.
Interview with HE Lars Gert Lose, Ambassador of Denmark to the United States. Interviewed by Ambassador Jim Rosapepe, United States Ambassador to Romania (1998-2001) and Member of the Board, Council of American Ambassadors.
In the newest episode of the Council of American Ambassadors (CAA) Podcast, Lars Gert Lose, the current Danish Ambassador to the United States, discusses Europe’s refugee/migrant crisis, Brexit and the future of the European Union, and the US presidential primary elections.
Prior to arriving in Washington, Ambassador Lose was the Chief Adviser on Foreign Affairs to the Prime Minister of Denmark. Ambassador Lose has held a range of high-level positions within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, including Head of the Foreign Minister’s Office.
The host for this interview is Ambassador Jim Rosapepe, who represented the United States in Romania from 1998 to 2001, and is a member of the CAA Board of Directors.
ROSAPEPE: Our guest today is the Danish Ambassador to the United States, Lars Gert Lose. Prior to arriving in Washington, Ambassador Lose was Chief Advisor on Foreign Affairs to the Danish Prime Minister. In his long career in the Danish Foreign Ministry, he’s had high-level posts including Private Secretary to Minister and Head of the Foreign Minister’s Office. Ambassador Lose, thank you for joining us today.
LOSE: Thank you for having me.
ROSAPEPE: Why don’t we start off with what I’m sure is very much at the top of people’s interest in Denmark and around Europe—and a lot of concern in the United States too—which is the refugee crisis around the Mediterranean. I think a couple of months ago there was a sense that Europe was handling it in a very—from an American perspective—from a very constructive way. That there were problems and challenges but frankly with German leadership it look like Europe was coming together. Then it seemed like things kind of fell apart. Walls went up and refugees continued to come. Where do you think we’re going with this? Where do things stand now, particularly with Denmark, but more generally with the refugee crisis?
LOSE: Thank you, Jim. Before heading into this, I think it is important to give your listeners a sense of the magnitude of the challenge in Europe. Whenever I discuss this people in the US I think there is a bit of lack of understanding of what we are facing in Europe. I’ll approach this from a Danish perspective. Denmark is a country of 5.5 million. Geographically we are the size of Maryland. The influx of refugees and migrants is enormous. The numbers are not sustainable. Just to give you some facts: in 2015 we received 21,000 asylum seekers. If you translate that to an American context, that would be the equivalent of 1.3 million asylum seekers in the US. The sheer number is incredible and it is difficult to handle. We expect a 20 percent rise this year in the number of asylum seekers to Denmark, so this is not going to stop anytime soon.
The challenge in itself, just to try and untangle that, there’s a political challenge, we have a challenge with integration because the numbers are so high. It puts an enormous strain on the society to integrate that many people in Denmark. Denmark is a very homogeneous society, it is also a society that wants to take part in solving this challenge. We are very internationally engaged whenever it comes to global crises and security issues and also the refugee issue. We are trying to do the best we can but the sheer number creates an enormous challenge to us. It is difficult to integrate that many people in the Danish society, but of course we have to because we want to take our share of refugees and do what we can in solving this crisis.
The other part of the challenge is economic. In Denmark we have a very well developed welfare state, which means that people have the right to universal healthcare, universal education, job training, housing if you are in need, unemployment benefits, etc. We have a very well developed, comprehensive welfare state and asylum seekers have exactly the same rights as Danish citizens. When you come to Denmark, you apply for asylum, you get asylum, and you have exactly the same rights of any Danish citizen. The costs of this are immense. It really challenges they way in which we have developed society and the welfare state of Denmark. It is not sustainable as it is now because the costs are going through the roof.
The third challenge that I would like to mention is the security challenge. Again, just to compare it to an American context, you have had a very fierce discussion—especially these days in the primary elections—about refugees and the security issues connected to that. I think in the US today it takes 18 months before you can be vetted as a refugee going into the US. The number of refugees coming to the US is much lower than in Europe or in Denmark. In Denmark, we don’t have a vetting procedure. People are coming into Europe, we don’t have internal border checks, so they show up in Finland, Norway, Sweden, and Germany, and then we start the vetting procedure.
ROSAPEPE: Let me intervene there, if I might. The original discussion several months ago, I think driven by the European Commission and some leaders in Europe, was to set up check-in points closer to where people come in, whether it’s in Turkey or Greece or other places, and vet them there, and then have the countries of Europe take quotas. It seems like neither of these things have happened. I’m curious, from a Danish perspective, why not?
LOSE: Because the challenge is so profound. There is a European Council meeting today where they will again try to find a European solution to this because no matter how you twist and turn this, there is only a European solution to this problem. No country handle this on its own. Not Denmark, not Germany, nobody.
ROSAPEPE: How would Denmark like to see it handled?
LOSE: What we need to do is control our external borders. That’s the only way to handle the crisis and this is what they are discussing today. What can we do in terms of strengthening our external borders. Europe is in a radically different position that the US due to our geographical location. It is supremely difficult to control the external borders on the Mediterranean Sea. We tried that for many years. Strengthening our efforts. Now NATO is trying to do something against human trafficking across the Mediterranean Sea. Greece has difficulty controlling its borders, the Balkan borders…It is just supremely difficult to control the borders. We haven’t succeeded yet, so we still have migrant and refugee flows into Europe at a very high number.
As you know, we have the Schengen Agreement in Europe which means we don’t have any internal border control.
ROSAPEPE: You do now because people have gotten waivers from the Schengen agreement, right?
LOSE: Some countries have border controls now. Sweden has. Denmark has introduced not a physical border control but we have spot samples taken at the Danish border. Germany has introduced in a certain period of time, it is temporary and it will be abolished depending how this develops. But of course we see a domino effect. As soon as some countries start introducing border checks other countries will be forced to do the same. To give you an example, I mentioned the 21,000 asylum seekers but that is only the top of the iceberg… You Denmark is kind of the bridgehead to continental Europe and the Scandinavian countries. If you want to go to Sweden, Finland, Norway, you pass through Denmark. So we had 91,000 people crossing the Danish-German border in that period of time. And then Sweden introduced border checks at the bridge in between Copenhagen and Sweden. So people that didn’t have identity papers, couldn’t identify themselves as being eligible for asylum in Sweden, they were stuck in Denmark in the Copenhagen area. We had a huge risk of a buildup of people without..again we had no vetting procedures and we had no idea who they were.
We introduced spot checks at the Danish-German border. This was not to reduce the number of people seeking asylum in Denmark because what you were asked at the Danish border was “Do you know you can’t go to Sweden? Do you want to seek asylum in Denmark?” A lot of people said yes, probably in increasing numbers. It was a security initiative.
ROSAPEPE: What happens at the border when people say “I want to seek asylum in Denmark?”
LOSE: Then the procedure starts and in Denmark you can get an accommodation and the authorities responsible for this will start processing your application.
ROSAPEPE: So they stay in Denmark, live in Denmark and go through a process. Playing this out a little more towards the future. What do you think is likely to happen? Do you think the European Union will be able to come up with a European-wide solution with the external borders and the vetting process and the allocation of quotas for different countries? Or is that a wonderful idea but unlikely to happen and therefore each country is really likely over the next year or two to work out their own arrangements.
LOSE: It is a good question. If you would have asked me four months ago if this would threaten the Schengen Agreement I would have said no. Because the Schengen Agreement, the lack of internal border control, is such a fundamental part of what we do economically, politically, identity-wise. But now we see this being questioned because countries like Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Austria, other countries are introducing border checks because we have to. So it is difficult to say how this will end. The only solution is not even external border check, it is to solve the crisis in Syria, the Middle East, and Afghanistan. Because this is where the refugees are coming from. We need to find a sustainable solution to this but until then we must check the external borders because of migrants and refugees coming into the continent as we speak. In terms of the quota idea, I have my doubts whether that will be possible. You know, Denmark is not part of the Asylum and Refugee Policy in the EU. We have opted out of that. We are part of the Schengen Agreement and the border control but not on asylum and refugee policy so we’re not part of that decision. It’s difficult. Also because there is a difference between what countries refugees and migrants want to go to. Northern European countries are the countries they want to go to because it is a safe environment, well developed welfare states, the benefits you get are good, you can get access to education and healthcare, etc. Those are very attractive countries. It also means that if you have a quota system allocating refugees to other countries in Europe where refugees don’t want to stay, they will just move again.
You may listen to the full interview here:
https://soundcloud.com/caaliveatmeridian/sets/ambassador-lars-gert-lose
The views presented in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent the views of any other organization.
a global affairs media network
Interview: The Refugee and Migrant Crisis in Europe
|
June 6, 2016
Interview with HE Lars Gert Lose, Ambassador of Denmark to the United States. Interviewed by Ambassador Jim Rosapepe, United States Ambassador to Romania (1998-2001) and Member of the Board, Council of American Ambassadors.
In the newest episode of the Council of American Ambassadors (CAA) Podcast, Lars Gert Lose, the current Danish Ambassador to the United States, discusses Europe’s refugee/migrant crisis, Brexit and the future of the European Union, and the US presidential primary elections.
Prior to arriving in Washington, Ambassador Lose was the Chief Adviser on Foreign Affairs to the Prime Minister of Denmark. Ambassador Lose has held a range of high-level positions within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, including Head of the Foreign Minister’s Office.
The host for this interview is Ambassador Jim Rosapepe, who represented the United States in Romania from 1998 to 2001, and is a member of the CAA Board of Directors.
ROSAPEPE: Our guest today is the Danish Ambassador to the United States, Lars Gert Lose. Prior to arriving in Washington, Ambassador Lose was Chief Advisor on Foreign Affairs to the Danish Prime Minister. In his long career in the Danish Foreign Ministry, he’s had high-level posts including Private Secretary to Minister and Head of the Foreign Minister’s Office. Ambassador Lose, thank you for joining us today.
LOSE: Thank you for having me.
ROSAPEPE: Why don’t we start off with what I’m sure is very much at the top of people’s interest in Denmark and around Europe—and a lot of concern in the United States too—which is the refugee crisis around the Mediterranean. I think a couple of months ago there was a sense that Europe was handling it in a very—from an American perspective—from a very constructive way. That there were problems and challenges but frankly with German leadership it look like Europe was coming together. Then it seemed like things kind of fell apart. Walls went up and refugees continued to come. Where do you think we’re going with this? Where do things stand now, particularly with Denmark, but more generally with the refugee crisis?
LOSE: Thank you, Jim. Before heading into this, I think it is important to give your listeners a sense of the magnitude of the challenge in Europe. Whenever I discuss this people in the US I think there is a bit of lack of understanding of what we are facing in Europe. I’ll approach this from a Danish perspective. Denmark is a country of 5.5 million. Geographically we are the size of Maryland. The influx of refugees and migrants is enormous. The numbers are not sustainable. Just to give you some facts: in 2015 we received 21,000 asylum seekers. If you translate that to an American context, that would be the equivalent of 1.3 million asylum seekers in the US. The sheer number is incredible and it is difficult to handle. We expect a 20 percent rise this year in the number of asylum seekers to Denmark, so this is not going to stop anytime soon.
The challenge in itself, just to try and untangle that, there’s a political challenge, we have a challenge with integration because the numbers are so high. It puts an enormous strain on the society to integrate that many people in Denmark. Denmark is a very homogeneous society, it is also a society that wants to take part in solving this challenge. We are very internationally engaged whenever it comes to global crises and security issues and also the refugee issue. We are trying to do the best we can but the sheer number creates an enormous challenge to us. It is difficult to integrate that many people in the Danish society, but of course we have to because we want to take our share of refugees and do what we can in solving this crisis.
The other part of the challenge is economic. In Denmark we have a very well developed welfare state, which means that people have the right to universal healthcare, universal education, job training, housing if you are in need, unemployment benefits, etc. We have a very well developed, comprehensive welfare state and asylum seekers have exactly the same rights as Danish citizens. When you come to Denmark, you apply for asylum, you get asylum, and you have exactly the same rights of any Danish citizen. The costs of this are immense. It really challenges they way in which we have developed society and the welfare state of Denmark. It is not sustainable as it is now because the costs are going through the roof.
The third challenge that I would like to mention is the security challenge. Again, just to compare it to an American context, you have had a very fierce discussion—especially these days in the primary elections—about refugees and the security issues connected to that. I think in the US today it takes 18 months before you can be vetted as a refugee going into the US. The number of refugees coming to the US is much lower than in Europe or in Denmark. In Denmark, we don’t have a vetting procedure. People are coming into Europe, we don’t have internal border checks, so they show up in Finland, Norway, Sweden, and Germany, and then we start the vetting procedure.
ROSAPEPE: Let me intervene there, if I might. The original discussion several months ago, I think driven by the European Commission and some leaders in Europe, was to set up check-in points closer to where people come in, whether it’s in Turkey or Greece or other places, and vet them there, and then have the countries of Europe take quotas. It seems like neither of these things have happened. I’m curious, from a Danish perspective, why not?
LOSE: Because the challenge is so profound. There is a European Council meeting today where they will again try to find a European solution to this because no matter how you twist and turn this, there is only a European solution to this problem. No country handle this on its own. Not Denmark, not Germany, nobody.
ROSAPEPE: How would Denmark like to see it handled?
LOSE: What we need to do is control our external borders. That’s the only way to handle the crisis and this is what they are discussing today. What can we do in terms of strengthening our external borders. Europe is in a radically different position that the US due to our geographical location. It is supremely difficult to control the external borders on the Mediterranean Sea. We tried that for many years. Strengthening our efforts. Now NATO is trying to do something against human trafficking across the Mediterranean Sea. Greece has difficulty controlling its borders, the Balkan borders…It is just supremely difficult to control the borders. We haven’t succeeded yet, so we still have migrant and refugee flows into Europe at a very high number.
As you know, we have the Schengen Agreement in Europe which means we don’t have any internal border control.
ROSAPEPE: You do now because people have gotten waivers from the Schengen agreement, right?
LOSE: Some countries have border controls now. Sweden has. Denmark has introduced not a physical border control but we have spot samples taken at the Danish border. Germany has introduced in a certain period of time, it is temporary and it will be abolished depending how this develops. But of course we see a domino effect. As soon as some countries start introducing border checks other countries will be forced to do the same. To give you an example, I mentioned the 21,000 asylum seekers but that is only the top of the iceberg… You Denmark is kind of the bridgehead to continental Europe and the Scandinavian countries. If you want to go to Sweden, Finland, Norway, you pass through Denmark. So we had 91,000 people crossing the Danish-German border in that period of time. And then Sweden introduced border checks at the bridge in between Copenhagen and Sweden. So people that didn’t have identity papers, couldn’t identify themselves as being eligible for asylum in Sweden, they were stuck in Denmark in the Copenhagen area. We had a huge risk of a buildup of people without..again we had no vetting procedures and we had no idea who they were.
We introduced spot checks at the Danish-German border. This was not to reduce the number of people seeking asylum in Denmark because what you were asked at the Danish border was “Do you know you can’t go to Sweden? Do you want to seek asylum in Denmark?” A lot of people said yes, probably in increasing numbers. It was a security initiative.
ROSAPEPE: What happens at the border when people say “I want to seek asylum in Denmark?”
LOSE: Then the procedure starts and in Denmark you can get an accommodation and the authorities responsible for this will start processing your application.
ROSAPEPE: So they stay in Denmark, live in Denmark and go through a process. Playing this out a little more towards the future. What do you think is likely to happen? Do you think the European Union will be able to come up with a European-wide solution with the external borders and the vetting process and the allocation of quotas for different countries? Or is that a wonderful idea but unlikely to happen and therefore each country is really likely over the next year or two to work out their own arrangements.
LOSE: It is a good question. If you would have asked me four months ago if this would threaten the Schengen Agreement I would have said no. Because the Schengen Agreement, the lack of internal border control, is such a fundamental part of what we do economically, politically, identity-wise. But now we see this being questioned because countries like Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Austria, other countries are introducing border checks because we have to. So it is difficult to say how this will end. The only solution is not even external border check, it is to solve the crisis in Syria, the Middle East, and Afghanistan. Because this is where the refugees are coming from. We need to find a sustainable solution to this but until then we must check the external borders because of migrants and refugees coming into the continent as we speak. In terms of the quota idea, I have my doubts whether that will be possible. You know, Denmark is not part of the Asylum and Refugee Policy in the EU. We have opted out of that. We are part of the Schengen Agreement and the border control but not on asylum and refugee policy so we’re not part of that decision. It’s difficult. Also because there is a difference between what countries refugees and migrants want to go to. Northern European countries are the countries they want to go to because it is a safe environment, well developed welfare states, the benefits you get are good, you can get access to education and healthcare, etc. Those are very attractive countries. It also means that if you have a quota system allocating refugees to other countries in Europe where refugees don’t want to stay, they will just move again.
You may listen to the full interview here:
https://soundcloud.com/caaliveatmeridian/sets/ambassador-lars-gert-lose
The views presented in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent the views of any other organization.
