Subscribe
The topic of migration has assumed, in recent decades, a growing centrality in the European political debate. In this complex and polarized scenario, Denmark has distinguished itself as an atypical actor: initially criticized for its severe approach to immigration, it is now among the promoters of a hard line that is gaining consent within the European Union. The transition to a reference point of European migratory policies deserves an in-depth analysis, especially in the light of the Danish half-yearly presidency of the EU Council. The historical and political position of Denmark on immigration can, in fact, be strategically advantageous to promote and implement common policies of contrasting illegal immigration, also in the direction of what the Italian government is trying to implement with the agreements with Albania. This transformation must be read in the wider context of the EU’s internal dynamics, where migratory policies are increasingly influenced by security considerations, demographic control and public opinion management. Denmark, through a political path characterized by institutional pragmatism and social consensus, has been able to shape a migratory model that is now looked at with interest by several Member States. It is not simply a series of restrictive measures, but an articulated strategy, which combines containment policies, outsourcing of asylum procedures, redefinition of the criteria of residence and a political language capable of combining security and social responsibility. The fact that these policies come from a social democratic government makes the Danish case even more worthy of attention: the choice to face the migratory issue with tools normally associated with conservative or populist parties shows how the management of migrations is redefining the traditional ideological categories. This suggests that Denmark is not only an isolated actor with a particular position, but a potential precursor of a new European paradigm, in which the effectiveness of migratory policies can constitute a balance between democratic legitimacy and the needs of European governance. In this perspective, the Dane of the EU could represent a privileged political window to give institutional form to this new orientation, acting as a catalyst for a structural reform of European migratory policy.
THE HISTORICAL POSITION OF DENMARK ON IMMIGRATION
Denmark has long maintained an autonomous position with respect to the community regulatory framework regarding asylum and immigration. Unlike many Member States, it makes use of a clause that allows it not to fully adhere to the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). This autonomy has facilitated the adoption of particularly restrictive policies starting from the migratory crisis of 2015-2016. The Danish response was not limited to the intensity of border controls, but included structural reforms: in 2019, temporary protection became the rule for asylum seekers, making it more difficult to obtain the permanent residence. A further turning point was represented by the Memorandum signed with Rwanda in 2021, in which Copenhagen proposed to transfer asylum seekers to extraterritorial centers. Although the project was suspended following the criticisms of the European Commission and operational difficulties, it has established a political precedent that is now relaunched on a continental scale.
THE EVOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN CONTEXT
In May 2024, with the approval of the new pact on migration and asylum, the EU opened to a more flexible and decentralized approach in the management of migratory flows. This moment represented an opportunity for Denmark to assert its experience and strategic vision. Only two days after the adoption of the pact, the Danish government published a joint letter signed by 15 countries, including key actors such as Italy, Greece and Netherlands, in which the outsourcing of asylum procedures was proposed as an effective and sustainable solution. The Danish model, therefore, has gone from being an exception to representing a reference, at a time when political and social fatigue in the face of increasing irregular migratory flows makes policies more acceptable: policies that, until a few years ago, would have been considered radical.
THE DANISH PRESIDENCY OF THE EU: A STRATEGIC WINDOW
The beginning of the semester presidency of the EU Council by Denmark in the second half of 2025 represents a decisive juncture. Not only for the migratory agenda, but for the possibility of directly influencing the European decision-making mechanisms. The Danish government aims to achieving an agreement by the end of the year, not only on the externalisation of the procedures, but also on the redefinition of the concept of “safe third country” – a central legal node that conditions the possibility of transferring migrants outside the EU territory. From an institutional point of view, the Presidency offers significant tools to pilot the political agenda.
THE SOCIAL-DEMOCRATIC EXCEPTION: THE PARADOX OF THE RESTRICTIVE LEFT
A distinctive element of the Danish case is represented by the political identity of its government. Unlike what happens in other European contexts, in Denmark this migration curb is promoted by a social-democratic executive. The premier Mette Frederiksen and the minister of immigration Kaare Dybvad have repeatedly underlined how the control of migratory flows is a necessary condition to preserve social cohesion and maintain popular consent towards the welfare state. This approach has its own internal coherence: the idea is that progressive policies in the climate and social fields can be politically sustained only if accompanied by a severe line on immigration. A strategy that paid: Denmark is one of the few countries where a socialist government has managed to maintain a solid electoral base in a European context generally unfavourable to the traditional left.
FUTURE PROSPECTS: TOWARDS A NEW EUROPEAN ARCHITECTURE?
The Danish presidency could mark a turning point in the way in which Europe faces the migratory issue. If Copenhagen managed to successfully guide the approval of a legal framework for the outsourcing of asylum procedures, a precedent would be created with lasting implications. The model of bilateral agreements with third countries for non-EU hubs differs significantly from the logic that, to date, has informed the European approach to migration, centered on the internal redistribution of asylum seekers, the interstate cooperation and compliance with international conventions on refugees. The outsourcing – if institutionalized – would represent a paradigm change, in which borders control would no longer be a geographical prerogative, but a political and contractual one. Denmark’s experience, anchored to an autonomous regulatory structure with respect to CEAS, gives the country the flexibility necessary to propose solutions that other Member States have only recently started to consider. However, the success of this project will depend on the ability to reconcile control needs and fundamental rights, a considerable legal and moral challenge. The risk is to inaugurate a paradigm that, despite satisfying national public opinions, compromises the founding principles of the Union. In fact, deterrence policies – if not accompanied by legal guarantee mechanisms, administrative transparency and independent monitoring – can degenerate into discriminatory or arbitrary practices, in contrast with the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights. The Union’s Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights could play a crucial role in determining the legitimate limits of externalisation, especially in relation to the principle of non-refoulement and the right to an effective appeal. The historical position of Denmark on immigration, once marginal and criticized, has turned into a strategic resource in the new European context. Strengthened by a long experience in restrictive policies and an institutional leadership capacity guaranteed by the EU Council Presidency, Copenhagen is now in the position to decisively influence the future European policies regarding migration. But this influence is accompanied by the need to build consent not only between Member States, but also within civil society and European institutions. In the absence of a broad regulatory and political support, the implementation of outsourced mechanisms risks further fragmenting the already fragile balance of common migratory policies. However, this influence entails a remarkable responsibility. The Danish model cannot be exported without a critical reflection on its limits, both in terms of economic sustainability and legal compatibility. Only an approach that integrates administrative efficiency, protection of human rights and political legitimacy will truly be able to offer a shared and lasting solution to the phenomenon of irregular migration. In this perspective, the Danish action will have to measure itself not only on the ability to obtain immediate results, but also on the long-term impact of the proposed reforms. In this sense, the Danish presidency represents not only a political opportunity, but also a test for the entire European Union: the success or failure of the proposed initiatives will deeply mark the future of European migratory policies for the years to come. It will be precisely in the balance between national sovereignty, international cooperation and human rights that the credibility and cohesion of the European project on migration will be played.