How Europe’s far right is changing EU asylum policy

Less than six months ago, the European Union signed off a reform package designed to address glaring flaws in its common asylum system laid bare during the crisis years of 2015 and 2016, when the arrival of more than 1 million people overwhelmed ill-prepared national authorities.
The EU migration and asylum pact was the culmination of almost 10 years of fraught negotiations. It saw the 27 countries agree on measures to more evenly distribute the costs of taking in asylum seekers across the bloc, but also beef up external border protection to stop people reaching the EU in the first place.
Now, as far-right politicians exert ever more influence on the levers of powers in European capitals, both directly in government posts and indirectly in opposition, the deal looks more fragile than ever.
In recent weeks, a string of countries that had previously been instrumental in getting the reform package, due to come into force in 2026, over the line have announced a hardening of their individual national asylum policies.
France’s new right-wing government, tacitly dependent on the backing of the far-right National Rally, announced plans to tighten borders. Under pressure from recent electoral successes by the far-right Alternative for Germany party, the center-left coalition government in Berlin announced it would ramp up checks on EU internal borders to control migration.
Last week, the Dutch minister in charge of asylum, Marjolein Faber of the far-right PVV, announced plans for the “toughest migration policy ever”. But most controversially for the Netherlands’ EU neighbors, Faber told the European Commission said she would seek an opt-out from the legally binding package.
Within days, Budapest announced similar ambitions, prompting short-lived fears of a domino effect.
In the end, it quickly emerged that The Hague’s demand would only come into play if and when the EU treaties were next renegotiated, something that is not on the cards any time soon.
Exemptions from EU law on certain policies are possible to obtain in theory (Denmark has one for migration policy), but getting one requires the agreement of the other states to be written into the EU’s basic laws.
As Alberto-Horst Neidhardt of the European Policy Center think tank explained, one should be careful to distinguish between rhetoric and the reality.
“We hear more and more political statements trying to send a message to the national electorate,” Neidhardt said. “I would separate between the political declarations by governments in the past weeks, and the technical work on the pact, which is in full swing.”
Camille Le Coz, an expert from the Migration Policy Institute think tank in Paris, agrees. “There’s a gap between what you say and do.” At the same time, “what you’re saying publicly can have ramifications for the other countries.” Greece, for example, was incensed by Germany’s recent announcements about increased border checks, she pointed out.
Around the continent, governments are increasingly keen to be seen as being “tough” on migration. Many politicians fear being accused by the public of accepting EU laws that mean taking in more asylum seekers. The member states are closely watching each other, and accusations of free-riding or hypocrisy are quick to fly.
In the next two years, each country will need to write the changes into national law. Under the new rules, asylum seekers and refugees are to be more thoroughly screened within seven days of arrival in the EU. They also allow certain applicants to be held at external borders and assessed in a fast-track procedure to allow for swifter deportation if unsuccessful.
But for far-right politicians like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, the most contentious part of the law is a mechanism that obliges all EU states to take in approved refugees from other member states to spread new arrivals more evenly. Under EU rules, asylum applications are generally supposed to be made in the country of arrival, a system few would assert is fair to southern border states like Italy and Greece.
If other member states refuse relocations, with thousands set to take place each year, they must pay a financial contribution of €600 million ($668 million) a year or offer logistical support instead.
The Netherlands, for example, is likely to opt for financial or logistical contributions rather than accepting relocations, migration expert Neidhardt said. This wouldn’t be the same as an actual opt-out, which would take years to negotiate. “The Netherlands remains bound to the rules just agreed.”
The migration and asylum pact was a compromise that satisfied no one totally — be they anti-immigration hardliners like the Hungarian government, states on EU external borders like Greece or common end destination countries like Germany.
Perhaps least impressed were those advocating for the rights of asylum seekers and migrants, who pointed out the deal would not stop thousands of people dying while crossing the Mediterranean every year and would likely undermine the right to claim asylum.
In Neidhardt’s opinion, despite what EU governments say in public, privately they know that the deal is “too big too fail.”
“Should the pact fail, that would mean the end of the common European asylum system,” he said. “And that’s not in the interest of any of the member states, whether we’re talking about Germany, the Netherlands — whatever.”
In fact, the toughening of EU asylum policy predates the pact, or even recent gains in influence for the far right in capitals from Stockholm to Rome. For years, the EU has been spending more on border protection and channeling funds to common countries of origin to try and stop people seeking a new life in the EU in the first place.
For Camille Le Coz of the Migration Policy Institute, the pact thrashed out earlier years remains the best way for member states deal with many migration management issues. The European Commission’s priority must now be ensuring member states have the necessary “political buy-in” to keep things advancing, she warned.
“The whole reason why we have this common European asylum system is connected with the Schengen area and freedom of movement,” she recalled.
For Le Coz, it remains to be seen if this very “fragile” deal can hold. The first milestones are already looming. By the end of the year, all the member states are supposed to have finalized their implementation plans. “I think that’s going to be very interesting to see.”
Edited by: Andreas Illmer