Title: Tunisian Extremist’s Attack Highlights Belgium’s Flawed Deportation System
The recent attack in Brussels, Belgium, carried out by an alleged Tunisian extremist, has put the spotlight on the country’s flawed deportation system. The attacker, who killed two Swedish soccer fans before being shot dead by the police, was residing in Belgium illegally and should have left the country three years ago. However, due to administrative failures, he was able to remain in the country and carry out the attack.
Belgium, a country that has been repeatedly targeted by extremist attacks, is now facing a heated political debate over its inability to deport individuals like the Tunisian national who pose a threat to national security. The government’s failure to prevent the attack has raised serious questions about the effectiveness of Belgium’s deportation policies and the measures in place to enforce them.
Authorities are still investigating the motive behind the attack, which took place near the venue where Belgium’s national soccer team was playing against Sweden in a European Championships qualifier. Despite being on police files and suspected of radicalization, the attacker managed to obtain a semiautomatic rifle and carry out the heinous act.
In response to the criticism, Belgium’s Prime Minister Alexander De Croo acknowledged the need for stricter enforcement of deportation orders. He emphasized the importance of making such orders binding, particularly for individuals who do not qualify for protection. De Croo also called for improved protection of the European Union’s external borders and coordinated return policies among member states.
Sweden’s Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, who visited Brussels to attend a ceremony in honor of the victims, expressed understanding towards Belgium’s difficulties in deporting rejected asylum seekers who refuse to leave voluntarily. He highlighted that Sweden faces similar challenges with a significant number of people declining to leave despite having their asylum applications denied.
According to Justice Minister Vincent Van Quickenborne, the attacker had been denied asylum in 2020 and was associated with human trafficking, illegal residence, and a potential risk to state security. However, Belgian authorities lost track of him after his asylum application was rejected, as he chose not to be housed in a reception center.
Critics of the Belgian government have pointed out the contradictory actions of authorities. While they were unable to locate the attacker for deportation, they swiftly identified his address and conducted raids at his flat after the attack. The ease with which the attacker acquired a gun further highlights Belgium’s struggle to combat drug trafficking and the widespread circulation of firearms.
Belgium’s deportation system has a history marred by controversy. In 1998, a Nigerian asylum seeker, whose application had been rejected, was tragically suffocated during her deportation. Consequently, Belgium must address these concerns, with calls for stricter measures regarding criminals and radicalized individuals.
The issue of deportations extends beyond Belgium, as many European Union countries also struggle with the effective enforcement of deportation orders. Only a small percentage of individuals whose asylum applications are rejected actually leave voluntarily.
While investigations into the motive for the Brussels attack are ongoing, it is evident that Belgium’s flawed deportation system played a role in allowing the attacker to remain in the country and perpetrate violence. The incident serves as a reminder of the pressing need for improved deportation policies, better coordination among member states, and enhanced security measures to protect citizens within the European Union from the threat of extremism.
