THE European Union likes to boast that it is a force for good. But in the past ten days as many as 1,200 boat people have drowned in the waters of the Mediterranean. An unknown number were refugees from Syria, Eritrea and Somalia fleeing war or persecution. They perished in part because the EU’s policy on asylum is a moral and political failure.

In a hastily arranged summit, under way as The Economist went to press, EU leaders set out to do something about the drownings. Before them was a ten-point plan designed to enhance rescues, suppress people-smuggling and spread the burden of taking in refugees. Yet, even if Europe’s leaders embraced the plan in full, it would still fall short.

Officials say 1m migrants are camped on the southern shore of the Mediterranean, waiting to embark on a life that is incomparably better than the one they are leaving behind. The Arab world is engulfed in fighting that is likely to last decades and which has set whole nations adrift. Chunks of Africa are prey to sectarian and ethnic strife and to environmental depredation. An enclave of stability and wealth in an ocean of violence, Europe has not begun to grapple with the choices ahead.

Nightmare nostrum

A refugee crisis is hard to cope with because its very existence is a symptom of warfare, persecution or misrule (see article). You cannot stop the tide of refugees because, this side of Utopia, you cannot impose peace upon Libya and Syria or wish good government on Eritrea and Somalia. You cannot let everyone in, because refugees mingle with people in search of prosperity—and states want to choose their economic migrants, not be chosen by them. On the other hand you cannot keep everyone out, because, after the crimes of the second world war, countries made solemn undertakings never again to abandon innocent people to persecution and conflict.

A detailed look at Europe's refugee crisis Yet, as well as reflecting a deep malaise in the lands they are fleeing, the plight of Europe’s boat people also exposes the failings of countries with a duty to shelter them. In Europe that starts with a breakdown of ethics. The EU is putting only a third as much money and less than a tenth of the manpower into maritime rescue as it did last year. Several countries, including Britain, argued that a high chance of being rescued acts as a “pull” factor which only encourages more migrants. In effect, the EU was proposing to stand back and watch one lot of innocent people drown so as to deter another from following them into boats. That logic was wrong as well as morally repugnant. Even before the recent disaster, the death rate this year, compared with the start of 2014, was ten times greater—and still people have been coming in the same numbers. European solidarity has yet again been shown to be flimsy. Although UN conventions say refugees are the responsibility of the country where they turn up, allies have sometimes shared the burden. When boat people left Vietnam, a co-ordinated plan eventually resettled over 1m of them across the rich world. But co-operation in Europe has been in short supply. Although leaders negotiate asylum policy at the EU level, they jealously guard their national powers. That way, mindful of public opinion and the threat from anti-immigration parties, they can both cynically deflect responsibility towards Brussels and also avoid having to accept many flesh-and-blood refugees. Last year 626,000 people applied for asylum to the EU (only a fraction of them came by boat); roughly half of the applicants who were processed were successful. France granted asylum to 15,000; Britain to only 11,000. Despite honourable exceptions, including Germany, with 41,000, and Sweden, with 31,000, most countries wish the problem would go away.

The cruel seafarers

Europe’s policies are also rife with unintended consequences. A new fence between Greece and Turkey stopped migration across the land border, but led to a doubling in—more dangerous—crossings of the Aegean in the first half of 2014. Relying on merchant vessels to answer migrants’ calls for help causes them to switch off their radios, increasing the risk of collisions and the dangers for shipping in distress. Countries shut asylum-seekers inside detention centres for long stretches or prevent them from working in order to make life so miserable that people will seek refuge elsewhere. That wastes money, besides making newcomers harder to integrate.

If the EU is to live up to its values, it must act on many fronts at once, from saving lives at sea to helping countries with the greatest burden. EU leaders are right to boost the rescue mission—but it needs to be much bigger, larger even than the one in operation last year. The EU is also right to take on the people-smugglers. But they will be resilient, as the profits are irresistible and the supply of crew members almost inexhaustible.

Maritime migration is thus a problem to be dealt with on land. UN treaties mean that refugees must travel to the EU to claim asylum there—which is why so many head for the Italian island of Lampedusa, 70 miles (113km) from the Tunisian coast. The best way to stop the boats is for camps to process asylum applications to Europe on the south shore of the Med. If camps are seen to work, refugees will prefer them to the risk of drowning. Setting them up will not be easy. The EU will have to pay north African countries to host them. Asylum-processing must be fast, fair and efficient. The economic migrants who are rejected need to be sent back home. And member states must sign up to their share of refugees—which should be well within the scope of 500m wealthy EU citizens.

Europe cannot put an end to the violence and desperation that leads people to flee, but in the longer run it should do more for its neighbours. Engagement makes sense in itself and may eventually help stem the flow of refugees. If the EU works for a settlement in Libya, the criminal networks may become less entrenched. If it accepts north African produce, it may face fewer north African people. If more of the EU offers help to the 1m refugees in Lebanon, fewer will turn up on the streets of Paris and Berlin. Europe likes to think it is a model for how nation states can work together to make the world a better place. At the moment, the boat people put that idea to shame.