I think the main issue we have in Europe at the moment is the lack of solidarity amongst EU member states when it comes to sharing responsibility for refugees.

I think the main issue we have in Europe at the moment is the lack of solidarity amongst EU member states when it comes to sharing responsibility for refugees.

The problem has to be seen in political terms and in cultural terms. The first one includes the capacity of European States - and the United States -  of reaching a consensus that may allow a logical distribution of the refugees, with the same patterns to every country.

The cultural question is, indeed, the most problematic. If we study the History of Europe in the last 70 or 80 years or, why not, the whole 20th century, we shall find lots of differences between cultures, even when we analyse neighbour nations. The acceptance of a new culture - and the Syrian culture is, in many paths of thinking, very much connected with ISIS History- is something that has never been consensual, as you may see the case of Hungarians, or the Former Youguslavian Republics, or even the Iberian contrast, or the many Russian cultural clashes.

To reach a consensus for the solving of this crisis, the first thing to be done is educate the nationals of each country - including, once again, the United States, against Trump's ideas - and that will take, at least, another century.

I do support the two answers put forward by our friends however, resources can be one area which we can consider when talking about this issue. Resources in a sense, the capital or the finance which can keep the process of looking after the refugees and also to combat the issue in the affected areas. If we don't have the resources, how can we be on the 'winning' side?

This would depend on what you mean by resolve.  By resolve are you asking why the European Union is unable to take in more refugees or why the European Union is unable to resolve the cause of the influx of refugees.

Both questions would produce divergent answers. 

On the former, simplistic as this might sound, and in spite of the posturing thus far, there is not the political will to and the nation states are hiding behind the veneer of collective agreement.  I agree with culture driving decision making in this regard but the idea that the refugees are not like us is a factor worth considering.  Were the refugees to be from a European country, perhaps we would have a different narrative and outcome.

On the latter question, the European Union is powerless to resolve the crisis.  All the European Union has is moral persuasion which they are not wielding sufficiently and even if they did, cannot produce any definite outcomes that would resolve the crisis. 

i think the questions should read: 'why the European Union is unwilling to take in more refugees or why the European Union is unwilling to resolve the cause of the influx of refugees'

EU is certainly not unable to take in refugees. take a look at Turkey, which recepted more than 3 Million refugees.

i agree, there is a lack of political concesus. the worrying part is that Opportunist politicans are taking Advantage of the Situation in order to safe their spot in power.

so, we should ask ourselves, how the EU could implement an effective burden-sharing mechanism.

Agree with all comments above. We remember  as English schoolchildren collecting money in class to help Hungarian refugees in 1956. Shame on Hungary.

Despite our thoughts about the Hungarian ways of thinking (somehow agreeing with Karis Muller), or even England - which is not in the mood to cooperate with Europe in most issues, besides those that may be of their interest - the whole world should rethink the policies used towards the millenium goals (MDGs) signed by UN represntatives in 2000. The achievement of those objectives is vital to reach an equilibrium for everyone, atached to the idea that we would get a better world, more comprehensive and respectful between different peoples and different policies. There always has to be a beginning to reach the correct political formula.

For that achievement there must be a serious commitment between antagonist cultures, religions and, above all, politicians. If not, the problem remains.

Refugees are not criminals, they are not the problem. Criminals are those who insist on selling weapons to maintain the wars, and the problem is that the whole political world - UN included - closes his eyes to the facts.

The main problem of EU with solving the problem with Syrian refugees, first come with no common sense of consensus between the EU members and the second and more important is not having plan without NATO for solving the problem with the syrian refugees. The refugees must be divided in precise kvotas per every european country and after solving the crisis in Middle East they can come back to their native countries. 

This was done Andrej but several countries in the former Eastern bloc have refused, forgetting the times when their own refugees were welcomed into the  Western bloc (1956, 1968).

The dimensions of the problems are: cultural, economic and political. The millions of migrants bring with them contradictory cultural variables to the European communities; economically, the migrants constitute an economic burden on the stressed European economies; politically, the migrants bring with them the political conflicts of the Middle East, which will essentially lead to a politically complicated environment.

One of the main problems is the lack of institutions and political commitment.  The current legal framework based on the Dublin rules is insufficient since the external border controls in Italy and mostly in Greece have not been functioning at the same degree as before 2015. The migration policy of the EU is not shaped as it often is in federals states where federal and state level of governance and interacting regarding responsibilities and capacities. There is no European ministry or department for migration as on the national levels. In Canada for example the federal government and state governments are interacting when it comes to redistributing individual refugees or asylum seekers,  planing the integration and social adaptation process, and also the labor market  and language policy. Theoretically 1 million refugees and asylum seekers in a union with population with 500 million is sometimes represented as case of 1 person coming to an island with 500 inhabitants. However in reality this is more complicated due the fact that most of the members states have different experiences of migration , including the humanitarian one. For example the experiences between Sweden and Germany are smaller than those between Sweden and Latvia. 

Thanks everyone.A very fruitful discussion. @vladan lausevic, I like your statement on Dublin rules. but how about EU negotiating with Assad in creating safe zone/no fly zone inside Syria in order to manage the influx of refugees to Europe?

I suppose that the discussion should not be maintained just within the European borders, but also in the United States, mainly because they are largely responsible for the enlargement of the war in Syria for a lot of reasons. The discussion of a "safe zone" would never been well accepted by the parts. Syrians are divided, the Russians support one side and the US/EU allies supports the elimination of that side, ones in favour of Assad and the others against Assad, and all three against ISIS. How could they all agree on a "safe zone" and where it should be placed inside Syrian teritory?

The Dublin III procedure itself. It says that "irregular migrants" should be registered in the first country they arrive at. This is unfair regarding the fact that it overburdens countries like Greece, Italy or Hungary. Unfortunately it also contributes to xenophobic tendencies due to fear that "illegal migrants will overrun my countries" and inspires countries like Hungary to build walls and fences and create xenophobic tendencies. This procedure is not advantageous for the refugees either, as they cannot select the country they want to live in. A fair burden sharing could be suggested, however this could lead to cherry-picking and again, just ordering that this refugee should go to this country and that refugee could go to that country could affect their free choice of where they would like to live.

[B]ut how about EU negotiating with Assad in creating safe zone/no fly zone inside Syria in order to manage the influx of refugees to Europe?

The solution for establishing a no fly zone will be dependent on consensus to reach by USA and Russia. they Support different sides in the syrian war. russia supports the Regime of azad which wants the moderate rebels dead. USA on the other Hand supports the moderate rebels. why? russia's Support is of the syrian government is guided by the idea to harm usa and let themselves get lock up in negotiations with the government. USA wants to mitigate russias influence.