Never before have we experienced a noborder camp on the outer borders of the EU at which political protests and social struggles for the freedom of movement were as intertwined as they were in Lesvos. International press coverage about the detention centre at Pagani was considerable and we return with many new impulses for transnational networking. Even if meetings were characterised by strong disagreements, our evaluation of Lesvos is overwhelmingly positive.(1)
“Tomorrow when we continue our journey, we will be refugees again. But till the last minute we will be just people here tonight, friends celebrating together. Who would’ve thought that on this island we wouldn’t have to hide in the woods and that we would get the gift of a night of freedom amongst friends!”
These words speak volumes. They are the words of a young Afghani man on the last night of the noborder camp that took place near Mytilini, the capital of the island of Lesvos. True words they are, given the impressive events of those days, in particular at the Infopoint which was set up along the harbour right from the start. There tourists could get information about the situation of refugees, whilst (silent) supporters from the island brought blankets and food. Some of the locals also shared the experiences they had had with refugees. Within a few days, this self-organised ‘Welcome Centre’ became the central meeting point for (paperless) newcomers and released detainees; a space to rest, a space to exchange information and a space for collective action.(2)
As we expected, both time and place of the noborder camp were well-selected. Lesvos is key site in the external border regime of the EU: Each night new refugee boats arrived and the detention centre at Pagani had been suffering from overcrowding for weeks. Greek border guards and Frontex were on patrol around the clock.(3) Around 600 activists from many different countries had travelled to Lesvos for the week of protests. Aside from the Greek activists, most of them were from Germany, but also from many different countries. Five days before the noborder camp began, 150 young people detained in Pagani went on hunger strike to demand their release. This set the tone and of what was about to unfold. The first solidarity actions began then, producing the kinds of images that would cause stirs in the international media in the weeks to come: refugees smuggled a camera into the prison to document the inhumane conditions forced on them inside.(4) With a slight delay, these even made it onto CNN and some of this material was also broadcast in the German media. However, both press work within Greece as well as on an international level could have been even more effective if engagement with mainstream media hadn’t been such a controversial issue.(5)
The first contentious issue that emerged was a familiar one to activists in Germany: 40 hunger strikers had fought their way out of Pagani and were waiting for the crossing to Athens with nowhere to stay and without any resources. The places on the ferries were all booked up and they couldn’t leave, so they were invited to join the camp. Immediately people began to worry how to continue to do political actions when hundreds of refugees needed to be cared for. Many – especially local activists – feared getting lost in individual support work and being instrumentalised by the state in the process. What was at stake here was the possibility of connecting practical solidarity with political demands. Unfortunately though, it remained a theoretical debate in meetings as to how dynamic resistance could unfold through joining together social (survival) struggles and political initiatives. This was why the Infopoint was such an astute compromise.
At the Infopoint, noborder activists wanting to confront the border regime politically could come together with those whose journey to Europe was a practical challenge to those borders. Through this process, refugees and activists were able to break through language barriers and organise mutual support as well as collective (political!) action. The kitchen collectives brought food and noborder activists offered medical assistance, legal advice and practical help for people continuing their journey. Experienced migrants translated and shared what they had learned along the way, those who were more rested helped the exhausted newcomers. New arrivals participated in farewell parades for those embarking on their journey towards Athens. Setting a precedence, an Afghani family fought and won the ability to register without detention! For the Frontex action day, refugees and activists painted a huge multi-language ‘Freedom of Movement’ banner and hung it up at the Infopoint. It’s not always easy to get the balance between care and activism or negotiations and street actions right, and so everyone’s emotional and physical boundaries were constantly being pushed to their limits. Yet it was precisely this process that appeared to us to be one of the most powerful aspects of the noborder camp.
From the moment the hunger strikes happened shortly before noborder09 began, it was clear that the detention centre would become a main focal point. Pagani was completely overcrowded with at times 1000 men, women and children locked away in appalling conditions lacking in hygiene as well as access to food and water. Nearly every day, larger and smaller actions took place with calls of “Freedom! Azadi!” resounding from inside and out. Protesters shook the gates of the prison, occupied the courtyard and in the end also the roof. A source of long and bitter debates was whether and how to have forced a mass break-out and close down the prison. Wouldn’t that have been the only appropriate action (and technically possible)? However, people inside were clear that they didn’t want to break out like ‘criminals’, they wanted to be released (people also feared still having to encounter the authorities at the ferry port, a chokepoint if you want to go further). And so – at least for the duration of the noborder camp – the strategy was to put continued pressure on the authorities from inside and out, to shorten the time refugees were physically detained and to transform the prison into open centre.
This debate led straight into inextricably linked discussions about action repertoires, repeatedly surfacing in all meetings and working
groups. Already in advance, intense conflicts had ensued within the Greek networks: anarchist groups weren’t participating because
they couldn’t work with the “network for political and social rights” ('Diktio'). Autonomous and anarchist groups from other countries
expected more direct actions and consistently felt like they were being restricted when they made concrete proposals for actions. It’s
true that many ideas for actions were blocked, either because of fears that these wouldn’t be carried out responsibly, or because these
might endanger other (in some cases actually also questionable) negotiation tactics. Additionally, huge communication problems
existed that had to do with different protest cultures as well as (often non-transparent) decision-making processes. Also, the riot cops
brought in from Athens did anything but make any of the actions easier. Completely out of the blue they would use their batons to
demonstrate that civil disobedience wouldn’t be met with any kind of civil response. Another difficulty were conflicts around different
sensitivities in given situations. A good example here was the attempt (thwarted by other activists) by a few small groups to break out
of the demonstration in the inner-city harbour area to do a militant action – against clear agreements within the incredibly heterogeneous
preparatory group that had organised the demo, along with repeated pleas by local activists. Overall, lamentably (and this is directed at
everyone), we weren’t successful at carrying out self-organised and well-prepared actions that directly confronted the infrastructure of
Frontex, Coastguard & Co.
There was quite a buzz on the Frontex-action day when activists in 50 paddle boats attempted to surround the Coastguard. Of course the Greek coast guards were ‘nice enough’ to display their finesse in making waves that push back refugee boats at high sea. At the same time as this was going on, the demo against Frontex started, led – amongst others – by activists from Mali and Mauritius, who in West Africa are also faced with EU border agency operations. In workshops it was possible to strengthen transnational networking with them as well as activists from Eastern Europe and Turkey, meaning that more joint initiatives against Frontex and illegal deportations ('refoulements') along the EU’s outer borders are planned for the future. More than ever before, noborder09 left behind sustainable structures on a local level. The week of protests invigorated and strengthened the local support group which continues to raise public awareness of the scandalous conditions in Pagani, not least because new detainees continue to rebel. Clearly motivated by noborder09 events, the following weeks saw more protests which have now led to the re-instatement of an open centre. Newly arrived families should be registered there without being detained, a small but real shift from the existing practice of deterrence. Additionally, the ‘Voices of Pagani’ have made Dublin-refoulements more difficult, and against the backdrop of the successful fast-track appeal at the German Constitutional Court, it’s no coincidence that Schaeuble has complained at Greece endangering the whole Dublin-System. (6)
Via the Infopoint, noborder09 came into contact with an estimated 200 Sans Papiers and was able to undermine the existing registration and internment system during the days of the noborder camp. The contacts established have been maintained beyond Athens and refugees who have made it to where they wanted to go have already been in touch! For a few moments, the Infopoint allowed us gain a glimpse of what a self-organised “Welcome-Centre” could look like. The words of a young woman from Somalia leave no doubt at all: “I am most thankful to have learned that there is more than one journey. When I left Somalia, I started my journey to find a safer and better place to live, because I wanted to support my family. I can now see more clearly what Europe looks like and how it isn’t the safe place I hoped to reach. We are thrown into terrible prisons and Europe sends its troops to fight us at sea. I have never learned so much in such a short time. It was difficult to learn, but I learnt even more. I began my second journey here, seeing all the others who sit in the same little boats and fight for survival and to get further. In the last days together with you here in this tent in Mytilini I have been able to see what it would be like if we all go on the journey together. Maybe to another place that might exist somewhere in the future.”
transact! October 2009
(*) ‘Azadi’ is Farci for ‘Freedom’.
(1) See also
http://lesvos09.antira.info/, as well as http://birdsofimmigrants.jogspace.net/biographi
(2) A separate brochure about the Infopoint will be published in the coming months.
(3) In Pagani refugees’ fingerprints are taken and subsequently they are detained (between 2 weeks and 2 months) until they receive a ‘white paper’ stating that they have to leave Greece within 30 days.
(4) This and other videos can be viewed here: http//lesvos09.antira.info/nobordertv/
(5) Before the noborder camp there was a decision taken by the local group that the noborder camp as a whole shouldn’t engage in any mainstream media work.
(6) In September 2009 the Constitutional Court stopped a deportation of a refugee from Irak in a summary proceeding. The man should have been deported to Greece which was the country of his first entry to European Union. Schäuble (Germany’s Interior Minister since elections in September) is one of the hardest opponents to any kind of reform on Dublin2-convention.
These words speak volumes. They are the words of a young Afghani man on the last night of the noborder camp that took place near Mytilini, the capital of the island of Lesvos. True words they are, given the impressive events of those days, in particular at the Infopoint which was set up along the harbour right from the start. There tourists could get information about the situation of refugees, whilst (silent) supporters from the island brought blankets and food. Some of the locals also shared the experiences they had had with refugees. Within a few days, this self-organised ‘Welcome Centre’ became the central meeting point for (paperless) newcomers and released detainees; a space to rest, a space to exchange information and a space for collective action.(2)
As we expected, both time and place of the noborder camp were well-selected. Lesvos is key site in the external border regime of the EU: Each night new refugee boats arrived and the detention centre at Pagani had been suffering from overcrowding for weeks. Greek border guards and Frontex were on patrol around the clock.(3) Around 600 activists from many different countries had travelled to Lesvos for the week of protests. Aside from the Greek activists, most of them were from Germany, but also from many different countries. Five days before the noborder camp began, 150 young people detained in Pagani went on hunger strike to demand their release. This set the tone and of what was about to unfold. The first solidarity actions began then, producing the kinds of images that would cause stirs in the international media in the weeks to come: refugees smuggled a camera into the prison to document the inhumane conditions forced on them inside.(4) With a slight delay, these even made it onto CNN and some of this material was also broadcast in the German media. However, both press work within Greece as well as on an international level could have been even more effective if engagement with mainstream media hadn’t been such a controversial issue.(5)
The first contentious issue that emerged was a familiar one to activists in Germany: 40 hunger strikers had fought their way out of Pagani and were waiting for the crossing to Athens with nowhere to stay and without any resources. The places on the ferries were all booked up and they couldn’t leave, so they were invited to join the camp. Immediately people began to worry how to continue to do political actions when hundreds of refugees needed to be cared for. Many – especially local activists – feared getting lost in individual support work and being instrumentalised by the state in the process. What was at stake here was the possibility of connecting practical solidarity with political demands. Unfortunately though, it remained a theoretical debate in meetings as to how dynamic resistance could unfold through joining together social (survival) struggles and political initiatives. This was why the Infopoint was such an astute compromise.
At the Infopoint, noborder activists wanting to confront the border regime politically could come together with those whose journey to Europe was a practical challenge to those borders. Through this process, refugees and activists were able to break through language barriers and organise mutual support as well as collective (political!) action. The kitchen collectives brought food and noborder activists offered medical assistance, legal advice and practical help for people continuing their journey. Experienced migrants translated and shared what they had learned along the way, those who were more rested helped the exhausted newcomers. New arrivals participated in farewell parades for those embarking on their journey towards Athens. Setting a precedence, an Afghani family fought and won the ability to register without detention! For the Frontex action day, refugees and activists painted a huge multi-language ‘Freedom of Movement’ banner and hung it up at the Infopoint. It’s not always easy to get the balance between care and activism or negotiations and street actions right, and so everyone’s emotional and physical boundaries were constantly being pushed to their limits. Yet it was precisely this process that appeared to us to be one of the most powerful aspects of the noborder camp.
From the moment the hunger strikes happened shortly before noborder09 began, it was clear that the detention centre would become a main focal point. Pagani was completely overcrowded with at times 1000 men, women and children locked away in appalling conditions lacking in hygiene as well as access to food and water. Nearly every day, larger and smaller actions took place with calls of “Freedom! Azadi!” resounding from inside and out. Protesters shook the gates of the prison, occupied the courtyard and in the end also the roof. A source of long and bitter debates was whether and how to have forced a mass break-out and close down the prison. Wouldn’t that have been the only appropriate action (and technically possible)? However, people inside were clear that they didn’t want to break out like ‘criminals’, they wanted to be released (people also feared still having to encounter the authorities at the ferry port, a chokepoint if you want to go further). And so – at least for the duration of the noborder camp – the strategy was to put continued pressure on the authorities from inside and out, to shorten the time refugees were physically detained and to transform the prison into open centre.
This debate led straight into inextricably linked discussions about action repertoires, repeatedly surfacing in all meetings and working
groups. Already in advance, intense conflicts had ensued within the Greek networks: anarchist groups weren’t participating because
they couldn’t work with the “network for political and social rights” ('Diktio'). Autonomous and anarchist groups from other countries
expected more direct actions and consistently felt like they were being restricted when they made concrete proposals for actions. It’s
true that many ideas for actions were blocked, either because of fears that these wouldn’t be carried out responsibly, or because these
might endanger other (in some cases actually also questionable) negotiation tactics. Additionally, huge communication problems
existed that had to do with different protest cultures as well as (often non-transparent) decision-making processes. Also, the riot cops
brought in from Athens did anything but make any of the actions easier. Completely out of the blue they would use their batons to
demonstrate that civil disobedience wouldn’t be met with any kind of civil response. Another difficulty were conflicts around different
sensitivities in given situations. A good example here was the attempt (thwarted by other activists) by a few small groups to break out
of the demonstration in the inner-city harbour area to do a militant action – against clear agreements within the incredibly heterogeneous
preparatory group that had organised the demo, along with repeated pleas by local activists. Overall, lamentably (and this is directed at
everyone), we weren’t successful at carrying out self-organised and well-prepared actions that directly confronted the infrastructure of
Frontex, Coastguard & Co.
There was quite a buzz on the Frontex-action day when activists in 50 paddle boats attempted to surround the Coastguard. Of course the Greek coast guards were ‘nice enough’ to display their finesse in making waves that push back refugee boats at high sea. At the same time as this was going on, the demo against Frontex started, led – amongst others – by activists from Mali and Mauritius, who in West Africa are also faced with EU border agency operations. In workshops it was possible to strengthen transnational networking with them as well as activists from Eastern Europe and Turkey, meaning that more joint initiatives against Frontex and illegal deportations ('refoulements') along the EU’s outer borders are planned for the future. More than ever before, noborder09 left behind sustainable structures on a local level. The week of protests invigorated and strengthened the local support group which continues to raise public awareness of the scandalous conditions in Pagani, not least because new detainees continue to rebel. Clearly motivated by noborder09 events, the following weeks saw more protests which have now led to the re-instatement of an open centre. Newly arrived families should be registered there without being detained, a small but real shift from the existing practice of deterrence. Additionally, the ‘Voices of Pagani’ have made Dublin-refoulements more difficult, and against the backdrop of the successful fast-track appeal at the German Constitutional Court, it’s no coincidence that Schaeuble has complained at Greece endangering the whole Dublin-System. (6)
Via the Infopoint, noborder09 came into contact with an estimated 200 Sans Papiers and was able to undermine the existing registration and internment system during the days of the noborder camp. The contacts established have been maintained beyond Athens and refugees who have made it to where they wanted to go have already been in touch! For a few moments, the Infopoint allowed us gain a glimpse of what a self-organised “Welcome-Centre” could look like. The words of a young woman from Somalia leave no doubt at all: “I am most thankful to have learned that there is more than one journey. When I left Somalia, I started my journey to find a safer and better place to live, because I wanted to support my family. I can now see more clearly what Europe looks like and how it isn’t the safe place I hoped to reach. We are thrown into terrible prisons and Europe sends its troops to fight us at sea. I have never learned so much in such a short time. It was difficult to learn, but I learnt even more. I began my second journey here, seeing all the others who sit in the same little boats and fight for survival and to get further. In the last days together with you here in this tent in Mytilini I have been able to see what it would be like if we all go on the journey together. Maybe to another place that might exist somewhere in the future.”
transact! October 2009
(*) ‘Azadi’ is Farci for ‘Freedom’.
(1) See also
http://lesvos09.antira.info/, as well as http://birdsofimmigrants.jogspace.net/biographi (2) A separate brochure about the Infopoint will be published in the coming months.
(3) In Pagani refugees’ fingerprints are taken and subsequently they are detained (between 2 weeks and 2 months) until they receive a ‘white paper’ stating that they have to leave Greece within 30 days.
(4) This and other videos can be viewed here: http//lesvos09.antira.info/nobordertv/
(5) Before the noborder camp there was a decision taken by the local group that the noborder camp as a whole shouldn’t engage in any mainstream media work.
(6) In September 2009 the Constitutional Court stopped a deportation of a refugee from Irak in a summary proceeding. The man should have been deported to Greece which was the country of his first entry to European Union. Schäuble (Germany’s Interior Minister since elections in September) is one of the hardest opponents to any kind of reform on Dublin2-convention.
Comments
Hide the following comment
How we see the No Border Camp Diffferently
07.10.2009 02:27
Border in Lesbos 2009. We don't agree completely with that.
First, the story about the development, the idea and the following
preparation was somehow puzzling for us. We at least see now -- after
the Camp -- some things more clear. That's how we see it now: In
Germany parts of the antiracist movement invited for the No Border and
the activists from different political scenes started to prepare for
travelling. In Greece the dictio (network for global social rights)
was part of the preparation but only mobilised their people. Greek
anarchists didn't know about the preparation till December, though the
greek anarchists are an important part of the political movement about
migration and the work with immigrants. Only a few anarchists knew
about the upcoming camp, mostly because german autonomous friends told
them about the idea.
In December the locals from Mitilini (Lesbos) were invited. There a
only a few anarchists in Mitilini and they weren't sure about taking
part in the preparation of the No Border. Some saw a chance in taking
part to support the political actions about migration on the island,
others objected totally because they (like other anarchists in Greece)
don't wanted to work together with dictio. Also the anarchists groups
in Thessaloniki and Athens refused to take part because of their
political differences with dictio. They didn't want to work together
with them. That was not surprising at all, because normally the don't
work together. There a just a few exceptions from this decision, only
when the starting point is the same, then sometimes it worked out, but
never, if one of the groups is just informing the others after
preparing something. So there weren't any political anarchists groups
from Greece taking part, only a few individuals.
But only a few internationals knew about that political decision of
the anarchists not being part of the No Border. The preparation teams
from Germany and Greece didn't communicate this openly. For that
reason the internationals expected that they will meet -- like in other
No Border Camps in Germany -- a lot of activists from different
political scenes. Their expectation were only partly delivered. There
were a lot of anarchists and autonomous activists and groups from
different countries but not from Greece. That was a confusing
situation. In our opinion a presentation about the history of protest
at the beginning of the Camp should have made the situation more clear
but unfortunately this didn't happen. At the same time and for the
some reason we missed a presentation about the preparation team. That
would have made the situation more clear for the internationals.
Some activists from Germany were aware of the point that the
anarchists groups wouldn't take part in the No Border, but
nevertheless decided to go to Mitilini. This was a political decision,
because on camps like this there is always a "camp-own" dynamic, so
that it's possible to develop and to permute radical left topics and
actions.
Unfortunately it wasn't like that. During the week the participants
had more and more the feeling to be exploited and controlled by the
preparation team. Direct actions and own ideas were blocked and
dismissed with always the same reasons:
a) the former political work of the locals is is danger, if there are
any confrontations on the island, because till then there were some
first successes trough NGO-delegations and negotiations with the local
authorities
b) direct action will harm the migrants, because they only want to get
the paper to come to Athens
c) direct actions in Lesbos can't be mediated to the local people
and above all this reasons there seemed to be a more or less open fear
or "hazard analysis" that the "black bloc" is going to destroy
Mitilini completely...
The possibility that human rights policy and direct actions can be
combined and complement one another wasn't seen in this discussions.
Before the No Border started officially it was clear that a lot of
anarchists and autonomous activists are going to take part. According
to this, there were - beside of the important direct support of the
migrants in the camp and at the infopoint in Mitilini -- a lot off
activists, who wanted to develop responsible political actions. But
already in the first action-plenaries there was shown this immense
fear for direct actions that somehow also attack. So it was more and
more clear that the political views about what should happen on this
camp diverge completely. To sharpen it: At the end there was mostly a
humanitarian human rights policy with all its facets like dealing with
the authorities and play their games. Against this background we see
the "fear" of some local activists. They were afraid to loose their
"power" if there were some direct actions from anarchists and
autonomous activists without them controlling it.
In this situation day for day more and more internationals were
dissatisfied. Most of them came with positive experiences from other
international camps and were really disappointed about the strict
denial of every civil disobedience or just a tiny paint-ball.
For to make clear and transparent for the people that weren't in
Militini how ideas were objected and decisions were made, we would
like to go more in detail about an idea for an action at Pagani
detention-centre:
After people have seen the detention-centre, there were just shocked
and angry. A former store-house, where 1000 migrants are caged in a
few rooms each with about 180 migrants. (Originally there were plans
to put 280 people at all in Pagani.) The unacceptable circumstances in
Pagani are documented on a video (
The first impulse was: "we have to shut this hole thing down". But
that's unfortunately not that easy. After talking to the people
inside, it was clear that most of them didn't want to break out. Some
of them for sure would have chosen the way to live illegally in
Greece, but that was not common sense between them. Most of the people
inside are waiting for a paper to leave the island. With this paper
they are allowed to travel to athens, at the same moment the paper is
an order to leave Greece within 30 days. This paper is the only legal
way to leave the island. Because of the "Third Country Regulation" of
the EU the migrants are not allowed to seek for asylum in other
european countries than Greece. With this paper they only can go to
seek for asylum in Athens (0,1 percent allowance of claims) or to live
illegally in Europe. In Pagani regularly migrants are released with
this paper, sometimes more than a dozen a day, mostly because the cops
arrest daily new people and take them to Pagani.
Besides there was for good reason the fear, that in case of a riot in
front of the jail they cops could use tear-gas (the greek cops love
it) and that could cause a uncontrollable and dangerous panic inside
Pagani. Because of this reason we decided to look for a clever action
to minimise the danger.
With some people we developed an action and presented it. Our idea was
to rededicate the detention-centre into an open transit without cells
and fences. While the people are waiting for their paper there is no
need to have a jail, they can wait everywhere in Lesbos for that. To
make this action in a responsible way it must have been sure that
there are as less cops as possible at Pagani (only the six securities
working there). Another action in the city of Mitilini, at the same
time -- the occupation of the prefecture -- should cause enough work for
the cops. Meanwhile a "technic-team" could open everything at Pagani.
Leaflets should inform the local society and the tourists about the
"new transit-centre" and about our general political demands. This
action should have taken place a day before the official Pagani action
day.
This proposal was presented at a delegation-meeting, where also sat
some people of the preparation-team. There was a long discussion about
it and finally it was blocked (specially from people in the
preparation-team) for the same reason we wrote about in the beginning
of this text. Instead of that it was decided that the official
demonstration should take place at the day it was already planned and
the prefecture should be occupied by "surprise". With this decision it
was accepted that the local police and the riot cops from athens will
be at Pagani, who didn't have something against an escalating
situation in front of the detention-centre.
During the discussion about our proposal we more and more got the
feeling, that there was no confidence that we as international
anarchist/ autonomous activists could handle the situation
responsible. Rather it went out that some people just wanted to
control whatever is going to happen. For some of the organisation-team
their human rights policy was at the foreground, the ideas and the
dynamic of the participants in the camp was completely negated and
direct actions were objected and finally blocked, instead of having
different actions at the same time side by side respecting each other.
For us neither the release nor a riot was in the focus of our action,
the only idea was to rededicate the detention-centre because the only
reasons for this inhuman way treating migrants are harassment and
determent. Also it was not the idea to "release" people if they want
to wait for their paper, if somebody would chose to get out of the
situation, ok, everyone can chose for him or herself.
From our proposal only the occupation of the prefecture remained. This
action was not openly announced but failed because of our bad
preparation. On the spontaneous delegation-meeting afterwards it wasn't
even possible to decide for a spontaneous demonstration, because this
"couldn't be communicated and mediated" to the local society and the
fear that the autonomous / anarchist activists are going to destroy
everything stood in the foreground.
This is only one example that just should make it more transparent how
ideas of direct actions were blocked on this camp. Again and again
ideas were discussed so long that nothing came out of it and it needed
a lot of time to figure out what kind of power games were played and
by whom. For sure this kind of discussion were also part in other
action-camps, but most of us had the impression that this time it was
worse and that some really had a special interest in controlling
everything.
The structure of power inside the camp was in-transparent, we all
stayed to long in this kind of discussions instead of organising
ourselves. For this situation there is also a critique on the local
anarchists who partly also prepared the camp. There wasn't a clear
position and some of them were also part of the blocking people. Later
we understood that most of them didn't expect so many
autonomous/anarchists activists with other ideas than the human rights
fraction. But for them as well it was complicated to find out who is
who and who wants what..
Only at the end of the camp we had a common sense that we would have
needed a autonomous/anarchists plenary beside. For that there was also
a proposal at the beginning, but at that time most of us thought that
there will be an own camp dynamic depending on the participants and we
didn't expect this blocking behaviour.
Some german antira-activists also had their hands in some of the
"bottom situations" of the week. After a demonstration in Mitilini
some activists had prepared paint-balls for one office of the border
police and Frontex. The demonstration ended about 100 metres before,
but one group tried to mobilise people to go further in the direction
of the office. One from the preparation-team for the No Border stopped
them in a confrontative way and threatened them even with beating if
they continue. He argued with a so called "consensus against
confrontation" of the camp that never had existed. Fascinating was
also the estimation of the greek anarchists that even with some
paint-balls the situation with the riot cops from Athens would
escalate and we as internationals couldn't stand such a situation.
Therefore they also objected this action.
To top this the greek anarchists who for political reasons didn't take
part in the No Border appeared fully covered and armed out of nowhere
in the demonstration with banners and greek slogans at the same time.
They planned their own action without communicating their aim. About
300 activists followed them without knowing where they were going and
for what. After a long while passing the dark tiny streets of Mitilini
it turned out that we are on the way to a traditional greek concert
where some people wanted to put some banners with political demands
and held a speech on the stage about the greek migration policy. Not a
bad action at all but this also shows that there was no communication
at all.
What else happened?
Important and eminent was the Info-point in Mitilini. It was not
planned before but spontaneous build up and it has shown the fatal
migration policy in the middle of the city. First sceptical eyed by
the locals day for day more locals showed up, bringing food and other
needed things. There were leaflets and the migrants could get support
and juridical information. A positive example was the support for a
family from Afghanistan. They were not send to Pagani but to an open
camp-side near the airport where they could wait for their papers.
With tips and tricks some migrants were supported and with this
political pressure the writings of the papers sometime went quicker.
But for a lot of people their activism ended at the infopoint - of
course also because they were exhausted and overstrained. Their energy
and dynamic all went into the direct support and there was neither
energy nor time for something else.
Also at the camp there was a dynamic that in our opinion was fatal.
Trough the cooperation with local social workers at Pagani, the NGOs
and Human Rights Organisations (Lawyers) the part of the human right
issues were more and more the main parts. At the same time political
demands or contexts between different issues were more and more
unattended. Because of that the "paper" and the released people were
pointed out as the only political and most important issues. There
where news about "success" daily without saying that there are also
released people normally and without scandalising that the paper for
the 140 released migrants were written on the 21. august -- one week
before their release from Pagani. Which consequences this kind of
political work has, that only wants to deal and only looks for
juridical solutions, was shown on Saturday in front of and inside of
Pagani. Here the proposals of the people inside itself were blocked.
In the morning the people inside rebelled and the gates were opened
because of their demands. Some people from the camp got there to have
a look what's going on there. Because of the action against Frontex in
the harbour only the usual securities and a few cops were there. So
the situation was good to support the migrants but more people were
needed. This was prevented by some people from the camp who
communicated trough the infopoint at the camp that "everything is ok
and there are enough people to support". Probably there was the same
fear that the situation could get out of control. So most of the
people decided to join the great action in the harbour.
At Pagani the situation meanwhile went somehow bizzare. One woman who
works at Pagani (we don't know if she is a lawyer or NGO or whatever)
called the people to go inside in their cells, because she wanted to
read the rest of the 140 names of the people who should be released.
(The papers that already were one week old) When people of us asked
why they couldn't do that while the people stayed outside, she argued
that the situation is to confused to read the names and inside the
situation is more under control. The protests of the few activists
outside couldn't do anything against it and the people went under this
pressure "voluntarily" inside the overcrowded cells. Meanwhile some
more activists arrived because it had turned out that the migrants
very well wanted support.
One hour later about 50 activists got inside because of a lucky break.
Some sat down, other started to talk to the people inside and also
others tried to make the open gate unusable. The security and the cops
were overstrained with the situation and their colleagues from Athens
had enough work at the harbour. ... really a good situation .... till,
well, till the human rights activists again destroyed the situation
and the possibilities. One of them made a deal - without someone has
asked for that -- with the police that we are going to leave and
therefore the cops are not going to attack us. To make more pressure
on the activists he also pointed out that the rest of the woman and
children wouldn't be released if we stayed. He acted like a cop to
sabotage this action. To make it short: The cooperation between NGO's,
social workers and parts of the camp preparation scotched every
action. In the opposite every -- partly planned -- release was pointed
out as a political success of the camp.
Also in other issues it was impossible to figure out a context between
contents. After a short spontaneous blockade of a military parade that
takes place in Mitilini every Sunday there were a lot of critique for
this action. In Greece there is unfortunately also for the radical
left just a small discussion about the military. In the rest of the
society there is less to no discussion. The military parade on the
next Sunday was not only companied by riot cops but also by
nationalists and some fascists who attacked verbally the info point.
Also the military action of the greek army (in Afghanistan) is no
point of discussion in Greece. Contexts like war and reasons for
migration are ignored. So this action as well was criticised because
of the confrontative character. Here again we missed the chance to
dispute politically. Instead of that, the camp only pointed at the
illegal detention and tried to encourage the dealing position of the
local social workers.
In spite of all our fundamental critique there also where some good
pointed actions like the boat-action in the harbour or the occupation
of the roof in Pagani. There is a good documentation about all this so
we don't want to stress more on this. Everyone can watch the videos.
We made this report mainly because of all the "success news" coming
from Lesbos and we really disagree with that point of view. We really
don't want to play our role as "small sheriffs" to enforce the Geneva
Convention or to be the cue ball of the local social workers. We
criticise emphatically the politic of power of some of the preparation
team to blockade the dynamic of the camp and the idea of having direct
actions. And of course we would like to have a discussion about our
critiques in Solidarity.
At the end we send solidarity greeting to the comrades in Rotterdam,
keep at it!
Reports from autonomous participants from different cities in Germany