AGI – They are called “European elections” but, in practice, everything boils down to the sum of “27 national competitions”. This was underlined from Brussels by Andy Bounds, correspondent and historical writer of the Financial Times, recalling how, on Sunday evening, each of these “competitions will give the pulse of how, in the various member countries, the respective citizens perceive the EU’s response to crucial dossiers” . In addition to the war unleashed by Russia in Ukraine, the problem of the high cost of living and the conflict in Gaza, there is also the thorny issue of migration and how to manage the waves of migration from Africa, after the almost record arrivals in 2023 (according to Frontex data which grew by almost 18% compared to 2022, to over 355 thousand units).
Could the result of the European elections really reflect on the policies already started by Brussels with the Continent? Analysts are quite in agreement in maintaining that the partnership between the old continent and Africa is moving on an already determined path: in fact, Africa and Europe share a common vision until 2030 in the context of a partnership that has been renewed and further strengthened in February 2022.
The objective of the latter is to promote, through increased European solidarity, security, peace, sustainable economic development and prosperity of the inhabitants of the Continent. And it involves various programs and aid packages: among these the Global Gateway strategy which aims to stimulate public and private investments aimed at the development of connectivity of up to 300 billion euros by 2027; the Program for Cooperation on Health and Vaccines and Enhanced Cooperation for Peace and Security.
The relations, now consolidated between the two parties, also provide for the implementation of various ‘regional’ agreements in the form of ‘action plans’ to respond to more delicate regional issues (for example in the Sahel and in the countries of the Horn of Africa ). Furthermore, the EU-Africa partnership develops through forums of structured and formal dialogue at various levels: the EU – AU (African Union) summits are held at fixed intervals, at least every 3 years, and bring together heads of state and government; Ministerial (or “troika”) meetings between representatives of African countries and the EU, the African Union Commission and EU institutions are also held on a periodic basis. Finally, EU commissioners periodically meet their counterparts from the AU Commission.
In harmony with this complex framework which currently underpins bilateral relations between the two continents, the Mattei Plan of the Meloni government also fits in, which, not surprisingly, has established a control room with the task of promoting coordination between the different levels of government and public and private bodies, as well as to incentivize access to international financial resources (such as those made available by the Ee-Africa Global Gateway) and coordinate the various initiatives taken within the Plan. Not only Italy but also other countries – inside and outside the EU – are betting on the continent.
According to data from the Council of the EU, however, it is precisely European companies, globally, that represent the main source of foreign direct investments with a stock invested in the continent which, since 2016, has always exceeded 200 billion euros. According to estimates by the International Monetary Fund, after Asia, in 2024 the African continent will be the fastest growing region in the world. A forecast also confirmed by the African Development Bank (AfDB), which recently estimated an average increase in the real gross domestic product of the African continent at 3.8% (for 2024) and 4.2% (in 2025).
Africa therefore constitutes an important growth opportunity for Europe and stronger and better coordinated cooperation between the EU-Africa and the various programs of the member countries (including the Mattei Plan) could only be good for the Old Continent: in terms of ‘protagonism’ and promotion of its image in the world (Africa is considered by China and Russia, not today, a mere land of conquest) but also in purely economic terms, i.e. to promote investments with positive repercussions for both parts to be implemented in compliance with social and environmental standards as well as respecting the needs and different cultures of the African partners.
Against the backdrop of a now stabilized bilateral framework, a European electoral campaign of a very different nature took place, especially on the issue of migration seen, especially on the right, as one of the great emergencies at Europe’s borders. On migration and, in particular, on the Mediterranean and Balkan routes followed, the main European political families have fought once again this year.
All European political families (with the exception of Identity and Democracy which chose not to adopt a common electoral programme) have in fact included the migration issue in their political programme, among the most urgent priorities of the next legislature. The Migration and Asylum Pact adopted last month by the EU Council has therefore ended up at the center of the conflict.
The pact which establishes a series of rules to manage arrivals in a presumably more organized way, introduces efficient and uniform procedures for processing asylum requests and carrying out repatriations, as well as providing for a new crisis response mechanism and a new voluntary program for the resettlement of refugees from third countries. In Europe, however, there are those who would already be willing to put it in the attic to introduce in its place more restrictive policies aimed at externalization (of migrants to non-EU countries). And also those who would simply like to delete it or those who claim its authorship as a point of merit (and potential votes).
An overview of the positions of the various parties on the issue.
European People’s Party (EPP) – The EPP entitled the chapter dedicated to the problem of its Manifesto for the 2024 European elections “Our Europe protects its borders from illegal immigration”. In line with the positions expressed by the president of the EU commission Ursula with der Leyen, the EPP focuses on “humanity and order”, the leitmotif of the new European approach fully supported so far. Order will have to be ensured by the Member States (and not by smugglers) who will have to decide who enters Europe. The EU will also need stronger external borders and more rigorous checks on irregular arrivals. The EPP also opts for greater sharing of the burdens of migratory flows, with responsibilities spread between the various national authorities and the transformation of Fronte into a sort of coast guard for the European border.
Party of European Socialists (PES) – The PSE in its programmatic Manifesto fully defended the Pact on asylum and migration by arguing that “its implementation must translate into a fair, safe and predictable approach, based on respect for human rights and the dignity of people”, we read in the Manifesto . The PSE claims the idea of a common and coordinated management of migration and asylum seekers “based on solidarity and shared responsibility” and is generally against the outsourcing of asylum seekers.
RenewEurope – Not too far from the EPP line is Renew Europe, the liberal group in the European Parliament. The management of migrants and asylum seekers is the eighth priority of the former Alde group and requires “clear and stable” management, i.e. “adequate control of our external borders”, in contrast to traffickers, but also a respectful approach of the men who “must be at the center” of the European Union’s action. The Manifesto does not address the issue of asylum seekers and the possibility of opening non-EU reception centers to deal with requests.
Greens – The program of the European Greens, on the contrary, soundly rejects the migration policies of the last legislature, arguing that the parties have allowed themselves to be carried away by the fears harnessed by the far right. Strongly criticizing the EU pact for migration and asylum, the European Greens are calling for a mechanism for the mandatory relocation of migrants, because it is necessary and urgent.
Conservatives (Ecr) – On the opposite side of the barricade, the Party of European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) based its electoral campaign on the “protection of national borders” and on the fact that the EU must help member states manage migratory flows without forcing their citizens to welcome illegal immigrants. Hence the proposal for a “global strategy” that protects “all possible entry points, including air, land and sea borders”. Also on the agenda are the strengthening of Frontex and Europol, which should help member states respond to the flows, and the plan to have asylum seekers’ applications managed mainly outside the EU. The electoral campaign of the parties of this family has at various times proposed the idea of naval blockades and joint naval missions in an anti-landing perspective.
European Left – Also opposed to the EU Pact on migration and asylum, but for the opposite reasons, is the European Left which, in its programme, harshly attacked “Fortress Europe” and asked for the cancellation of the Pact “because it condemns refugees to detention and , in most cases, to deportation”. In the manifesto, “Fortress Europe” is also accused of having waged a “war against migrants and refugees” for decades which has caused suffering and thousands of victims in the Mediterranean and along the Balkan route.