ESTABLISHING A U.S.-EU MIGRATION DIALOGUE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 001584 SIPDIS DHS PLEASE PASS TO DHS/PLCY MICHAEL SCARDAVILLE. STATE PLEASE PASS TO CA/FO, CA/P, PRM/FO AND PRM/MCE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: SMIG PREF CVIS KFRD EUN SUBJECT: ESTABLISHING A U.S.-EU MIGRATION DIALOGUE REF: ATHENS 2038 BRUSSELS 00001584 001.2 OF 003 ¶1. This is an action request for CA, PRM, EUR and DHS. See paragraph 8. ¶2. SUMMARY: USEU hosted a working lunch November 17 on migration and refugee issues, for contacts from Swedish and Spanish EU missions (the current and upcoming EU Presidencies),as well as the EU Council and Commission. The initiative, undertaken by the Consular Affairs (CA), Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) representatives at post, was designed as a follow-up to the commitment for the U.S. and the EU to expand dialogue on migration and refugee issues, which was expressed in the October 28 EU-U.S. Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) ministerial statement. The lunch participants discussed the content of such a dialogue, agreeing that it could encompass legal, illegal, voluntary and involuntary migration, but must be practical, focused, results-oriented and not duplicative of work done in other fora. The group identified possible action items on which to work, as well as structural questions which would need to be addressed to establish a productive dialogue. USEU offers recommendations and seeks concurrence from CA, PRM, EUR and DHS. END SUMMARY. -------------- "WHOLE OF GOVERNMENT" APPROACH TO MIGRATION -------------- ¶3. The EU-U.S. statement on "Enhancing transatlantic cooperation in the area of Justice, Freedom and Security", which was adopted at the JHA Ministerial in Washington, DC on 28 October, recognized migration as one of the major international policy issues of the 21st century, affecting hundreds of millions of people in sending, transit and receiving countries. The U.S. and the EU both face significant challenges in managing, directing and protecting these migratory flows, while safeguarding their borders. The Statement declared, "We intend to improve our common understanding of the global phenomena of migration and refugee issues and look for joint responses in areas where we are both affected. To this end we commit to expand our dialogue." Recognizing the interrelated nature of their work on aspects of the migration and refugee agendas, USEU's officers from CA, PRM and DHS have been coordinating efforts at post to take a holistic view of migration writ large to achieve greater results than each pursuing their agendas separately. With the adoption of the 28 October statement, the three USEU offices invited EU counter-parts to a working lunch to examine how to establish a migration and refugee dialogue. USEU began the discussion with its vision for a dialogue that would be practical and results-oriented, a perspective heartily shared by the EU participants. The ensuing discussion was lively and far-reaching while never leaving the realm of the "do-able." Both the U.S. and EU representatives outlined the dynamics of, and constraints intrinsic to, their inter-agency processes and the need for approval from their respective capitals regarding the form and direction of the dialogue. -------------- BRAINSTORMING SESSION -------------- ¶4. The participants at the lunch developed a list of possible initiatives a more formal dialogue could undertake, including: -- Developing systematic, regularly-scheduled training opportunities for transatlantic counterparts on anti-fraud and other best practices, regular site visits to view one another's consular sections, consular databases, and border controls, as well as fact-finding trips on refugee resettlement efforts; -- Studying together how best to integrate refugees and other migrants into their host country societies, for the benefit of the migrant and society, as well as a means to avoid radicalization; -- Reimagining the visa process in an increasingly high-technology, "paperless" world; -- Exploring together how best to work with other countries to address illegal migration from and through them, as well as by sea, sharing our experiences trying to establish bilateral or regional migration partnerships (the EU is particularly interested in U.S. efforts with Mexico and Latin America and is willing to share its experiences on its BRUSSELS 00001584 002.2 OF 003 southern and eastern borders); -- Assessing the potential of the EU's comprehensive approach to migration (NOTE: The EU refers to this as the "global approach" but it is not intended to be world-wide. It is a country- or region-specific plan that focuses on three aspects - organizing and facilitating legal migration, reducing illegal migration, and addressing the migration-development nexus, while also safe-guarding human rights and ensuring protection of refugees. END NOTE); -- Examining common challenges in controlling access to territory and managing transit migration, including exploring potential consular data sharing to screen out mala fide travelers; -- Jointly supporting a program to help third countries produce their own migration profile, envisioned as a standardized overview of the scope and impact of migration on their country, to promote development of evidence-based migration policy as well as to enable the U.S. and EU to assess the impact of their capacity building and other policies in third countries; -- Streamlining and harmonizing the U.S. and EU approaches to certain types of employment visas such as intra-company transfers, and exploring the scope for recognition of titles and credentials; -- Analyzing the role of student migration on education and labor issues, and whether policies should encourage them to stay or depart after completing their studies; -- Examining approaches to the challenges inherent in dealing with unaccompanied minors; -- Coordinating the U.S. and EU approach to the Global Forum on Migration and Development (Reftel). The above list is not exhaustive but provides a flavor of the possible areas of cooperation and accomplishment. USG ideas that were not raised at the lunch due to time constraints include: -- Joint migration capacity building in third countries like Libya; -- Developing a common approach to international adoptions in third countries such as Vietnam; -- Sharing approaches to interviewing/adjudicating Somalis in the absence of civil documentation. -------------- ACCOMPLISHING OUR GOALS -------------- ¶5. Given the cross-cutting nature of the substantive areas offered for possible inclusion in a dialogue, there is an array of actors and institutions on both sides that could be involved. The Spanish opined that the EU's High Level Working Group (HLWG) on Migration would be best suited to coordinate the efforts of different parts of the EU. The HLWG began in 1999 with a mandate to develop common, integrated, cross-cutting policy approaches to the most important countries of origin of asylum-seekers and migrants. Placing the U.S.-EU migration dialogue under the HLWG on the EU side would mean that its initiatives would be within the EU Council structure, as opposed to the Commission, and so will have the leadership of the Presidency and incorporate the voices of the 27 member states. This placement may have even greater importance after implementation of the Lisbon Treaty, as member states acting together in coalition will have rights to initiate proposals in these sorts of JHA issues. ¶6. The trio of offices at USEU (CA, PRM and DHS) already enjoys strong communication and excellent working relationships and is capable of handling the bulk of the coordination and daily work required for the USG to realize the goals of the dialogue. But the appropriate interlocutors from CA, PRM and DHS in Washington need to be identified, and decisions made about whether a coordinating body, comparable to the EU's High Level Working Group on Migration, exists or could be created to provide oversight and the decision-making required to ensure success. ¶7. USEU suggests that CA/P, PRM/MCE and DHS/PLCY take the lead for their bureaus/agency, and establish a coordinating BRUSSELS 00001584 003.2 OF 003 mechanism, which includes EUR/ERA, to facilitate action on the dialogue in Washington. Given that the dialogue originated in the JHA Ministerial statement, USEU also recommends the JHA Ministerial as the appropriate venue for finalizing the projects developed at the working level. This may require broadening the Ministerial from its current USG configuration. Typically lead by the Secretary of DHS and the Attorney General, State's representation has been driven by the agenda. For the 2009 agenda, for example, G/TIP and INL spoke at the Ministerial, with other bureaus sending notetakers. Expanding the migration dialogue as envisioned above will, at a minimum, require PRM and CA to be at the table, and may suggest a larger reexamination of the appropriate USG delegation as a whole. ¶8. Action Request: The EU intends to raise the migration dialogue internally at the next HLWG meeting in December, and has invited the United States to participate in a day-long planning meeting in Madrid on January 13, 2010, as a follow-on to the January 11-12 meeting of the informal JHA Senior Level Meeting. Therefore, USEU requests that CA, PRM, EUR and DHS review our recommendations in paragraph seven and assign offices to take the lead in each bureau/agency, by December 4. In addition, USEU requests a decision regarding attendance at the January 13 planning meeting in Madrid. MURRAY .