A borderline argument

France’s concerns about Roma immigrants is not the greatest threat to Romania’s membership of the Schengen zone.

In the face of mounting criticism of its programme to deport Roma, France’s government has this week sought to deflect attention back to Romania, the country of origin for most Roma migrants, accusing it of failing Europe’s largest ethnic minority.

France has gone as far as to threaten Romania’s cherished goal of joining Europe’s border-free Schengen area unless the country makes greater efforts to integrate its Roma community. This is a potent threat, as Romania has made a massive effort over the past two years to prepare itself for Schengen entry, a major prize, and hopes to join in March 2011. France has a veto over this, as any Schengen expansion needs to be approved unanimously by the 25 countries that are members of the bloc (22 are members of the EU).

Pierre Lellouche, France’s Europe minister, said this week that France had “reservations” about Schengen enlargement to Romania, hinting at concerns that poorly-integrated Roma would seek to leave the country en masse for other member states.

François Fillon, France’s prime minister, said on Tuesday (24 August) that he would write to José Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Commission, calling on him to ensure that a portion of the EU regional-aid money given to Romania each year is used for social inclusion of Roma.

“France does not have the judicial means to force the Romanian government to spend these [EU] funds on housing and educating its population…but Europe can,” Lellouche said.

The Romanian government views Schengen membership as a rite of passage to becoming a fully fledged EU member state, and as proof that it is regarded as an equal by its peers. Membership is also viewed as a huge electoral asset – the government that leads Romania into Schengen, so allowing its citizens to cross much of Europe without showing a passport, is likely to reap rewards at the polls. It is no surprise that the reaction of Teodor Baconschi, Romania’s foreign minister, to Lellouche’s threat was firm. “No political dialogue should be underscored with threats,” he said.

In reality, however, Romania’s struggles to cope with corruption and reform its judiciary pose a graver threat to its Schengen ambitions than concerns about its treatment of Roma, unless France is determined to use its veto.

The Commission has firmly told France that there is no link between the integration of minorities and the requirements for Schengen entry (which centre on Romania’s border control procedures, visa-processing systems and participation in the Schengen Information System). Most national governments are unsympathetic to France’s attempts to justify its deportations, and would be unlikely to support a hold-up to Schengen expansion on the grounds Lellouche has suggested.

There is, though, widespread concern in the EU that Romania is failing to live up to commitments it made when it acceded to the EU, in 2007, to fight corruption and reform its judiciary. The Commission warned in July that there were “important shortcomings in Romania’s efforts to achieve progress”. The Commission has in the past considered directly linking this progress to Schengen membership, but has so far refrained from doing so. Member states would, however, find it politically difficult to allow Romania into Schengen, even if it had met all the formal requirements to join, because they would face allegations of having let a country with a dubious record in dealing with corruption take over policing part of the bloc’s external border.

This is the real threat to Romania’s Schengen ambitions.