The outline of the security strategy in the context of the immigration crisis


USA and EU policy in the Middle East implemented during the first 15 years of the twenty-first century was based on ad hoc measures, determined by domestic issues of Western countries. Thus, no strategy for coordinated action or calculation of any enduring positive effects was developed, by or for any side in the conflict. This resulted in a dramatic deterioration of the situation both within the region itself, and within Europe.

Below are the few projects of  tactical level which together make up the strategy and would, in my opinion, normalize the situation in the Middle East and radically reduce the threat from radical groups. From the European perspective, it would also indirectly contribute to reducing the wave of immigrants. Naturally, this is only the outline of such a strategy, and certainly contains many loopholes. However, with the proper will of the Western countries, it is feasible. Cited issues must be implemented in parallel for all three layers (unless otherwise indicated in the text). Points are therefore not in chronological order:

I. Middle Eastern political issues:

  1. Using the agreement with Iran, immediately resume contacts with the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Agree on a “road map” for Syria*:
  2. Prolonged agreement with Iran while controlling and reducing the Iranian nuclear program and consequent influence in the region in accordance with point 1 cited above.
  3. Backroom negotiations with the GCC, Iran, Israel and China and Russia in order to establish cooperation. Initial area of common interest to launch negotiations: the division of spheres of influence in the region and agreement on the rights of Sunni and Shiite minorities where they are a minority. In the absence of agreement on the issue of Iraq and Yemen, a contingency plan should take into account the need to share these countries. In this respect, there is also the need to negotiate within the same group. The issue of delimitation and possible resettlement and access to places of worship. The best result of these negotiations would be obtaining the cooperation of both parties in reducing Sunni and Shiite extremism and prohibiting the efforts of (corrupting elements within these groups?) from acquiring weapons of mass destruction by either party.
    • How to withdraw from the conflict while minimizing further losses and trends of revenge,
    • Communicate with FSA leadership who have not gone over to Al – Nusry (probably already applies to a small number) and a reconciliation with Assad for their inclusion in Syrian military structures.
    • Direct joint military effort against PI.
  4. Bring to the negotiations between Turkey and the Kurds the Kurdish statehood issue and Kurdish freedoms in Turkey and abandon their terrorist activities in Turkey. The negotiations should be attended by representatives of Iranian, Iraqi and Syrian authorities. Area of initial agreement to launch negotiations: the establishment of a Kurdish state in Northern Iraq and Syria but not in Turkey. Agreement between Turkey and Kurds is POSSIBLE!! Just how it happened during „Zero problems with neighbours” policy period of Mr Erdogan.
  5. Creation of a Kurdish state, the borders of which should be established as a result of the Turkish- Kurdish agreement under UN agency. At the same time the UN should send a contingent to monitor agreements and designate observation points along all borders of the new state. Chinese UN troops as a sign of China role in modelling of theworld order.
  6. Resume and place strong emphasis on re-opening negotiations between Israel and Palestine. The negotiations must take into account and engage countries participating in this conflict except the Israeli and the Palestinian Authorities– the EU and the US, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt and Iran. This will lead to the deployment of the UN contingent inside the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and at the Israeli borders. Again Chinese Peacekeepers together with US would seem to fit here.
  7. Bring to the negotiations the stabilization of the situation in Yemen. For this purpose, it is necessary to include Iran and the GCC countries in the talks. The UN contingent to supervise the agreement and reconstruction of power.
  8. To achieve points. 5-7: full EU cooperation with the US, China, Russia, GCC, Turkey, Israel, Egypt and Iran on security issues.
  9. Great emphasis on and commitment of the EU and the United States in cooperation with the religious authorities in the Middle East. Scholarship program for religious leaders to promote “peaceful version” of Islam.
  10. Maximum improvement of the relations with Egypt. Only after improving the conditions of the international situation, the weakening influence of the so-called IS in Egypt and stabilization of the situation in Egypt gradually increasing pressure on civil liberties, women’s rights etc.
  11. Definite change of the course in case of China. China is making great policy in the ME and Africa and could be constructive if treated as partner.

II. Middle East – humanitarian issues:

  1. The EU and the US must undertake the financing, organization and control of existing refugee camps in the Middle East. The model for these camps should be the Turkish organizational method, which provides the best conditions for refugees.
  2. Negotiations with the Iraqi authorities and Syria, backed by strong action and propaganda or information to reflect the subjectivity and political role of minorities in those countries.
  3. Financial and organizational support – through humanitarian organizations with confirmed authority and effectiveness for the reconstruction of Iraq, Syria and Yemen. A model of the stabilization mission with the use of the humanitarian organizations:
  4. Alongside the political rebuilding and stabilizing of Iraq, Syria and Yemen and the formation of Kurdistan, a promotional campaign for the resettlement of the population of the camps and emigration to  home countries should be set up.

III. The EU and the US:

  1. The introduction of “General Monitoring Refugees Rules” in the EU. From the EU external border refugees should be monitored, using all available methods.
  2. Establishment of temporary refugee files on the basis of the monitoring process as detailed in point 1 above. Documenting all actions of individuals. As a result, even when their documents are unavailable,  you can collect data on them.
  3. On the basis of the “General Monitoring Refugees Rules”, profiling of people of high suspicion and subjecting them to surveillance in countries that they eventually reach.
  4. Strict law enforcement in EU countries without tolerating actions arising from cultural differences. Eg. Prayer in the temple or in the legally assigned place for that, freedoms and civil rights strictly adhered to, incitement to hatred on cultural or changing the constitutional order be treated with severity.
  5. Persons calling for the establishment of Sharia in Europe the same treatment as neo-fascist groups. Not only deny it in public, but prohibited by law.
  6. Treat surveillance of all places of worship where it is even less likely that 4 and 5 might occur. This action should be aimed at detecting particularly dangerous  “sleeper cells” of terrorists.
  7. Educate people in Europe using programs like this: and here

*This point has become very complicated since Russia started its military operation. Propaganda on both sides (Russia – pro Assad and Western – anti Assad) radicalized and now it is much harder to make this point workable.

Warm thanks to Sarah @italianistica for helping me with the correction 🙂


Autor: Milczanowski Maciej

Maciej Milczanowski Maciej is a former professional soldier, participant of two foreign missions: UN in Golan Heights commander of platoon and position (1997-1998) and NATO Iraq Battle Capitan in Tactical Operation Center (2004-2005). Holds an MA in National Defense Academy in Warsaw and Ph. D. in Jagiellonian University both on politics in ancient history and he now works in University of Information Technology and Management in Rzeszow, Poland. Visiting Fellow in Hoover Institution, Stanford University. CEO of Institilute for Research of the National Security and leader of the Zimbardo Center for Conflict Resolution (Z-CenterC&R)

2 myśli na temat “The outline of the security strategy in the context of the immigration crisis”


Wprowadź swoje dane lub kliknij jedną z tych ikon, aby się zalogować:


Komentujesz korzystając z konta Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie na Google+

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Google+. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie z Twittera

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Twitter. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie na Facebooku

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Facebook. Wyloguj /  Zmień )


Connecting to %s