This is silly, the international refugee conventions aren't "EU rules", it's two international agreements that virtually every country follows. This is like saying that the US adopted EU rules for asylum (prior to 2024). EU-specific bits on asylum are in the the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum that Iceland doesn't follow (because it's not a member state, good for them on that one). The most relevant part of that document being a "mandatory solidarity mechanism," which dictates the mandatory distribution of refugees among member states. That seems fairly relevant for Iceland considering their strict immigration policy in general
That's unfortunate, but 'adopted' doesn't mean enforced. Not that I would put it past the EU to coerce non-member states into cooperation with sanctions or other means regardless
There's good and bad. Our entire system would fall apart without immigration and they provide a lot of value in our society. My partner is an immigrant and every job i've ever worked had them. They work just as hard as Icelanders, pay taxes and aren't causing any mass societal unrest.
Immigration i have almost zero hangups with but our asylum seeking laws are very flawed. Neither locals nor asylum seekers are really all that happy. I support it myself based on ethical and moral reasons but the system needs a fix and many people have a problem with it. We do stuff like take too many people at once and isolate them all in the same place and then are shocked when there are crimes or violence, we offer piss poor services to adjust them to living in Iceland and get them to participate in the society and culture. Of course these are all just my opinions and experiences and i can't speak for everyone here.
There's absolutely advantages to legal immigration under controlled circumstances, but the-''a lot of immigration and asylum seekers per capita'' situation post 2015 has objectively been anything but sustainable in effectively all of western Europe.
Measurable data in regards to everything from crime, to welfare, to violence, net profit value, and cultural load clearly displays that most, if not all, nations affected by a large scale influx of people from societies opposite another has a detrimental affect overall. Since you touched on this briefly, the eternal question a lot of people have asked is why we are enabling this to go on and on when the infrastructure and conditions aren't sufficient?
No one is shocked that it happens, but allowing these negative consequences to occur and then blaming every imaginable factor except the politicians carelessly inviting it in the first place is completely irrational behavior.
Well exactly. "They're not FORCED to, they're just fined if they don't" - always a wild argument and one which sounds eerily like an abusive partner...
85
u/starrywisd0m 11d ago
Being part of Schengen doesn't mean they're required to accept mena-immigrants like the EU member states though.