Little cold war

A certain menace was hanging in the air, and has quickly taken concrete form: those who do not respect the principle of free circulation, will not themselves enjoy access to certain advantages of the European Union. This is the message contained in the reprisal taken by the European Commission against Switzerland, whose students and researchers will be excluded from the Erasmus and Horizon 2020 programs, if Switzerland persists in rejecting the extension of the free circulation agreement to Croatia, the latest country to join the EU. The response, a measured one, makes it clear that there will be a price to pay for decisions such as those adopted in the referendum on February 9, which limits the admission of EU citizens to the Alpine country; it does not, however, affect the hard core of relations between both sides.

For some years now in several European countries, populist movements have been stoking popular resentment with scare campaigns predicting the end of the local way of life due to an invasion of foreigners, who are accused of undercutting wages and exploiting generous welfare policies. Certainly there are abusive practices inherent in the functioning of any welfare state, but these require corrective policies and not populist maneuvers.

Immigration contributes to prosperity, as is demonstrated in the case of Switzerland, where growth averages a little over two percent annually with an unemployment rate as low as 3.5 percent. Many people are convinced by the arguments in favor of immigration, the proof being that the referendum failed in the principal cities and in the cantons where most foreigners live, while it succeeded in rural territories where people are more responsive to populist language about the defense of national identity and the evils of “overcrowding.”

The EU’s reprisal is a warning to those who may be tempted to follow the Swiss example in other countries of the Union, ranging from the exclamation “wonderful news” with which the referendum result was received by the leader of Britain’s far-right UKIP party, to the satisfaction expressed by the populists in the Netherlands and the Northern League in Italy. The advocates of a united Europe are attempting to react against this xenophobic line, warning UK Prime Minister David Cameron and other politicians who are tempted to undermine a principle as basic as that of the free circulation of persons. Though the years of crisis have weakened Europeanism and bred pessimism, the leaders of a space that now comprises almost 500 million people cannot shrug their shoulders at actions that may incite others to retrograde movements.

It is painful to begin a little cold war in the heart of the Old Continent, but the other option — that of becoming a hostage to extremist policies — is even worse. Particularly when this situation arises on the eve of the elections to the European Parliament. This dimension has some bearing on reality in Spain, and the campaign previous to the May ballot offers a good opportunity for debate. To focus the whole spotlight on domestic politics is to retreat from what is in fact an international problem.