EU PUSHES DIALOGUE WITH U.S. ON MIGRATION

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 001704

SIPDIS

STATE PASS TO PRM/MCE NED NYMAN, CA/VO TIM SMITH, EUR/ERA
ALESSANDRO NARDI. DHS PASS TO DHS/PLCY MIKE SCARDAVILLE.

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/18/2019
TAGS: SMIG PREF CVIS KFRD EUN
SUBJECT: EU PUSHES DIALOGUE WITH U.S. ON MIGRATION

REF: A. USEU BRUSSELS 1584

B. USEU BRUSSELS 1522

Classified By: USEU POL MC Christopher Davis, for reasons 1.4(b) and (d
)


1. (U) This is an action cable. See para 8.


2. (SBU) Summary: On December 16-17, 2009, CA and PRM
representatives at USEU met twice with Maria Bassols Delgado,
Spanish Ambassador at Large for Migratory Affais, and her
colleagues from the Spanish MFA and Ministry of Labor and
Immigration, to discuss the U.S.-EU migration dialogue (Ref
A). According to Bassols, who will become the head of the
EU Council,s High Level Working Group on Migration (HLWG)
when Spain assumes the EU rotating Presidency on January 1,
the Lisbon Treaty and Stockholm Program will have a
significant impact on how the EU addresses migration and
refugee issues at the community level. She outlined a number
of areas for possible U.S.-EU cooperation and noted that the
HLWG would be able to identify concrete initiatives, obtain
funding and get results. These changes present a good
opportunity for the United States to affect outcomes and
influence migration policy. End Summary.


3. (C) Reporting that the Swedes (current EU Presidency) did
not present the U.S.-EU migration dialogue to the HLWG on
December 16 as expected (Ref A),Ambassador Bassols stated
she then placed it on the January 12, 2010 HLWG agenda in
order to obtain the necessary buy-in of the 27 member states.
The migration dialogue is also on the agenda for the
senior-level informal meeting (Madrid January 11-12, 2010) to
plan the April 2010 U.S.-EU Justice and Home Affairs (JHA)
Ministerial. Characterizing the migration dialogue as the
most important new initiative to come out of the October JHA
Ministerial in Washington, the Spanish asked that the USG
representatives give the JHA senior-level group an overview
of what is being considered for the dialogue, with caveats
noted that much remains to be decided. Bassols said she will
host a planning meeting later in January with Marc Richir
from the EU Commission and USEU's CA, PRM and DHS officers to
discuss the projects suggested at the HLWG. (Note: USEU's
DHS Attache was unavailable for these meetings with Bassols
due to travel. End Note)


4. (SBU) According to Ambassador Bassols, even with the
anticipated institutional flux during the Spanish presidency
due to implementation of the Lisbon Treaty (Ref B),the
Spanish have already sorted out the necessary coordinating
mechanisms with the Commission to provide oversight and
backing to the migration dialogue. Bassols agrees with the
Commission that the JHA track is the logical "home" for the
migration dialogue and policy initiatives, and that
accomplishments would be best reported at the semi-annual JHA
Ministerials.


5. (C) Ambassador Bassols identified potential areas of
cooperation, such as participating in antifraud and other
migration training programs with the United States, and joint
migration capacity building efforts with third countries.
She stated that the HLWG is also interested in learning about
U.S. practices in a number of migration-related areas with an
eye to seeing whether they lend themselves to joint
activities.

The EU areas of interest include how the United States:

- works with its neighbors to control legal and illegal
migration,
- returns illegal migrants to their country of origin and/or
last country of travel,
- handles voluntary versus involuntary return,
- assists the integration of migrants in the U.S.,
- administers its refugee resettlement programs,
- takes back its citizens who have been denied entry or
deported from third countries.

This list is not exhaustive, but would be used to spark
conversation among the HLWG members. Bassols encouraged the
U.S. to provide her with thoughts on issues to consider or
avoid, and said she would tailor her remarks at the HLWG
accordingly.


6. (C) USEU representatives reiterated the importance of
this migration dialogue not duplicating efforts underway in
other fora, for example, the Intergovernmental Consultations
on Migration, Asylum and Refugees (IGC). Bassols stressed
that the IGC was not the appropriate venue in which to
accomplish the EU's aims, as it includes only eleven of the

BRUSSELS 00001704 002 OF 002


twenty-seven EU member states and consists of information
exchange rather than policy and programmatic initiatives. She
contrasted the IGC with the HLWG, which has the ability to
identify and fund initiatives. Pablo Lopez Pietsch, who
represents Spain at the IGC, characterized it as having "no
funds, no programs and no decisions." NOTE: France, an EU
heavy-hitter which is also an IGC member, has not been active
in the Geneva forum and did not participate in the December
Consultations. Italy and Malta, both central to EU migration
and refugee issues, are not members of the IGC. Also
unrepresented in the IGC are the newer EU members who are
most affected by the pressures of irregular migration on the
EU's external land border. End Note.


7. (C) Comment: Migration and refugee issues have
historically been competencies of member states, but there
has been a steady transition to EU community-level
involvement. The establishment of the common European visa
policy and common European asylum policy, the creation of
Frontex, the EU returns directive and the recent EU Council
decision for a joint refugee resettlement plan are all
examples of this trend. The current Lisbon Treaty
transformations of EU institutions, as well as the increasing
involvement of the EU institutions in migration and refugee
issues, present a better opportunity for the U.S. to affect
the outcomes, rather than waiting until positions and
priorities are settled. End Comment.


8. (SBU) Action Request: In order to facilitate discussion
at both the HLWG in Brussels and the senior-level informal
meeting in Madrid on January 12, 2010, Department (CA, PRM,
EUR/ERA) and DHS are requested to review EU proposals for
information sharing and projects with the U.S., as well as
ideas listed in Ref A and any other suggestions from
Washington, and provide feedback by January 8, 2010.

Kennard
.