logo
Denmark's migration reset sets stage for EU-wide rethink

Denmark's migration reset sets stage for EU-wide rethink

Euronewsa day ago
When it comes to migration, Denmark can barely hide its sense of vindication.
"What has been mainstream among our populations for quite many years is now mainstream for many of us politicians as well," Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said earlier this month, speaking at the European Parliament in Strasbourg.
"Finally."
Her minister for immigration, Kaare Dybvad, feels equally triumphant.
"I remember when I started in this post three years ago, the Austrian minister was the only one who supported these notions," Dybvad told Euronews in an interview.
"Now it seems there are a lot more countries that have rallied around the notion that we should get democratic control of the migrant flows."
For years, Denmark was considered the European Union's black sheep of migration policy. In the aftermath of the 2015-2016 migration crisis, the country began adopting increasingly restrictive rules to deter arrivals and hinder access to legal safeguards, a decision powered by its opt-out clause from the EU asylum framework.
In 2019, Denmark approved a "paradigm shift" law that made temporary protection for refugees the new norm. The focus turned to self-sufficiency to stimulate integration in the labour market and reduce welfare dependency. Permanent residence was still available, but subject to strict criteria on full-time, long-lasting employment.
By limiting the duration of asylum, Danish authorities made it easier to check whether the grounds of protection were still applicable and, if not, whether deportation was feasible.
Denmark became the first European nation to declare parts of Syria as "safe", alleging the situation on the ground had "improved significantly". At that time, the designation, which saw the residence permits of hundreds of Syrian refugees revoked, proved extremely controversial and made international headlines.
A similar outcry occurred in 2021 when Denmark signed a memorandum of understanding with Rwanda. Under the deal, Denmark would transfer asylum seekers to a reception centre in the African nation to wait for the examination of their applications.
It was the first time that an EU member state openly pursued an outsourcing strategy. The European Commission, which had harshly criticised a similar scheme between the United Kingdom and Rwanda, reserved its right to take legal action.
"External processing of asylum applications raises fundamental questions about both access to asylum procedures but also effective access to protection in line with the requirements of international law," a Commission spokesperson said in 2022.
A year later, Denmark ditched the plan – but retained the principle. Instead of pursuing outsourcing at a national level, the country would aim higher: the European dimension.
From black sheep to shepherd
The Danish bet on the European level did not immediately resonate.
The bloc was then negotiating the New Pact of Migration and Asylum, a comprehensive reform aimed at establishing common, predictable rules for the reception and distribution of asylum seekers. The talks were bitter and intense, and laid bare the old-age divisions between the South and the North. At times, the Pact seemed doomed to fail.
In the end, member states recognised the value of having collective legislation to deal with a cross-border challenge like irregular migration. The five interlinked laws under the Pact were adopted on 14 May 2024, with only Poland and Hungary voting against.
The moment was hailed as a historic breakthrough.
But for Copenhagen, it was not enough. Two days after the vote, Denmark published a letter co-signed by Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland and Romania.
In the document, the 15-strong group advocated, in no uncertain terms, the outsourcing of asylum procedures, including by setting up a "return hub mechanism" where "returnees could be transferred to while waiting their final removal".
The letter made special mention of Italy's initiative to build centres in Albania to process asylum claims of migrants rescued in high waters.
It was a show of force and a declaration of intent that Brussels could no longer ignore. The conversation quickly shifted from the Pact to so-called "innovative solutions".
In October, the lobbying paid its greatest dividend when Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, endorsed the idea of building deportation centres on foreign soil, a clean break from the executive's traditional thinking.
Soon after her re-election, the Commission presented a draft regulation that would enable member states to strike arrangements with nations outside the bloc to transfer rejected asylum seekers in return for financial incentives.
By coincidence, the law is primed for negotiations just as Denmark assumes the six-month presidency of the EU Council. The country has underscored its intention to reach a political deal on the file before the end of the year.
Another key priority is the review of the "safe third country" concept, which would facilitate the relocation of asylum seekers beyond European borders.
"We want to move the migration agenda forward," Lars Løkke Rasmussen, Denmark's foreign minister, said earlier this month in a briefing with journalists in Aarhus.
"It's well known we have a rather tough policy towards illegal migration, and we have proven to be pretty successful," he added.
Pushing the law
As it happens, Copenhagen has more-than-decent chances of success: the 15-country group that backed the 2024 letter has grown over time and today represents a decisive majority. Germany joined shortly after its new federal chancellor, Friedrich Merz, came into office. Merz has praised Denmark's migration policy as "truly exemplary".
The speed at which things are moving has alarmed humanitarian organisations, who warn that outsourcing will waste taxpayers' money and fuel human suffering.
"Denmark's model of migration control is being advertised as the gold standard and worthy of imitation because it aims to deter asylum-seekers from coming," said Céline Mias, EU director at the Danish Refugee Council (DRC).
"The current trend of European nations focusing on deterrence mechanisms and externalising asylum processes is not only ethically questionable, often violating the principle of non-refoulement, but also demonstrably ineffective in the long run."
At any rate, outsourcing remains a largely abstract concept.
Neither Denmark, its allies nor the European Commission have yet offered details on what these external facilities might look like in practice. There has been no financial estimation, no logistical blueprint and, crucially, no suggested destination.
The Italian-Albanian protocol, which von der Leyen hailed as a pioneering model from which the bloc could draw lessons, has fallen well below the five-digit figure of asylum seekers originally announced. With a reported price tag of €74.2 million, the centres currently host a few hundred migrants under deportation order.
Danish officials admit they have not yet conducted an assessment to flesh out the project of "return hubs", but insist any agreement with a non-EU country should be designed as a mutually beneficial partnership and comply with international law and fundamental rights, a high standard that might complicate the selection process.
Given the divisive nature of outsourcing, the scheme is expected to be pursued by a "coalition of the willing" with the political and potentially financial support of Brussels.
A progressive spin
Denmark's approach to migration comes with an ideological twist.
Instead of being spearheaded by a right-wing government, as is generally the case in Europe, the stringent policy is enthusiastically promoted by the Social Democrats.
The party defends many of the ideas common in the European left, such as climate action, gender equality, LGBTQ rights and a strong welfare state. But on migration, it has chosen to deviate sharply from the progressive agenda and adopt a hard line that raises eyebrows among socialists and prompts cheers among conservatives.
The taboo-breaking fusion has played in Frederiksen's favour. The prime minister is one of the three socialists who have managed to survive the recent right-wing shift and retain their seat in the European Council. The other two are Malta's Robert Abela, who supports outsourcing, and Spain's Pedro Sánchez, who opposes it.
"We need to tackle the migratory phenomenon by thinking about the future generations and not the future elections," Sánchez said last year, arguing a welcoming approach was necessary to address Europe's demographic crisis and ensure economic prosperity.
But Frederiksen and her ministers are convinced that their method is the only viable option for centre-left politicians to stay in power and fend off the advance of hard-right forces, which pose a direct threat to their progressive beliefs.
Kaare Dybvad, Denmark's minister for immigration, believes other social democratic parties should reframe the hot-button issue by taking their cue from Copenhagen.
"Migration is often a burden for the constituents. Working-class communities have taken the largest part of the task of integrating people into local communities and the labour market," Dybvad told Euronews.
"And therefore, if you're a party that is representing low-skilled, low-paid people, then you should be quite restrictive around migration."
Asked if he felt vindicated by Europe's change of heart, the minister said: "I'm just happy that we have a lot more discussions on these matters."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Gloomy times ahead for European political advertising
Gloomy times ahead for European political advertising

Euronews

time12 minutes ago

  • Euronews

Gloomy times ahead for European political advertising

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews. Last week, Meta announced that it will discontinue all political, electoral, and social issue advertising on its platforms in response to a European Union regulation that is set to take effect in October 2025. Google made a similar announcement in November 2024, signaling a major shift in the digital advertising landscape for political campaigns across Europe. The Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising (TTPA), like many well-intentioned regulations, set out to address real challenges, such as foreign interference in European elections and the need to harmonise fragmented political advertising rules. However, as it developed, its scope expanded significantly, leading to unintended consequences – not theoretical or distant ones, but immediate and tangible impacts affecting a broad range of actors. In practice, this means that political parties, candidates, and policy-focused organisations (such as think tanks, non-governmental organisations, and civil society groups) will no longer be able to use sponsored, personalised advertisements on Google and Meta platforms to reach their audiences starting in October. This restriction applies not only during election periods but also in any instance where the intent is to influence legislative or regulatory outcomes at the EU, national, or even regional level. Why the platforms opted out The platforms have decided to opt out because the TTPA outlines strict obligations that result not only in high compliance costs, but also in the need to disclose many practices to a broad range of people – while also minimising the effectiveness of advertising per se. The TTPA provisions requiring political ads to carry so-called 'transparency labels' are not the issue – many EU member states already require candidates to disclose sponsorship. Nor are the requirements to block sponsored campaigns from third countries during the three months prior to elections; in today's context, that may be a strict but necessary measure. What is problematic is that these 'transparency labels' must be accompanied by 'easily retrievable transparency notes,' which would disclose not only the sponsor (fair), and the election or referendum to which they are linked (also fair), but also the amounts paid and the use of targeting techniques. Advertising platforms would also be required to disclose their internal advertising policies and retain and share this information for seven years (Article 19, TTPA). Targeted advertising has long been on the European Commission's agenda, and with the TTPA, it becomes a reality, specifically under Article 18. Targeted political ads will only be allowed if users give separate, explicit consent for their data to be used for political advertising (consent that can be withdrawn or modified at any time). Moreover, personalised advertising would be de facto abolished, as the use of personal data, such as ethnic origin or political opinions, is prohibited for profiling and targeting purposes. In other words, users would be shown a broad mix of ads, including ones that do not align with their political views. As a result, political candidates or NGOs will likely have to spend more to reach their intended audience, as they'll need to target wider, less specific demographics. Additional obligations for Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) include record-keeping requirements (Article 9) and the obligation to share those records with a broad range of stakeholders – journalists, civil society organisations, researchers, and even political competitors of those who ordered sponsored advertising (Article 17). What civil society groups and EU countries may have overlooked What many civil society groups and EU member states may have overlooked is that the TTPA's definition of political advertising extends far beyond electoral campaigns. According to Article 3, section 2, it also applies to any advertisement 'designed to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, voting behaviour or a legislative or regulatory process, at Union, national, regional or local level'. In other words, any advertisement – from environmental groups, civil society organisations, or industry representatives – intended to support or oppose legislation or regulation, whether at the EU, national, or even municipal level, falls under the scope of the TTPA. There is a limited exemption under Article 18, which allows NGOs to communicate with existing subscribers, members, or former members without being subject to the regulation – but, in practice, this is a minor exemption, limiting civil society groups from reaching new audiences. Notably, back in March 2024, only digitally advanced Estonia and Austria abstained from the vote on the TTPA (with Hungary voting against), possibly anticipating the unintended consequences now beginning to emerge. What these changes mean for Europe Political candidates and advocacy organisations will likely be forced to shift toward traditional media campaigns, which are typically more expensive and less efficient. Reaching new audiences will become more complicated, and many will need to rely on organic growth or find workarounds to expand their user base – without promoting issue-specific content through paid ads. Meanwhile, the actors that often pose the greatest security risks to Europe – those with opaque funding and questionable ties to third countries – normally already possess large user databases and employ flexible, tech-savvy outreach strategies. These include leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) tools and influencers with established followings, allowing them to continue reaching European audiences with little disruption.

Syria wants Russia 'by our side,' foreign minister says in Moscow
Syria wants Russia 'by our side,' foreign minister says in Moscow

Euronews

time11 hours ago

  • Euronews

Syria wants Russia 'by our side,' foreign minister says in Moscow

Syria's top diplomat said Damascus wants Moscow "by our side" on the first visit to Russia by a member of the new government since former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was ousted in a rebel offensive late last year. Russian President Vladimir Putin hosted Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani in the Kremlin on Thursday, according to Syrian news agency SANA, a meeting that underlined the Kremlin's desire to establish working ties with the country's new leadership. Before the talks with Putin, al-Shibani met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who emphasised that the Russian authorities "sincerely wish that the Syrian people, with whom we have long-standing friendship, overcome all existing challenges and completely normalise the situation." "The current period is full of various challenges and threats, but it is also an opportunity to build a united and strong Syria," Al-Shibani said. Al-Assad was an ally of Russia and Moscow's scorched-earth intervention in support of him a decade ago turned the tide of Syria's civil war and kept al-Assad in his seat until his swift demise in December. Russia, which has focused on the fighting in Ukraine and kept only a small military contingent in Syria, didn't try to counter the rebel offensive but sheltered al-Assad after he fled the country. Without naming al-Assad, al-Shibani called on Russia to support the country's "transitional justice" process and said Syria has formed a committee to review past agreements with Russia. Despite having been on opposite sides of the battle lines during the civil war, the new rulers in Damascus, headed by interim President Ahmed al-Sharra, have taken a pragmatic approach to relations with Moscow. A Russian delegation visited Damascus in January and the following month Putin had a call with al-Sharaa that the Kremlin described as "constructive and business-like." Russia has retained presence at its air and naval bases on the Syrian coast and the Kremlin has voiced hope for negotiating a deal to keep the outposts. Moscow also has reportedly sent oil shipments to Syria. Syria's Defence Minister Murhaf Abu Qasra accompanied al-Shibani on his visit to Moscow and met his Russian counterpart Andrei Belousov. They discussed "cooperation between defence ministries and the situation in the Middle East," the Russian Defence Ministry said. Speaking to reporters after the talks on Thursday, Lavrov thanked "Syrian colleagues for the steps they're taking to ensure the safety of Russian citizens and Russian facilities" in Syria. "We reaffirmed our support for the preservation of the unity, territorial integrity and independence of the Syrian Arab Republic and are ready to provide the Syrian people with all possible assistance in post-conflict reconstruction. We agreed that we will continue our dialogue on these issues," Lavrov said. Al-Sharaa has thanked Russia for its "strong position in rejecting Israeli strikes and repeated violations of Syrian sovereignty" after Israel intervened in clashes between Syrian government forces and armed groups from the Druze minority earlier this month. Al-Shibani on Thursday criticized Israel's "interference in internal affairs" and said it complicates efforts to resolve conflicts between different communities in Syria.

Trump announces 90-day negotiating period on trade with Mexico
Trump announces 90-day negotiating period on trade with Mexico

Euronews

time12 hours ago

  • Euronews

Trump announces 90-day negotiating period on trade with Mexico

The United States will enter a 90-day negotiating period with Mexico over trade as 25% tariff rates stay in place, part of the rush of trade activity on Thursday before President Donald Trump plans to impose a broad set of global levies starting on Friday. Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that his phone conversation with Mexican leader Claudia Sheinbaum was "very successful in that, more and more, we are getting to know and understand each other." The Republican president had threatened tariffs of 30% on goods from Mexico in a July letter, something that Sheinbaum said Mexico can now stave off for the next three months. "We avoided the tariff increase announced for tomorrow and we got 90 days to build a long-term agreement through dialogue," Sheinbaum wrote on X. The leaders' morning call came at a moment of pressure and uncertainty for the world economy. Nations are scrambling to finalise the outlines of a trade framework with Trump in order to avoid him imposing higher tariff rates that could upend economies and governments. Trump reached a deal with South Korea on Wednesday and earlier with the European Union, Japan, Indonesia and the Philippines. His commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, said on Fox News' "Hannity" programme that there were agreements with Cambodia and Thailand after they had agreed to a ceasefire to their border conflict. Among those uncertain about their trade status are Switzerland and Norway. Norwegian Finance Minister Jens Stoltenberg said it was "completely uncertain" whether a deal would be completed before Trump's deadline. But even the public announcement of a deal can offer scant reassurance for an American trading partner. EU officials are waiting to complete a crucial document outlining how the framework to tax imported autos and other goods from the 27-member state bloc would operate. Trump had announced a deal on Sunday while he was in Scotland. "The US has made these commitments. Now it's up to the US to implement them. The ball is in their court," EU commission spokesman Olof Gill said. The document would not be legally binding. Trump said as part of the agreement with Mexico that goods imported into the US would continue to face a 25% tariff that he has ostensibly linked to fentanyl trafficking. He said autos would face a 25% tariff, while copper, aluminium and steel would be taxed at 50% during the negotiating period. He said Mexico would end its "Non Tariff Trade Barriers," but he didn't provide specifics. Some goods continue to be protected from tariffs by the 2020 US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which Trump negotiated during his first term. But Trump appeared to have soured on that deal, which is up for renegotiation next year. One of his first significant moves as president was to tariff goods from both Mexico and Canada earlier this year. US Census Bureau figures show that the US ran a $171.5 billion (€149 billion) trade imbalance with Mexico last year. That means the US bought more goods from Mexico than it sold to the country. The imbalance with Mexico has grown in the aftermath of the USMCA as it was only $63.3 billion (€55 billion) in 2016, the year before Trump started his first term in office. Besides addressing fentanyl trafficking, Trump has made it a goal to close the trade gap.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store