ΑΛΛΗΛΕΓΓΥΗ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΕ: ΕΞΕΛΙΞΕΙΣ ΣΤΟ ΠΕΔΙΟ ΤΗΣ ΠΡΟΣΦΥΓΙΚΗΣ ΠΡΟΣΤΑΣΙΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΡΟΚΛΗΣΕΙΣ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΕ ΚΑΙ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΛΛΑΔΑ

Minos Mouzourakis 101 potentially grave implications for the global protection regime. The EU approach may encourage third countries, including the major refugee-hosting countries, to follow suit by limiting access to protection on their territories. 19 This could lead to a shrinking of global protection space at a time when forced displacement has reached record levels. 20 Fourthly, a policy built on deflecting protection responsibility beyond Europe un- dermines the EU’s credibility and influence in external relations. Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) clearly states the objectives of EU external ac- tion as promotion of human rights, democracy, sustainable development and con- flict prevention. In both senses of the EU’s normative power, i.e. as a positive role model or as a promoter of values in its external policies, the EU’s identity, cred- ibility and ability to influence will surely be fatally undermined by the proposals put forward. In addition to the impact on the EU itself as a space for protection, expanded use of the “safe third country” concept would constitute another intru- sion of narrowly conceived domestic policy priorities into EU external affairs, un- dermining efforts to build comprehensive and to some extent value-based exter- nal policies. In this regard, offering funding in exchange for “safe third countries” taking more responsibility places powers in the hands of third countries which can hold the EU to ransom by agreeing or not cooperate. Given its contested legal basis and wide-ranging political implications, the “safe third country” concept should at most remain an optional tool for use in pre- scribed circumstances with sufficient safeguards in place. Following discussions in the Council, a proposal by the Estonian Presidency presented on 15 November 2017 suggests to revert back to an optional “safe third country” concept, although the same is not proposed in respect of the “first country of asylum” concept; the latter is to remain mandatory, in line with the Commission proposal. 21 19. In the case of Turkey, the world’s largest refugee-hosting country, this has taken the form of border walls in the course of 2017: Hürriyet, ‘Turkey-Syria border wall to be completed by end of September’, 22 September 2017, available at: http:// www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey-syria-border-wall-to-be-completed-by-end-of- september-118278; ‘Turkey starts building security wall on Iran border’, 9 August 2017, available at: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey-starts-building-security-wall- on-iran-border--116510. 20. UNHCR, ‘Forced displacement worldwide at its highest in decades’, 19 June 2017, available at: https://www.unhcr.org/afr/news/stories/2017/6/5941561f4/forced- displacement-worldwide-its-highest-decades.html. 21. Council of the European Union, Proposal for an Asylum Procedures Regulation (first reading) , 14098/17 15 November 2017, 4 and 9.