The joint statement published at the initiative of Denmark and Italy, signed by seven other states (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia), marks an important step in the European migration debate. This declaration, which brings together Northern, Central and Eastern Europe, lays down necessary markers: affirmation of human rights, recognition of successful integration pathways, but also affirmation of the right of societies to protect themselves against failed integration.
This text opens a lucid debate on the inadequacy of post-war international law in the face of contemporary, postcolonial and globalized migrations. It calls for the promotion of a civic and cultural integration model, and for the creation of clear legal instruments in response to migratory delinquency — notably through a special status allowing for simplified expulsions. For our culture of hospitality must be defended against those who deliberately undermine it.
General Context
Europe has been experiencing a structural migration crisis for over a decade. From the Syrian war to Sahelian instability, and the growing pressure on eastern borders, migratory flows have profoundly transformed our societies and our debates. The EU has put in place a number of tools: the Asylum Pact, the “Return” Directive, the reinforcement of Frontex, bilateral cooperation. But the balance remains precarious, interstate tensions are growing, and migration is now a lever of external influence actively used by certain regimes.
Current European Doctrine
European migration policy rests on several pillars:
- The Schengen Area: internal free movement, with external border controls;
- Frontex: support for Member States in border control and returns;
- The Dublin Regulation: responsibility of the first country of entry for asylum applications;
- The 2023 Migration and Asylum Pact: flexible solidarity and partial burden-sharing;
- The “Return” Directive: organization of deportations.
But these instruments are now weakened: solidarity is unequal, enforcement is patchy, and trust among Member States has eroded.
Furthermore, the key issue is no longer just how to accelerate deportation procedures, but how to compel countries of origin to take back their nationals—because without credible diplomatic leverage, any tightening of the law remains largely ineffective. Immigration has become a clash of wills, and Europe must assert its own—one that reflects the clear and growing will of its populations.
A Political Debate That Has Become Existential
Since Germany’s unilateral decision in 2015, immigration is no longer just an administrative or humanitarian matter. It has become a question of sovereignty, cohesion, and identity. It touches on the civic pact, demographic balance, political legitimacy and trust in the rule of law.
Powers such as Russia or Belarus have knowingly used migratory flows as hybrid weapons. International conventions from the 20th century, designed in a post-war context for intra-European or regional mobility, are no longer suited to contemporary, massive, multi-ethnic and often disorganized migrations.
Re-legitimizing Intergovernmental Action
We welcome the initiative of Denmark and Italy, which reaffirms the right of European states to consult with one another upstream and in parallel to the EU institutional process. This is neither a retreat nor a sign of distrust toward the EU: it is the legitimate expression of intergovernmental diplomacy, in service of a political impetus that only the European Council can provide.
The European Union must not become an institutional monolith in which the Commission crushes all political dynamism. The dual structure of executive power between the Commission and the Council is a guarantee of democratic vitality: it allows for arbitration between technocratic inertia and populist volatility.
The Worrying Evolution of European Law Towards an “Enforceable Right to Stay”
We observe with concern a trend in constitutional and fundamental rights law in Europe that tends to transform asylum rights, or the right to family life, into a quasi-enforceable right to residence, regardless of the real situation, the will to integrate, or the legality of the migratory path.
This logic weakens the sovereignty of states, preventing them from autonomously determining conditions for entry, residence, and expulsion. Yet integration cannot begin with an act of disloyalty — neither toward the native population, nor toward foreign nationals who have respected the rules and demonstrated their will to integrate.
Law cannot be dissociated from civic loyalty. The authority of the rule of law rests on this requirement of reciprocity.
For a European Right of Hospitality: Just, Firm, Incarnate
- Yes, we defend human rights, but these also entail duties for asylum seekers and migrants;
- Yes, we want legal and demanding integration pathways, based on language, historical memory, civic values, and democratic culture;
- Yes, we recognize successful integration, but we refuse to ignore blatant failures, which lead to delinquency, separatism, or even radicalization;
- Yes, we want to reform international migration law, which is now outdated in the face of contemporary realities;
- Yes, we affirm that the migration issue is not only a matter of individual rights, but a multidimensional question, grounded in objective criteria of “integration readiness”, whether civic, cultural, or economic;
- Yes, we call for a new European right of hospitality, based on two pillars:
- The active recognition of successful integration trajectories;
- Zero tolerance for organized clandestinity, communitarian behaviors, and crimes committed by non-integrated foreigners.
- Yes, we call for the establishment of a specific legal status for criminal foreign nationals, allowing for accelerated expulsion procedures. For these acts directly undermine the heart of the European civic pact.
What we defend is neither closure nor laxity. It is a principle of lucidity, justice, and responsibility. Regaining control over our migration policy means defending our borders, but also reaffirming the conditions of hospitality: reciprocity, integration, and respect for the democratic authority and cultural continuity of host societies.