​Daniela Pisoiu, a senior researcher at the Austrian Institute of International Relations, explained in an interview to HotNews.ro the reasons that, in her opinion, caused Austria’s refusal to grant Romania access to the Schengen zone.

Just two days before the meeting of the Council of the CIS on December 8-9, at which a decision should be made on the accession of Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia to Schengen, the Austrian government strongly declares that it is against the admission of Romania and Bulgaria to the free movement zone. The reason was given as illegal migrants who had to pass through two countries and arrive in Austria.

However, official figures from Frontex, the European institution responsible for the EU’s borders, show in its latest report that “the Western Balkans is the most active migration route to the EU”, with 128,438 illegal entries recorded in the first ten months of this year. , which is three times more than in the same period of 2021.

In addition, the weakness of the reason referred to by the Austrian chancellor is noted in an article published yesterday in the Austrian newspaper Die Presse, signed by two researchers, Dr. Judith Kohlenberger, an expert in the field of migration at the Institute for Social Policy at the University of Economics and Business in Vienna and Dr. Daniela Pisoiu, political scientist and senior researcher at the Austrian Institute of International Relations.

In order to offer the Romanian public an informed perspective on this topic, I asked a Romanian researcher, a signatory to the article in Die Presse, to answer a few questions.

In a comment you co-signed in Die Press with Dr. Judith Kohlenberger, you claim that the Frontex report does not mention migration on the “Eastern Balkan” route (which would also include Romania) referred to by the Austrian Chancellor, but instead as the most active migration route to The EU is called the “Western Balkan” path. So that the Romanian public can better understand this topic. Do you think there is a problem with illegal migration through Romania or Bulgaria?

Daniela Pisoiu: According to Frontex sources, there is no Eastern Balkan route. The Romanian authorities also do not recognize the existence of such a route.

Mr. Chancellor Nehammer (Chancellor of Austria) cites a study he himself conducted, according to which 40% of the 75,000 unregistered migrants arrived via the Turkey-Bulgaria-Romania-Hungary route and the rest via the Serbia-Hungary route.

This information will be collected from migrants’ mobile phones, as well as during conversations with them and traffickers. In addition, no additional information was provided, and there are doubts about the seriousness of this study.

Serbia, Hungary and the Schengen area

Which countries do you think should be referred to when Austria refers to illegal migration?

The problem is primarily Serbia, which exempted a number of countries from visas, such as India or Tunisia. These people go to the EU and have no chance of asylum because they are not from countries with security problems.

There is also the issue of people who have already been in the Western Balkans and are now moving. In principle, the territory of the Western Balkans is problematic because the borders between the countries are transparent.

And, of course, Hungary, which does not register migrants from these countries, but sends them further to Austria.

Why do you think Mr. Nehammer wants to block Romania and Bulgaria from entering the Schengen area and not Croatia?

For domestic policy reasons. They want to solve the problem of migration from Austria, or at least show that they are taking a hard line. There have been talks with Hungary and Serbia, but progress has been minimal.

The topic of migration is very important in the program of the ÖVP (non-Austrian People’s Party). In addition, the ÖVP party faces large and numerous corruption scandals.

Domestically, they are trying to show that they are capable of governing and also showing results. Initially, there was also a veto against Croatia. It was later canceled, mainly due to tourism, given the large number of Austrian tourists traveling to Croatia.

In general, Austria is hoping through this blockade to get help from the EU on migration and asylum issues – which are actually separate issues from Schengen. Namely, measures to reduce migration to Europe, both illegal and legal.

The last argument of the Austrian government is that “the system does not work”, so we are not expanding the Schengen area. Translated, this means: because Hungary does not register migrants from Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria are being punished.

Next is the general problem of illegal migration, which has nothing to do with Schengen. So Romania and Bulgaria are the scapegoats for Hungary’s failures and the migration problem in general.

What should Romania have done so that there was no opposition to Austria upon joining the Schengen zone?

• Romania should insist on the real situation. If Austria has data that contradicts European data, ask for it.
• Strengthening relations with other European countries, especially with Germany, France and Italy on these issues.
• Refuse to support Austrian proposals on migration and asylum if Austria opposes Romania’s accession to Schengen.

In your opinion, could the fact that Austria is not a member of NATO influence the country’s decision to oppose the accession of Romania and Bulgaria to Schengen? I believe that the question makes sense in the context in which the expansion of the space of free movement was discussed, and in the context of the war (she could support the help that Ukraine received from the allies).

The Austrian government has no overall vision, neither European nor global, and has no detailed security policy. It is almost entirely focused on domestic politics and, in particular, on the survival of the ruling coalition, which is in danger of collapsing, largely due to corruption scandals and several failed attempts at reform. In this context, the issue of NATO does not play a big role.

What are the consequences of Romania and Bulgaria not joining the Schengen Area?

What, in your opinion, will be the political consequences of Romania and Bulgaria not joining the Schengen zone? Will it benefit Russia? Would extremist, pro-Russian, populist formations in these two countries bordering Russia help?

As for Bulgaria, it is possible.

But the impact on the European Union?

Yes, because it will once again become clear that national interests, and especially party interests, are higher than the interests of the European Union, citizens and the rule of law. Romania has the right to be part of Schengen. This is not a service.

The political decision on December 8-9 should be a formality.

• Read also: Port of Rotterdam vs Constanța, Romanians’ favorite Schengen comparison, cocaine phase