For many years, Sweden and Denmark were considered the preferred destinations for asylum seekers in Europe. But those times are over, as a recent ranking by the Danish Ministry for Immigration and Integration shows. Accordingly, Germany has changed course in migration policy in recent years and overtaken its Nordic neighbors.
The reason for the low asylum numbers in the Scandinavian countries is a hard change of course in politics – but the hard course of the Scandinavian countries also has consequences.
Integration is said to be better if there is less influx
The ranking of the Danish Ministry of Immigration and Integration refers to the number of asylum applications in relation to the population between 2008 and 2022. Germany has been able to stay in the top 10 of the statistics since the beginning of the migration crisis in 2015. In contrast, Sweden has fallen from 2nd place in 2015 to 16th place in 2022 and Denmark from 9th place in 2015 to 19th place in 2022, noting that the list does not take into account how many asylum seekers are actually admitted and which ones protection status they receive.
Denmark in particular has significantly tightened its migration policy in recent years. Kaare Dybvad Bek, Minister for Integration of the Danish Social Democratic Party, welcomes his country’s positioning on immigration policy. While other countries are increasingly relying on immigration due to the shortage of skilled workers and demographic change, Denmark is taking a different approach: “It’s good that we have a relatively low influx of asylum seekers, so that our integration measures can absorb that,” Bek explained in a press release .
Denmark flouted the EU’s Schengen Agreement
Denmark has followed a strict course in migration policy for years. As early as 2002, Parliament cut cash benefits for non-EU citizens by half because it feared that high levels of immigration could jeopardize the welfare state. With the migration crisis, this course was tightened again significantly.
Denmark even flouted the EU’s Schengen agreement and set up checkpoints at the German-Danish border in 2016 under the bourgeois government of Lars Løkke Rasmussen. The controversial “jewellery law” still allows the authorities to take away valuables from asylum seekers with a value of around 1340 euros or more – unthinkable in Germany.
„Zero Migration“
It was only in 2019 that the left-wing bloc around the Danish Social Democrats won the election. This was possible, among other things, because the party of Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen took tough positions on migration policy and was thus able to gain decisive votes from the right. In addition, alienated voters migrated to the left-wing coalition partner. Denmark thus remains a pioneer in the strict migration policy and goes its own way regardless of the decisions and developments in the EU.
The government now stands for the goal of “zero migration” and wants to be the only EU member to send Syrians back to their homeland and outsource asylum procedures to third countries.
Sweden used to be considered a ‘humanitarian superpower’
Sweden, on the other hand, has only tightened its migration policy in recent years: In 2014, Sweden was still considered a “humanitarian superpower” and distinguished itself as a shelter for people in need. But with the migration crisis in 2015, Sweden changed course: The country registered 163,000 asylum applications – more than ever before. In terms of population, Sweden took in more refugees and migrants than any other EU country at the time. The Swedish people suddenly found themselves confronted with a new reality.
The country’s limits became visible and contradicted the long-standing ideal of granting unconditional refuge to those in need of protection. The government finally felt compelled to pull the emergency brake and tightened its asylum policy for the first time.
Right-wing populist party gained importance
The issue of migration has also changed the political climate in Sweden: the right-wing populist party Sweden Democrats has gained in importance in recent years through its asylum-critical program and increasing public discussion about immigration and integration. In particular, gang crime in urban centers and the consequences of failed integration are increasingly the subject of media and political debate.
In the elections in September last year, the Sweden Democrats finally became the strongest force in parliament and replaced the Social Democrat-led government. However, they failed to achieve an absolute majority and were unable to form their own cabinet.
Instead, with their support, a centre-right coalition was able to form the government. In return, the formation of the new government gave the Sweden Democrats significant influence over the country’s migration policy. This also led to a tightening of asylum policies and a more restrictive attitude towards migration and integration. The fact that a right-wing populist party is instrumental in forming the government in Sweden marks a profound change in the country’s political landscape.
Hard migration policies also have a downside
Apart from the fact that refugees from war zones are increasingly having to be housed in other countries, the Scandinavian countries run the risk of leaving behind a group with their tough migration policies that could be a role model for successful integration. And even people who were born in Denmark but do not have Danish citizenship face a complicated procedure to obtain citizenship.
In Denmark, for example, people must have at least 42 months of full-time employment within the last four years in order to become a citizen. Further requirements such as a permanent job and social commitment have been added since the turn of the millennium. Even a three-year training period is not enough, because the school holidays are not taken into account.
Young people in Denmark are particularly needed: Business associations are already complaining that more workers are needed than the Danish population can currently offer. The Scandinavian countries, on the other hand, no longer have any problems with the integration of immigrants.
