处理好了，难民潮将是欧洲的黄金机会

    作为避难所的德国要不堪重负了，至少目前情况如此。上周末，德国关闭了边境，将难民拒之门外，并且截停了载有数千避难者的来自奥地利的列车。作为欧洲最大经济体，德国的“敞开大门”政策也有上限。仅上周六（9月12）一天，就有超过1.3万名难民涌进了慕尼黑。

    德国内政部长托马斯•德迈齐表示，这项政府紧急命令是临时措施，旨在让德国用更有序的方式来接纳难民潮。

    申根协定允许持合法护照者在26个欧洲签约国自由通行。然而，突然叫停申根协定的做法已经在一些国家蔓延——奥地利、斯洛伐克以及荷兰也已采取同样措施；匈牙利和捷克也加强了边境控制；法国、波兰和瑞典则正在考虑实施类似行动。铁幕已经消失了25年以上，而今人们似乎正在重新筑起这道壁垒。

    局面本不该如此。按预估，德国今年本来要接纳80万难民，其中许多都来自战火纷飞的叙利亚。这样的难民接纳规模在西方发达国家中首屈一指。与之形成对比的是，奥巴马政府终于承诺美国将接收1万名叙利亚难民——至少已经许下了这样的诺言。但考虑到严格的背景审查以及安全方面的要求，几乎可以肯定，这个过程将耗时数年。本周一（9月14日），在布鲁塞尔召开的欧盟内政部长会议未能拿出解决方案，这似乎使得恐慌情绪在欧盟蔓延进一步加速，进而阻碍成员国采取接收难民的行动。

    难民危机是对欧洲一体化理念的又一次考验。不过，和较为贫穷、人口也较少的中东国家这些年来一直被迫应付的局面相比——他们也没像欧洲那么大呼小叫——就能更客观地看待本次危机的真正程度。

    2011年叙利亚爆发内战，至今已有400万叙利亚人背井离乡，其中大多数都逃到了约旦、土耳其和黎巴嫩。经济和物产同样贫乏的约旦接纳了60多万难民，后者给约旦的房地产市场带来了沉重压力，他们对水的巨大需求也让约旦的水资源迅速减少。今年，土耳其的难民数量直线上升，已逼近200万人。情况最坏的也许要数小国黎巴嫩，当地本来已有逾40万巴勒斯坦难民，现在又来了110万叙利亚人寻求庇护。在如今的黎巴嫩，大约每四个人里就有一个是难民。

    这些叙利亚邻国的财力无法承担这样的重担。约旦、土耳其和黎巴嫩三国共有人口8600万，名义GDP总额约9000亿美元。而欧洲有5亿人左右，GDP更高达18.4万亿美元。

    也许，在适当的帮助下，叙利亚的邻国可以应付规模巨大的难民潮。但尽管西方已经向该地区提供了人道主义援助，但大家都觉得这些援助都力度不足。联合国难民署估算，今年该地区的叙利亚难民需要超过45亿美元的援助，而国际援助只有这个数字的37%。一些批评人士指出，难民放弃资源匮乏的难民营，到富裕的欧洲寻找新生活一点儿也不奇怪。

    当然，欧洲对接纳难民犹疑不定也有一定的原因。比如说，没有足够能力来应付成千上万寻求庇护的人；再比如说，安全顾虑，特别是在今年早些时候巴黎和哥本哈根发生恐怖袭击之后。但有些反对声音更多是基于民族主义和文化因素。在捷克、波兰和斯洛伐克，数千抗议者走上街头示威，反对移民并高呼反伊斯兰教口号。他们打出的横幅上写着“回自己家去”和“伊斯兰教意味着死亡”。匈牙利总理维克托•欧尔班就从宗教和文化角度反对接收穆斯林难民，还以16和17世纪奥斯曼帝国曾占领过匈牙利为引证。与之类似，斯洛伐克也决定只接纳信奉基督教的叙利亚人。

    美国外交关系协会指出，欧盟各国无法携手应对难民潮的局面和欧债危机期间的情况如出一辙，它们都把本国利益置于群体利益之上。

    不过，在这样的氛围中，几乎还没有人提到这些乘火车、卡车和木筏前往欧洲的移民和难民带来的机遇。在这些打算进入欧洲的难民中，有一些是叙利亚中产阶级成员，比如医生、工程师和教师，他们或来自遭政府军轰炸的阿勒颇，或来自受到IS恐怖威胁的地区。这些人给进入老龄化阶段的欧洲大陆带来了后者急需的活力和机会。

    欧盟委员会认为，老龄化是欧盟面临的最大社会和经济问题之一。到2025年，欧洲超过五分之一的人口将达到或超过65岁，这会给社会服务和医疗保健带来极大压力。

    年轻移民也许正是欧盟迫切需要的生力军。同时，和约旦、土耳其或黎巴嫩不同，欧洲用于接纳移民的资源要多得多。据美国CNBC报道，欧盟经济和金融事务专员皮埃尔•莫斯科维奇表示，不应仅从成本角度来看待当前的移民和难民危机，还应将其视为机遇。

    莫斯科维奇说：“这也是一种资源，一种人力资源。我们这些国家需要移民……不应该像民粹主义者那样只从不利的方面来看待其经济影响。”

    《金融时报》同时报道，德国财长沃尔夫冈•朔伊布勒持有同样的积极看法。他认为短期成本可控，长期来看则可能受益匪浅。一般来说，移民有益于劳动力市场。此外，经合组织以及德国欧洲经济研究中心的一些研究论述认为，移民的贡献超过了他们得到的服务。

    鉴于欧洲经济复苏乏力，尽管当前的难民危机令人悲痛，但它对欧洲的未来也许至关重要。至少，有数据可以支持这一点。不过，要平息席卷欧盟多国的恐慌潮，光有良好的数据还不够。（财富中文网）

    译者：Charlie

    校对：詹妮

    So much for sanctuary in Germany—at least for the moment. Over the weekend, the nation closed its borders, turning back refugees and halting Austrian trains carrying thousands of asylum seekers. The open-door policy of Europe’s largest economy has its limits: More than 13,000 refugees had flooded Munich on Saturday alone.

    The emergency order from the German government was a temporary move, according to Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere, an opportunity to handle the refugee influx in a more orderly fashion.

    However, the dramatic suspension of the borderless Schengen Zone—which allows passport-free movement among 26 European states—appears to have been contagious: Austria, Slovakia, and the Netherlands have followed suit; Hungary and the Czech Republic also increased border controls; and France, Poland, and Sweden are considering similar moves. More than 25 years after the Iron Curtain fell, the walls appear to be going back up.

    It wasn’t supposed to be like this. Germany has been expected to welcome 800,000 refugees this year, many from war-wracked Syria, making it the standout among Western developed countries. By contrast, the Obama Administration has pledged that the U.S. will resettle 10,000 Syrian asylum seekers, at least eventually: The process will almost certainly take years, given rigorous background check and security requirements. The panic gripping the EU appeared to accelerate after a meeting of interior ministers in Brussels on Monday failed to come up with a plan, deferring action to the member states.

    The refugee crisis presents yet another test for the idea of an integrated Europe. However, the real scope of the crisis is placed in some perspective by what poorer, less populous Middle Eastern states have been forced to accommodate—with far less fanfare—for years.

    Of the 4 million Syrians who’ve fled since their country’s civil war began in 2011, the vast majority have crowded into Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon. Poor, arid Jordan hosts more than 600,000 refugees, who are sorely taxing housing markets and thirstily tapping the country’s rapidly declining water resources. Turkey’s refugee population has skyrocketed this year to almost 2 million. Worst off, perhaps, is tiny Lebanon: 1.1 million Syrians have joined a preexisting population of over 400,000 Palestinian asylum seekers. Today in Lebanon, roughly one in four people is a refugee.

    Syria’s neighbors lack the financial wherewithal to handle this burden: Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon have a combined population of 86 million and a nominal GDP of roughly $900 billion. As a point of comparison, the EU boasts a population of half a billion and a GDP of $18.4 trillion.

    Perhaps Syria’s neighbors could accommodate the region’s massive displacement, given proper help. But while humanitarian aid has flowed to the region from the West, by most accounts it is insufficient. According to UNHCR, the UN’s refugee agency, the humanitarian needs of the region’s displaced Syrians tops $4.5 billion this year. International donors have only pledged about 37% of that. Little wonder, say some critics, that refugees are abandoning under-resourced camps in search of a new life in wealthy Europe.

    Of course, there are reasons for Europe’s hesitation to take them: a lack of capacity to handle thousands of asylum seekers, for instance, and security concerns, particularly in the aftermath of the Paris and Copenhagen terrorist attacks earlier this year. But some of the opposition is more nationalist and cultural in flavor. In the Czech Republic, Poland, and Slovakia, thousands of protesters have flocked to demonstrations, opposing migration and chanting anti-Islamic slogans. Banners read GO HOME and ISLAM IS DEATH. Hungary’s Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, has opposed accepting Muslim refugees on religious and cultural grounds, citing his country’s occupation by the Ottoman Empire in the 16th and 17th centuries. Slovakia, similarly, has decided to only accept Christian Syrians.

    According to the Council on Foreign Relations, the bloc’s inability to craft a comprehensive response to the refugee influx echoes the dynamics of the European debt crisis, in which national interests have taken precedence over collective concerns.

    But in this current atmosphere, too little is made of the opportunity presented by the migrants and refugees heading to Europe by train, truck, and raft. Among the refugees attempting to get in are the remnants of Syria’s middle class: doctors, engineers, and teachers fleeing Assad’s barrel bombs in Aleppo, or the reign of terror ushered in by the Islamic State. They bring vitality and opportunity to an aging European continent that badly needs it.

    According to the European Commission, the graying of Europe is among the EU’s most serious social and economic challenges. More than one-fifth of Europeans will be 65 or older by 2025, placing great strain on social services and health care.

    Integrating young migrants could provide a much-needed demographic boost. And unlike Jordan, Turkey, or Lebanon, Europe has far more resources to integrate them. As reported by CNBC, Pierre Moscovici, European commissioner for economic and financial affairs, has stated that the current migration and refugee crisis should not just be seen in terms of cost, but opportunity.

    “It is also a resource—a human resource,” Moscovici said. “Our countries need migration … the economic impact should not just be looked at in a negative way as populists would have it.”

    According to the Financial Times, Wolfgang Schäuble, Germany’s finance minister, takes a similarly warm view: The short-term costs are manageable, while the long-term benefits are potentially substantial. Migrants are, generally, a boon to labor markets. Moreover, they pay out more to the state than they take in services, according to separate pieces of research by the OECD and the Centre for European Economic Research.

    In light of Europe’s anemic economic recovery, the current refugee crisis, while founded in misery, may be vital to the EU’s future. The data, at least, are supportive. But in facing down the tide of panic that grips many EU states, good data may not be enough.