Ever since the creation of the Schengen area in 1985, and especially after the 2015–2016 migration crisis, Asylum and Migration has been high on the EU agenda, not only because of the constant migration flows reaching Europe since the early ‘70 s, but also due to its close interconnectedness with the core essence of the process of European integration: the creation of an internal space of free movement. This chapter describes and discusses the debate around Asylum and Migration ahead of the 2024 European Elections by analysing the way in which the European political parties dealt with it in their electoral programmes. In particular, the analysis focuses on four broad issues around which the debate on Asylum and Migration was expected: (1) General approach to Asylum and Migration; (2) Search & Rescue and Frontex; (3) Externalisation of Asylum and Migration policies; (4) Legal migration. The analysis reveals how the “security vs. human rights” approach is the main cleavage arising among the parties’ proposals, emerging consistently throughout the four categories scrutinised, although in different forms and nuances.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

“Another Brick in the Wall”? Asylum and Migration as a Campaign Issue for the 2024 European Elections

  • Michail Schwartz

摘要

Ever since the creation of the Schengen area in 1985, and especially after the 2015–2016 migration crisis, Asylum and Migration has been high on the EU agenda, not only because of the constant migration flows reaching Europe since the early ‘70 s, but also due to its close interconnectedness with the core essence of the process of European integration: the creation of an internal space of free movement. This chapter describes and discusses the debate around Asylum and Migration ahead of the 2024 European Elections by analysing the way in which the European political parties dealt with it in their electoral programmes. In particular, the analysis focuses on four broad issues around which the debate on Asylum and Migration was expected: (1) General approach to Asylum and Migration; (2) Search & Rescue and Frontex; (3) Externalisation of Asylum and Migration policies; (4) Legal migration. The analysis reveals how the “security vs. human rights” approach is the main cleavage arising among the parties’ proposals, emerging consistently throughout the four categories scrutinised, although in different forms and nuances.