Migration researcher: “Put human dignity back on the agenda”

The debate about migration to Germany has heated up. Migration researchers warn against simplification. Human dignity must be back on the agenda, demands expert Petra Bendel in an interview tagesschau.de.

tagesschau.de: How do you perceive the current debate about migration to Germany?

Petra Bendel: The current debate is very excited and is often based on very one-dimensional recommendations for action, instead of being fact-oriented and more complex – because migration is simply a very complex issue.

tagesschau.de: Are there any demands that seem sensible to you in this debate?

Bendel: Anything that starts at different political levels and with different instruments seems more suitable to me than propagating that there is one silver bullet to tackle migration.

tagesschau.de: So you would say there is no silver bullet?

Bendel: No, there is no silver bullet.

Matching software for distribution

tagesschau.de: Since 2021, you have been running a project in which refugees are to be distributed among municipalities using an algorithm. How exactly does this work?

Bendel: This is a pilot project that I am carrying out together with the University of Hildesheim and four federal states. It’s called “Match’In” and the background is that so far the distribution of refugees from the federal states to the municipalities has mostly been done using quotas, but the individual requirements and needs are not properly matched with the municipalities’ existing resources.

We want to do this using an algorithm and based on science. On the one hand, we want to better take into account the needs and conditions of those seeking protection and, on the other hand, make better use of the potential of migration for local development and thus improve integration and participation right from the start.

tagesschau.de: What individual needs do those seeking protection have?

Bendel: Broadly speaking, there are five major categories. The first is the network: Do I already have family somewhere? Then it’s about health: Are there any special needs? And about the job: What knowledge and skills do I bring with me? About questions about education, which might provide additional information about where I should best be accommodated.

We also ask about special protection needs: Do I belong to a sexual minority or do I have certain religious requirements?

On the other hand, the voluntarily participating municipalities fill out the integration profiles in which they specify: What is the status of our health care, what educational offerings can we provide, what labor market structures do we have? Are there mobility offers? And then our matching software runs over it, which uses the algorithm to make a distribution suggestion.

“Asylum law has no numerical limits”

tagesschau.de: In the current debate there are always voices calling for an upper limit – or an integration limit, as Markus Söder has recently called it. What do you think of it?

Bendel: This is a recurring part of the refugee policy discussion. In my opinion, the legal scope for such a limit is not very great, because there is the Geneva Refugee Convention and European refugee law, which takes up and expands Geneva law. And we have the basic German right to asylum. All three have no numerical limit.

Now Markus Söder recently said that the integration limit is only a guideline. What that means in practice has not yet become entirely clear to me.

“Smugglers don’t travel to the border”

tagesschau.de: Another common demand is that there should be controls at the German borders. This has been going on for a long time on the Bavarian border with Austria. In your opinion, does it make sense to control the intra-European borders?

Bendel: That depends on how you do it. We already have the veiled search, i.e. mobile and suspicion-independent controls in the area near the border. Flexible additional border controls are now to be temporarily introduced at the borders with the Czech Republic and Poland.

But on the one hand there are legal questions. Only if someone enters the country with an entry ban or re-entry ban can you prevent him or her from entering the country. When a person seeking protection submits an asylum application, this means that they are no longer staying in Germany “illegally” and their application must be examined. And on September 21st, the European Court of Justice repeatedly made it clear that even if a person does not apply for asylum, one cannot directly refuse to return at the internal border, because third-country nationals who have entered the country must then receive a return decision – i.e. a deportation threat with a deadline for voluntary departure .

This means that the hope associated with these border controls is exaggerated. Because it is not so easy to drastically reduce the number of entries through internal border controls – at best at the EU’s external borders.

We also have to ask about feasibility. As a rule, the smugglers do not travel with you to the border. And the smugglers are preparing for it. If it becomes known where border controls are taking place, unauthorized entry will very quickly shift elsewhere.

“Few legal options”

tagesschau.de: Nevertheless, Interior Minister Nancy Faeser argues precisely that she wants to combat smuggling activity. Can politicians even prevent smugglers from bringing people into the EU and Germany?

Bendel: This is difficult and a very complex undertaking. The smugglers have a business model, also because there are very few legal options for entry.

tagesschau.de: Would it then be a necessary step to create more legal channels?

Bendel: For some people, legal entry would be a better option, for example for people who could come through immigration law as skilled workers or as workers. For others, this is not an option. These are people who need humanitarian protection but do not have the appropriate training for the labor market.

The Federal Government Commissioner for Migration Partnerships, Joachim Stamp, should now ensure that returns are better enforced because the lack of returns is usually due to a lack of cooperation from the countries of origin, which do not take back their own nationals. And on the other hand, the federal government also wants to offer incentives through the instrument of migration partnerships. These can be work visas, for example.

“We need workers”

tagesschau.de: The federal government is planning such partnerships with Georgia and Moldova, for example.

Bendel: Yes. The main thing is that very few people from these countries actually receive asylum here. On the other hand, we would like to open up work opportunities for them, because we need workers.

However, Mr. Stamp found it difficult to conclude such an agreement with Georgia and the Republic of Moldova because both countries rightly argue that they themselves have too few workers. Transferring the Western Balkans regulation, which was a real successful model, to other countries is simply not possible.

“Major objections”

tagesschau.de: The EU is also planning an agreement with Tunisia. Is it problematic to conclude agreements with such states?

Bendel: Migration pacts are rightly criticized when they put the prevention and combating of irregular migration ahead of all other issues. If they support authoritarian regimes that are dubious in terms of human rights.

In Tunisia, the current ruler’s rhetoric contributed to refugees being driven into the desert. It has also been documented that the Tunisian coast guard is exposing the occupants of migrant boats to drowning by stealing their engines on the high seas.

Finally, there is also cooperation at the EU level with the Libyan coast guard, where there are enough reports of torture and slave trafficking, from arbitrary arrests to executions. These are serious objections.

“Factual debate and Differentiation”

tagesschau.de: With which countries could you even imagine concluding migration agreements?

Bendel: States in which a large number of young people cannot be absorbed into the labor market, states like Senegal or Nigeria. There we could, for example, use the instrument of Global Skills Partnerships, i.e. training partnerships. They have the charm that there is a modular system in such training courses. On the one hand, people train in the country itself. On the other hand, those who want to leave the country can take additional modules and, for example, learn German and the requirements of the German labor market in their country of origin. This is a good model because it respects the needs of everyone involved.

tagesschau.de: Finally: What would you like to see regarding the migration debate in Germany?

Bendel: I would like to see an objective and differentiated debate. I hope that the discourses will put human dignity back on the agenda. That we make it clear that we also have an interest in immigration – and not just be overrun.

The interview was conducted by Belinda Grasnick, tagesschau.de.