Politics of Migration in the EU

Migration is a pan-European issue and one that invokes a different response within and from each EU Member State. The political, economic, and geographic situations in each Member State are different, which not only impact the internal, national approach to dealing with migration and asylum, but influences the approach taken by and stance of each Member State at EU level. Migration has become an increasingly intractable matter in the EU, one which requires a unified solution. Achieving a common approach to dealing with and managing migration and asylum in the EU has moved forward in recent months, but progress has once again stalled, following the failure of the European Council to agree to Conclusions on migration at the 29-30 June European Council meeting.

This blog explores the political conversations around and responses to migration across and between Member States and will assess how this influences discussions and decisions at EU level, with a view to the deadline of February 2024 for agreement on the EU’s New Pact on Migration and Asylum.

Political Temperature Check

Migration evokes a reaction for almost everybody, and it transcends all levels of society and politics, which ensures the topic is ever-present on national and international agendas. Many scholars and international organisations argue that worsening global crises such as conflict, insecurity, and climate change will only increase irregular migration to Europe and that this trend will only be exacerbated by ‘pull factors’ from EU Member States, such as access to labour markets, security, education, healthcare, and so on. Thus, needing to deal with migration and asylum will likely never be off the table across the EU. Indeed, in its "risk analysis" for the coming years until 2032 [1] , Frontex, the EU’s border management agency, says that it expects migration pressure to continue increasing. The report states that in the next decade, EU border management will experience a higher occurrence of migration/refugee crises and highlighted the complex interplay of geopolitics, security conflicts, and other megatrends which will influence different regions of the world, including countries in close proximity to Europe.

In the past year alone, migration has greatly impacted national politics across the EU, from the declaration of a State of Emergency in Meloni’s Italy[2] to the collapse of Rutte’s Government in the Netherlands[3]. The full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 precipitated a large-scale displacement of Ukrainians into the rest of Europe. Of the more than 6.3 million Ukrainians currently displaced, nearly 6 million are recorded to be in Europe, of which 4 million have registered for temporary protection in the EU[4]. While there has been strong EU-wide support for granting Ukrainians temporary protection, the signs of migration ‘fatigue’ have started to build up, according to The Centre for Economic Policy Research[5]. This, together with a rise in migration along the Mediterranean and Western Balkan routes has had a significant impact on migration discourse across the EU.

Predictably, geography has played a key role in the response of different Member States to migration. Alliances of like-minded and geographically proximate countries have surfaced in migration discussions, with the Visegrad Four grouping of Poland, Hungary, Czechia and Slovakia taking a common approach to many facets of migration policy and the Med5 Group made up of Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta and Spain meeting in recent months to agree common positions ahead of EU level meetings. Ireland shares a common approach on some matters with the likes of Germany, Luxembourg and Portugal and indeed shares the position of having the option to opt-in to matters of Justice and Home Affairs under the EU Treaties with Denmark. The Member States along the EU’s external borders, particularly along the Mediterranean, are also seen to have a more hardline approach to migration and asylum policy, given they are the first entry point for most people seeking asylum.

The volume of people arriving in frontline member states has, over time, revealed the limitations of the EU’s capabilities to agree on a common approach to migratory issues such as returns, ‘burden-sharing’ and ‘fair’ settlement. These coastal and border Member States’ positions in negotiations around the EU Pact for Migration and Asylum have often resulted in bitter divisions emerging between member states. Italy and Greece, which have had to manage especially large waves of arrivals, seek to have more authority to remove rejected asylum seekers while Poland and Hungary, which are firmly opposed to any compulsory redistribution of asylum seekers, have opposed two legislative files in the Pact, namely the Asylum Migration Management Regulation (AMMR) and the Asylum Procedure Regulation (APR) and blocked European Council Conclusions on migration at the June Summit[6].

Notably, the rise in migration into Europe has seen an increase in anti-migrant sentiment in many Member States, coupled with far-right parties gaining ground across Europe, including in the likes of Austria and France, as well as in the likes of Finland, Italy and Sweden, where they currently serve in or support governments. Ireland is no exception to this, with a rise in anti-migrant sentiment seen in the form of protests taking place outside temporary housing for migrants across the country[7].

EU Level

The divergent views of Member States are most visible when they come together for high level meetings, such as the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council or at the European Council Summit. On 08 June 2023, at the JHA Council, after 8 years of blockage, the EU agreed a ‘general approach’ on the aforementioned AMMR and APR which form part of the EU’s New Pact on Migration and Asylum. Lithuania, Malta and Slovakia however abstained from this vote, and Poland and Hungary opposed it.  While there is not total agreement on the approach taken, agreement on the Pact has started to move forward in recent months. For those in support of the Pact, the optimism following the breakthrough at the June JHA Council was short lived, as at the European Council Summit on 29-30 June, the Heads of Government failed to agree on Conclusions pertaining to migration, reportedly after Poland and Hungary refused to sign off on them[8]. Both countries oppose the EU’s new mandatory migrant relocation quota system, as agreed at the JHA Council. This stalemate continued to the most recent meeting of the Justice and Home Affairs Council in Spain on July 26, over the so-called “crisis regulation,[9]” which details measures to lift pressure on EU border countries facing spikes in people seeking asylum. The Spanish EU presidency suggested a compromise which failed to gain support from several countries. The representatives from Austria, Czechia, Hungary, and Poland came out against the proposal, while Germany, the Netherlands, and Slovakia said they would abstain after expressing concerns that the standard for granting asylum might be lowered by the regulation. Other countries, Italy included, meanwhile were in support of the proposal from Spain[10]. This failure to agree on an agreed position among the Ministers posed a major setback to the Pact before the summer recess, as the European Parliament has indicated that it won’t approve other files under negotiation until Member States reach a deal on the whole package[11] and it is now unclear when negotiations will restart.

Looking Ahead to the Pact Deadline

As Institutions and Governments break for summer, the future of the Pact and the prospect of a common European approach to migration and asylum once again appears uncertain. For many in Europe, the summer months represent a period of rest, but for many, the summer months will bring a dangerous and life-threatening journey across seas and across borders in search of asylum and sanctuary. As the deadline for the Pact looms, which is meant to coincide with the end of the Spanish Presidency of the Council of the EU in December 2023, Member States stand at a crossroads. Compromise, solidarity and understanding is required by all Member States if the Pact is be agreed. Progress made in the first half of 2023 should not be undermined by the political situations in any Member State.