We don't even know how many there are; some say 200.000, some 400.000, others even 600.000. How many economic migrants, refugees, how many refugees. And this is also part of the problem; because a bit of clarity in those who are institutionally responsible for managing the forced migration of these months on the continent would be a must.
A problem that Europe, unprepared as ever, a simulacrum of an empty container, is facing without any overall vision, torn apart by the Eastern States (Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Greece) - but also Austria, Denmark, Sweden - intent on curbing, even physically, the Balkan route, and the traditional ones of the old continent, unable to choose between the terror of their own future and the generalized propensity to welcome, subtly served by a certain political culture and by the world Catholic.
The first, Third World, has long replaced the masses of the proletarians with those of the desperate in perennial journey, with an eye to a possible enlargement of its own electoral basin.
The second, more severely challenged even within it, driven by the need to find areas of dialogue and a common space with a confession destined to become, in the medium term, if not the majority, at least the most influential in a secular continent, it seems to search of a difficult balance between teaching and consent.
In this situation picture, even the media do not help to shed light, repeatedly bombarding public opinions with pictures of overflowing boats and lifeless children returned to our shores, only to skilfully overlook the preponderance of males in soldier age (16 -40 years) - beyond 75% -, and how some of them can pay up to € 7.000 per trip.
Reference is also made to demography (aging of the population) to give a positive value to new arrivals, also hinting at the need for someone to pay our pensions, up to the point of supporting - as I said Diamonds on the Republic of 1 February - that "in order not to become extinct, in order not to end up on the margins, we should really close the borders. To the north. To prevent immigrants (... ..) from going elsewhere. And to leave us at home always older. More and more alone (...). "
Legitimate points of view in an open and plural debate of an evolved society like ours.
But there is also another interpretation, which sees the migration phenomenon as something carefully induced to hit Europe within it, irrevocably undermining social cohesion.
Kelly M. Greenhill of the Harvard Kennedy School called them "coercive engineered migrations, coercive designed emigrations ”ie "cross-border movements that are deliberately created or manipulated in order to extract political, military and / or economic concessions from one or more targeted states".
An unconventional weapon, instrument of a new (asymmetrical) way of waging war, like the one theorized in the 1995 by two Chinese colonels, Quiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, in the book "Guerra senza limits" (Libreria Editrice Goriziana, 2001), with the comment of Fabio Mini.
Immigration as a means of war, which acts in two stages: first by forcing the contender to immediately manage the phenomenon of arrivals, arranging for the relevant reception; then forcing him to govern the innumerable internal problems caused by the integration (?) in the social fabric of such a foreign body. All with the ultimate goal of gradually weakening the host.
Immigration as a weapon of a "war without limits" fought with means and strategies different from those of classical conflicts (symmetrical, linear, rational, based on a Cartesian logic); a war fought (even on European soil) without soldiers, guns and cannons, but with "non-military" tools (economic, social, political, terrorist, financial, information), in order to destabilize the ganglia of the state organization.
A war that sees refugees not as a consequence of the conflict, but the conflict itself, as recently written by an American scholar: "The nature of war has changed; refugees today is war".
Interpreting the phenomena we are experiencing in this light may not be politically correct, but it would help - I believe - to make us less vulnerable.