Why is a pact needed?
The EU has had common basic rules for handling asylum for a long time, above all in the so-called Dublin rules that one must seek asylum in the EU country where one first arrives and that the application must then be handled in that country. In practice, it has worked poorly, which was not least evident during the great refugee crisis of 2015. The pressure has become great on the countries at the EU’s external borders, which has led to overcrowded refugee camps and difficult conditions. Many have also voluntarily applied further within the EU because they would rather seek asylum in countries such as Germany or Sweden.
What was agreed upon?
Not really a dramatic change, but clearer rules regarding how asylum seekers and migrants are to be received and handled, among other things to ensure that everyone is properly registered and to be able to more quickly distinguish people who are unlikely to be granted asylum. In addition, it is about how the countries should be able to help each other if the pressure on someone becomes severe, by, for example, redistributing people or contributing personnel, equipment or other things. Greater focus must also be placed on sending back people who do not have the right to stay and cooperating more closely with countries outside the EU.
What have you been arguing about?
Above all, how the countries should help each other – and if they have to. Southern countries such as Italy and Greece have long pleaded for help to deal with large numbers of new arrivals. At the same time, several countries in the East have angrily said no to having to take care of people who rarely want to come to their countries. The EU countries want to solve it by having countries that absolutely do not want to accept new arrivals be allowed to pay themselves free, with the equivalent of a quarter of a million kroner per person – which will go to a common EU fund. Another contentious issue is what should be required in order to quickly send migrants without asylum grounds back to the country they arrived from, rather than their country of origin.
What does this mean for Sweden?
If the system works perfectly, both asylum seekers and migrants should be taken care of in the country where they first arrive. In that case, the initial pressure on Sweden will be very low, considering the geographical location. If there is severe pressure on another country, Sweden can also choose to pay to the EU instead of accepting asylum seekers. Then, however, the question remains what happens if there is a large-scale crisis somewhere.
Is it ready now?
No absolutely not. What the EU countries now agree on is admittedly unique and something that has been argued about for years. But that’s only halfway to a settlement. Final negotiations are now beginning between the Council of Ministers and the EU Parliament, which has a slightly softer line towards asylum and migration than many of the EU countries. In addition, the countries still have to agree on their view on rules in crisis situations, where the EU Parliament wants to see requirements for a mandatory redistribution of asylum seekers.
The goal is for the final negotiations to be completed at the beginning of 2024.