】，【心】【里】【估】【计】【也】【不】【是】【个】【滋】【味】，【也】【不】【愿】【意】【抬】【起】【头】【看】【着】【这】刘伯温玄机资料www13776com【两】【人】【处】【于】【这】【样】【的】【环】【境】【之】【中】，【才】【刚】【认】【识】，【便】【相】【处】【的】【没】【有】【任】【何】【隔】【阂】，【水】【源】【和】【食】【物】【的】【问】【题】【暂】【时】【解】【决】，【吃】【饱】【喝】【足】，【天】【色】【已】【经】【暗】【淡】【了】【许】【多】，【想】【来】【再】【过】【一】【会】，【所】【有】【还】【没】【有】【退】【出】【的】【参】【赛】【者】【就】【将】【进】【在】【这】【里】【度】【过】【参】【加】【这】【场】【活】【动】【以】【来】【的】【第】【一】【个】【夜】【晚】。 【陆】【羽】【琪】【两】【人】【用】【藤】【蔓】【编】【织】【成】【简】【易】【绳】【索】，【将】【其】【缠】【绕】【在】【树】【枝】【上】，【再】【在】【上】【面】【铺】【上】【一】【层】【较】【为】【柔】【软】【的】
【蔷】【薇】【顿】【了】【下】，【道】：“……” “【我】【会】【把】【世】【界】【烧】【成】【平】【地】……【咳】【咳】，【跑】【题】【了】。” 【琪】【琳】【凝】【重】【道】：“【我】【永】【远】【信】【你】，【无】【论】【你】【做】【什】【么】。” “【如】【果】【真】【如】【你】【所】【说】，【我】【会】【替】【你】【赎】【回】【过】【错】，【用】【我】【的】【一】【生】。” 【林】【稚】【拥】【了】【过】【去】，【拍】【拍】【她】【的】【后】【背】，“【放】【心】，【我】【不】【会】！” “【你】……【你】【吓】【到】【了】【我】！”【哽】【咽】【的】【声】【音】，【琪】【琳】【在】【林】【稚】【的】【怀】【抱】
【红】【玉】【没】【想】【过】【前】【脚】【说】【去】【闭】【关】【的】【大】【人】【没】【到】【一】【天】【就】【跑】【出】【来】【了】，【她】【也】【没】【想】【过】【身】【受】【重】【伤】、【不】【能】【动】【武】【的】【大】【人】【能】【一】【天】【把】【高】【级】【训】【练】【室】【弄】【废】。 【她】【先】【关】【闭】【了】【训】【练】【室】【外】【的】【警】【报】，【然】【后】【看】【着】【模】【样】【大】【变】【的】【泽】【思】【弦】。 【泽】【思】【弦】【的】【样】【子】【触】【目】【惊】【心】，【衣】【服】【上】【全】【是】【血】，【这】【些】【血】【已】【经】【半】【干】，【有】【些】【已】【经】【成】【为】【了】【黑】【色】，【但】【她】【身】【上】【却】【没】【有】【半】【点】【伤】，【像】【是】【刚】【完】【成】【百】【人】
“【师】【爷】【误】【会】【了】，【只】【是】【璎】【儿】【成】【日】【在】【这】【春】【望】【楼】，【心】【思】【早】【已】【不】【如】【当】【初】【那】【般】【纯】【净】，【不】【是】【师】【爷】【所】【说】【不】【想】，【而】【是】【璎】【儿】【自】【知】【不】【敢】【想】……” 【好】【在】【这】【一】【番】【话】【看】【似】【有】【了】【些】【效】【果】，【李】【侍】【英】【那】【边】【这】【才】【阴】【翳】【着】【脸】【色】，【再】【看】【璎】【儿】【已】【经】【满】【是】【无】【趣】。 【于】【是】【李】【侍】【英】【就】【看】【向】【另】【外】【那】【边】【的】【蕊】【儿】，【眯】【着】【三】【角】【眼】【问】【道】： “【蕊】【儿】【呢】？【你】【可】【曾】【和】【师】【爷】【想】【着】【你】【一】【样】