As the European Union braces for the upcoming Parliament elections, the bitterly contested issue of migration is front and centre. It’s an issue linked to pertinent security questions and the underlying visions different political families have on the future of the EU. It has shaped political discourse across the continent and is central to current campaigns. Although the Parliament adopted the EU’s new migration and asylum package in a series of hard fought votes in April, European political families are adopting distinct stances, reflecting their ideological orientations and visions for the future of Europe.
From securing borders to championing human rights, the approaches vary widely. But amidst these diverging paths, could there be room for some unexpected alliances? Let’s take a closer look at the positions of major political groups.
EPP’s balancing act: securing borders while upholding values
The Group of the European People’s Party (EPP) adopts a nuanced position on migration, balancing the reinforcement of EU borders with humane treatment of refugees and migrants. Advocated by Manfred Weber, this strategy aims to ensure security and social cohesion within EU states while upholding the EU’s core values of human rights and dignity. The approach suggests strengthening Frontex, the EU’s border agency, for border security and streamlining asylum processes, seeking to address public concerns over security and integration, while also maintaining the EU’s image as a protector of human rights.
This stance is poised to attract a diverse voter base, appealing particularly to centrist and right-leaning voters concerned about national security and social services, without alienating those who value the EU’s humanitarian obligations. However, it faces challenges in balancing strict border controls with efficient and fair asylum procedures, risking criticism for either compromising on security or neglecting humanitarian principles. The EPP’s approach reflects an attempt to reconcile conflicting interests within the migration debate.
S&D: a call for solidarity and fairness in migration
The Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) advocates for a unified and empathetic approach to migration, emphasising solidarity and shared responsibility among EU member states. S&D parliamentary group leader Iratxe García Pérez underscores the importance of collective action in managing migration effectively, advocating for the reform of the Dublin Regulation to ensure an equitable distribution of asylum seekers among member states. The S&D’s push for the integration of refugees into European societies highlights its dedication to principles of social justice and equality, aiming to foster a more inclusive and cohesive Europe.
This approach is designed to resonate with voters who prioritise humanitarian values and the principles of fairness and cooperation in EU policy-making. By focusing on solidarity and the fair treatment of refugees, the S&D positions itself as a champion of a compassionate Europe, appealing to a left-leaning electorate that values social justice and the protection of human rights. The party’s stance seeks to bridge divides and encourage a collective European effort in addressing the complexities of migration, highlighting the potential for policy reform and greater societal integration.
ALDE: championing liberal principles in migration management
The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Party (ALDE) champions a liberal approach to migration, focusing on the creation of a common asylum system and establishing legal migration pathways. Guy Verhofstadt, a historic figure within ALDE, articulates the importance of such initiatives, asserting they are key to addressing migration challenges while staying true to liberal principles and enhancing societal prosperity. However Mark Rutte, the outgoing liberal Dutch prime minister, has been associated with the recent EU policy of paying North African states to prevent and manage migration on the EU’s behalf. The ALDE platform emphasises migration’s potential benefits to European societies, advocating for policies that are both practical and respectful of human rights.
ALDE’s position aims to appeal to a centrist and liberal voter base that values both the practical benefits of managed migration and the ethical imperative of human rights. By proposing legal pathways for migrants and a unified asylum system, ALDE seeks to present a solution that balances the need for security and order with compassion and respect for individual dignity. This approach reflects a belief in the positive role of migration in economic and cultural enrichment, targeting voters who prioritise forward-looking and humane policies in the European migration discourse.
ECR: emphasising national autonomy in migration decisions
The European Conservatives and Reformists Party (ECR) stands firm on the principle of national sovereignty in the realm of migration, advocating for individual member states to dictate their own migration policies. It rejects the imposition of obligations on all member states to share the burden either by taking in refugees, or by paying or assisting EU partners to do so. Ryszard Legutko articulates this stance, critiquing the EU’s uniform approach to migration as ineffective and underscoring the need for states to exercise autonomy in these decisions. This perspective champions stricter immigration controls and the establishment of bilateral agreements on migration and repatriation, positioning national security and interests as paramount.
This approach is tailored to appeal to conservative and right-leaning voters who prioritise national sovereignty and are sceptical of EU-wide mandates on migration. The ECR’s advocacy for more rigid border controls and the flexibility for nations to engage in direct negotiations on migration issues resonates with constituents concerned about national identity and security. By emphasising the importance of each state’s right to govern its migration policy, the ECR seeks to attract voters who favour a more decentralised approach to European governance, particularly in areas as sensitive and complex as migration.
ID: asserting national sovereignty in migration control
The Identity and Democracy Party (ID) takes a hardline stance on migration, foregrounding national sovereignty and the strengthening of border controls as essential to ensuring citizen safety. Matteo Salvini, a leading figure in the ID, encapsulates this approach with a focus on the paramount importance of security and the necessity for nations to exercise full control over their borders. By calling for reduced immigration levels and the bolstering of the EU’s external borders, the ID positions itself in opposition to the prevailing EU migration policies, signalling a deep-rooted scepticism towards the Union’s handling of migration issues.
This stance is designed to resonate with voters who hold national security and sovereignty as their top priorities, appealing particularly to the right-wing electorate disillusioned with the EU’s approach to migration. The ID’s emphasis on stringent border controls and a more restrictive immigration policy targets those concerned about the impacts of immigration on national identity and security. By advocating for stronger national discretion in migration matters, the ID aims to attract voters who are critical of supranational governance and favour a more nation-centric approach to migration management.
The Left: pushing for inclusive and fair migration policies
The Party of the European Left emphasises the socio-economic dimensions of migration, advocating for policies that not only facilitate but also normalise the inclusion of migrants into European societies. They call for the dismantling of barriers to migration and the implementation of fair asylum processes, aiming to ensure that migration policies are inclusive and equitable.
The Left’s strong stance on social justice and migration attracts voters who are disillusioned with traditional migration policies that they see as unfair or discriminatory. This includes younger voters, activists, and community organisers who prioritise human rights and are looking for policies that offer genuine inclusivity and opportunity for all, regardless of their origin.
The Greens: advocating for sustainable and humane migration policies
The European Green Party integrates environmental concerns with migration policies, focusing on the impacts of climate change as a driver of migration. Their manifesto promotes sustainable development practices both within and outside EU borders to address the root causes of forced migration. Additionally, they advocate for humane treatment of migrants and refugees, proposing robust integration programs that also focus on environmental sustainability.
It’s an approach that could resonate particularly with environmentally conscious voters who understand the nexus between global warming and forced migration. Younger, progressive voters, including millennials and Gen Z, are especially supportive of such holistic approaches that combine climate action with human rights. These voters are often urban, educated, and deeply concerned about global equity and sustainability.
Potential alliances: finding common ground
Interestingly, the migration debate might just be the crucible for some unlikely alliances. The recent passage of a landmark migration bill by the EP, which introduces significant reforms poised to reshape the EU’s approach to migration and asylum, is a good case to better understand where alliances may unfold. The bill garnered broad support from centrist forces within the EU, including social democrats, liberals, and mainstream conservatives, who view it as a balanced compromise that respects the right to asylum while tightening border controls. This coalition underscores a centrist pivot in EU politics, aiming to address voter concerns about migration post-pandemic while upholding fundamental human rights.
So, while the EPP and S&D stand on seemingly opposite ends of the spectrum, their shared emphasis on a balanced, humane approach to migration could serve as a bridge for cooperation. Both parties might find common ground in crafting policies that combine security with solidarity, potentially working together to reform the Dublin Regulation and enhance the EU’s asylum system. Most of their members voted in favour of the migration and asylum package in Parliament.
On the other hand, the ID and ECR, with their strong emphasis on national sovereignty and stricter migration controls, could deepen their collaboration despite their rivalry. Mutual interest in empowering nation-states to manage their borders could lead to joint initiatives aimed at reforming the EU’s migration framework to allow for greater autonomy. Interestingly, some of the mainstream conservatives from Central and Eastern Europe are hostile to the part of the policy that will see migrants distributed across the EU. Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland, a conservative, said his country would not accept relocated migrants under the new policy.
This may foreshadow how a centrist party like the EPP could tacitly align with ID and ECR to vote for tougher controls and more national powers in the future. The support from centrist parties suggests a strategic alignment that could influence voter behaviour, particularly among moderate electorates who favour pragmatic solutions to migration.
Migration as a key issue during (and beyond) EU elections
The EP elections offer a critical juncture for addressing migration issues, with each political family presenting a distinct vision for the future. From calls for solidarity and fairness to demands for sovereignty and security, the debate around migration underscores the diverse perspectives within the EU. For political professionals, understanding these positions is essential for engaging in the broader discourse on Europe’s future, providing valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
As the EU moves towards the elections, the positions of these families will undoubtedly continue to influence the policy landscape, offering a glimpse into the potential direction of the EU in the coming years.
