We'll begin with Narva. What plan does Frontex have with Narva and establishing a command and training center there?

We have had a presence in Narva for several years already; our patrol boat operates on the Narva River today. It was deployed there at Estonia's request, after the removal of those buoys. And the plan is that, since Frontex is currently decentralizing its operational command and work management, we want to bring that management closer to the regions.

This is under discussion: To create an operational area for the Nordic, Baltic, and eastern border region, with a command center which could be in Estonia. The government has clearly indicated that their belief is that this should be in Narva.

Why in Estonia?

Narva is first of all highly symbolic in today's security picture. Second, it is right on the border, at one of the highest-traffic land border crossing points on the eastern border. There is a sea border there, a river border, a green border, and the infrastructure necessary.

We have experience with Narva; a very useful experience, and it is my belief that coordinating the region's operations and activities from there would definitely be a good and beneficial thing.

What does it give Estonia, if the EU and Frontex flags fly there?

I think that this once again gives a symbolic signal that Estonia's border with Russia is a European border, and this is in our shared interest that it be clearly guarded. This also certainly adds to practical cooperation. The people stationed there would train more with our Police and Border Guard Board (PPA). And I think it also would rejuvenate local life and make it a bit more diverse.

What does this mean in practice. How many people would be there if all goes as planned?

We can talk about that once we get to the point of establishing the facility. I think we will come back to that discussion later.

But might we say roughly 30 people at that command center?

This is the initial optimal planning with all command centers. We are setting up seven of these across Europe, and we're talking about 30 to 40 people. This area managed here would concern the Nordics and the eastern border. The operational area's personnel would vary depending on needs - around 400 people. And additionally a training center, with people coming in and out of training?

Yes, the plan is to conduct tactical training within the command center's framework. These would include for instance use-of-force training, which all the officers guarding our borders must undergo. Another aspect is that Narva hosts a branch of the Internal Security Academy (Sisekaitseakadeemia), with its well-equipped training facilities, and this might be used in the future for broader training which Frontex wants to provide the European border guard community. This discussion is ongoing as well, yes.

I noticed there was mention of 200 people on site at once — can it be something on that scale?

We have held several training sessions like that, where we've searched for a training venue, and 200 was the size of one of these training sessions which we had to find a venue quickly for, and I have to state, Narva did not have the facilities for that, at that time. In the future, there will definitely be more.

Let's just say work is underway in that regard, and right now I wouldn't want to be throwing out figures, as these have a tendency of taking on a life of their own.

A little bit on other topics. This eastern frontier is very close to us here. How has the situation with regard to migration incursions changed over time? In your earlier briefing, you said countries like Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland are quite decisively pushing people back, which under normal conditions would violate international law. Doesn't this move thoughts along the lines maybe of international law being changed to incorporate the concept of migration as an attack?

There haven't been any big changes on the eastern border, and all the threats remain exactly the same. Finland has closed its border and does not intend to abandon this policy for the time being. In exactly the same way, all other countries along the eastern border have developed specific measures, in case migration is used as a weapon. Latvia and Poland are indeed under pressure now. There have been thousands of attempts to cross, clearly backed by state-organized structures.

So in this context, nothing has really changed: Member states have the right to implement their own measures; this is their sovereignty and sovereign decision. Amending international law is a long and drawn-out process. The thinking has certainly changed, as there is now an understanding that what has been happening at the eastern border isn't ordinary migration, but rather the manipulation of migration; pressure on states.

In the light of this, I think something will eventually happen both in European and international law. But waiting for that is a little too much; it could take a whole decade for changes to come.

Will Frontex's operation on the Baltic Sea become permanent and change in nature due to the types of incidents that keep happening there?

There are many operations on the Baltic Sea. Frontex has had maritime operations there in previous years in cooperation with other agencies, mainly focused on rescue missions. Today, yes, we have been discussing, with Poland and the other Baltic and coastal states, whether to make this operation permanent, and whether also to focus more on hybrid threats.

This needs coordination with military structures and so on, but it is clear that our presence would surely increase security. The more surveillance equipment, vessels, and drones we have in the area, the more preventive and beneficial this measure would be.

You also spoke about what it would mean for internal security if a peace in Ukraine were concluded in a way that promises no future prospects to Ukrainians. What kinds of internal security threats could that bring?

We are primarily still talking about the security and defense perspective on what is happening in Ukraine, and that is certainly the most major concern. But from an internal security standpoint, it could be assumed that if the war ends without prospects for Ukraine and ends in a grim way, then millions of people will start moving toward Europe — that is without a doubt.

At present, for example, all men under mobilization are barred from leaving Ukraine. Given that they have family members in Europe, the presence or absence of future prospects will greatly influence their decisions. That is certainly one part of the issue.

Another aspect, which we've seen in connection with the Balkan wars, is that after a war, organized crime intensifies and arms trafficking takes on a very major role. A large share of the illegal weapons used by organized crime in Europe today originate from the Balkan states.

There is no denying that this concern exists in the context of Ukraine too, and we will certainly see that we'll need to address arms trafficking much more seriously than before.

What plans do you have for EU borders: Should people prepare for long wait lines?

New systems are coming to the EU's external borders, with the aim of automating border checks over the long term and centrally storing data on people's arrivals, to better monitor and conduct personal risk assessments.

The other aspect concerns internal borders, which I would say more reflects domestic politics, as Frontex has no role there. But it is clear that the Schengen area is not functioning ideally today. Several countries have introduced internal border checks, and I believe Europe must work to make external border control more effective, so these internal controls can be subsequently lifted.

This is where all the new systems we have been implementing come into play, as they give us added assurance that the background of those coming into Europe has been checked. And we know and can monitor who has entered and when they've left.

So this will in the fall, as I understand. What might it initially bring with it?

The entry/exit system is set to be launched this autumn. This will mean that at major entry points, such as like Europe's larger airports or the Eurotunnel, queues may form.

Essentially we are adopting a system similar to what the Americans have been using for about a decade, with biometric and fingerprint and all entry data stored centrally in Europe, not individually in each member state. Understandably, launching it will take time, and travelers will need to exercise a little patience.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!