Poland’s Hardline On Migration, From Pariah To Blueprint For The West

-Analysis-

WARSAW — After Donald Tusk’s words about the partial suspension of the right to asylum, we heard warnings that we Poles would become pariahs of Europe. Now it turns out that Tusk’s Poland is the avant-garde leading the way for the entire EU into the future.

Tusk’s declaration about suspending the asylum law sounded reckless — not because European officials don’t do such things, but because they don’t speak about them out loud.

Thus the outrage was not only motivated by humanitarian and human rights concerns, but also included warnings that “Tusk will write Poland out of the European legal order” — and that we will end up like Hungary, which now has to pay 200 million euro in fines for violating asylum rules. Although ordered by the European Court of Human Rights, the penalty is enforced by the European Commission itself.

Not even a week had passed and everyone could see that nothing like that would happen. At the European Council summit on October 17, Tusk’s idea was met with sudden widespread understanding, which in many cases was probably concealed by enthusiasm (now the sky is the limit in asylum policy). And in others, relief that the daredevil pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable is not a barbarian who tramples on treaties, but a good European colleague.

Correspondents noted that Tusk was also supported by Spanish left-wing Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, who tends to be on the humanitarian side in the European debate on migration, which is certainly appreciated by the thousands of migrants whom Spain brutally pushes away from its land borders with Morocco every year.

The support of the head of the European Commission, affectionately known as “Ursula Border Leyen”, a long-time spokeswoman for Fortress Europe, should surprise nobody.

Doing the dirty work

Today, European Union countries are divided into three groups: those that discreetly break the asylum law, those that do it openly and ostentatiously, and the rest that are not located on the external borders and cheer for their eastern and southern neighbors to do the dirty work.

Tusk’s declaration will perhaps encourage other countries to take the path of the rule of law, i.e. to properly codify what they have been doing illegally or semi-legally for years. It may be slightly different on paper, but the dynamics are similar: first, migrants are pushed out “without any procedure,” then it is partially legalized by some regulation, and then, when the problem of non-compliance with higher legal acts becomes too bothersome, it is solved by a proper, coherent push-back law (as in Spain in 2015 or in Lithuania and Latvia in 2023).

The position of the EU itself is also evolving, although rather cosmetically: from support for border walls and thanking subsequent countries for agreeing to be “Europe’s shields,” and reaching deals with third countries, to tacit or quite open support for changes in national laws.

Monique Pariat, Director General for Internal Policy and Migration at the European Commission, defended the new push-back laws of Lithuania and Latvia: “These two small countries are doing everything in their power to protect the EU borders,” she said in September 2023 at a forum of the European Parliament.

Feelings and fears

The European Commission is now examining a law introduced in Finland in July that allows for the temporary suspension of the right to asylum in exceptional situations. However, EU institutions have been silent for many months regarding the fact that Finland completely closed its eastern border in December last year. Thousands of migrants gathered there at that time, brought there by Russian services, were informed that they could apply for asylum in Finland only at Finnish airports and ports — where they could only get there with a valid visa.

Yet another trick has been used in Spain: for years, thousands of migrants crossing onto its territory have been immediately pushed back to Morocco. In 2020, the Court in Strasbourg issued a judgment sanctioning this practice. The justification stated that migrants do not have to cross the border illegally because Spain allows them to submit asylum applications at one crossing point, in the town of Beni Ansar.

Explaining to millions that their feelings and fears are just primitive racism may be counterproductive.

Although the Tribunal admitted that this possibility is a fiction – migrants cannot get to this crossing, and only a few people managed to submit such applications in a few years – it emphasized, however, that it was not Spain’s fault. Indeed: because access to the crossing is blocked by the Moroccan services, which Spain and the European Union pay handsomely for this.

So it doesn’t matter whether it is done using breakneck legal structures, powdered with nuanced rhetoric, or with blunt words and practices, as announced by the Polish Prime Minister — the effect is the same: there is no free passage and no right to asylum. Poland is not a pariah here, it is in the European mainstream.

According to a survey conducted in September for the weekly Die Zeit,, 82% of Germans want their asylum policy to be tightened. According to the Helsinki Times, 62% of people expressed support for the new Finnish law suspending asylum law. citizens. At the height of last year’s border crisis, the Finnish Border Guard once again topped the rankings of most trusted public figures.

Since 2021, humanitarian organizations have been accusing Lithuania of using extremely brutal practices against migrants on its border with Belarus. At the same time, however, Lithuanian citizens praised the policy. Although indicators of trust in institutions there are traditionally low, a few months after the outbreak of the border crisis, support for the actions of the border services amounted to 54%, the highest in 20 years.

Kremlin’s role

It is a legitimate question to ask whether the political turn to the right is a reaction to social moods, or whether these moods are shaped by intensified rhetoric. We know that hostility of Polish society towards Muslim refugees has been growing since 2015, even despite the practical absence of refugees in Poland from Muslim countries. It is necessary to not forget about the role played by Russian disinformation, which has been fueling xenophobic moods since 2015. We also know the Kremlin generously funds the leading anti-immigrant parties throughout Europe.

However, it is worth noting that in Germany and Sweden the opposite phenomenon has occurred: the large increase in the number of immigrants and refugees was for years supported by a positive discourse of the political mainstream. Professor Ruud Koopmans, a migration researcher and director at the Berlin Social Science Centre, spoke recently about the large overrepresentation of asylum seekers who came to Germany after 2015 in the statistics of violent crimes — even as both the mass media and political class ignore, belittle or justify subsequent disturbing phenomena.

Poland is not a pariah here, it is in the European mainstream.

The complete disconnect between the opinion-forming narrative of the middle class and the feelings of average citizens may go unnoticed for years, but it will eventually backfire on the electoral system — as happened in the recent state elections in Germany.

The fight against propaganda and disinformation is very important, but explaining to millions that their feelings and fears are just primitive racism and xenophobia may be counterproductive. One can wring one’s hands over the polls about push-backs and the growing support of far-right parties. Still, the clearly expressed sentiments of a significant slice of society — especially when it’s happening in so many different countries — won’t just simply go away.