The European Union, once lauded for its compassionate response to migration crises, is undergoing a marked shift towards a more restrictive and security-focused approach. A decade after the death of Alan Kurdi sparked widespread sympathy and pledges of support, the bloc is now prioritizing border control and limiting irregular entry, a change driven by shifting voter sentiment and the rise of right-leaning political forces.
The culmination of this shift is the recently overhauled EU Pact on Asylum and Migration, finalized in . This pact aims to expedite the asylum process and, crucially, limit the number of irregular migrants entering the EU. The agreement, described as “historic” by EU Commissioner for Home Affairs Ylva Johansson, signals a renewed emphasis on shared responsibility among member states, but at the cost of a more hardened stance on border security.
This move away from a perceived “golden age of solidarity” reflects a broader trend across Europe. Voters have steadily shifted to the right, empowering parties that advocate for stricter immigration policies. This political realignment is forcing mainstream parties to adopt more conservative positions, even as humanitarian organizations warn of increasingly dire consequences for migrants and asylum seekers.
The change in tone is particularly striking when contrasted with the immediate aftermath of the tragedy involving Alan Kurdi. His death, and the subsequent images of his body washed ashore, prompted an outpouring of emotion and a commitment from European governments to address the root causes of migration and provide refuge for those fleeing conflict and persecution. Now, according to Josephine Liebl, head of advocacy at the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), “All of this started in 2015, and measures are getting even stricter.”
The securitization of migration policy isn’t occurring in a vacuum. A parallel trend towards a more geopolitical and security-centered posture is taking hold across the EU, influenced by external shocks such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. A recent report from the Austrian Institute for International Affairs highlights a growing process of securitization in Europe, suggesting a systemic erosion of diplomatic restraint. This “Time of Hawks,” as the report terms it, is characterized by the rise of hardline security elites and a return to coercive power politics.
While the EU formally maintains its commitment to multilateralism, the practical implications of the new migration pact and the broader securitization trend are clear: keeping migrants out is now the primary objective. This represents a significant departure from the earlier focus on preventing loss of life at sea and providing humanitarian assistance.
The economic implications of this shift are complex. Restricting migration could exacerbate existing labor shortages in certain sectors, particularly those reliant on low-skilled workers. However, proponents of stricter controls argue that limiting the influx of migrants will reduce the strain on social welfare systems and protect the jobs of native-born workers. The long-term economic consequences remain to be seen, but the immediate impact is likely to be felt most acutely by migrants themselves, who face increasingly limited pathways to safety and opportunity.
The EU’s hardening stance on migration also raises questions about its broader geopolitical role. By prioritizing border control over humanitarian concerns, the bloc risks undermining its reputation as a champion of human rights and international law. This could have implications for its relationships with other countries, particularly those in the developing world that are grappling with the challenges of displacement and migration.
The shift is not limited to policy changes. The political landscape across Europe is being reshaped by the rise of far-right parties, who have successfully tapped into anxieties about immigration and national identity. These parties are now playing a more prominent role in shaping the policy agenda, pushing for even stricter controls and challenging the traditional consensus on migration.
The EU’s new approach to migration is a response to a complex set of factors, including shifting voter sentiment, geopolitical pressures, and the perceived failure of previous policies. However, it also represents a fundamental change in the bloc’s values and priorities. Whether this new course will ultimately prove successful remains to be seen, but the era of open borders and compassionate responses to migration is over, at least for now.
The situation is further complicated by external factors, such as the challenges of transporting Russian gas through Azerbaijan’s corridor, highlighting the interconnectedness of energy security and geopolitical stability in the region. While seemingly unrelated to migration, these broader geopolitical shifts contribute to a climate of increased insecurity and a focus on national interests, reinforcing the trend towards securitization within the EU.
