Cyprus-Forum.com

[supporttheunderdog]

Why don't you look at what has been 'applied' to help you work out what 'applies'.

As usual we do not get a straight answer to a straight question....

Fact, as at November 2015 when the Frontex evaluation was performed, under ec 2007/2004 ( as ammended) the responsibility for external borders lay with the member nations, not Frontex, who had a clearly defind but limited secondary role in supporting member nations. You have produced nothing verifiable or credible to contradict that.
Even in the proposal you quoted it was stated day to day management of externsl borders lay with the member nnations with The planed new agency and coastguard likewise wise having a secondary role but with increased ability to unilatrally intervene, if needed.

Your premise therefore about the shared nature of the management of Eu borders, designed to suite your agenda of removing any responsibility from Greece for the identified serious deficiencies found in the November 2015 inspections is not correct.

Indeed most of your assertions about the evaluation and the actions flowing from it are not correct.

Indeed the document you cited can have no relevence to the position in November 2015 when it wasxwritten after the event and in response to the situation.

The EU is bending over backwards to deal with the irregular migrant flow not to help Greece but to protect the rest of the EU From the consequences of such migration, including the fact that terrorists were using the refugee route to get into Greece as a Schengen country with less risk of identification because no checks were in place, in some Islands, and from where they could get to other EU states without having to pass any formal border check.

Fact. The Eu council has made it very clear with explicit reference to the then Article 26 of the Schengen Border Code thst unless Greece can demonstrate that it has taken steps to sufficiently remedy the serious deficiencies identified that it may take action to require at least the partial reimposition of some internal border controls to ensure that the identified serious deficiencies in manegement of the Greek external border, which under ec 2097/2004 (even as ammended) us tge responsibility of Greece,m are circumvented, i.e. that those leaving Greece to go to other Schengen states may be required to show passports and be recorded.

I WILL NEVER FORGIVE YOU FOR SINKING SO LOW AS SEEKING TO IMPLY THE BELGIANS DESERVED THE TERRORIST ATTACKS FOR BEING CRITICAL OF GREECE, OR OTHERWISE LINKING THE ATTACKS TO THE CRITICISM, PARTICULARLY AS IT IS KNOWN THAT SEVERAL TERRORIST INVOLVED IN THE FRENCH AND/OR BELGIAN ATTACKS TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE SERIOUS DEFICIENCIES TO SNEAK IN TO THE SCHENGEN AREA.

I HOPE THAT SHOWS TO EVERYONE HERE HOW MORALLY CORRUPT YOU ARE WHEN IT COMES TO YOUR AGENDA OF DIVERTING BLAME AWAY FROM GREECE FOR THE SERIOUS DEFICIENCIES.

[GreekIslandGirl]

Fact, as at November 2015 when the Frontex evaluation was performed, under ec 2007/2004 ....

Who gives a fig about some outdated documents? Oh, yeah you and erolz.

Why don't you at least have a look at page 1 of this thread and use your brain as to why even Frontex is going to get additional help if not a complete make over.

The crisis has exposed clear weaknesses and gaps in existing mechanisms aimed at making sure that EU standards are upheld. Therefore, it is now time to move to a truly integrated system of border management. The European Border and Coast Guard will bring together a reinforced Agency, with the ability to draw on a reserve pool of people and equipment, and the Member States’ authorities, who will continue to exercise day-to-day border management.

Why are they doing that now if Frontex was not deficient?



This might also give you a clue that the Frontex was operating with deficiencies:

“The EU external borders are confronted with three major challenges: an unprec­edented rise in migratory pressure, an increasing terrorist threat and a steady rise in the number of regular travelers,” it concluded.

In order to deal with those flows, border agencies are going to have to do a better job of identifying arrivals and improving risk profiles to spot potential threats.

“Border management will increasingly be risk­-based, to en­sure that interventions are focused on high-risk movements of people, while low­-risk movements are facilitated smoothly,” it found.

The report also detailed the enormous stress the migration crisis placed on the EU last year.

EU countries reported a record 1.82 million illegal border crossings in 2015, six times higher than the previous record set in 2014. Most of the crossings — more than 885,000 — occurred along the Eastern Mediterranean route between Greece and Turkey, including the Greek islands in the Aegean.

The Western Balkan route, including Hungary’s and Croatia’s border with Serbia, accounted for about 764,000 border crossings. Because of increased traffic along these routes, the number of migrants arriving on the Central Mediterranean route to Italy fell by 10 percent to 154,000.

Over 90 percent of illegal border crossings occurred in the second half of the year, the report said.

“There is no EU system capable of trac­ing people’s movements following an il­legal border ­crossing,” the report said. “Therefore it is not possible to establish the precise number of persons who have illegally crossed two sections of the external borders of the EU.”

The number of asylum seekers in the EU rose to its highest level ever at 1.35 million in 2015, according to the European Asylum Support Office.

The largest number of illegal crossings were by Syrians (or people claiming to be from Syria) at 594,059, followed by Afghanis at 267,485.

The migration pressure has created a political crisis in Europe, which has struggled to stem the flow amid rising worry that uncontrolled movement of people is undermining the bloc’s security — a concern sharpened by terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels.

“The Paris attacks in November 2015 clearly demonstrated that irregular mi­gratory flows could be used by terrorists to enter the EU,” noted the report.

Illegal migration is also dangerous for those seeking to enter the EU. The International Migration Organization estimated that more than 3,770 people died while trying to cross the Mediterranean in 2015.

The number of detections of people smugglers also increased by 20 percent to more than 12,000, with most being Moroccans, Spaniards, Albanians and Syrians.

Frontex coordinates cooperation among member countries in managing the bloc’s external borders, and also regularly reports on the control and surveillance of EU frontiers.

http://www.politico.eu/article/eu-needs ... tex-finds/

[supporttheunderdog]

Who gives a fig about some outdated documents? Oh, yeah you and erolz.

The EU commission and council for two, who do not appear to consider them outdated but are acting on them. And it is their views, not mine nor Erolz nor even yours, which count.

Nothing else that is going on by way of aid to Greece takes away from that, no matter what you may seek to claim to the contrary by way of Special pleading if not specious arguement. Whether you like it ir not Greece was found seriously deficient and not by me or Erolz but by the EU who must by your logic be Greek haters.

[qoute]Why don't you at least have a look at page 1 of this thread and use your brain as to why even Frontex is going to get additional help if not a complete make over.
[/quote]
I did. I refered to it. See the emphasised part below.

The crisis has exposed clear weaknesses and gaps in existing mechanisms[/b][/u] aimed at making sure that EU standards are upheld. Therefore, it is now time to move to a truly integrated system of border management. The European Border and Coast Guard will bring together a reinforced Agency,[/u][/b] with the ability to draw on a reserve pool of people and equipment, and the Member States’ authorities, who will continue to exercise day-to-day border management.

That does not affect the position as was in November 2015.

In order to deal with those flows, border agencies are going to have to do a better job of identifying arrivals and improving risk profiles to spot potential threats.
~~~~~~
“There is no EU system capable of trac­ing people’s movements following an il­legal border ­crossing,” the report said. “Therefore it is not possible to establish the precise number of persons who have illegally crossed two sections of the external borders of the EU"

That is the essence of the serious deficiencies, which even under the new proposals will be left to National authoritie who will be responsible for the day to day management of the external borders, including recording of irregular migrants.

The difference is that when they foul up, the EU will have the right to step in with or without the member state's approval, let alone request, so you will end up with non Greeks telling Greeks how to run the Greek extetnal border.

Next it will be the Greek economy, even more than now.

“The Paris attacks in November 2015 clearly demonstrated that irregular mi­gratory flows could be used by terrorists to enter the EU,” noted the report.

This Was something you tried to deny. The citizenship or origin of the attackers does not detract from the fact they exploited the identified serious deficiencies to sneak in without being recorded. See the point above.

Frontex coordinates cooperation among member countries in managing the bloc’s external borders, and also regularly reports on the control and surveillance of EU frontiers.

Yes, That is what i have bern saying, coordinating cooperation, not taking on the role of control. See psra 4 ec2007/2004 as ammended. Valid law until repealed.

http://www.politico.eu/article/eu-needs-to-strengthen

A bit of journalism? What is the official status of it?

[supporttheunderdog]

Another piece of journalism, expressly passed on as such, which reports on the current position.

https://euobserver.com/migration/133219

Add to the list of parties who seem to accept the position under law, and the validity of the decisions, the GREEK GOVERNMENT.

Explain if you can why the GREEK GOVERNMENT is apparently complying with the requirements to produce plans to remedy the identified serious deficiencies under laws and legally valid decisions made under them that you (and no one else) claims are redundant, or outdated, or no longer apply....

[GreekIslandGirl]

The crisis has exposed clear weaknesses and gaps in existing mechanisms[/b][/u] aimed at making sure that EU standards are upheld. Therefore, it is now time to move to a truly integrated system of border management. The European Border and Coast Guard will bring together a reinforced Agency,[/u][/b] with the ability to draw on a reserve pool of people and equipment, and the Member States’ authorities, who will continue to exercise day-to-day border management.

I don't know why you assume having a shared external border management cadre for such a crisis wouldn't also allow the usual day-to-day border management also. That's the reason the reports all state Greece has to overall manage the extra boats, ships, personnel etc that are part of the shared management (but you seem to think Greece is being criticised when it's stated these aspects are under Greece's control). Greece, as any other state, has the final say (as far as international laws etc allow) in who and what gets set up around its own borders - which are at the same time, the EU's external borders and require joint management against those people who are coming to 'the EU' as opposed to just 'visiting Greece' for a holiday.

[supporttheunderdog]

This explains Frontex Role, and by extrapolation Greece's responsibility and I think us sufficiently authoratative to confirm what the position is. The key point made is that the Schengen Borders Code includes a series of detailed measures designed to compensate for the abolition of internal border controls by tightening security at the Union’s external frontiers. It clearly states that the primary responsibility of border control lies with those Schengen countries that have an external border – including land and sea borders and international airports. One key requirement is that Member States having an external frontier must ensure that proper checks and effective surveillance are carried out there.

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Schengen countries are obliged to deploy sufficient staff and resources to ensure a “high and uniform level of control” at the external borders of the Schengen area. They must also ensure that border guards are properly trained. EU and Schengen Associated Countries also assist each other with the effective application of border controls via operational cooperation, which is coordinated by the EU agency Frontex. Its main task is to augment and to add value to, border control activities of the Member States. Thus the agency is also mandated to assist EU countries in raising and harmonising border management standards with the aim of combating cross-border crime while making legitimate passage across the external border of the EU faster and easier.

The Schengen area now extends along some 44,000 km of external sea borders and almost 9,000 km of land borders. Schengen comprises 26 countries (including a number of non-EU states, so-called Schengen Associated Countries), meaning free internal movement for nearly half a billion people. It should be noted that the removal of checks at internal borders makes the controls at external borders much more important, since Schengen members are thus reliant on the checks made by other members. Simply put, the Schengen area’s border is only as strong as its weakest link.

The Schengen Borders Code includes a series of detailed measures designed to compensate for the abolition of internal border controls by tightening security at the Union’s external frontiers. It clearly states that the primary responsibility of border control lies with those Schengen countries that have an external border – including land and sea borders and international airports. One key requirement is that Member States having an external frontier must ensure that proper checks and effective surveillance are carried out there.

How it works
While regular border control is the exclusive responsibility of the Member States, Frontex’s role focuses on coordination of deployment of additional experts and technical equipment to those border areas which find themselves under significant pressure. Frontex also builds the capacity of the member states in various areas related to border control, including training and sharing of best practices.

Intelligence-driven
Frontex joint operations are planned and developed on the basis of an Annual Risk Analysis Report which analyses the likely future risk of irregular migration and cross-border crime along the EU external border. During the annual meetings with Member States the agency then prioritises the proposed joint operations on the basis of their importance and the resources available in order to ensure an effective response.

Consultation with Member States
Together with the host country Frontex makes an assessment of the number of officers with specific expertise and the quantity and type of technical equipment required. Frontex then directs a request to all Member States and Schengen Associated Countries for the necessary officers, clearly specifying their required profiles (false document experts, border checks, surveillance experts, dog handlers, debriefers etc) as well as specific equipment needed for the operation (e.g. helicopters, planes, patrol cars, thermo-vision equipment, heart-beat detectors). Those countries then decide on the level of contribution they can make to the joint operation.

Operational Plan
This document clearly defines the aim of each joint operation, where it is to take place and the quantities and types of technical equipment and officers to take part. Many operations require the deployment of debriefers, who conduct interviews with migrants with the purpose of gathering information about people-smuggling networks. In addition, cultural mediators and interpreters enable migrants to express themselves in their own languages. The operational plan also clearly states the rules of engagement for officers taking part in the operation.

Implementation
At this stage, border guards and technical equipment are deployed to the operational area and carry out their duties according to the operational plan. The deployed officers (guest officers) work under the command and control of the authorities of the country hosting the operation.

During deployment guest officers have capacity to perform all tasks and exercise all powers for border checks or border surveillance in accordance with Schengen Borders Code being border checks, border surveillance, stamping, interviewing undocumented persons, consultation of databases.

They wear their national uniforms and a blue armband (picture) with the insignia of the EU and Frontex. For the purposes of identification vis-à-vis national authorities and citizens, guest officers carry an accreditation document, provided by Frontex, which they must present on request.

Code of conduct
All officers deployed to an operation coordinated by Frontex are bound by the code of conduct, which includes specific provisions on the respect of fundamental rights and the right to international protection and lays out a set of behavioural standards that all staff involved in a Frontex joint operation must follow.

Evaluation
Once completed, each operation is evaluated by Frontex, the participating countries and other stakeholders involved ensuring that the operational process is constantly refined.

I do not think it can made any clearer that your opinions on the roles and responsibilities of Frontex and those of the member states are not at all correct but rather that Erolz and I have a better understanding of the position as reflected in the above, and EU law, which the above reflects, but if you think that the above is not correct please quote authoritative scource material which contradicts the point that The Schengen Borders Code ...clearly states that the primary responsibility of border control lies with those Schengen countries that have an external border – including land and sea borders and international airports where One key requirement is that Member States having an external frontier must ensure that proper checks and effective surveillance are carried out there and that regular border control is the exclusive responsibility of the Member States.

I know you will not because you cannot as outside of the law the above quoted section is about as authoritative as it can get.

[GreekIslandGirl]

I'm not arguing with the 'primary responsibility' - I've already told you each country has to oversee what operations are conducted in its delineations or borders. But as well as that is the shared/joint responsibility of the external border - or are you going to flat out deny that in the face of all the amendments, additions, and NEW "Agency" set ups?

The shared responsibility aspect is what is important for Schengen to operate because other (internal, say) countries have to know that the external borders are managed (co-managed) against illegal migrants (and now a HUGE crisis) and that is why they have a right to offer personnel to assist/oversee - and more than the fact they have a right, they are legally bound and have to obey EU law and share that burden. This is where your blinded aim to blame Greece let's any logic completely pass you by.

[supporttheunderdog]

I'm not arguing with the 'primary responsibility' - I've already told you each country has to oversee what operations are conducted in its delineations or borders. But as well as that is the shared/joint responsibility of the external border - or are you going to flat out deny that in the face of all the amendments, additions, and NEW "Agency" set ups?

The shared responsibility aspect is what is important for Schengen to operate because other (internal, say) countries have to know that the external borders are managed (co-managed) against illegal migrants (and now a HUGE crisis) and that is why they have a right to offer personnel to assist/oversee - and more than the fact they have a right, they are legally bound and have to obey EU law and share that burden. This is where your blinded aim to blame Greece let's any logic completely pass you by.

I quite agree there is a shared responsibility where what I quoted above very clearly sets out the nature of the shared responsibility - which is on clearly defined and limited terms - and where what we evidently disagree upon is on what the precise legal obligations are - both as to responsibility of member states for their EU external border and of other member states to render assistance under the Schengen Border Code, where I have also stated that that if other nations are in breach of legal obligations under the SBC to provide support I will condemn them.

I think you have consistently sought to understate the responsibility of the Member nations and and overstated the shared element, where it is that heavy primary responsibility upon Greece and lighter shared responsibility on Frontex and other EU nations that lead to severe deficiencies being found by in the management by Greece of its external borders and with no identified criticism of either Frontex or any other nation in respect of the management of the Greek external EU border. However as far as I know from all official reports Greece did not formally request a RABIT until 3rd December, after and possibly in response to the Evaluation visit, and as it is axiomatic no obligations can arise until a RABIT is requested no responsibility can fall upon Frontex or any other state for failure to provide in the period prior to the request. I will be interested to see if the Ninth biannual report on the functioning of the Schengen area (due out mid/late May) has any comments on any failings to respond to the request.

On the logic point I think one can only argue on the basis of what the underlying legal position was at the time, when discussing legal obligations and what flows from them, and fact that that new laws or new agencies have come about since, or that aid has been offered, cannot alter the contemporaneous position, ie that up to 13th November 2015 . That is where I think there is massive non-sequiter in your argument in trying to transpose later events back in time to distort the reality of the position as it was in November 2015 where inspections found that there were serious deficiencies and Greece has been required to take steps to remedy them, but transposition back in time of post November developments, ie the response to a request for a RABIT on 3rd December cannot be logical.

One cannot alter the past, as you would wish, so that there were no serious deficiencies. It is a historical fact they were identified. Do you accept that?
Those are by the way criticisms expressed by the EU - a historical reality not invented by myself or Erolz to blame Greece.

What we all have to hope for is that by 12th May Greece has satisfied the EU that it has adequately dealt with the identified serious deficiencies.

[GreekIslandGirl]

Well, in the end, the EU admitted it was deficient in its management of the external borders by finally taking its own advice, evaluations, recommendations etc and invested more Frontex manpower, equipment, developed a whole new "Agency" - the European Border and Coastguard - and greater Triton/Poseidon Sea patrols and not to mention NATO-Aegean reconnaissance sailings - plus the deal with Turkey to act better and take back migrants.

Was this what Greece was 'deficient' in? All those missing things that have now been magically added to the mix? I can't wait to see how they are going to word a document on Greece's management of all these extraneous entities.

[erolz66]

Who gives a fig about some outdated documents? Oh, yeah you and erolz.

Rich coming from the person who in response to an EU Commission press release about the conclusions of the 'Schengen Evaluation Report on Greece' not ONLY immediately starting quoting and has continued to quote month after tedious month, from a report that specifically said covered a period that ended BEFORE the 'Schengen Evaluation Report on Greece' was completed but who ALSO tried to claim that this report, that specifically said covered a period that ended BEFORE the 'Schengen Evaluation Report on Greece' WAS the 'Schengen Evaluation Report on Greece'. A total lie that having made all those months before you STILL have not addressed and STILL try and use as the basis for further compounding lie after lie .