van Welzen 1

Jack van Welzen

Mr. Phillips
AP English III
6 December 2015
The Calais Crisis: Solving the Impossible
While almost everyone must move from one home and into another at some point in their
lives, few are faced with the life threatening danger that the migrants in Calais must confront in
order to reach their destination. Although rooted in over a decade of conflict, the migration crisis
existing between France and Britain has recently been reinvigorated with attempts made by
several thousands of temporary residents of Calais, France to illegally cross the English Channel
into the United Kingdom. When confronted with an obstacle course of terrain, passport checks,
riot police, and several fences in front of them, the majority of migrants stop within Calais and
stay there temporarily. However, the growing tension between the French and the British exists
because several migrants try to illegally pass the police and jump the fences in order to pass into
Britain. Millions of euros are being dumped into the expansion of the security of the border, but
migrants still manage to slip by the guard of the countries. Due to this inefficiency of physical
barriers, Britain and France should shut down the fence program and cooperate with other
European Union countries in order to establish an economic incentive for the migrants to move
to other parts of the world.
The primary reason that the Calais crisis cannot be solved is that the British and French
governments are too stuck on the idea that they can solve the problem by building temporary
shelters and increasing the number of fences. Both countries have already invested large sums of

van Welzen 2
money in building the best physical barriers that they can on their borders. BBC News states that
the Calais port is now protected by 16 ft (5m) fences topped with coils of razor wire and CCTV
with the gates and exterior guarded by heavily armed French riot police. Eurotunnel has spent
9.2 million on security in the first six months of 2015 alone (Why is There). Along with
these barriers, the French government has established temporary homes made out of shipping
containers in order to accommodate the Calais residents who seek asylum in Britain (Calais
Jungle Camp). It seems almost encouraged for the residents to stay because of the
hospitality of the shelters and the plethora of fences preventing them from leaving. While the
governments seem to be trapping the migrants into Calais with fences and homes, they seem to
be also trying to do the opposite and force the migrants out with police forces. However,
because those who are pushed away from Calais are still only a small hike away and can return
with ease, French authorities are receiving many questions on the effectiveness of their actions
(Why is there). The governments are contradicting themselves by wishing that the migrants
would leave while simultaneously providing them with shelter, sticking them in a cage of fences,
and making poor efforts at actually pushing illegal immigrants out of Calais. M. Bernard
Cazeneuve, French Minister of the Interior, recognized the inefficiency of the current system by
stating that its totally unrealistic to think were going to resolve the humanitarian tragedy,
resulting from global unrest, with security measures. They are necessary but wont be enough
(Comprehensive Solution). In a similar vein, Alex Morrison argues that the fences will
only be effective until migrants find different places to enter after realizing that they cannot get
past at their current location. Morrison and Cazeneuve have the same underlying idea that the
current set up must be seen as only temporary and cannot be used as a long term solution without
serious consequences. In order to progress towards a real solution, the countries have to cut their

van Welzen 3
losses, abandon the fence and shelter system, and cooperate with each other to formulate a
permanent answer.
Alone, neither France nor Britain has been successful in solving the Calais crisis causing
one possibility that should to be taken in order to find an answer to stand out: cooperate with
each other. In regards to the border control, Cazeneuve stated that the agreement to restrict
borders in both Britain and France made by Nicolas Sarkozy sounded great but resulted in
disproportionately large amounts of pressure on France and not Britain. France has invested over
25 million on protection and has proven to be quite successful, but with Britains lack of
initiative, solving the crisis is impossible (Comprehensive Solution). The weight, if put
solely on Frances shoulders, is far too much to bear. In order to relieve some pressure, Britain
should carry some of the load. However, Britain also cannot solve the problem on their own as
Cazeneuve later establishes in saying that all of the European Union needs to help fix the
problem. If the problem is resolved using Britain alone as a safety valve, the connection between
Britain and France will decay (Comprehensive Solution). Neither side can be expected to
solve the problem on their own; they need to work with each other as well as with other countries
within Europe to settle the issue. Receiving the international aid required to make changes is a
fairly easy task as stated by Frans Timmermans, the First Vice President of the European
Commission, when he argued that the European Union will never repress those who need
protection and called on EU member states to be faithful to their human voices in the face
of what he called a global crisis (EU Offers 5 mln). In seeing the current state of France
and Britain, the countries in the European Union are more than willing to help solve the Calais
crisis. However, simply having the required resources is not enough. The countries must be able

van Welzen 4
to appropriately allocate the money and manpower into a plan that is more effective than the
fences.
When dealing with the migrants living in Calais, there are two major groups. On one
hand, there are the legitimate refugees seeking asylum in Britain and on the other, there are the
opportunity seekers wishing to start a new life in the promising countries of Europe. The source
of the issue is grounded in the latter, but due to improper identification, it is hard to separate the
two and get to the root of the issue. As Chris Harris stated in addressing the origins of the issue,
many see Europe, and particularly Britain as somewhere that offers the prospect of financial
gain. This is not the caseour streets are not paved with gold. The misconception that Britain
is a haven of economic prosperity has resulted in thousands of job seekers moving into Calais.
Cazeneuve suggested that this problem should be attacked at the entry point of immigrants into
Europe. In order to separate legal asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, while also creating
rules for origin countries that set standards for deportation, Italy must establish reception
centers (Comprehensive Solution). These centers will provide a first line of defense
against the job seekers who wish to enter England and will stop many in their tracks. Anyone
who manages to slip past will be met with the second defensive measure in France. To prevent
migrants from ever making it to Calais, the French government will read through asylum
applications the moment the migrants arrive in France. The government can reject those seeking
new opportunity while accepting those running from persecution or war (Harris). After being
met with these examinations, many of the trouble causing migrants will turn back and Calais will
be mostly cleansed of the trouble makers. However, many opportunity seekers are already in
Calais, and some may manage to slip past the testing. In order to push these people out of
Calais, the current residents will go through examinations and those who arent seeking asylum

van Welzen 5
will be forced out and given economic compensation. Their real desire is to live a life that is
more financially stable than their current one, and if the governments pay them to leave, they
will be able to fulfill this desire somewhere else with the money. Although not completely
flawless, the idea of giving money to those seeking it will result in large steps towards solving
the Calais crisis by reducing the total population dramatically.
One of the biggest oppositions that arises from this proposal is the problem of funding.
From paying the border workers to providing the economic compensation, the solution is fairly
costly. However, much of this cost can be covered by money that is already being set aside to
help France in building fences. It was seen as the job of the Calais Chambers of Commerce to
maintain the protection of the exit in Calais. In order to aid in accomplishing this goal, Britain
offered 12 million (Why is there). Similarly, due to Frances lack of ability to handle the
many migrants currently settled in Calais, Frans Timmermans, declared that the European Union
would provide France 5 million euros to move the migrants (EU Offers 5 mln). This
funding originally designed to build more fences and move the migrants is more than sufficient if
it is set aside for the proposal. By doing so, little money will have to be spent out of the French
or British wallet. Another opposition exists in the idea that instead of pouring money into this
new, potentially unsuccessful idea, more money should be spent building more fences and
creating stronger borders. By looking into the past, it is clear that this idea is flawed and will
only result in a prolonged failure. People will always manage to avoid the borders in some way
and make it to their destination. It is difficult for anyone to tell how many people are making it
to Britain. Although the exact numbers are unknown, the British Home Secretary Theresa May
admitted that some people do complete the journey (Why is there). Regardless of how
strong the physical barriers become, there will always be a few who make it past them. Instead

van Welzen 6
of wasting money on attempting to secure borders, the money should be dedicated to the
examination and compensation proposal.
The current issue present in the northern port city of Calais, France cannot be solved by
beating the dead horse of building a larger number of fences. Both France and Britain need to
abandon the unsuccessful idea of using physical barriers and transition into attacking the root of
the issue and providing economic compensation to those forced out of Calais. Fewer of those
who are pushed out will try to get back in because of their reward. Therefore, along with the
thinning stream of immigrants entering Europe, the migrant population of Calais will decrease
and the decade-old crisis will finally end. All that it takes to leap this barrier is for France to be
willing to try something new and give it time to work. Once the problem is solved, France will
be able to turn their attention to the more pressing matters of terrorism that their country is
facing.

van Welzen 7
Works Cited
"Calais 'Jungle' camp migrants double to 6000; The number of migrants camped on France's
north coast near Calais has doubled to around 6,000 in recent weeks, boosted by an influx
across EU borders." Telegraph Online 17 Oct. 2015. Student Resources in Context. Web.
19 Nov. 2015.
""Comprehensive Solution" Needed for Calais Crisis - Minister." France in the United Kingdom.
N.p., 5 Aug. 2015. Web. 04 Dec. 2015.
"EU offers 5 mln euros to help refugees in France's Calais." Xinhua News Agency 31 Aug. 2015.
Global Issues in Context. Web. 19 Nov. 2015.
Harris, Chris. "Five Solutions to the Calais Migrant Crisis." RSS. N.p., 3 Aug. 2015. Web. 04
Dec. 2015.
Morrison, Alex. "Calais Migrant Crisis: Fences 'push Migrants Elsewhere' - BBC News." BBC
News. N.p., 12 Aug. 2015. Web. 04 Dec. 2015.
"Why Is There a Crisis in Calais? - BBC News." BBC News. N.p., 3 Oct. 2015. Web. 04 Dec.
2015.