Author: Emma Nelson
November 12, 2024
Immigration has remained a polarizing topic of debate in Europe since the migrant crisis in 2015, when conflicts and instability in the Middle East and North Africa drove hundreds of thousands of refugees to Europe’s shores. Since the calamity, the European Union has struggled to balance its humanitarian commitment to resettling asylum seekers fleeing war and persecution with calls for more comprehensive immigration reform. Many members of the EU seek increased border control, driven by concerns over the impact of migratory flows on the job market, housing costs, and national identity. Far-right, populist parties who champion strong anti-immigrant rhetoric have thus gained momentum in the past decade. Studies show that in times of economic uncertainty, far-right parties gain traction as people often place blame on immigrants for high crime rates and unemployment. Volker Turk, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, warned that the EU needs to be vigilant of anti-immigrant speech in far-right agendas as “history tells us, in particular in Europe, that the vilification of the other, that the denigration of the other, is a harbinger for what’s to come.”
The need for such vigilance was evident during the lead-up to the European Parliament elections this past summer. In the EU’s most significant election since Brexit, the COVID-19 Pandemic, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, 720 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) were selected to represent the public in office. The European Parliament oversees the EU budget, authorizes legislation, and elects the President of the European Commission. With such power, it is a significant force in shaping EU policy. In the election, the center-right European People’s Party (EPP), the center-left Socialists and Democrats (S&D), and the liberal Renew group held their positions as the three largest factions in Parliament. However, far-right groups such as the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) and Identity and Democracy (ID) gained appreciable traction, securing a combined 131 seats. The growing influence of the far-right in Parliament mirrors developments at the national level, where seven EU member states– Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, and Slovakia– currently have far- right parties in government.
The parliamentary election results not only reveal a numerical increase in far-right representation, but also signal the expansion of far-right ideology in EU governance, particularly in regard to immigration. Center-right parties have curved their narratives around immigration towards a harsher approach to appeal to voters who might have otherwise defected to the far- right. Historically, the EPP has worked in tandem with the S&D to pass legislation, often supported by Renew. Recently, however, the EPP has strengthened its ties with the far-right ECR, led by Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni, to cooperate on immigration policy. While the left and center stand in opposition to the far-right on most economic, social, and foreign policies, immigration is one issue where concessions have been made to capture the support of voters swayed by far-right rhetoric. Susi Dennision, a senior fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, speaking on immigration policy, noted that “the challenge Europe has been grappling with for the past 15 years has been the normalization of the far right’s agenda.”
Recent EU immigration policies cater to the far-right’s demands for harsher border control and can be divided into two main approaches for migration management. The first focuses on increasing physical security at EU entrance points, framing immigrants as threats to national safety. The EU has recently adopted a comprehensive plan fitting this strategy called the New Pact on Migration and Asylum which introduces stronger screening processes, strengthened database technology, and the expansion of detention centers. The second approach involves outsourcing migration management to neighboring countries, aiming to prevent migrants from ever reaching the EU’s borders. Both tactics pose certain risks to the safety and rights of asylum seekers.
The New Pact on Migration and Asylum marks the most significant overhaul of EU immigration policy since the 2015 crisis. The framework calls for a streamlined process of asylum procedures, using technology and large-scale IT systems to mitigate the number of people who make it into EU member countries. Specifically, the legislation authorizes the mass surveillance of migrants, imposing mandatory biometric data collection– which includes facial images– from people as young as six years old. Databases will retain all information for up to 10 years and be accessible by police across the EU to employ in identity checking. Security checks will now apply to any person entering the EU irregularly, with those deemed “risk[s] to national security or public order” subject to fast-tracked border procedures, which offer reduced protections during the asylum application process. The criteria for what constitutes a “risk” is dangerously discretionary, leaving room for discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or religion. Catherine Woollard, Director of the European Centre on Refugees and Exiles, says that, “the theory is that by making people suffer with hostile policies you create a deterrent and fewer people will arrive. But in practice people will still arrive because they have no choice, so there’s no deterrent effect – just the suffering.”
The brunt of this suffering is likely to occur in detention centers where thousands of migrants will be sent under the new screening processes. These centers are modeled after the Closed Control Access Centers in Greece, facilities which have been critiqued by human rights organizations for their poor conditions, prison-like police patrols, and drone monitoring. The Pact proposes the expansion of detention, predicting a minimum of 30,000 people to be held at any given time. Those deemed threats to security or who fled economic instability rather than war or persecution will be expelled back to their home countries. Those unable to return will likely spend months in detention, awaiting immigration proceedings.
The second focus of EU immigration reform has been the outsourcing of migrant management to countries outside Europe. Aiming to externalize the problem, the EU has made monetary deals with a number of states in the Middle East and North Africa to curb migration in their own countries. They have promised €7.4 billion in total to Egypt through 2027, €1 billion to Lebanon from 2024 to 2027, and €210 million to Mauritania. These agreements follow previous payments to Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, and Turkey. Although the idea behind these transactions is that the governments receiving money will use the funds to improve conditions in their countries and strengthen border security, the investments are often filtered into cruel migratory practices. For example, in Libya, whose coast guard the EU continues to sponsor, migrants caught at sea are sent to detention facilities where torture, forced labor, and sexual violence have all been documented. In 2018, reports found detained migrants were sent to slave auctions. These incidents are not isolated to Libya, however. In May, journalists reported that Black migrants in Mauritania, Tunisia, and Morocco caught fleeing were driven in vehicles donated by the EU to the middle of the desert, left stranded without provisions. Despite these recorded instances of abuse, many right-wing politicians seek to further externalize the migration crisis from Europe, with 19 out of the 27 EU nations signing a letter calling for deals with more MENA countries.
The strength of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum and the continuing efforts of the EU to externalize migration to neighboring countries regardless of abuse reflect the increasing influence of far-right ideologies on Europe’s political landscape. Concern over the number of migrants illegally entering Europe is valid. However, the measures aimed to address security distress often come at the cost of human rights and dignity, exacerbating the suffering of asylum seekers. As a collective with a long-standing commitment to humanitarian principles, the EU must balance its security interests with the need to protect vulnerable populations, ensuring that fear and division do not dictate its future.
Glossary
Calamity- an event causing great and often sudden damage or distress
EU- European Union
Concession- Something allowed or given up, often to end a disagreement
Outsourcing- Using an external provider to handle a situation that would other side be handled internally
MENA- Middle East and North Africa