Attempts by European centre parties to outflank the right on migration could be misguided

Centrists like Mette Frederiksen are talking tough on migration. But adopting right-wing policy may make it harder to manage the issue.

Expert comment Published 21 May 2024 3 minute READ

Michelle Pace

Associate Fellow, Europe Programme

In an interview with the Financial Times a few months ago, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen argued that ‘the left’ in Europe should be tougher on migration, suggesting that her robust migration stance at home is a guaranteed pan-European vote-winner.

Indeed on 6 May, at an international conference on migration hosted by her government in Copenhagen, the current ‘deeply dysfunctional’ EU asylum system was high on the agenda. 

Frederiksen’s insistence on this issue is due to an overwhelming right-wing surge expected in June’s European elections’ results. Her strategy at home has been to adopt the policies of the right wing Danish People’s Party – which have indeed won votes for her centre-left Social Democratic Party. (Frederiksen’s current government coalition, formed in December 2022, bridges the left-right divide, being composed of the Social Democrats, the Liberals and the Moderates – breaking the traditional left-right divide for the first time in over four decades). 

But can Europe’s mainstream parties of the centre-left replicate Frederiksen’s electoral success, in a context of multiple crises for progressive, left politics across the region? And how would that affect European cooperation on dealing with migration issues? 

European voters and migration

Voting for the European Parliament in June constitutes a defining moment for the EU’s future political direction.

Europe is an ageing continent, and a new parliament will need to carefully balance Europe’s economic need for more workers with the obligation to sustain trust with voters on how it manages migration and asylum.

The EU’s statistics agency – Eurostat – reported that the number of asylum applications had risen steadily in recent years, reaching 1,048,900 in 2023. And, since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, around 4.2 million Ukrainian refugees have been accommodated in the bloc. 

In April 2024, the EU adopted a ‘new’ common migration pact primarily intended to create a stronger bulwark around European countries. It aims to reduce the number of newly arrived asylum seekers, speed up asylum procedures and establish processing centres outside the EU.

Even those who are most concerned about migration are unlikely to believe mainstream parties that adopt far-right policies.

However, according to an ECFR poll – conducted during January 2024 across 12 EU countries – migration is not as central a policy issue for those voting in European Parliament elections as policymakers like Frederiksen assume. 

The ECFR poll suggests that the political centrality of immigration does not stem from the fact that it is Europe’s most acute crisis in the eyes of its inhabitants, but from right-wing parties’ success in making it a symbol of the EU’s failures. Even those who are most concerned about migration are unlikely to believe mainstream parties that adopt far right policies.

What the poll does indicate is that voters do hold strong beliefs about their leaders’ motivations. In other words, what will win votes during the EP June 2024 elections is ‘who speaks and not what is said’. This June’s EP election is thus about personalities. 

Frederiksen is rumoured to be a likely candidate for the post of president of the European Council: it could be that her personality has as much an impact on voters’ preferences as her migration policies. 

Hindering cooperation

The common migration pact rests on a logic of voluntary cooperation between countries: it features no new and legally binding obligations on EU member states. 

There is no guarantee that adopting a hard line migration stance will allow even centre-right European political parties to form a stable majority on this issue in the European Parliament.

This reflects a legal fact: decision-making power on immigration policy rests with member states, not with the European Parliament. 

Individual countries decide on short-or long-term residency permits, employment and education policies, citizenship eligibility criteria, family reunification, asylum status, eligibility for deportation to a safe country of return, and other issues. 

But rules differ across the member states, incentivizing would-be migrants to relocate to more welcoming jurisdictions. Centrist and hard right parliamentary groups who agree on significantly restricting immigration and limiting the EU’s authority on migration policy may aggravate this situation. And introducing more restrictive domestic policies would undermine the cooperation the pact requires to be effective.

Meanwhile there is no guarantee that adopting a hard line migration stance will allow even centre right European political parties to form a stable majority on this issue in the European Parliament. 

The centre right European People’s Party (EPP), and groups further to the right including Identity and Democracy (ID) and the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) are unambiguously divided on other crucial European policy issues. For example, while the Swedish Democrats and the Finns Party have softened their anti-European stance, Germany’s AfD still calls for Germany’s exit from the EU. 

Meanwhile, on 4 May leaders from most social democracies in Europe signed the Berlin Democracy Declaration of the Party of European Socialists (PES), which pledged never to collaborate with the ECR or ID in the European Parliament. Frederiksen, whose party is a member of the PES, was not a signatory. 

Elevating hard-line migration policy to the mainstream will undoubtedly undermine the effectiveness of the EU’s Migration Pact.

By seeking to outflank right parties on migration policy, Frederiksen has enjoyed short-term domestic electoral success. But, in doing so, she has created division within the PES. 

And, even if centre right European political parties – like the EPP – follow her lead, they would still likely find it hard to form stable majorities in a new European Parliament with far right counterparts. 

In any case, elevating hard-line migration policy to the mainstream will undoubtedly undermine the effectiveness of the EU’s migration pact, as countries diverge on national migration regimes and drive division in its implementation.

It would seem wiser if centrist parties avoid being dragged right on migration by fear of a right-wing surge and instead concentrate on demonstrating the leadership that voters in June’s elections will recognize.