TIME Greece

Large Numbers of Refugees Landed on Greek Shores Overnight

Refugees and migrants carry belongings while boarding passenger ship "Tera Jet" heading to port of Piraeus, at port on island of Lesbos
Dimitris Michalakis—Reuters Refugees and migrants carry their belongings while boarding the passenger ship Tera Jet heading to the port of Piraeus, on the Greek island of Lesbos, on Sept. 1, 2015

Officials insist Greece lacks the means to cope

A ferry carrying 1,749 refugees and migrants docked in Piraeus, 7 miles south of Athens, on Tuesday night; 2,500 more were expected to arrive on Wednesday morning, the BBC reports

The new arrivals will continue to put pressure on Greece, which state officials insist lacks the means to cope.

Of the 160,000 migrants who have landed on Greek shores thus far this year, 23,000 arrived last week alone, prompting President Prokopis Pavlopoulos to reach out to his fellow European leaders for assistance, the BBC says.

Greece is a major terminal for refugees from the Middle East, who frequently begin their journeys across Europe after arriving via ferry at ports near Athens or other Greek cities. A large percentage of them comes from Syria, where a massive civil war has raged since 2011.

The influx has rattled Europe’s leaders. In an interview with the Singaporean press in early August, U.K. Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond controversially remarked that the tide of displaced peoples arriving on the continent’s shores threatened to seriously disturb the standards and stability of European life.

[BBC]

TIME migrants

Hungary’s Border Fence Isn’t Stopping Desperate Syrian Migrants

Migrant crisis
Yuri Kozyrev—NOOR for TIME A Syrian family prepares to turn themselves into a Hungarian detention facility for migrants arriving in the European Union in Roszke, Hungary on Aug. 29, 2015.

Hungary wants to impose prison terms against refugees who sneak across the border on their way to the E.U. They're still coming

The smuggler’s asking price was high—about $800—but that didn’t seem to bother Tarek al Saleh, a 23-year-old refugee from Syria. Nor was he much concerned about the risk of getting robbed and left for dead, as many other Syrian migrants have been this year while making their way to Europe. The gamble was worth it, he said, as long as the human trafficker showed him the way into Hungary, his gateway into the European Union—and steered him clear of any Hungarian police.

“He knows where police stand,” al Saleh said of his Serbian smuggler. “He knows where to go.” They had agreed to meet at sundown on Saturday in the Serbian village of Horgos, just a couple of miles south of the E.U. border, and walk north through the corn and sunflower fields. His final destination, he said, was the Netherlands, where he hoped to meet up with a family friend. But he’d be racing against the clock to get there through Eastern Europe.

On Saturday night, when al Saleh reached the northern edge of Serbia, soldiers in neighboring Hungary finished erecting a razor-wire fence along the Serbian border, which had previously been open and unguarded for anyone trying to walk into the E.U. Later this week, the Hungarian parliament is set to reinforce that fence with legal penalties. The right-wing government of Prime Minister Viktor Orban wants to make it a criminal offense to cross the border illegally, punishable by up to three years in prison.

“We are going to communicate to them: ‘Don’t come to Hungary,’” says Zoltan Kovacs, the government’s chief spokesman. “’Illegal border crossing is a crime. Do not attempt it, or you are going to be arrested.’”

Currently, Hungarian authorities have no right to arrest the migrants crossing into the E.U. illegally, even as their numbers have peaked at more than 3,000 per day, at the end of last week. The tide of refugees, mostly coming from conflict zones in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, has been part of the largest mass migration into Europe since World War II, and Hungary has already registered around 140,000 migrants so far this year, triple the number who arrived during the first eight months of 2014. Most of them have little interest in remaining in Hungary, but they have to pass through the country to reach the more prosperous states of Europe, often Germany, which expects to receive an unprecedented 800,000 applications for asylum this year, quadruple the number Germany registered in 2014. As a result, says Kovacs, “the whole system is overwhelmed.”

But for the moment, the Hungarian border fence is doing nothing to hinder the migrants’ arrival. Quite the opposite—its construction seems to have triggered a massive rush to reach the E.U. before Hungary shuts the gates. Thousands of people, nearly all identifying themselves to police as Syrian, kept streaming through the gaps in the fence through the weekend, leaving a trail of debris along the railroad tracks that they have used to guide their way north: empty bottles of baby powder, diapers, hand sanitizer, worn-out shoes, used blankets, apple rinds and peach pits. On Saturday night, a full and yellow moon rose to light their way, and local farmers came onto the road in northern Serbia to sell the migrants water, cigarettes and candy bars.

“They seem to be decent people,” said Zoltan Wass, a Serbian citizen who grows grapes and plums on a patch of land along the railroad. Even though the migrants have been picking fruit from his property without permission, he added, “We feel for them, maybe because we know what it’s like to run away from war.”

During the Balkan wars of the 1990s, Hungary was also on the receiving end of waves of refugees, mainly Serbs, Croats and Bosnians fleeing the slaughter. While the Balkan nations suffered through Europe’s first war since World War II, the Hungarians remember the discomfort of accommodating tens of thousands of their less fortunate neighbors. That may help explain why most Hungarians—more than 60%, according to a nationwide poll conducted in July–support the construction of the fence to keep out migrants from Syria and Afghanistan, lands that are far more culturally foreign to them than the nearby Balkans. But that doesn’t mean such measures will work.

Ghafek Aiad Alsaho, another Syrian in his mid-twenties who is trying to flee his country’s civil war, had been living in a Turkish refugee camp for nine months before he heard in July that Hungary was planning to seal its southern border. The news made him realize that it was time to make the journey of more than a thousand miles—through Turkey, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia and into the E.U.—because he felt he may not get another chance. His hometown of Deir ez-Zour, in eastern Syria, is under siege from the militant group known as Islamic State, and he has no intention of going back there. “It’s a one-way trip for me,” he says.

On Saturday, when he arrived at the Hungarian border with Serbia, he knew better than to walk through the gaps in the fence and risk getting caught by the Hungarian police. Under E.U. law, a migrant can only apply for asylum in the E.U. country that first registers his arrival. So most migrants try desperately to avoid being registered by the police before they reach the country where they want to stay.

Alsaho is no exeption. His dream is to make it all the way to Norway—whose citizens are among the wealthiest in Europe— before turning himself in to Norwegian authorities to be registered as an asylum seeker. That meant he would need to travel the length of Europe without getting caught by police. So when night fell over Hungary, he scurried underneath the barbed wire and made a run for it. “It was just me, the forest and the moon,” he says.

But the police were quick to catch him. More than two thousand Hungarian officers have been deployed in recent weeks to help patrol the border with Serbia, and several of them chased Alsaho down and, he says, roughed him up before taking him by bus with other migrants to be registered in a processing camp near the town of Roszke. Arriving there at dawn on Sunday, he stuck his head out of the window of the idling police bus to speak with a reporter. “I’ll be out of here in three days,” he promised in nearly perfect English. “And then I’ll move on.”

That determination was typical of the Syrians at Europe’s doorstep. Their homeland has become an inferno that shows no signs of abating—in four years, half the country has been killed, displaced or forced to flee. Many of them have no homes to which they could return. Even if Hungary’s parliament criminalizes the crossing of its border fence this week and starts putting Syrian migrants in prison, they likely to find another way in, even at the risk of using human traffickers who have little regard for their safety.

Waiting for his smuggler to arrive in the shade of a hackberry tree on Saturday afternoon, al Saleh said he knew of the horrific deaths of 71 migrants whose bodies were discovered inside a refrigerated truck last week in Austria. But the risks of being trafficked across the illegal crossing of a border in Hungary were tame, he added, compared to the dangers he faced in his hometown of Aleppo. With much of that city destroyed amid fighting between the Syrian government and rebel forces, his parents took up a collection among their neighbors and friends so that he could make it to Holland to continue his studies in medical engineering. “They are waiting for me to call,” he says. And no fence is going to stop him.

TIME Innovation

Behind Russia’s Arctic Land Grab

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

These are today's best ideas

1. Russia just claimed half a million square miles of the Arctic. They won’t get it.

By Paul Stronski at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

2. Here’s why wages are flat and how to fix it.

By Thomas Kochan in the Conversation

3. See how scientists created human “tissue velcro” to repair damaged hearts.

By Tyler Irving in University of Toronto Engineering News

4. Are the billions we spend training the militaries of other nations worth it?

By Matthew Saintsing in Small Wars Journal

5. What Donald Trump gets wrong about the border.

By Abigail Golden-Vazquez in the Aspen Idea

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME 2016 Election

Scott Walker: Building a U.S.-Canada Border Wall is a ‘Legitimate Issue’

Scott Walker
Mic Smith—AP Republican presidential candidate, Wis. Gov. Scott Walker, gives a foreign policy speech on the campus of The Citadel on Aug. 28, 2015, in Charleston, S.C.

Walker said some fear terrorists coming in through Canada

Republican presidential candidate Scott Walker said on Sunday that building a wall on the U.S.-Canada border is “a legitimate issue for us to look at,” proposing a focus on the northern border as the members of the GOP primary field tighten their stances on illegal immigration.

The Wisconsin governor, who supports boosting security along the southern border, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that focusing on border security would take care of “almost every one of the other issues [of immigration] out there,” including birthright citizenship.

“Whether it’s talking about the 14th Amendment or anything else, until we secure the border and enforce the laws, we shouldn’t be talking about any other issue out there,” he said.

Walker added that some voters supporting a norther border wall worry that terrorists could cross from Canada to the U.S. in the wake of a lone wolf attack on the Ottawa Parliament in October. “[Voters] raised some very legitimate concerns, including some law enforcement folks that brought that up to me at one of our town hall meetings about a week and a half ago. So that is a legitimate issue for us to look at.”

[NBC]

TIME Donald Trump

Univision’s Jorge Ramos: Reporters Need to Get Tougher on Donald Trump

Donald Trump media Jorge Ramos
Scott Olson—Getty Images Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump fields a question from Univision and Fusion anchor Jorge Ramos during a press conference held before his campaign event at the Grand River Center in Dubuque, Iowa, on Aug. 25, 2015.

A network anchor calls on his colleagues to do better

Days after exchanging heated words with Donald Trump, Univision anchor Jorge Ramos has some words to share with his fellow national political reporters: Do more to make Trump answer the tough questions.

“He hasn’t been challenged enough,” Ramos said of Trump. “He hates to be challenged and it is time that we start doing it.”

At issue for Ramos are a set of immigration policies that Trump has announced, but not yet explained how he would implement. At the top of the list is Trump’s plan to make all of the nation’s 11 million undocumented immigrants leave the country before many of them would be allowed back in under legal status. When asked by TIME, ABC News and others about how he would force millions from the country, Trump has so far only offered evasions. “It’s called management,” he told TIME.

Ramos says that sort of non-response is unacceptable from a leading presidential candidate, especially given the number of people who could be affected. “If he wants to do it in the short term, he would need to use the army, use stadiums, public places,” Ramos said. “The only way to do that would be to use trains and buses and airports to deport millions of people. It’s in a scale never seen before in the world. And it is incredibly dangerous.”

Ramos also thinks Trump needs to explain how he would fund a new wall along the southern border and how his plan to undo birthright citizenship would work in practice. “If he denies citizenship to newborns then we would have stateless babies, babies with no passport and no country,” Ramos said. “How do you deport them? Do you send ICE agents to hospitals? And where do you deport them? Do you send them to Mexico if the father is from that country or to Honduras if the mother is from that country?”

At a press conference in Iowa on Tuesday, Ramos tried to ask these questions of Trump, using his aggressive style. Initially, Trump said Ramos was acting out of turn. “Go back to Univision,” Trump said, before asking his security to expel Ramos from the room. Later, Trump invited Ramos to return and the two men spoke over each other for several minutes. However, the questions were left unanswered.

It was not the first time Trump has declined to describe the process of carrying out his stated policies. When asked on ABC News Sunday about the cost of building a wall, Trump said, “We need a wall. We have to get a wall.” When asked how he would round up 11 million people for deportation, Trump repeated his familiar “management” line.

Five days earlier, Trump offered a similar answer to TIME. “It’ll all work out,” he said on Aug. 18, while emphasizing his managerial credentials. “Politicians can’t manage. All they can do is talk.”

After Ramos was expelled from the Trump press conference, he was confronted by an apparent Trump supporter in the hallway, who told Ramos to “Get out of my country.” Born in Mexico, Ramos is a naturalized U.S. citizen. “What many people think and say in their houses now is being expressed in the streets and in their workplaces and in public spaces,” Ramos says. “And those biases and those rejections of immigrants have been legitimized by Mr. Trump’s dangerous words.”

Ramos has had a standing request to interview Trump for weeks. Instead of responding directly to one invitation, Trump posted a handwritten note from Ramos, which included the anchor’s cell phone number, on Instagram. Ramos, whose Univision broadcast has a nightly Spanish-language news audience of more than 2 million, still hopes to talk to the candidate. “If it happens, it will be an uncomfortable interview for him for sure,” says Ramos. “He can’t and he should not get away with empty promises. At stake is the future of this country.”

In a separate proceeding, Trump has sued Univision, alleging breach of contract after the network backed out of broadcasting the Miss Universe pageant. Univision’s decision not to air the pageant followed Trump’s claim that Mexico was sending rapists and criminals across the southern border. Trump subsequently ordered that Univision employees be denied service at his south Florida golf courses, including one near Univision headquarters that Ramos said he had previously visited. “It hasn’t changed anything at all,” Ramos says of the ban.

He added that he also recently dined at Jean Georges, a Michelin-starred restaurant in the Trump International Tower next to Central Park. “I was pleasantly surprised to realize the vast majority of the people working in the kitchen and the restaurant were Mexicans, from the state of Puebla,” Ramos said. “I used to go to those places, but I won’t anymore.”

Read next: Trump Proud of Kicking Jorge Ramos Out of Press Event

Download TIME’s mobile app for iOS to have your world explained wherever you go

TIME language

Why Dropping ‘Anchor Baby’ Is a Problem for Politicians

Dictionary
JGI/Jamie Grill—Getty Images/Blend Images

Language experts share their thoughts on how politicians and dictionaries have treated a heated term

Jeb Bush’s recent references to “anchor babies”—meaning certain children of undocumented immigrants, who are granted American citizenship by virtue of having been born within the nation’s borders—have landed the 2016 candidate in hot water, even after his attempt this week to clarify that was referring to isolated cases of Chinese “birth tourism” rather than to Hispanic immigrants. The outraged response was swift. “No matter which ethnic group you’re referring to, ‘anchor babies’ is a slur that stigmatizes children from birth,” California Rep. Judy Chu said in a press release.

Crucial to Bush’s defense of the term is the idea that it’s simply what you call the phenomenon he’s talking about. “You give me a better term and I’ll use it, I’m serious,” he told reporters. But, in fact, the phrase is a relatively recent coinage and, though it might seem cutesy—the type of thing that Stephen Colbert can use to make puns about children who steal microphones from newscasters on live TV—its history is anything but.

Many people trace the idea’s origins to the 1980s, when the term “anchor people” or “anchor children” was used as an epithet for Vietnamese youth whose families sent them to the U.S., with the hope that they could make money and then sponsor relatives back home for citizenship. (When these kids arrived in shabby vessels in Hong Kong, seeking asylum before traveling across the Pacific, locals called them “boat people.”) However, those early uses were not expressing the same idea that’s up for discussion today: the “anchor children” of that era were relatively older refugees, following in the footsteps of countless young people throughout American history who have set up homes in their new nation before helping their families immigrate.

It was years later that the new model of “anchor baby” started to take off, with a new meaning: infants conceived specifically so that their families could somehow benefit from their birthright citizenship. In the mid-2000s, proponents of strict immigration laws used the phrase to make arguments for keeping the doors closed tighter. Mainstream usage was spread by outlets like Newsmax and Fox News giving a larger platform to those voices, according to research documenting that spread. (The anchor baby’s more extreme cousin is the “terror baby,” the hypothetical kid who is birthed in America to more effectively carry out home-grown terrorism later on.)

The term really took hold in 2011, when the American Heritage dictionary sparked a controversy by adding an update with this definition:

anchor baby, n., A child born to a noncitizen mother in a country that grants automatic citizenship to children born on its soil, especially such a child born to parents seeking to secure eventual citizenship for themselves and often other members of the family.

The dictionary’s editor said on NPR that they had attempted to “objectively” define the phrase. And it’s true that the two words on their own are each innocuous. Being an anchor can even be a compliment. “There’s nothing specifically about the words themselves that makes them offensive,” says linguist Ben Zimmer, executive producer of Vocabulary.com, “but the idea that people are trying to find a devious way to get into the country by having children here basically dehumanizes everyone involved.” Advocates at places like D.C.-based Immigration Policy Center called the dictionary’s entry “poisonous and derogatory” for lacking the “offensive” label that is attached to definitions of taboo words.

In a few days, the definition was updated:

anchor baby, n. Offensive Used as a disparaging term for a child born to a noncitizen mother in a country that grants automatic citizenship to children born on its soil, especially when the child’s birthplace is thought to have been chosen in order to improve the mother’s or other relatives’ chances of securing eventual citizenship.

This about-face stirred debates about who should decide what’s offensive and who shouldn’t. Was an American institution kowtowing to liberals? Or was a dictionary being descriptive about how a word is truly perceived among English-speakers? When Oxford Dictionaries quietly added their definition after that controversy settled, they tagged it with a bright orange offensive label. Those signs are, Oxford editor Katherine Martin says, not chosen by lexicographers making emotional decrees but affixed as guidance for people who want to use the language intelligently.

Often when language gets accused of being offensive, public figures and media shift to more neutral ground, which can lead to some exhausting phrasing. (When the AP banned their journalists from using undocumented immigrant and illegal immigrant, for instance, standards editor Tom Kent suggested to TIME that a more precise description might be “foreigners in the United States in violation of the law.”) Martin says one problem with anchor baby is that there is no natural alternative, overwrought or otherwise—and not for the neutral reason suggested by Bush, whether or not he meant to insult anyone. “There is no neutral term for this because it is a term that is intended to be derogatory,” she says.

One indication of that intention, as the Washington Post‘s Amber Phillips points out, is that the idea it describes doesn’t entirely make sense in practice. As TIME explained in 2011, “the law says the parents of such a child must wait till she is 21 for her to be allowed to sponsor them to live and work legally in the U.S., and research shows that the vast majority of children of illegal immigrants are born years after the mother and father have arrived in the U.S.”

Regardless, the phrase has stuck. And, while debate over its use can actually lead to discussion of important issues like candidates’ positions on birthright citizenship (Bush is for it; Donald Trump, who also uses the term, is against it), that stickiness is just one more reason for conscientious politicians to steer clear of it, says linguist Zimmer. “The difficulty is that those pithy words and phrases are much more memorable and work their way into the public consciousness,” he says. “And once they’re there, they are difficult to dislodge.”

TIME 2016 Election

Donald Trump Trolls Jeb Bush With a Little Help from Bush’s Mom

"Mother knows best, Jeb!"

Donald Trump delivered another well-placed jab at Jeb Bush on Monday with a video quoting the former Florida governor’s mother, Barbara saying “We’ve had enough Bushes” run for president.

The video, which the campaign posted on the real estate mogul’s Instagram account, quotes a 2013 clip of the former First Lady responding to a question from NBC asking whether she “would like to see her son run for president.”

“No,” Barbara Bush answers in the clip. “I really don’t. I think its a great country. There are a lot of great families. There are other people out there that are very qualified, and we’ve had enough Bushes.”

“Mother knows best, Jeb!” the text in Trump’s video says tauntingly over footage of the former first lady saying her son should not run for president.

Even Barbara Bush agrees with me.

A video posted by Donald J. Trump (@realdonaldtrump) on

In the last few days, the Republican presidential frontrunner has repeatedly attacked Bush, calling him “low-energy,” criticizing his immigration plan and his views on women’s issues. Jeb has struck back, accusing Trump of having until recently held Democratic positions and supporting a single-payer healthcare system.

Barbara Bush has since changed her mind about her son’s candidacy, saying in the months before Jeb announced his candidacy that “our problems are so profound that America needs a leader who can renew the promise of this great nation.”

Trump added an additional sting in his attack on Jeb: When Barbara Bush says “great families,” Trump’s video shows footage of the billionaire with his family. When Barbara Bush says “other people out there that are very qualified,” Trump’s video shows footage of himself delivering a speech.

TIME Immigration

The Republican 2016 Field Takes a Hard Right on Immigration

Rivals take a page from Trump's tough talk

Former Sen. Rick Santorum, the son of an Italian immigrant, shrugged when asked Thursday if everyone born in the United States was, in fact, a citizen. “There is a legal dispute as to what the language of the 14th Amendment means,” the law school graduate told reporters who were summoned to hear his plan to deal not only with the immigrants in this country illegally but also to curb those entering legally.

With his carefully considered words, Santorum joined the growing legion of Republican White House hopefuls taking tougher—and perhaps unrealistic—approaches to immigration policy. It’s no longer just Donald Trump, whose rise in the polls came after he labeled Mexican immigrants “criminals” and “rapists.” Trump’s rivals have also been recalibrating their immigration rhetoric to tap into voters’ frustrations.

A host of GOP candidates called this week for an end to automatic citizenship for American-born children of immigrants in the United States illegally. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal each backed Trump’s call to end automatic citizenship. Jindal hoped no one would notice that he was born to parents in the United States on green cards. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush urged tougher enforcement against “anchor babies,” an epithet for children born to parents in the country illegally and often a reason families in the country illegally are not deported.

This is the nightmare many Republican leaders feared. Ever since Hispanic voters helped lift Barack Obama to reelection in 2012, party elders have been warning the GOP to ditch the divisive language on immigrants. A party seen as anti-immigrant cannot win the votes of immigrants, GOP strategists say, which could doom the party’s future with the Hispanic voting bloc projected to grow from 24 million to 40 million over the next 15 years.

“America is changing demographically, and unless Republicans are able to grow our appeal the way GOP governors have done, the changes tilt the playing field even more in the Democratic direction,” a Republican National Committee panel wrote in its autopsy after 2012 nominee Mitt Romney’s loss. “It does not matter what we say about education, jobs or the economy; if Hispanics think we do not want them here, they will close their ears to our policies.”

The well-received report, however, failed to tamp down the embers of nativism that linger in pockets of the Republican base. Many GOP voters see the complexion of the country changing in ways they don’t like, an economy recovering too slowly and a workforce that does not necessarily look like it did a generation ago. This cohort is a dominant force in many conservative congressional districts, which is the primary reason a bipartisan rewrite of U.S. immigration law never came to a vote in the GOP-controlled House after sailing through the Senate.

As these frustrations fuel Trump’s rise, his rivals are grasping for rhetoric and programs that can reach his supporters. For instance, Santorum’s immigration plan calls for cutting the number of immigrants coming to the United States by a quarter. “The American worker is struggling and, as a result, the American family is struggling,” Santorum said. Like Trump, the runner-up for the 2012 presidential nomination called for a giant wall along the U.S.-Mexican border, but one built on American lands by American workers. Walker, a former proponent of a path to citizenship, has recast himself as an immigration hardliner in a bid to give his campaign a jolt in the all-important Iowa caucuses. Bush’s use of the “anchor baby” slur is a far cry from his prior calls for the party to use more sensitive language on immigration and his condemnation of Trump’s “rhetoric of divisiveness.” Gone are the days when Bush described illegal immigration as “an act of love.”

Given the raw language and tone, the GOP could once again find itself shut out of a voting bloc that is swelling in size and influence. The nonpartisan National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials estimates that the bloc will be about 11 percent of all eligible voters in 2016. The Pew Hispanic Center projected after the 2012 election that 40% of the growth in the U.S. electorate by 2030 will come from Latinos.

GOP leaders have tried to repair the relationship. Business groups, GOP operatives and top lawmakers all sought to patiently nudge the party toward a comprehensive immigration-reform deal that would stop the demographic bleeding. It’s why Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who supports a path to legal status for immigrants in the country illegally, defended the practice of birthright citizenship. It’s why Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, the son of Cuban immigrants, has also worked to distance himself from those who would end automatic citizenship. To CNBC on Thursday, Rubio was blunt: “These are individual candidates who are responsible for their own rhetoric.” It’s why Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of the architects of the Senate’s reform program, called Trump’s proposals “gibberish.”

“That’s going to kill the Republican Party,” the South Carolina Republican said as he visited the Iowa State Fair this week.

But there’s a reason Trump is the one leading in the polls while Graham is barely flirting with 1%. The tough talk resonates with the conservative electorate that picks the GOP nominee. And with every step Republicans take toward earning the votes of Hispanics, each clanging insult from Trump and his imitators throws up another hurdle for Republicans in the long slog to the White House.

TIME portfolio

Discover Melilla, the Southern Frontier in Europe’s Migrant Crisis

Melilla, a Spanish enclave in Morocco, has become a modern-day fortress

Melilla, a small Spanish enclave on the Moroccan coast, may seem like an idyllic destination for summer holidays, with sandy beaches, turquoise waters and historic Roman ruins. The town, which Spain conquered in 1497, is an architectural treasure where influences from different cultures can be observed side-by-side. Anchoring it all is the Ciudadela citadel, an imposing Spanish military fortress with insurmountable walls built to repel Moroccan forces in the 16th and 17th centuries.

But today, for many migrants, Melilla has a very different meaning. It’s the culmination of a weeks-long journey, often commenced in West Africa. It holds the promise of a better life in Europe — but only if they can evade border patrols and overcome the 10- to 20-ft.-high fences that have transformed Melilla into a modern-day fortress, too.

“It’s the border of the border,” says Gianfranco Tripodo. The Italian photographer has spent the last three years documenting migrants’ attempts to climb Melilla’s fence. “When I started to work in Melilla, there was so little coverage of the migrants’ situation,” he explains. “And I wanted to see with my own eyes the tangible and real consequences of the European Union’s migration policies on thousands of people.”

Tripodo followed migrants on both sides of the fence — in the many unofficial refugee camps set up around Melilla in Morocco, as well as at the Centros de Estancia Temporal de Inmigrantes (CETI) where migrants are processed once in the Spanish enclave. “Not far from the center, some migrants have built a sort of meeting place with chairs and stuff they’ve collected around the city,” he says. “People cook, drink or just hang out,” as they wait for authorities to settle their fate.

See the story of Fez, 27, a deaf migrant in Melilla as he tried to reach the rest of his family in Europe – a video directed by Guillem Valle, co-founder of Me-mo magazine.

On April 24, 2014, as Tripodo was working in the compound, word arrived that a “jump of the fence” was underway. “I immediately rushed there and some 40 migrants were standing on top of a building on the side of the border,” he says. “After a couple of hours, the Spanish Guardia Civil started to push back the migrants into Morocco.” Some of them were able to scale the barrier, stepping on European soil. “But, despite the fact that they had a right to stay in Spain according to European and Spanish immigration laws, some police officers tried to grab them to send them back to Morocco.” According to Tripodo, the resulting confrontation severely injured some of the migrants.

For the Italian photographer, the tense situation in Melilla is just one aspect of a wider immigration crisis that is affecting the whole of Europe, from Italy and Greece, all the way to France and the U.K. It’s crisis, he believes, that has yet to be met with an adequate response. “The countries that are most exposed to the flow of migrants — such as Spain, Italy and Greece — lack the resources and funds to take care of this emergency,” he says. Last year, for example, Italy was forced to scrap its Mare Nostrum rescue operations, which used to cost more than 9 million Euros per month. Its replacement is called Operation Triton, whose focus shifted from rescuing migrants to securing the border. In the first six months of 2015, about 2,000 people have died in the Mediterranean.

“You can’t stop people from coming to Europe simply by making the route more dangerous or by strengthening the border,” he says. “This doesn’t work, and everyone can see what the consequences are in their newspapers every day: more tragedies and more deaths.”

Gianfranco Tripodo is an Italian photographer based in Madrid, Spain.

Mikko Takkunen, who edited this photo essay, is an Associate Photo Editor at TIME. Follow him on Twitter @photojournalism.

Francesca Trianni is a video producer at TIME. Follow her on Twitter @frantrianni.

Olivier Laurent is the editor of TIME LightBox. Follow him on Twitter and Instagram @olivierclaurent

TIME United Kingdom

The U.K.’s Foreign Minister Says ‘Marauding’ Migrants Could Lower European Living Standards

Politicians Attend COBRA Meeting To Discuss Tunisian Terror Attack
Rob Stothard—Getty Images Philip Hammond, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, walks along Downing Street on June 29, 2015, in London

Philip Hammond says the current migrant influx is "not a sustainable situation"

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond says that the quality of European life will fall if the E.U. is forced to absorb millions of African migrants.

He made controversial remarks while on a trip to Singapore, the BBC reports.

“The gap in standards of living mean that there will always be millions of Africans with the economic motivation to try to get to Europe,” he told the BBC.

“So long as the European Union’s laws are the way they are, many of them will only have to set foot in Europe to be pretty confident that they will never be returned to their country of origin. Now, that is not a sustainable situation, because Europe cannot protect itself and preserve its standard of living and social infrastructure if it has to absorb millions of migrants from Africa.”

He also spoke pointedly on the migrant camps in the coastal French city of Calais, where the entrance to the Channel Tunnel has become a bottleneck of those who seek to enter the U.K.

“So long as there are large numbers of pretty desperate migrants marauding the area, there always will be a threat to the tunnel’s security,” Hammond said. “We’ve got to resolve this problem ultimately by returning those who are not entitled to claim asylum back to their countries of origin.”

Steve Symonds, director of Amnesty International’s refugee program in the U.K., described Hammond’s comments as “mean-spirited” and “shameful.”

“Rather than throwing up the drawbridge and talking about how Europe can ‘protect’ itself from migrants, Mr. Hammond should be working with our E.U. partners to ensure that people don’t drown in the Mediterranean or get crushed beneath lorries at Calais,” he told the BBC.

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com