dw.com
Post-2015 Migrant Influx Reshapes European Politics and Public Opinion
Following Angela Merkel's 2015 declaration "Wir schaffen das!" (We can do it!), over 1 million asylum seekers arrived in Germany in 2015-2016, triggering a surge in asylum applications across the EU and significantly impacting European politics and public opinion.
- How has the issue of migration influenced European politics and elections?
- Migration became a dominant issue in national and European elections, particularly since 2015. In the 2024 European Parliament elections, 24% of respondents ranked migration as a top priority. The issue significantly impacted elections in countries where right-wing populist parties gained traction, such as Austria, the Netherlands, and Germany, often framing migration as a cause of various societal problems.
- What was the immediate impact of Germany's open-door policy for refugees in 2015?
- The 2015-2016 influx of over 1 million asylum seekers into Germany, primarily from Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, led to a sharp rise in asylum applications across the EU, exceeding 1.2 million in 2015 and 1.5 million in 2016. Germany became the main destination for asylum seekers within the EU, a position it held until 2025, when it was reportedly overtaken by France.
- What are the long-term consequences of the increased migration and how is the EU responding?
- The EU is responding to persistent strain on asylum systems and increased anti-immigration sentiment by implementing stricter asylum policies. A new EU migration and asylum pact, due in 2026, prioritizes border protection and faster deportations. This shift reflects a change from viewing migration as a humanitarian obligation to viewing it as a security threat, a change highlighted in the shift from Merkel's "Wir schaffen das!" to a focus on border control and deportation.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article presents a balanced overview of the migration issue in Europe, acknowledging both the challenges and the humanitarian aspects. While it highlights the rise of right-wing populist parties and anti-immigration sentiment, it also mentions the willingness to help Ukrainian refugees and the nuanced public opinion on the matter. The framing doesn't overtly favor one side, although the inclusion of multiple expert opinions might subtly suggest a more complex reality than a simple pro/anti-immigration dichotomy.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and objective. There's no evident use of loaded terms or emotionally charged language to sway the reader's opinion. The article uses descriptive terms like "right-wing populist parties" and "anti-immigration sentiment" without resorting to inflammatory language.
Bias by Omission
While the article provides a comprehensive overview, potential omissions include specific data on the economic impact of migration or the integration successes of migrants. Additionally, the perspectives of migrants themselves are largely absent. However, given the article's length and focus, these omissions are likely due to practical constraints rather than intentional bias.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses the impact of migration on European politics, including the rise of right-wing populist parties and the increasingly restrictive asylum policies. This directly relates to SDG 16, Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, as it highlights challenges to social cohesion, political stability, and the rule of law due to the divisive nature of migration debates and policies. The shift towards stricter border controls and faster deportations, as seen in the new EU migration pact, raises concerns about the protection of human rights and due process, key aspects of SDG 16.