Pat's not being honest here.
The FT piece says nothing about moral obligation - their argument's coldly pragmatic.
" But eventually the EU will have to reach a new deal. Geography creates its own imperatives. Turkey is Europe’s buffer to the Middle East, a region destined for long-term instability. It puts a huge responsibility on Ankara which the EU has an obligation to help bear.But hoping that Turkey’s grudging co-operation and the militarisation of the EU’s external frontiers can shut out migrants and refugees completely is delusional. The EU will face flows of migrants and asylum seekers across the Mediterranean for decades to come. It has to work closely with its neighbours — as Spain has with Morocco — to manage the problem while protecting human rights. That means co-operation on border enforcement while also providing legal routes for migrants and asylum seekers."
That's the problem with too many nationalist arguments. They pretend that the only reason we help/interact with the rest of the world is obligation, sympathy or political correctness. Each of which is pretty easy to argue against.
The real reason Europe needs to deal realistically with the migrant influx is long-term self interest.