Migration and politics of populism in Europe

Domestic politics became increasingly politicised because of the crises spurred in Iraq, Libya, and Syria, Sahel region increased prominence in media coverage, mobilisation of citizens with exclusive nationalist identities by predominantly right-wing populist parties, and worsened polarisation in public debates in Europe. Under these conditions, popular dissatisfaction with the European Union (EU)’s crisis management grew, and anti-EU and anti-refugee/immigrant ideologies were strengthened. Since 2015, the politicisation of migration in the EU has been a complex, contentious and completely a new phenomenon that has dominated political debates and discussions engendering political salience and polarised stances among member states.

Before the current Ukraine crisis, migration management in Europe was already fraught with complexity and political tensions and was exacerbated by factors such as the Syrian civil war, and the surge of terrorism in the Sahel region of Africa. The influx of refugees from conflict zones in Africa and other regions placed significant strain on European countries, leading to debates over responsibility sharing and burden distribution. Additionally, differing perspectives and approaches among EU member states further complicated efforts to develop a cohesive and unified migration policy. As a result, migration management remained highly politicised, with individual nations often prioritising their own interests over collective action at the EU level.

As a result of this politicisation, the increasing migrant and refugee crisis has gradually altered the direction and changed the standards of what is permitted to claim or do in Europe today to face it. The basis of the politicisation of migration constitutes the emergence of populist trends, nationalist movements, and non-unified views of the political elites of the MS, particularly, individualistic approaches and national interests (national interests vs EU solidarity) that do not serve the common interests of the Union; e.g. the growth of conservative nationalism and Eurosceptic populism in EU countries to construct “national communities” has raised worries about the rule of law in the Union. All those mentioned bring politicisation, more precisely, political factors to the fore in the decision-making process on migration policy and management.

In general, the politicisation of migration emerges mainly from some core factors. On the one side, within party politics, migration has become a controversial subject, with many political parties holding opposing positions and exploiting migration as a key issue to attract public support. Parties from the left to the right have exploited migration as a wedge issue to rally their bases and appeal to certain voter attitudes. On the other side, the advent of populist movements in Europe has exacerbated the politicking of migration. These movements frequently exploit popular anxieties and worries about migration, portraying it as a danger to national security, cultural identity, and economic stability. Media narratives, deception, and populist rhetoric have all influenced public opinion on migration. In some EU member states, populist political groups, particularly some mainstream politicians, interlocutors, and media outlets, capitalise on people’s fears about migration and do everything in their power to keep those fears alive.

The recent development of populist movements across Europe has influenced the EU’s debate on migrant policy. These movements have capitalised on growing public worries about identity, culture, and socio-economic considerations, providing simple solutions to complicated migratory issues. The rise of populist movements has had an impact on EU migration policy, both directly and indirectly. Populist parties across Europe have increasingly gained political influence, particularly in certain member states, where they have actively campaigned for a more restrictive immigration policy. Populist parties across Europe have increasingly gained political influence, particularly in certain member states, where they have actively campaigned for a more restrictive immigration policy.

For instance, in Italy, the League has been a prominent advocate for stricter immigration controls, emphasising the need to curb undocumented migration and prioritise the interests of native Italians. Similarly, in Austria, the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) has pushed for tougher immigration laws and stricter border controls, citing concerns about the perceived threat of cultural dilution and economic strain. Additionally, in Hungary, Fidesz, led by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, has adopted a staunch anti-immigration stance, advocating for the preservation of Hungary’s cultural and ethnic identity by limiting the influx of migrants and refugees. As a result, certain member states have adopted more nationalist and isolationist positions. The emergence of populist movements in the EU has had a considerable impact on migratory discourse and legislation. While these movements have capitalised on valid concerns, it is critical to approach migration policy with sensitivity to prevent oversimplification and discriminatory actions. The EU can navigate the challenges posed by populism while upholding its core values and working toward a future that promotes solidarity and respect for all individuals, regardless of their background, by promoting dialogue, fostering inclusive policies, and addressing the root causes of migration. In addition, Europe should desist from neo-colonial policies that impoverish people in Africa forcing them to take dangerous journeys as a desperate attempt to reach Europe.

Migration and security are two major problems that affect the EU’s political environment. When it comes to resolving these difficulties, member states take a variety of techniques and policies. Migration has been politicised as an EU priority since 2015. With the crisis, EU citizens for the first time regarded immigration as the most pressing issue confronting the EU. Some EU member countries, such as Germany and Sweden, have traditionally had a relatively open stance to migration, emphasising multiculturalism and a dedication to human rights. They have adopted welcoming policies for refugees and migrants, concentrating on help, integration, and equal rights. These countries see migration as a chance for economic development and cultural richness. Security and counter-terrorism member state, such as France, prioritises migration security concerns and emphasise sthe importance of securing national borders, combating terrorism, and addressing potential security threats, while also implementing integration programmes for refugees and asylum seekers. The country tightens immigration regulations, improves intelligence sharing, and supports anti-illegal migration policies. Several EU member states, namely Greece, Italy, and Spain, confront substantial issues due to their physical location and direct vulnerability to migration flows. These countries prioritise border control and collaboration with non-EU countries to manage migration, frequently requesting assistance and burden-sharing from other member states.