Europe’s outsourcing of border control increases risks to migrants – Doctors Without Borders

Report on the Impact of European Union Migration Policies on Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Policy Overview: Border Externalization and its Contradiction with Global Goals

A series of “border externalization” agreements, significantly accelerated since the 2016 EU-Türkiye deal, form the cornerstone of European Union migration policy. These partnerships with countries of origin and transit, including the 2008 Italy-Libya Treaty and the 2023 EU-Tunisia agreement, are designed to reduce the number of migrants and refugees arriving on European shores. While these policies are framed by the EU as successful in managing migration flows, this report assesses their profound negative impact on several key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

2.0 Analysis of Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

2.1 Undermining SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The EU’s strategy directly contravenes SDG Target 10.7, which calls for facilitating orderly, safe, regular, and responsible migration. By blocking established routes, these policies force vulnerable populations onto more clandestine and dangerous journeys, exacerbating inequalities.

• Creation of Perilous Routes: The primary outcome is the constant emergence of new, more hazardous migration paths as previous ones are closed.
• Increased Vulnerability: Migrants face heightened risks of exploitation, violence, and death, deepening the inequality between their safety and that of citizens in destination countries.
• Policy Ineffectiveness: The strategy merely displaces migration flows, as seen in the shift from Libyan to Tunisian departure points, rather than addressing the root causes of migration in a sustainable manner.

2.2 Detrimental Effects on SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The human cost of these policies represents a severe setback for SDG 3, which aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all. The operational approach results in devastating health consequences for individuals undertaking these journeys.

• Physical and Mental Health Crisis: Reports indicate widespread devastation to the physical and mental health of migrants due to the extreme duress and violence experienced on these routes.
• Increased Mortality: The externalization of borders is directly linked to thousands of deaths in the Central Mediterranean and other transit zones, a direct failure to protect the right to life and well-being.

3.0 Statistical Overview and Route Displacement

Data analysis reveals that while these agreements may temporarily reduce arrivals on specific routes, they do not curtail overall movement, instead causing a geographic shift in departures. This demonstrates a failure to create a sustainable or humane migration management system.

1. The Libyan Route (Post-2017 EU Agreement):
   • Arrivals from Libya decreased from 165,000 in 2016 to 7,000 in 2019.
   • However, numbers subsequently rebounded, stabilizing at approximately 40,000-50,000 arrivals per year since 2021, despite continued EU support for the Libyan Coast Guard.
2. The Tunisian Route (Pre-2023 EU Agreement):
   • By 2023, total arrivals in Italy reached 157,000, a figure comparable to the 2016 peak.
   • This surge was primarily caused by a displacement of departures from Libya to Tunisia, which became the main point of embarkation.
3. Post-2023 EU-Tunisia Agreement:
   • Following the 2023 agreement, departures from Tunisia have sharply decreased.
   • This follows the established pattern of route displacement, indicating that desperate individuals will continue to seek alternative, and likely more dangerous, means of passage.

4.0 Conclusion: Conflict with SDG 16 and SDG 17

The partnerships central to the EU’s strategy raise serious concerns regarding SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). By partnering with states to forcibly prevent departures, often in environments where migrants experience mass violence, the EU’s approach undermines justice and the rule of law. These agreements represent a form of partnership that prioritizes migration control over the fundamental principles of human rights and sustainable development, thereby failing to contribute positively to the global partnership for achieving the SDGs.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• The article directly connects migration policies to severe health outcomes, mentioning “thousands of deaths and devastation to the physical and mental health of people.” This highlights a failure to ensure the well-being of a vulnerable population.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• The core theme of the article is migration management. It discusses international agreements and policies that, instead of facilitating safe migration, make it more dangerous. This directly relates to the goal of reducing inequalities and ensuring safe and responsible migration for all.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The article points to the “tragic human consequences” of current migration policies, including “thousands of deaths” and “mass violence” experienced by migrants. This touches upon the goal of reducing all forms of violence and death rates.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• Target 3.4: “By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.” The article’s reference to “devastation to the physical and mental health” directly aligns with the mental health and well-being component of this target. The “thousands of deaths” also relate to the broader goal of reducing premature mortality.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• Target 10.7: “Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.” The article critiques EU policies for failing to meet this target, arguing that they force people to “take new, more dangerous routes,” directly contradicting the goal of safe migration.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• Target 16.1: “Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.” The article explicitly mentions that migrants experience “mass violence” in transit countries like Tunisia and that policy decisions lead to “thousands of deaths,” which are direct concerns of this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Indicators for SDG 10 (Target 10.7)

• Number of migrant deaths: The article mentions “thousands of deaths,” which is a direct measure of the lack of safety in migration. This aligns with official indicator 10.7.3 (Number of people who died or disappeared in the process of migration).
• Number of migrant arrivals: The article provides specific figures for arrivals in Italy (“165,000 in 2016,” “7,000 in 2019,” “157,000 migrants arrived in Italy in 2023”). These numbers are used to track migration flows and the effectiveness (or failure) of policies aimed at managing them.

Indicators for SDG 3 (Target 3.4)

• Impact on mental and physical health: The article implies an indicator by stating there is “devastation to the physical and mental health of people.” While not quantified, this points to the need to measure the health and well-being outcomes for migrants affected by these policies.

Indicators for SDG 16 (Target 16.1)

• Violence against migrants: The mention of “mass violence” experienced by migrants from sub-Saharan Africa in Tunisia serves as a qualitative indicator of violence against this population group.
• Migration-related death rates: The “thousands of deaths” resulting from dangerous journeys is a direct indicator for measuring progress on reducing violence- and policy-related death rates.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: doctorswithoutborders.org