Moderate European Parties Reaping Political Costs Over Immigration Policies

Moderate European parties face a fast-moving reckoning on immigration as 2024–2025 brings a sharp shift to the right in both talk and law across the continent. With far-right parties rising in polls and seats, mainstream leaders are hardening their positions, backing tighter borders, faster deportations, and new limits on asylum. The turn is clearest in Germany, Italy, Greece, and France, while Spain is testing a more open path. The European Union’s new Pact on Migration and Asylum, adopted in May 2024 and due to apply from 2026, now anchors this change and gives capitals a common tool to enforce it.

Political pressures and public mood

Across Europe, public frustration over asylum backlogs, irregular crossings, and low return rates is driving the political mood. As of August 27, 2025, Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) leads national polls, forcing rivals to compete on tougher ground. Similar pressure is visible in France, the United Kingdom, and Romania.

Center-right and center-left parties are narrowing the gap with the far-right on immigration by combining:

• Stricter controls at borders and on benefits
• Selective work visas and limited humanitarian programs
• Faster asylum procedures and tougher enforcement

Immigration, once managed through cautious compromises, has become a daily political battleground that shapes coalition talks, budgets, and foreign policy.

What the EU pact changes

The EU pact sets the tone and introduces several major shifts:

• Expanded border screening and faster initial processing
• Speeded asylum decisions for some cases
• Increased detention capacity at external frontiers
• Stronger cooperation and pressure to improve returns

It also creates a solidarity system requiring member states to share responsibility. Options include:

• Accepting a set number of asylum seekers each year
• Paying instead of taking people
• Sending staff, transport, or equipment

This is the most sweeping migration deal since the 2015–2016 crisis. Supporters say it aims to end deadlock; critics warn of legal risks around access to protection and the danger of refoulement if procedures move too fast or detention expands without safeguards.

Important: The pact is due to apply from 2026, but many national leaders are enacting measures now.

National responses: examples and trends

Germany
– The CDU leads the government and promises tighter border checks, reduced social benefits for non-residents, and a stronger role for national law in migration control.
– The AfD surge pressures rivals toward even tougher curbs on family reunification and stricter enforcement near borders.
– Proposed measures will face legal review at German and EU levels.

Italy
– The government is outsourcing parts of asylum processing to Albania, planning to handle up to 36,000 people a year in offshore centers.
– Legal setbacks have already forced some returns to Italy; one site is being converted into a repatriation hub.
– Critics warn of oversight gaps and abuse; supporters argue the plan will cut smuggling and ease pressure on coasts.

Greece
– In July 2025, Greece announced it would stop processing asylum claims from North Africa—a sweeping national bar likely to trigger legal tests on EU and international law.

Spain
– Proposes to regularize 300,000 undocumented people per year for three years to fill labor shortages.
– Moving unaccompanied children from the Canary Islands to the mainland.
– Spain’s model tests whether large-scale regularization paired with strict labor checks can win public support.

Numbers, economics, and demographics

Key data points underlying the politics:

• Only 19% of people ordered to leave the EU actually depart (estimate cited by leaders).
• Almost 30 million immigrants moved to Europe in the last decade.
• Irregular arrivals to Europe fell by about 40% in 2024 compared with 2023.
• Global displacement reached a record 122.6 million people by mid-2024.

Economic context:
– Europe is aging, and many sectors—from care to construction—need workers.
– Employers and business groups may push back against overly restrictive work-visa cuts if labor shortages persist.
– Spain’s proposed regularization is a direct response to labor needs in agriculture, care, and tourism.

The legal and human-rights debate

Rights groups and legal experts warn of several critical risks:

• Fast-track procedures and expanded detention can block fair hearings and increase the risk of refoulement.
• Outsourcing asylum processing (e.g., Italy-Albania) raises oversight and safety questions.
• Courts have already intervened in some offshore cases, highlighting gaps in legal protection.

Potential negative outcomes include:
– Wrongful denials and arbitrary detention
– Pushing migrants onto more dangerous routes
– Increased abuses in transit countries

The solidarity mechanism and implementation details

Under the pact’s solidarity mechanism, states can:

• Accept up to 30,000 asylum seekers a year,
• Or pay €20,000 per applicant instead,
• Or contribute staff, transport, or equipment.

Additional tools include a central database and common screening rules intended to reduce “asylum shopping” and improve tracking across borders. Success will depend on:

• Funding
• Training
• Monitoring and oversight
• Political will and court outcomes

Political dynamics and risks of “Trumpization”

The debate’s tone has shifted sharply. Observers note a trend sometimes labeled the “Trumpization” of Europe’s immigration debate—sharper language, harder lines, and a strong focus on deterrence. Examples:

• France’s Prime Minister François Bayrou using alarmist migration language
• CDU leader Friedrich Merz moving closer to AfD positions

Consequences:
– Short-term political gains but deeper polarization
– Harder cross-party compromise
– Local tensions and clashes (e.g., Torre Pacheco, Spain in July 2025)

Local impacts and capacity needs

Public sentiment varies by place:

• Border regions request more reception and policing support.
• Big cities emphasize work permits and housing funding.
• Rural towns need help with schools and clinics when arrivals rise.

Local leaders want predictable budgets rather than emergency grants. Implementation requires:

• Training for police and border guards
• Expanded reception centers with medical care
• More immigration judges and legal counsel
• Sufficient funding for integration services (language, housing, job training)

Practical questions for migrants, families, employers

• Faster border screening may mean less time to explain claims.
• Expanded detention can create long limbo periods.
• Higher bars for protection or wider safe-third-country lists will increase rejections.
• Narrow legal work routes push people toward risky crossings.
• Employers need clearer and faster work-permit routes to avoid dependence on irregular labor.

Community groups call for:
– Legal counsel for asylum-seekers
– Language and integration programs
– Local funding for reception and social services

Political outlook and the road ahead

The politics remain fluid and contingent:

• If jobs stay open and birth rates stay low, pressure to open legal routes will grow.
• If border numbers spike, calls for crackdowns will rise.
• Upcoming elections will test voter appetite for either approach.

Possible trajectories:
1. Copy Spain’s regularization model if it succeeds in practice.
2. More offshoring if Italy’s approach appears effective.
3. Legal pushbacks shaping policy via courts and procedural changes.

The EU pact aims to create a shared baseline, but national choices will shape human realities.

Final assessment and stakes

Both sides agree the status quo failed: backlogs grew and return rates were low. The central question for moderate parties is whether stricter tools will:

• Fix the system by delivering fair, fast, and lawful outcomes customers can see, or
• Trap moderates into continually moving rightward to match far-right demands.

Key takeaway: The next phase is about delivery—staff, systems, and fair procedures will determine whether the laws on paper actually improve outcomes or exacerbate legal and human-rights risks.

For official documents and further EU guidance, see the European Commission’s Migration and Home Affairs page for the New Pact: https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/new-pact-migration-and-asylum_en