Collective failure

Deutsche Welle: The Council of Europe commissioned you to investigate a refugee debacle that occurred off the Libyan coast last year. Could you tell us what happened?

Tineke Strik: 72 refugees tried to reach the European mainland in a totally overcrowded rubber dinghy that measured a bare seven meters (23 feet) in length. After two days at sea, they sent an SOS signal. Italian border police received the distress call and informed NATO headquarters and all military vessels and other ships near the boat's location. But the refugees were abandoned to the ocean, without food, water or gas. For 15 days, the boat drifted on the open sea before it was carried back to the Libyan coast. Sixty-three passengers were dead, nine survived.

The report blames several organizations for failing to save the refugees. Who should have been the first to react?

The Italians were the first to receive the signal of distress - and they reacted by locating the boat and alerting nearby ships. What Italy failed to do - and, as far as the Council is concerned, by all means should have done - was to coordinate an aid operation to ensure that these people were in fact saved. Italy renounces all responsibility, saying the boat was in Libyan waters. But there's a war going on in Libya, so authorities there were in no position to start a rescue operation.

Since Italy happened to be the first country called on to help, they should have accepted that responsibility and helped!

So in the end, the Italians are to blame for the disaster?

Not exclusively. Due to NATO's intervention in Libya, quite a few military vessels were in the area.  NATO headquarters was alerted, too. We found out that two ships were close to the Libyan boat; a Spanish frigate was just 11 miles away, an Italian ship 37 miles. One of theses ships should have seen fit to help the refugees.

What role did NATO play?

During those 15 days, there were several opportunities to rescue the refugees - that's what's so ironic about it! A senior NATO official told us nothing would have been easier than boarding the boat to take a look. Survivors say a military helicopter circled over the boat, left, returned, dropped off water and biscuits. The refugees were told to stay where they were and wait, that they would be rescued - they thought their rescue was imminent. But the helicopter never showed up again.

You see, several organizations and countries were informed about the situation - and no one reacted. After 10 days at sea, when a few people had already died, the refugees saw people in uniform on a military vessel peering at them through binoculars. The refugees waved like crazy, held aloft the bodies of dead babies and tried to make it clear they had no water and no gas. The military ship turned away.

Could something like that happen again?

I'm afraid it could - another reason why we so thoroughly investigated this case. On the one hand, you would think this area - a war zone - is currently under particularly close observation. On the other hand,   500 people went missing at sea last year, a figure similar to that of previous years. Now that the weather is better again, the 'season' has begun: migrants decide to flee, to set foot on such a boat and try to reach Europe. And even if we try to clarify who is responsible, refugees are still ignored often enough in times of need.

In the report you describe 2011 as the "deadliest year in the Mediterranean."

A kind of collective failure is to blame for that. The situation in Libya forced many Africans to flee the war - to flee Gadhafi and the uprisings. So there's a reason for the mass escape. Add to that ruthless traders in human trafficking who - as in the present case - squeezed 72 people in a small dinghy without food and water. What is strange is the fact that the incident took place in a NATO military restricted area and that this fact didn't facilitate the rescue but made it more difficult: all of a sudden, Italian border police, who have always saved many lives, did not feel they were in a position to intervene - the exact position of the military vessels was top secret.

Are you saying that in future, hundreds of refugees might not be rescued because of bureaucratic and communication difficulties?

Yes, and the two aggravate each other. Italy's attitude is that it was not responsible. So first, we have to convince the Italians that they in fact are responsible as long as Libya is unable to cope with a rescue. That has to be made clear.

There's another important reason for these catastrophes: the countries involved fear the consequences. Many North African refugees head to southern Europe, where the states are left alone with this problem, not just their rescue but also possible measures for their protection.

I believe it could be helpful if the northern EU member states would show more solidarity. They should regard Europe's southern borders as a common border. And the refugees, who are all in need of special protection, would have to be distributed evenly among all member states. Then, perhaps, the states bordering the Mediterranean might be prepared for a speedier rescue.

Interview: Johanna Schmeller / db
Editor: Martin Kuebler