14 ms·

Frontex Files

207 points by ruph123 6y ago

krylon 6y ago
EU immigration policy is a disgrace. We like to sneer at Donald Trump and his supporters, but what the EU is doing in the Mediterranean sea is just as bad as building a wall. Maybe even worse, given the number of people that drown every year. Letting hundreds of people die each year in order to "discourage" others is no way to deal with this situation. In Germany, we put former GDR soldiers on trial and into jail for shooting people trying to flee into Western Germany. How is this different?
- the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
  > In Germany, we put former GDR soldiers on trial and into jail for shooting people trying to flee into Western Germany. How is this different? Frontex does not shoot people.
  - krylon 6y ago
    No, they let them drown, they purposefully buy drones and aircraft instead of ships so they do not have to rescue them. It may not be quite the same, but it hardly measures up to the moral standards the EU likes to claim to stand for.
  - guerrilla 6y ago
    > Frontex does not shoot people. That wasn't the claim. The argument was that they kill people and that we've punished border guards who kill people before, so why not now. Shooting was just an example of killing.
  - lampe3 6y ago
    So for you it depends on how you kill people?
  - arendtio 6y ago
    Well, not yet but since they are interested in buying firearms that future doesn't seem to be so far away.
- blub 6y ago
  The EU has a quite reasonable (and rather lax) immigration policy, assuming that people come to the EU legally or move between EU countries. People that get smuggled across the Mediterranean on a dinghy are a very special case and bear the main responsibility for their fates.
  - earthboundkid 6y ago
    You just said in a public location and with no sense of shame that an appropriate consequence for trying to escape your country is drowning. During the years of communism, you had to be a pretty heartless Stalinist to say that those shot by border guards “bear the main responsibility”. It’s a very coarse and degrading thing to say, and I don’t see how anyone can say it without an ideology that denigrates human beings in their minds. If you think people should be sent back once they cross, fine, whatever. But you’re advocating something else, and it’s monstrous precisely because it’s seemingly banal.
    - blub 6y ago
      Nobody's shooting anyone or advocating that people should drown, tone down the drama. If someone is paying to get smuggled across the sea, there's a strong chance they will drown. That's reality.
  - krylon 6y ago
    As TFA points out, Frontex routinely and systematically ignores/breaks both European and international law. We do not deny medical treatment to people that get in car accidents, even if they caused the accidents themselves by driving recklessly. If the EU wants to keep migrants from Africa out, fine, but letting hundreds of people drown each year in order so send a message is not acceptable, ethically or legally.
    - blub 6y ago
      Maybe I missed something because I read with JS turned off, but in the article I read, Frontex is accused of meeting with lobbyists. Certainly fishy and morally dubious, but hardly unusual for the EU or for Germany for that matter. What laws are they systematically breaking and how is that connected to people drowning? For the record the EU has an obligation to look into asylum claims made in the EU and reject or accept them as applicable. On the other hand, it turns out many are approved even if not valid and the EU is barely able to deport anyone, illegal migrant or not. Basically whoever gets into the EU has a good chance to stay there, even if they don't have that right, so it's no wonder the EU is trying to deter more people from coming because this is putting immense stress especially on Western European societies and causing conflicts. EU countries (and I think all countries) have a separate obligation to rescue people in distress at sea. The fact that someone is drowning in the middle of the Mediterranean is not a concern of the EU, as crass as that may sound - one rescues whoever is in trouble near one's ship. Still the EU is going above and beyond and is also sponsoring rescue missions that fish people out of the sea. Obviously not everyone makes it.
- iagovar 6y ago
  Go and rent a place in one of the many places that do receive this waves of migrants. Talk to people.
  - lampe3 6y ago
    Yes I believe they are pretty annoyed by all of them and yeah they live in bad conditions. But that enough for having an company that kills? people? Maybe we should try to solve the problem in another way...
  - arendtio 6y ago
    The problem is everybody is looking at the symptom and wants to keep the poor people from moving to new places, yet nobody seems to care about the causes why they are leaving their homes. One example is the European food industry that exports milk products to Africa and disrupts the local economy, so people loose their jobs. But instead of regulating our industries to allow African countries to build up their own economies, we ramp up our forces to let those poor people die in the moat we call the Mediterranean. Instead of looking at the migrants, we should ask, what we, our organizations and especially our corporations are contributing to the problem. After all, how many rich migrants have you seen and how often are poor people the ones who control the situation?
    - liaukovv 6y ago
      Shouldn't africans solve their own problems? Isn't that what decolonialization was all about? I find your point of view rather insulting, implying that big white saviour must come and what? Build functioning society from outside? Impose "correct" government? Maybe send waves of missionaries to teach them how to live?
      - malthejorgensen 6y ago
        Colonialism still exists in the form of lopsided trade economics. Most of Africa is not able to trade freely with EU, creating a favorable economic situation for the EU. I'm not sure the milk example is a good one, but historically (post-colonialism) most value gained from mining in Africa has been gained by companies in the EU -- not much value gained for the African countries and citizens. This is due to the lopsided trade agreements but also corporate exploitation of the African countries. The African countries needs our help in the form of proper free-trade agreements, and in the form of us not meddling with their natural resources. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bilateral_free-trade_agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bilateral_free-trade_a...
- kyriakos 6y ago
  I disagree. I am living in Cyprus and we received 1848/mil population asylum seekers in 2020 alone. We have by far the highest number of asylum seekers of any EU country (more than double from Greece which made the news). We really do nothing but letting them walk in at this point even if most of them are financial refugees from africa rather than war-torn areas.
Tepix 6y ago
Pushback has got to stop and the people responsible for it have to face justice.
zepatrik 6y ago
Wow this is just unacceptable. > The Problem - Migrants (slide two in the gallery on the landing page) You know that this is an important topic because "ZDF (former Neo) Magazin Royal" is behind that. They are an kind of investigative satire format, unfortunately topics like these are not too funny... But very good work from their side. Frontex was always suspected and accused for not following any EU moral and legal processes, this is just a proof and absolutely unacceptable.
- mimischi 6y ago
  I’d say they are the German version of “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver”
  - usrusr 6y ago
    Certainly a very strong influence, much stronger now than before the 2020 hiatus/reboot, but it still retains more classic late show elements than Last Week Tonight (e.g. the stage band)
- morsch 6y ago
  The slide is part of the SafeShore project (System for detection of Threat Agents in Maritime Border Environment[1][2]), which received ~5 million EUR in grants, the largest beneficiary being an Isreali defense contractor. I'm not entirely sure what it bought us, I'm certain it included a PDF report and a few powerpoint slides. One of many (MANY) grants under H2020-EU.3.7. Secure societies - Protecting freedom and security of Europe and its citizens programme with a total budget of 1.7 billion EUR[3]. Another example chosen at random[4]: Improving the Effectiveness of the Capabilities (IEC) in EU conflict prevention, 2 million EUR, beneficiaries seem to be universities and think tanks. Another one? Ok[5]: EfficieNT Risk-bAsed iNspection of freight Crossing bordErs without disrupting business, ~7 million EUR, 1.3 million of which went to -- for some reason -- the French government owned nuclear power research think tank CEA, other beneficiaries include manufacturers of things like airport metal detectors who apparently need millions of EU funds to improve their own products. The H2020 in H2020-EU.3.7. is Horizon 2020[6], the 2014-2020 research funding framework (2014-2020 was a EU budget cycle, the current one is 2021-2027), which had an overall budget of an "estimated €80 billion of funding". What's my point? I have no point, really, I don't know a lot about EU research funding in general or this domain in particular, but it was interesting to look this stuff up and if nothing else it's nice to see that these things are out in the open for anybody to look up, even if virtually nobody does. Given how much money is being spent here, I can't help but wonder what kind of fraction of a fraction civil society is spending checking up on all of these projects. [1] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/700643 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/700643 [2] http://safeshore.eu/ http://safeshore.eu/, defunct, apparently 5 million wasn't enough to buy the domain for more than 4 years; working snapshot from late 2020: http://web.archive.org/web/20201128133711/http://safeshore.eu/ http://web.archive.org/web/20201128133711/http://safeshore.e... [3] https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/H2020-EU.3.7 https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/H2020-EU.3.7. [4] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/653371 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/653371 from the page with all H2020-EU.3.7. programs https://cordis.europa.eu/search?q=contenttype%3D%27project%27%20AND%20programme%2Fcode%3D%27H2020-EU.3.7.%27&p=1&num=10&srt=/project/contentUpdateDate:decreasing https://cordis.europa.eu/search?q=contenttype%3D%27project%2... [5] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/883424 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/883424 [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_Programmes_for_Research_and_Technological_Development#Horizon_2020 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_Programmes_for_Resea...
meibo 6y ago
Why is lobbyism not a solved problem? Why is it not yet more scrutinized than it should be? Peace and freedom in all western countries is at stake because there is no accountability. Is money that powerful? What else can we do than to vote carefully?
- ziftface 6y ago
  The only people in a position to reduce corruption have an interest in it. It's a story as old as time.
- 1MachineElf 6y ago
  Maybe it's just my own ignorance, but in the EU context, I don't understand the difference between a company "lobbying" an agency like Frontex versus a company having a "government sales team" doing "customer outreach" to Frontex?
  - PeterisP 6y ago
    The usual definition of lobbying involves meetings with various interested 'stakeholders' who are not aiming for a vendor/customer relationship; sales meetings and tenders for goods or services are something separate than someone getting their word in about policy. One other thing that surprised me in this article is the inclusion of "representatives of EU border control agencies to these meetings, but also international organizations such as Interpol, Europol and the OSCE, as well as representatives from countries known for their brutal border control policies" - I would definitely consider meetings with relevant state institutions from EU countries (which are partners of Frontex) and non-EU countries (which are generally doing equivalent functions as Frontex) as something entirely distinct from lobbying.
    - 1MachineElf 6y ago
      In the US, it would have better fit the definition of lobbying if Frontex had gone the elected representatives and pushed them for business. Having webinars and inviting potential government customers is sounds more like what Frontex is doing, and regardless of the ramifications, it's considered standard practice for government sales in US.
odiroot 6y ago
It's really worrying that there's some concentrated effort to take Frontex down.
- lampe3 6y ago
  What is worrying about that?
- sdoering 6y ago
  Why is journalistic reporting on supra governmental entities a concerted effort to take this entity down. In a democracy journalism is the fourth power. It is a vital part of checks and balances. Using loaded comments to discredit journalistic reporting on governmental misdoings feels somehow as if there is an agenda hidden behind such comments.
- CameronNemo 6y ago
  Whenever a standing armed force is built up, you should be worried.
- emteycz 6y ago
  It's more worrying that there is concentrated effort to further Frontex's power.
- arendtio 6y ago
  Frontex has been criticized for their methods for years and now it becomes obvious that they are not just doing their job in a morally questionable way, but also don't comply with EU regulation. This is a step forward. Just to be clear, I am not saying that there doesn't need to be someone who cares about the border control, but the way Frontex is doing it is just wrong.
  - tasogare 6y ago
    Frontex is being criticized for using shady methods but I don’t see any criticism towards illegal immigrants who aren’t respecting the immigration laws in the first place. Double standards as usual.
finiteseries 6y ago
Why is it problematic for Frontex to meet with weapons companies? “A new regulation passed by the European Parliament in the spring of 2019 stipulates that Frontex is to have a “standing corps” of 10,000 by 2027, and it is allowed to equip border agents with handguns. The problem is that no legal regulations permit members of an EU agency to carry firearms.” Why are lobbyists so interested in Frontex? “...In addition: Since 2019, Frontex has been permitted to own and acquire airplanes, drones and firearms.” - So the concern is that Frontex is being “too forward” in acquiring weapons it’s allowed to own, but not carry for some reason, while also being dishonest/misleading about meeting with vendors, correct? Biometric usage, and meeting with other border agencies instead of human rights groups aside.
quink 6y ago
For a bit of a background for non-German folks and particularly Australians... that's a "government-run", "federal" broadcaster publishing this. Sounds like shooting your own foot? No. The Basic Law of Germany, approved by the Western allies in 1949, included telecommunications as a responsibility of the federal government. And so the federal government thought to create a television service to compete with those of the states. The states sued and won in the constitutional court - saying that telecommunications only referred to infrastructure and delivery, definitely not the content (think fascism and communism as to why). The resulting corpse was used by the states as a foundation for a new broadcaster formed through a state treaty. Germany is part of the EU and thus Frontex. The individual states of Germany organised a sister organisation, ZDF, to the Federal Republic of Germany itself and it isn't. One reason I mention all this is because we've got a broken media environment unlike Germany here in Australia with a vast amount of media concentration. And the constitutionality of the ABC is based on the constitution saying that telephones and the postal service fall under the responsibility of the federal government. The ABC isn't Australia Post or Telstra. Yet somehow we all just went along with the premise. So this is what happened here in a similar situation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Files_(Australia) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Files_(Australia) - a police raid, the federal government applying pressure and a chilling effect for all future publications. The top three options in Australia for a 'stop the boats' leak like this would be 1. a broadcaster under a massive _chilling_ _effect_ by the 'stop the boats' government, 2. Rupert Murdoch or 3. Nine, with Costello in charge, who was literally the deputy 'stop the boats' guy. Horrifying. So when I see comments like > It's really worrying that there's some concentrated effort to take Frontex down. No, this leak comes from the constituent states of Germany being concerned by a "superior" power doing things that they haven't been authorised to do. Whether it's the Federal Republic of Germany deciding to start a public broadcaster despite the states (and Allied powers) not having agreed to that being its responsibility or whether it's the European Union starting a military (which it's not allowed to do) it's the same thing. It might be a concentrated effort, whatever - it doesn't matter - because it's a constitutional necessity. This leak here is an extremely important part of the process that all "inferior" constituent parts of something should engage in to keep the greater parts in check. Something the constituent states of Australia should take more seriously.
- 6y ago
mperham 6y ago
Sounds like the EU has its own ICE now?
- finiteseries 6y ago
  Nah, they’re not there yet. ICE has two separate parts, deportations, and a mini FBI [0]. All federal agents, but not dependent on the border. This is like a federal CBP x Coast Guard that also works with the Texas Border Patrol & Texas Coast Guard, the California Border Patrol & Florida Coast Guard, etc [0] - Homeland Security Investigations (small, quiet, transnational), deals with e.g. cartels, movie piracy, the FBI, child porn, while Enforcement and Removal Operations (big, loud, domestic) deports. There is some tension.

207 points by ruph123 6y ago

EU immigration policy is a disgrace. We like to sneer at Donald Trump and his supporters, but what the EU is doing in the Mediterranean sea is just as bad as building a wall. Maybe even worse, given the number of people that drown every year. Letting hundreds of people die each year in order to "discourage" others is no way to deal with this situation. In Germany, we put former GDR soldiers on trial and into jail for shooting people trying to flee into Western Germany. How is this different?

the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
> In Germany, we put former GDR soldiers on trial and into jail for shooting people trying to flee into Western Germany. How is this different? Frontex does not shoot people.
- krylon 6y ago
  No, they let them drown, they purposefully buy drones and aircraft instead of ships so they do not have to rescue them. It may not be quite the same, but it hardly measures up to the moral standards the EU likes to claim to stand for.
- guerrilla 6y ago
  > Frontex does not shoot people. That wasn't the claim. The argument was that they kill people and that we've punished border guards who kill people before, so why not now. Shooting was just an example of killing.
- lampe3 6y ago
  So for you it depends on how you kill people?
- arendtio 6y ago
  Well, not yet but since they are interested in buying firearms that future doesn't seem to be so far away.
blub 6y ago
The EU has a quite reasonable (and rather lax) immigration policy, assuming that people come to the EU legally or move between EU countries. People that get smuggled across the Mediterranean on a dinghy are a very special case and bear the main responsibility for their fates.
- earthboundkid 6y ago
  You just said in a public location and with no sense of shame that an appropriate consequence for trying to escape your country is drowning. During the years of communism, you had to be a pretty heartless Stalinist to say that those shot by border guards “bear the main responsibility”. It’s a very coarse and degrading thing to say, and I don’t see how anyone can say it without an ideology that denigrates human beings in their minds. If you think people should be sent back once they cross, fine, whatever. But you’re advocating something else, and it’s monstrous precisely because it’s seemingly banal.
  - blub 6y ago
    Nobody's shooting anyone or advocating that people should drown, tone down the drama. If someone is paying to get smuggled across the sea, there's a strong chance they will drown. That's reality.
- krylon 6y ago
  As TFA points out, Frontex routinely and systematically ignores/breaks both European and international law. We do not deny medical treatment to people that get in car accidents, even if they caused the accidents themselves by driving recklessly. If the EU wants to keep migrants from Africa out, fine, but letting hundreds of people drown each year in order so send a message is not acceptable, ethically or legally.
  - blub 6y ago
    Maybe I missed something because I read with JS turned off, but in the article I read, Frontex is accused of meeting with lobbyists. Certainly fishy and morally dubious, but hardly unusual for the EU or for Germany for that matter. What laws are they systematically breaking and how is that connected to people drowning? For the record the EU has an obligation to look into asylum claims made in the EU and reject or accept them as applicable. On the other hand, it turns out many are approved even if not valid and the EU is barely able to deport anyone, illegal migrant or not. Basically whoever gets into the EU has a good chance to stay there, even if they don't have that right, so it's no wonder the EU is trying to deter more people from coming because this is putting immense stress especially on Western European societies and causing conflicts. EU countries (and I think all countries) have a separate obligation to rescue people in distress at sea. The fact that someone is drowning in the middle of the Mediterranean is not a concern of the EU, as crass as that may sound - one rescues whoever is in trouble near one's ship. Still the EU is going above and beyond and is also sponsoring rescue missions that fish people out of the sea. Obviously not everyone makes it.
iagovar 6y ago
Go and rent a place in one of the many places that do receive this waves of migrants. Talk to people.
- lampe3 6y ago
  Yes I believe they are pretty annoyed by all of them and yeah they live in bad conditions. But that enough for having an company that kills? people? Maybe we should try to solve the problem in another way...
- arendtio 6y ago
  The problem is everybody is looking at the symptom and wants to keep the poor people from moving to new places, yet nobody seems to care about the causes why they are leaving their homes. One example is the European food industry that exports milk products to Africa and disrupts the local economy, so people loose their jobs. But instead of regulating our industries to allow African countries to build up their own economies, we ramp up our forces to let those poor people die in the moat we call the Mediterranean. Instead of looking at the migrants, we should ask, what we, our organizations and especially our corporations are contributing to the problem. After all, how many rich migrants have you seen and how often are poor people the ones who control the situation?
  - liaukovv 6y ago
    Shouldn't africans solve their own problems? Isn't that what decolonialization was all about? I find your point of view rather insulting, implying that big white saviour must come and what? Build functioning society from outside? Impose "correct" government? Maybe send waves of missionaries to teach them how to live?
    - malthejorgensen 6y ago
      Colonialism still exists in the form of lopsided trade economics. Most of Africa is not able to trade freely with EU, creating a favorable economic situation for the EU. I'm not sure the milk example is a good one, but historically (post-colonialism) most value gained from mining in Africa has been gained by companies in the EU -- not much value gained for the African countries and citizens. This is due to the lopsided trade agreements but also corporate exploitation of the African countries. The African countries needs our help in the form of proper free-trade agreements, and in the form of us not meddling with their natural resources. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bilateral_free-trade_agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bilateral_free-trade_a...
kyriakos 6y ago
I disagree. I am living in Cyprus and we received 1848/mil population asylum seekers in 2020 alone. We have by far the highest number of asylum seekers of any EU country (more than double from Greece which made the news). We really do nothing but letting them walk in at this point even if most of them are financial refugees from africa rather than war-torn areas.

Tepix 6y ago

Pushback has got to stop and the people responsible for it have to face justice.

zepatrik 6y ago

Wow this is just unacceptable. > The Problem - Migrants (slide two in the gallery on the landing page) You know that this is an important topic because "ZDF (former Neo) Magazin Royal" is behind that. They are an kind of investigative satire format, unfortunately topics like these are not too funny... But very good work from their side. Frontex was always suspected and accused for not following any EU moral and legal processes, this is just a proof and absolutely unacceptable.

mimischi 6y ago
I’d say they are the German version of “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver”
- usrusr 6y ago
  Certainly a very strong influence, much stronger now than before the 2020 hiatus/reboot, but it still retains more classic late show elements than Last Week Tonight (e.g. the stage band)
morsch 6y ago
The slide is part of the SafeShore project (System for detection of Threat Agents in Maritime Border Environment[1][2]), which received ~5 million EUR in grants, the largest beneficiary being an Isreali defense contractor. I'm not entirely sure what it bought us, I'm certain it included a PDF report and a few powerpoint slides. One of many (MANY) grants under H2020-EU.3.7. Secure societies - Protecting freedom and security of Europe and its citizens programme with a total budget of 1.7 billion EUR[3]. Another example chosen at random[4]: Improving the Effectiveness of the Capabilities (IEC) in EU conflict prevention, 2 million EUR, beneficiaries seem to be universities and think tanks. Another one? Ok[5]: EfficieNT Risk-bAsed iNspection of freight Crossing bordErs without disrupting business, ~7 million EUR, 1.3 million of which went to -- for some reason -- the French government owned nuclear power research think tank CEA, other beneficiaries include manufacturers of things like airport metal detectors who apparently need millions of EU funds to improve their own products. The H2020 in H2020-EU.3.7. is Horizon 2020[6], the 2014-2020 research funding framework (2014-2020 was a EU budget cycle, the current one is 2021-2027), which had an overall budget of an "estimated €80 billion of funding". What's my point? I have no point, really, I don't know a lot about EU research funding in general or this domain in particular, but it was interesting to look this stuff up and if nothing else it's nice to see that these things are out in the open for anybody to look up, even if virtually nobody does. Given how much money is being spent here, I can't help but wonder what kind of fraction of a fraction civil society is spending checking up on all of these projects. [1] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/700643 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/700643 [2] http://safeshore.eu/ http://safeshore.eu/, defunct, apparently 5 million wasn't enough to buy the domain for more than 4 years; working snapshot from late 2020: http://web.archive.org/web/20201128133711/http://safeshore.eu/ http://web.archive.org/web/20201128133711/http://safeshore.e... [3] https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/H2020-EU.3.7 https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/H2020-EU.3.7. [4] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/653371 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/653371 from the page with all H2020-EU.3.7. programs https://cordis.europa.eu/search?q=contenttype%3D%27project%27%20AND%20programme%2Fcode%3D%27H2020-EU.3.7.%27&p=1&num=10&srt=/project/contentUpdateDate:decreasing https://cordis.europa.eu/search?q=contenttype%3D%27project%2... [5] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/883424 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/883424 [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_Programmes_for_Research_and_Technological_Development#Horizon_2020 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_Programmes_for_Resea...

meibo 6y ago

Why is lobbyism not a solved problem? Why is it not yet more scrutinized than it should be? Peace and freedom in all western countries is at stake because there is no accountability. Is money that powerful? What else can we do than to vote carefully?

ziftface 6y ago
The only people in a position to reduce corruption have an interest in it. It's a story as old as time.
1MachineElf 6y ago
Maybe it's just my own ignorance, but in the EU context, I don't understand the difference between a company "lobbying" an agency like Frontex versus a company having a "government sales team" doing "customer outreach" to Frontex?
- PeterisP 6y ago
  The usual definition of lobbying involves meetings with various interested 'stakeholders' who are not aiming for a vendor/customer relationship; sales meetings and tenders for goods or services are something separate than someone getting their word in about policy. One other thing that surprised me in this article is the inclusion of "representatives of EU border control agencies to these meetings, but also international organizations such as Interpol, Europol and the OSCE, as well as representatives from countries known for their brutal border control policies" - I would definitely consider meetings with relevant state institutions from EU countries (which are partners of Frontex) and non-EU countries (which are generally doing equivalent functions as Frontex) as something entirely distinct from lobbying.
  - 1MachineElf 6y ago
    In the US, it would have better fit the definition of lobbying if Frontex had gone the elected representatives and pushed them for business. Having webinars and inviting potential government customers is sounds more like what Frontex is doing, and regardless of the ramifications, it's considered standard practice for government sales in US.

odiroot 6y ago

It's really worrying that there's some concentrated effort to take Frontex down.

lampe3 6y ago
What is worrying about that?
sdoering 6y ago
Why is journalistic reporting on supra governmental entities a concerted effort to take this entity down. In a democracy journalism is the fourth power. It is a vital part of checks and balances. Using loaded comments to discredit journalistic reporting on governmental misdoings feels somehow as if there is an agenda hidden behind such comments.
CameronNemo 6y ago
Whenever a standing armed force is built up, you should be worried.
emteycz 6y ago
It's more worrying that there is concentrated effort to further Frontex's power.
arendtio 6y ago
Frontex has been criticized for their methods for years and now it becomes obvious that they are not just doing their job in a morally questionable way, but also don't comply with EU regulation. This is a step forward. Just to be clear, I am not saying that there doesn't need to be someone who cares about the border control, but the way Frontex is doing it is just wrong.
- tasogare 6y ago
  Frontex is being criticized for using shady methods but I don’t see any criticism towards illegal immigrants who aren’t respecting the immigration laws in the first place. Double standards as usual.

finiteseries 6y ago

Why is it problematic for Frontex to meet with weapons companies? “A new regulation passed by the European Parliament in the spring of 2019 stipulates that Frontex is to have a “standing corps” of 10,000 by 2027, and it is allowed to equip border agents with handguns. The problem is that no legal regulations permit members of an EU agency to carry firearms.” Why are lobbyists so interested in Frontex? “...In addition: Since 2019, Frontex has been permitted to own and acquire airplanes, drones and firearms.” - So the concern is that Frontex is being “too forward” in acquiring weapons it’s allowed to own, but not carry for some reason, while also being dishonest/misleading about meeting with vendors, correct? Biometric usage, and meeting with other border agencies instead of human rights groups aside.

quink 6y ago

For a bit of a background for non-German folks and particularly Australians... that's a "government-run", "federal" broadcaster publishing this. Sounds like shooting your own foot? No. The Basic Law of Germany, approved by the Western allies in 1949, included telecommunications as a responsibility of the federal government. And so the federal government thought to create a television service to compete with those of the states. The states sued and won in the constitutional court - saying that telecommunications only referred to infrastructure and delivery, definitely not the content (think fascism and communism as to why). The resulting corpse was used by the states as a foundation for a new broadcaster formed through a state treaty. Germany is part of the EU and thus Frontex. The individual states of Germany organised a sister organisation, ZDF, to the Federal Republic of Germany itself and it isn't. One reason I mention all this is because we've got a broken media environment unlike Germany here in Australia with a vast amount of media concentration. And the constitutionality of the ABC is based on the constitution saying that telephones and the postal service fall under the responsibility of the federal government. The ABC isn't Australia Post or Telstra. Yet somehow we all just went along with the premise. So this is what happened here in a similar situation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Files_(Australia) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Files_(Australia) - a police raid, the federal government applying pressure and a chilling effect for all future publications. The top three options in Australia for a 'stop the boats' leak like this would be 1. a broadcaster under a massive _chilling_ _effect_ by the 'stop the boats' government, 2. Rupert Murdoch or 3. Nine, with Costello in charge, who was literally the deputy 'stop the boats' guy. Horrifying. So when I see comments like > It's really worrying that there's some concentrated effort to take Frontex down. No, this leak comes from the constituent states of Germany being concerned by a "superior" power doing things that they haven't been authorised to do. Whether it's the Federal Republic of Germany deciding to start a public broadcaster despite the states (and Allied powers) not having agreed to that being its responsibility or whether it's the European Union starting a military (which it's not allowed to do) it's the same thing. It might be a concentrated effort, whatever - it doesn't matter - because it's a constitutional necessity. This leak here is an extremely important part of the process that all "inferior" constituent parts of something should engage in to keep the greater parts in check. Something the constituent states of Australia should take more seriously.

6y ago

mperham 6y ago

Sounds like the EU has its own ICE now?

finiteseries 6y ago
Nah, they’re not there yet. ICE has two separate parts, deportations, and a mini FBI [0]. All federal agents, but not dependent on the border. This is like a federal CBP x Coast Guard that also works with the Texas Border Patrol & Texas Coast Guard, the California Border Patrol & Florida Coast Guard, etc [0] - Homeland Security Investigations (small, quiet, transnational), deals with e.g. cartels, movie piracy, the FBI, child porn, while Enforcement and Removal Operations (big, loud, domestic) deports. There is some tension.