Unlike in other countries, the political consequences of the refugee flows in Switzerland have so far remained manageable. But politicians should not be fooled by this.
If the Dublin Agreement comes under further pressure, new controls and defensive measures threaten to be introduced along the inner-European borders.
While the number of asylum seekers has remained at a high level for two years, Parliament will continue to increase the pressure on Justice Minister Beat Jans in the autumn session. The bourgeois parties are calling for a tougher approach to asylum policy with various proposals. The SVP has again requested an extraordinary session. This is the third special debate it has called for on asylum policy within a year. No other topic is better suited to the right-wing party to keep voters on board.
In fact, around 70,000 asylum applications have been submitted in Switzerland in the last two and a half years. In addition, there are over 100,000 people seeking protection from Ukraine, of whom around 66,000 are still here. That is a major undertaking for a small country.
But it is not just the numbers that give asylum policy such an enormous importance. On the contrary: during the Yugoslavian wars in the 1990s, the number of asylum seekers was higher. And compared to the immigration of employed people, the number of refugees is significantly smaller.
The flow of refugees is a challenge because it brings the world’s crises right into the heart of Switzerland. It is almost impossible to control and therefore forces the federal government, cantons and municipalities to make gigantic logistical efforts. Society is reaching its limits when it comes to integrating asylum seekers, who are often not prepared for the Swiss job market and are not familiar with the reality of life here.
People fleeing Islamism – and those bringing it with them
And finally, Switzerland is importing social, religious and political conflicts that it has not been confronted with until recently. This is most evident in the case of fundamentalist Islam: people are coming to Switzerland to flee from Islamism – and those who are bringing it into the country.
In Switzerland, the political impact of this development has so far been manageable. The rise of the SVP to become the strongest political force began long before the current refugee crisis. The collegiate government is consolidated. In recent years, some anti-Islam and anti-immigration proposals have been approved at the ballot box. But thanks to the Bernese political mechanism aimed at achieving maximum balance, the consequences have been manageable.
Switzerland is also a wealthy country with a low unemployment rate and a well-developed social system. It is structured on a small scale, and educational institutions and infrastructure are of a high standard. Even in structurally weak regions, people are generally doing well. The increasing number of asylum seekers is therefore causing resentment in many places, but it is manageable.
But one should not be deceived: Since the AfD’s huge success in Thuringia and Saxony, it has been possible to observe in real time how long-standing dogmas of asylum and European policy are being pulverized at breakneck speed. The proposals with which CDU leader Friedrich Merz is putting the “traffic light” coalition under pressure sometimes read as if they were copied directly from the SVP party program.
Rejections at the border, abandonment of the Dublin concept, review of subsidiary protection (provisional admission) or tighter controls along the borders – the SVP has been advocating all of this for months. In Germany, some of these solutions are no longer being rejected outright by even the SPD. The break with Merkel’s welcoming culture is obvious.
Similar developments are underway in many European countries. Switzerland is directly affected by this, not only for geographical reasons, but also because it is closely integrated into European asylum policy via Dublin.
Thanks to the priority of the Dublin Agreement, rejections at the border are now not legally permissible. People who have not previously submitted an application in a safe third country must therefore be allowed into the country for the asylum procedure, including in Switzerland. But it is no longer out of the question that this rule will be dropped.
Switzerland must keep pace with Europe
Since the elections in Thuringia and Saxony, there has been intense debate in Germany about whether asylum seekers should be turned away at the border. The debate is strongly motivated by domestic politics, especially since it runs counter to the EU asylum reform passed in May: This envisages a massive expansion of protection at the EU’s external border so that permeability between the Schengen countries can be maintained.
If Dublin continues to erode, however, there is a risk of new controls and defensive measures being introduced along the inner-European borders. German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser announced on Monday that border controls would be expanded. Switzerland must prepare for this. It must signal that it will not become a place of refuge if its neighbouring countries tighten the screws.
Additional, risk-based and temporary border controls could be a possible means in this case, not least in view of the domestic political mood. Until now, this resource-intensive measure was rightly not an option for Beat Jans. But it is obvious that the pressure on Switzerland is increasing.
Switzerland must also keep pace with Europe when it comes to the deportation of rejected asylum seekers to countries such as Afghanistan and Syria. These countries are currently not considered safe countries of origin. But here too, a change in mentality is becoming apparent, and here too, Germany is taking the offensive.
A few days ago, the country deported convicted criminals to Afghanistan for the first time since the Taliban regime came to power. Until recently, this would have been unthinkable. The government also wants to resume deportations to Syria after a court recently questioned the protection status for Syrians. All signs point to more harsh measures.
Although the borders within Europe are currently enjoying a revival, one thing is clear to everyone: strengthening borders and increasing deterrence will never be able to cope with migration on the scale we see today. Due to the increase in conflicts and global warming, even more people in Africa will probably soon be leaving their homes.
The European asylum systems are not designed for this: those who really need protection often do not receive it. Instead, many who do not need help or who do business as people smugglers benefit. Only at an international level can we succeed in counteracting this injustice and, in turn, strengthening regular migration. The EU asylum reform is intended to take this development into account. Switzerland will also benefit from this.
Italy as a role model
The UN Migration Pact also pursues this internationalization of asylum policy, as unpopular as it is with many citizens. Approval of the pact, which the Council of States will discuss next week, therefore represents no disadvantage for Switzerland – as long as it does not remain alone. More willingness to experiment is needed in this area too, for example in cooperation with third countries in the region of origin of asylum seekers.
Some migration experts are calling for entire asylum procedures to be outsourced to safe third countries, such as Senegal or Rwanda. In return, Switzerland would commit to accepting additional people on a regular basis, for example within the framework of quotas. The concept is controversial, but Switzerland should seriously consider it.
Italy currently appears to be having at least some success with a similar model. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has concluded various agreements with Tunisia that oblige the North African state to ensure that fewer asylum seekers cross the Mediterranean to Italy. In return, Italy provides financial support and takes in additional people from Tunisia as workers.
Since then, the number of asylum seekers in Italy has fallen dramatically. It is unacceptable that Tunisia is sometimes massively violating the human rights of refugees in carrying out its task. But Switzerland should not be deterred by these shortcomings, but should examine such ideas and implement them better. Even if we cannot expect too much from them, it would be a tentative step towards an asylum policy with a new focus.
Because one approach will definitely not work: leaving everything as it is. Wherever there has been no change in asylum policy, voters themselves sooner or later created momentum. They strengthened right-wing parties with sometimes xenophobic slogans and thus ensured maximum pressure on the established forces.
Significantly, in some countries it is the social democratic governments that are now taking a particularly ruthless approach to asylum law. Justice Minister Beat Jans should therefore get things rolling himself, before he can no longer prevent the dam from breaking in asylum law. Because Switzerland needs solutions that work – for the people who seek protection and for those who grant it.
