dw.com
Schengen Area Under Strain from Increased Border Controls
The Schengen Area, celebrating its 40th anniversary in June 2025, faces challenges as internal border controls surge to record highs due to increased migration, creating tension among member states and jeopardizing the future of free movement within the EU.
- What are the immediate impacts of heightened internal border controls on the Schengen Area's free movement principle?
- In 2024, internal border controls within the Schengen Area reached their highest levels since its inception. Germany reinstated checks on all land borders, and other nations implemented partial controls due to increased migrant arrivals. This sparked criticism, with Luxembourg's Interior Minister deeming it unacceptable and harmful to the Schengen Area's free movement principle.
- What factors caused the reinstatement of internal border checks, and what are the broader implications for EU migration policy?
- Increased irregular migration, particularly via the Balkan route, is the root cause of the rising internal border checks. Many countries cite security and the EU's ineffective asylum distribution system as justification for these temporary measures. This creates tension between maintaining free movement and effectively managing migration.
- What are the long-term consequences of the current situation for the Schengen Area, and what steps can be taken to mitigate negative effects?
- The Schengen Area's future depends on addressing irregular migration. Without improvements in external border protection and a functional EU-wide asylum distribution, increased internal controls will likely persist, eroding public trust and straining member state relations.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the reintroduction of internal border controls as a major threat to the Schengen Area's core principles. The headline, while not explicitly provided, would likely emphasize this negative impact. This is evident in the repeated use of phrases like "Schengen is one of the EU's biggest successes. We cannot allow borders to reappear in people's minds." The quotes selected also reinforce the negative perspective, with no significant counter-arguments presented. While the article mentions efforts to improve external border protection, it downplays these in favor of highlighting the problems created by internal border controls.
Language Bias
The article uses language that leans towards a negative portrayal of the internal border controls. Words like "threat," "major setback," and "reappear" carry negative connotations. While objectively reporting events, the word choices subtly shape the reader's perception of the situation. For instance, instead of 'reintroduction of border controls', a more neutral phrase like 'resumption of border checks' could be used.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the reintroduction of border controls and the resulting challenges to the Schengen Area, but offers limited analysis of potential long-term economic or social impacts of these controls on the EU as a whole. It also omits discussion of alternative solutions to managing migration flows within the EU besides stricter border controls. While the article mentions the EU's refugee relocation mechanism, it doesn't delve into its shortcomings or suggest concrete improvements.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy between maintaining the Schengen Area's free movement and controlling migration. It implies that these two goals are mutually exclusive, overlooking the possibility of more nuanced approaches to border management that could balance both concerns. The narrative subtly suggests that increased border controls are the only viable solution.
Sustainable Development Goals
The reintroduction of internal border controls within the Schengen Area undermines the principle of free movement and cooperation among member states, hindering the achievement of peace and security through enhanced collaboration and trust.