Today, Europe is experiencing a crisis as hundreds of thousands of migrants are arriving at its doorstep with no place else to go. Certainly, they will be taken care of, somehow or other, but the European states are not prepared. Europe is not prepared, either to share its resources or to recall its collective historical memory. The current chaotic attitude is undoubtedly a result of the traditionally protectionist policies of the European Union member states, towards the rest of the world, reflecting the fear that one has of the violence of others (different from oneself: foreign)… 

The lack of resources is a minor problem since generally, as long as there is the political will (desire), a solution to this discrepancy is found. Thus, the real question lies in the psychology or willingness of Europeans to let their life be transformed by the arrival of migrants forced into exile. And actually, the current possible change, which is un-expected and rarely popular, is much more complex and more sensitive than the one "under control" which occurred in the fifties and thereafter with the labour migration, in the last century, in response to a predefined plan, which on the whole, was the reconstruction of the comfort of some (the Europeans) to the detriment (at least in the short term) of others (the "immigrants").

So, today, most of us would agree without difficulty that regarding the issue of migration and our living together many changes (social, demographic, economic, linguistic, cultural, ideological, or religious) are foreseeable; but, how deep are these changes? Josefa asks us: "Who are we? What do we want for the present and for the future? Are we not "all migrants"? In Europe, are we ready to accept our "migrant" status and walk together, among forced migrants and "free" migrants?

Saving human lives, supplying shelters, feeding hungry people are all essential, generous and vital. But, do these charitable acts lead to an in-depth transformation of our societies or do they hide more fundamental questions that we do not dare to look into, because it may cause a division of "power"? Is it a question of "saving refugees" or "saving our world as we know it"?

Europe has always been and always will be a continent of migration. A land of welcome and exile, Europe is also a region that strives and declares itself to be one of the richest and most prosperous on our planet. Accordingly, in order to pursue its "development", Europe not only has to face the challenge of migration, but has to accept and embrace it completely and without hesitation. Europe should not distrust migration, for its future will be determined by it and not in spite of it. The influx of forced migrants, exiles, would become for Europe an opportunity beyond the harvest that is reaped by exercising one’s hospitality without expecting a real reciprocity. Welcoming and helping tend to keep at a discreet distance the idea of accepting help and being welcomed and challenged by others. Thus, migration itself is like a journey of conversion, like a structuring journey.

The European Union is indeed not the stakeholder: the member states are the stakeholders. And actually, with diverging opinions at the European level, nation-states are facing with great difficulty the current constraints of migratory flows. But, accordingly, the European Union has to assume its role as a visionary authority: a super governing body. Europe has to see far off, beyond the issues of countries, protectorates, borders, and internal quarrels: the key to the future can be found in historical events. Our migrations force us to think, not only about the management of the generous humanitarian act, but also about its meaning. Why? And not how?

We must emphasise the necessity of a common European approach regarding migration and asylum, so that member states have to give up their individual veto when there is a phenomenon that exceeds the intra-European problems and touches humanity, each person. A common approach to borders and the notions of asylum, as well as a common policy regarding migration, are inevitably going to develop in the future, progressively over the years, within Europe or after it breaks up and becomes universal.

As long as the nation-states are focused on protecting their own prerogatives, they will not be very efficient. The forced migration of hundreds of thousands of exiles has put a strain on the conservative plans for integration or for the living together under communalism.

The (nation, or even European) state ends up questioning its purpose. Should it serve only those within its borders or rather reach out to all of humanity, to the largest number of individuals?

At this stage there appears to be a second "layer". Which individual are we speaking about? Our migrations, free or forced, encourage us to think not only of each person, but of each aspect of the person; all that he or she carries in his or her luggage, including the culture and convictions of another place, or even of another time.

Therefore, let’s no longer think about borders, integration or the preservation of European identities. It’s more about letting ourselves be touched by an unexpected meaning of our migrations, namely the one about hospitalities and, above all, reciprocities. All that we share, the common Good, is not shared only once; it is received tomorrow, more than today and even more than yesterday.

Our participation in our migrations is unreservedly at the heart of our European states, because they are roads of peace, they go beyond our fears, they are not short-lived, but enduring, they build upon a structuring praxis that constitutes a challenge which, we can see it today, we can face only by accepting that it exceeds us, by taking part in it. So let us enter the era of movement, mobility, a common exile, that of the journey at the heart of our cities. Europe, in these states, will then become a step towards a humanity in search of peace, thus a migrating humanity, on the way to a much-desired eternity.

Together, all migrants.