Judging from media reports about recent meetings at different levels, EU leaders have so far been unable to find a common approach toward resolving the refugee problem. Moreover, the general tone of media content suggests that the intellectual reflection sees Europe isolated, doomed to self-defense and weak in the face of the challenges of our time.

       Notably, media pounced on the topic with unprecedented fervor. Refugees are the central subject of discussions not only in European and American media, but also many Islamic and Asian news outlets. On the one hand, reporters are hungry for juicy news after a fairly uneventful summer. On the other hand, refugees provide vivid and exciting visuals — desolate women, little children, capsized boats, soldiers with automatic rifles, much speculation about refugee behavior, the reactions of politicians, etc.

       Of course, I do not claim to provide an exhaustive analysis of all media, but judging from the key outlets like CNN, BBC, NY Times, Times and FT, to name a few, it's possible to draw conclusions about the topics that are touched upon more or less often. Of course, I reiterate, my findings are subjective.

       The focus is on the European authorities and Europeans’ attitude toward refugees. The overwhelming majority of publications deal with refugees’ misfortunes, difficulties and conflicts on their way to safe havens.

       However, journalistic materials and statements by politicians and analysts often focus on the issue of European identity. It is stated as follows: if you allow unrestricted access for refugees, it can erode the foundations of European society; if you don’t allow refugees in, or significantly lim it their numbers, it undermines European humanist values. Both approaches almost equally threaten to erode European identity. Of course, lots of allusions come into play, such as memories of the Germans, who came to the Roman Empire as refugees and destroyed it in the end; reminders that modern Europeans and Americans are, essentially, refugees. Some go as far back as recalling the sad fate of the Neanderthals, who were driven out by the Cro-Magnons tens of thousands years ago and vanished. Well, mainstream journalists normally don’t go that far back.

       The socioeconomic portrait of refugees is another issue under discussion. Numerous calls to support the admission of refugees emphasize not only the need for compassion for the less fortunate, not only the appeal to the days of Nazi Germany, or the civil war in Russia, but also clearly indicate the lack of human resources in Europe, the need for an influx of young people to grow the economy. Those who oppose refugees use economic reasoning just as often, and point to growing competition on the labor market, among other things. Notably, the arguments of the refugees’ supporters make more economic sense, as they discuss the details of regulating the influx of refugees in terms of production growth at a time when the detractors of refugees are prone to social alarmism along the lines that "the newcomers will take away your job."

       Differences between various political and social actors in Europe have a place of their own in the media. Clearly, there is not even a trace of consensus on how to resolve, or at least control, the problem. The right and the left are equally unable to act consistently even in their official ideologies. The millenarians, who cannot wait for doomsday to come, when, as they say, all races will get mixed up, are the only group who cannot hide their excitement. By the way, the eschatological message was clearly sent during several rallies to support refugees, including one in London.

       Reportedly, the differences in positions adopted by various countries, many of which, in spite of their economic dependence on the EU, cannot afford to ignore the opinion of their own citizens, are significant and hard to overcome.

       Anyway, media focus on the situation in Europe and the behavior of ordinary Europeans and the EU authorities.

       Much less attention is paid to the refugee problem in non-European countries, in particular to what caused this refugee flow. I believe the events in the Middle East and North Africa are due to the disintegration of traditional Islamic society and traditional socialization methods. This disintegration has led to a global civil war in this macro-region, which sucked in the United States and many European countries, siding with different forces. In many ways, the situation in the Islamic world can be compared to what happened in Tsarist Russia. Traditional society fell apart and thousands of young people from rural areas found themselves living in suburban areas. Back then, Russia also faced a major challenge in terms of the social self-realization of young educated and semi-educated people. It also had radically-minded intellectuals, seeking ways to perform a “fair" reorganization of the world and it also had vast amounts of readily available money. Just as the civil war in Russia threw lots of refugees into the countries of the Entente (though, not only there), the global civil war in the Islamic world makes all kinds of people seek refuge in Europe (and not only there). Re-reading Jose Ortega y Gasset’s The Revolt of the Masses now might be a good idea, as he described such processes in his book. Yury Tynyanov, a Russian author, focused on this phenomenon when he wrote about suburban culture.

       Curiously, the problems facing the countries wh ere the refugees are coming from are addressed by the media in a relatively cursory manner. It seems that most media outlets believe that only the European authorities and European citizens can make decisions. There are almost no talks about the behavior of the Europeans and the Americans in the Islamic world. Well, except some general statements, depending on the author’s state of mind. It is assumed that solely Europeans should comply with humanistic values, not residents of the conflict-torn countries from which refugees are fleeing.

       Of course, they condemn ISIS actions as extremely violent and mention that several countries in the region are in opposition to the Islamic State, but not much more. This approach correlates with another relatively poorly represented aspect of the contemporary refugee movement. Who is fleeing? Who are these people? At one point in time, it was clear that Russian emigration, although politically heterogeneous, in general, belonged to European culture. Just like everyone else, refugees from the Soviet Union sought a better life, but many were democratically-minded. Can the same be said about the ideology and identity of the current wave from the Middle East and North Africa? Are they fleeing their homes because their beliefs are incompatible with radical Islam, because they are in need of human rights and democracy? Or do they see Europe as an evergreen pasture?

       It would be unfair to claim that the problem is fully ignored. For example, various materials about the threat to European identity focus on what the refugees think and if they are willing to integrate into European culture, or not. By the same token, the socioeconomic debate focuses on the newcomers’ skills and educational level. Clearly, there is some apprehensiveness in the media, especially the mainstream media. Clearly, the marginalized media and bloggers cover all topics without exception.

       The unwillingness or reluctance to discuss things that can and should be done in the countries wherefrom the refugees are coming is the most disquieting thing in leading publications.

       Essentially, the fate of the island of Europe – a modern, albeit slightly scuffed Noah's Ark of civilization – is being discussed. There are two extremes: let in everyone, no questions asked, or build Hadrian’s Wall and keep everyone out (or let in few people). Clearly, various authors, analysts and politicians mix these solutions at will. In fact, they are discussing defense and protection options. An offensive is almost out of the question. Assuming that most refugees prefer a relatively civilized, democratic way of life – and the results of Arab Spring indicate the presence of a significant number of people of relatively secular and democratic orientation there — then why not help the refugees to re-arrange things in their respective countries the way that they want them to be? Why not develop a strategy of assistance and support to rational-minded forces in the region? Why not try to take this fight for the refugees’ survival back to the countries wherefrom they came?

       In the meantime, both the supporters and the detractors of the refugees agree on one thing – there might not be sufficient capabilities to keep the island of Europe afloat.

       Thus, as can be seen clearly in the media, the differences between European countries and political forces keep growing amid the overall uncertainty of the action plan.

       This inevitably weakens the EU.

       Views expressed are of individual Members and Contributors, rather than the Club's, unless explicitly stated otherwise.