Why some countries refuse to sign the migration compact

A conference in Marrakech, Morocco, from December 10 to 11 is due to approve the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, which was finalized in July with only the U.S. staying out. But the non-binding accord is drawing strong opposition from nationalists in Europe and elsewhere, and EU countries including Hungary, Austria and Poland have since pulled out or expressed reservations.

Refugees and migrants are entitled to the same universal human rights and fundamental freedoms to be protected and fulfilled. However, they are governed by separate legal frameworks. Only refugees are entitled to international protection defined by international refugee law. 

The New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants,  was adopted by the UN General Assembly on September 19, 2016, for member states to commit to the protection of the human rights of all refugees and migrants regardless of their status. It has paved the way to the adoption of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM), which presents a cooperative framework addressing migration in all its dimensions.

The process to develop the GCM started with consultations handled from April to November 2017, which included a series of thematic sessions, such as the human rights of all migrants, social inclusion and cohesion, drivers of migration (climate change, natural and man-made disasters, poverty), protection and assistance and so on. In December, a report came out with recommendations to the member states based on the inputs received during the consultation phase.

The US withdrew from the negotiation phase (January-July 2018) in December 2017, and 193 Member States signed the preliminary approval in July 2018. Hungary, led by a right-wing nationalist party, announced that they will reject the pact in July by calling it “a threat to the world.” Austria (governed by a coalition of conservative and far-right parties) and Poland (ruled by nationalist party with a strong anti-migrant rhetoric) followed Hungary. 

As of November, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Australia stated their decisions to  abandon the GCM, which they had 18 months to object. Countries following in their wake are growing: Israel and recently the Dominican Republic have also joined that list. So far, 164 countries have publicly confirmed their participation and commitment to GCM.

GCM has created intense political tension in the European countries. Leaders who backed the pact are experiencing strong opposition in their country. The Belgian PM has announced that he is going to Marrakech following internal turmoil in the parliament and risking the coalition government to withstand the strong winds of the migration issue.

While Italy, Switzerland, and Belgium are backing away from GCM, and 30 countries are rejecting, falling off from the Compact Tree, what is in it that scares them off? After all, GCM is a legally non-binding,  cooperative framework to encourage "international cooperation among all relevant actors on migration, acknowledging that no state can address migration alone, and upholds the sovereignty of states and their obligations under international law."

Opposing countries justify their withdrawal, saying it is against their own security interests, already promoting “safe, orderly and regular migration” policies and their sovereignty to decide on their migration issues. For them, GCM is very dangerous, intensifying the refugee crisis rather than reducing it, facilitating  migration and encouraging illegal entry, etc. These are mostly the countries with extremely bad reputations on how they handle migration issues. 

Their governments consist of nationalist, far-right wing, conservative parties who won the elections based on the fear they created in their voters with their anti-refugee campaigns. Rather than the rights of refugees and migrants, they are more concerned about “fundamental human rights of people who want nothing else than to be able to live in peace and security in their own homelands” as stated by Peter Szijjarto, Hungary's Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Briefly, they do not want to mix up the refugees and migrants. They fear taking in more migrants and losing their hard-won successes in pushing away people who seek to live with dignity, and share the responsibilities equitably with developing countries who take the burden mostly.

We are back to square one. All these efforts started with the rising flow of irregular migrants due to war, poverty, and social and political instability to the EU from 2015 to now. Now, the debate on legal migrant routes and preventing human trafficking have brought all of us to the point where some countries hesitate even to show up in Marrakech to discuss a framework of cooperation. Instead they want to build taller and stronger walls, and razor wire border fences.