Disputes about Brexit in the UK has mostly developed along two lines: economy and migration. It is now clear that concerns over migration flows have strongly affected the results.

 

 

Right-wing parties have fully engaged with those discourses to channel disillusionment. Racism and an anti-immigrant rhetoric coupled with the scapegoating strategy in the refugee-crisis. It was certainly no coincidence that the far-right UKIP party unveiled an anti-migrant poster showing a queue of refugees with the slogan “Breaking Point: the EU has failed us all”.

 

 

However, the UK refugee policy is much more London-Based than the Leave Block says. A favourable geographical position and being outside the Schengen zone make the UK in a vantage position. The EU has very little impact on the asylum system in the Island. Britain opted out from European asylum policies. British government avoided taking on the quota system.

 

 

So, Brexit won’t affect significantly European refugee-policies.

 

 

However, Brexit can affect the life of refugees in many ways.

 

 

 

First, Brexit may lead further disagreement about borders management. For people living in Calais, this may mean a major change.

 

 

Despite efforts, living conditions in the camp are very poor, and people suffer from high level of vulnerability. Moreover, since February, when the Southern part of the Jungle was dismantled, population has been growing every day, the latest Help Refugees census says. Now, it amounts as many as 6,123 people – including 700 children (78% of them are unaccompanied).

 

 

Under 2003 Touquet agreement, British officials can legally conduct identity check in Calais. This is a bilateral agreement, but as Mr Xavier Bertrand, head of the Hauts-de-France region said, Brexit makes the agreement politically untenable. ‘British people have chosen to take back their freedom, they must take back their border,’ he declared right after the victory of Leave. Natacha Bouchart, major of Calais, joined the chorus: ‘British people must take on the consequences of their choice.’ Mr Hollande, however, rejected pressures, defending Le Touquet with or without Brexit. But this is nothing new. French politicians have often called for re-negotiating the agreement.

 

 

 

If the agreement is suspended, Jungle could be relocated in Britain, where the actual border is settled.

 

 

 

 

Second, we may expect a major radicalisation in anti-immigrants narrative and an intensification of discussions concerning the burdens of the refugee crisis. Brexit in fact may significantly affect next year’s presidential election in France.

 

In France, the EU is mostly seen through the filter of the refugee crisis. Immigration will be a major argument for the upcoming campaigns. Miss Marine Le Pen celebrated Brexit. She strengthened her conservative position and mounted scepticism towards the EU by turning uncontrolled immigration into the symbol of a system out of control. If there is something worry with Brexit, rampant conservative rhetoric is one of the major concerns, especially when it comes to the protection of asylum seekers.

 

 

 

Third, for the refugee themselves, the situation is complex and heteronomous. Despite criminalization of mobility with the EU, and walls, Help Refugees has recently counted as many as 31 new arrivals in Calais each night. This trend is quite alarming and demonstrates that the crisis is far from being resolved.

 

With the Brexit, we can expect the same resilience we have had when some governments thought of fences, walls and barbed wires as successful ways to keep people out. This tendency has enriched the human trafficking and the smuggling industry, which today is the primary beneficiary of the management of the refugee crisis. Refugees, immigrants, asylum seekers will try to cross the Channel overnight, the UK being or not in the Union.

 

Of course, Brexit adds another layer of uncertainty to people escaping from wars and deprivation. They live in a limbo, once in Europe. They travelled for months. They invested all their economic resources to reach relative and friends, who, in many cases, live in the UK. They live in fear of police’s violence and racism, without protection.

 

How can Brexit make any difference for them?

 

The role of perceptions is however very important. Some people in the camp feared Brexit causing the lockdown of the UK borders. Others saw it as a novel opportunity. If authorities relocate the camp in Britain, they believe asylum seeking being easier. If the Jungle stays in Calais, they think that French officials might not be willing to check borders.

 

 

 

 

Fourth, Touquet might not be officially revised, but there could be collateral, unexpected effects in the way authorities cooperate. The Dublin Regulation – which has already proved to be a failure – will have no impact. French authorities might be more flexible with the controls and let people cross. People could not be sent back to the country of first arrival.

 

Paradoxically, isolationist narrative fostering Brexit might bring about more refugees and migrants for the UK.

 

 

 

Being these speculations, once thing is certain: in the short term, Brexit is not changing the life of people in Calais. Their situation remains the same and their intentions too, so they simply won’t give up. Once negotiations have been started, it is likely to cause more desperate journeys across the Channel. Many people might try to cross before the agreement is enforced or even after. For sure, upcoming French election will revolve around borders management and bilateral agreement with the UK. Migrants and refugees will certainly be a target to gain popular support. If conservative regains power, we can expect anti-immigration narrative, pressures for rethinking Touquet and bad consequences for the thousands people living in the Jungle.

 

For now, we know that Brexit has increased racism, xenophobia and violence against migrants and refugees. Something that might escalate with French elections. This is what the majority of refugees now fears.

 

 

Beyond that, the progressive erosion of the rights of refugees or asylum seekers, together with the lack of viable legal channels to obtain protection, will just open more space to human traffickers. Across Europe and in Calais, protection and mobility are slowing becoming commodities to buy – with a severe human cost.

 

 

 

Therefore, with or without Brexit, as long as refugees are considered an issue of borders management or economic grievances, rather than a humanitarian concern; there will be just short-sighted political gains and severe collateral effects. Nothing more than that.