A few months before the Arab spring that thundered off in Tunisia, tore through the Middle East and the Maghreb and and swept power off the feet of tenacious dictators liker Hosni Mubarak, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and Muammar Gaddafi, I watched a documentary on African migrants trying to cross to Europe through North Africa.
Libya, its then leader Muammar Gaddafi’s strategy of blocking the migrants specifically, was the focus of the documentary.
The Libyan leader, apparently, had a deal with the EU to ensure the seemingly uncontrollable influx of migrants through his country’s southern border to European countries was systematically, nay ruthlessly, checkmated. Hundreds of thousands of migrants, some escaping persecution but most fleeing from poverty, had crossed to Europe, surviving unimaginable risks. And many more were waiting for an opportunity to take a leap. But with the deal, worth millions of Euros, it was hoped the influx would be frustrated and a ‘Black Europe’ prevented.
Gaddafi, reports said, had requested an annual payment of €5 billion. But EU agreed to pay €50 million over three years. Although several millions of Euros short of his request, the deal was sealed and the regime intensified its crackdown on foreign nationals using Libya as gateway to Europe.
Prior to the deal most migrants apprehended trying to cross to Europe through Libya faced instant deportation to their country of origin. But that changed as soon as the agreement came into force. Deportation, it was thought, only temporarily stopped the migrants because many determined ones often re-embarked on the journey once they were back home.
But the regime was to make sure they were put in custody so they would not have the chance to make any further attempts. Thus, a new strategy was adopted and many would-be migrants to Europe languished in Libyan jails. Amongst them were several scores of Nigerians.
President Gaddafi’s death in October 2011 threw the country into further chaos. Libya, consequently, became the floodgate for migrants to Europe. But it also means higher risks, including death in the hands of rival groups fighting for control. ISIS also took advantage of the confusion to establish a strong presence.
Migrants from sub-Saharan Africa are most at risk. Many travel through extremely unsafe routes to the north African country where they are exposed to more danger. Many die in the open desert because they hire dubious guides who abandon them along the way. Many are attacked by bandits who dispossess them of money and any other valuables. Many are abducted and forced to contact relatives back home for ransom before they are released.
There are also tales of some being arrested in parts where there’s a semblance of government and forced to pay heavy fines for being in the wrong places. But more disheartening are the stories of those who survive all the danger in the desert and in the war-torn country only to fall prey to high seas murderers who, after collecting money from the migrants in a deal to ship them to Europe, throw them overboard or force them onto inflatable boats that are abandoned to wander off and sink shortly afterwards, killing hundreds, including women and children.
Those who survive the ordeal tell tales of horror. A group consisting of many Nigerians told of the torture the traffickers who held them at knife-point subjected them to in an over-crowded vessel, from which nearly 200 were thrown overboard in the high seas, the remainder abandoned before the vessel docked and the Navy eventually rescued them.
The biggest lure for most of those who undertake the horrifying journey is a desire for pastures new, which they erroneously assume Europe offers. But what they either are not told or refuse to believe when told is the probability of success is, sadly, hugely exaggerated. The risk, realistically, far outweighs the benefit, if one was lucky not to lose one’s life.
In the mid 1990s I met a young man who had just left high school and was learning a trade but was frustrated and wanted to ship out. His destination was the US and hoped to, initially, travel by road through the Sahara to North Africa. He eventually left and was stuck in a West African country for many years. Finally, he took the risky leap through the sea and arrived his dream destination a couple of years ago. By my calculation he probably spent 20 years wallowing in uncertainty. But even greater uncertainty does he face now, in a new place, in a fast changing world with new and increasing demand for specialist skills.
Last week, two very distressing events happened. First, an undercover video by CNN’s Nima Elbagir went viral, showing just a snippet of what happens to African migrants in Libya. In the video some men believed to be Nigerians came under the hammer for as little as $400; what they go through after they are sold is better imagined. The second was the burial, somewhere in Salerno, Italy of 26 Nigerian women, some of whom were teenagers, who were being trafficked to Europe but got drowned in the Mediterranean Sea.
The Nigerian government has, so far, condemned the ‘slave auction’ in Libya and criticised the Italian government’s rush to bury the dead women, nine days ahead of schedule. While this is commendable, it has merely skimmed the surface. No one has, yet, ordered full investigations into both tragedies with a view to finding solutions to, at least, the problems that keep forcing Nigerians to flee their country, their comfort zone, and undertake unprofitable risks.
Applying diplomatic leverage, the government needs to move beyond media criticisms and work with the recognised authorities in Libya in order to find ways of rescuing its citizens trapped in the war-ravaged country. The country also needs to establish the actual identity of each of the women buried in Italy so there can be some form of closure for their families. Otherwise, they may never find out what has happened to them.
