In contrast, since 2016, Europe has relocated only 25,000 Syrian refugees from Turkey. Given that most refugees are out of sight and outside Europe`s borders, EU member states have simply breathed the problem. For the EU, the question was how to raise the money, while for Turkey, the most important question was when the money would arrive. According to Dr Cigdem Nas, president of the Foundation for Economic Development, the main obstacle was the difference of opinion between Turkey and the EU on the use of the funds. While Turkey has lobbied and wants above all to meet the general needs of refugees, there have been delays because eu member states` funds have to be monitored by the EU, she said. But Knaus sees even more pressing issues that could threaten the deal if not resolved. His words proved not only instructive, but also prophetic. As Syrian refugees sought safe countries to live for themselves and their families, relations between the EU and Turkey were severely compromised. The European Commission decided on Wednesday that the second tranche of €3 billion promised under the refugee deal would be made available. In contrast, the Turkish government said it has received €1.85 billion from the EU so far. Financial support from the EU Fund reaches Turkey through projects.

Aid is not provided in the state coffers. Long before President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the 2016 migration deal was just a thread, his long-standing threat to open borders. Turkish officials had expressed dissatisfaction with the EU`s argument over the argument of three provisions of the agreement on the argument: visa liberalisation, modernisation of the customs union and acceleration of Turkey`s EU accession negotiations. They also called for increased support for Ankara`s initiative in Idlib, including air cover to create a “safe zone” and more humanitarian aid to displaced civilians in Syria, as well as increased financial assistance to Syrian refugees in Turkey. . . .