The European Union’s migration governance in crisis: Historical legacies, theoretical insights, and policy lessons from 2015-2016

The 2015-2016 migration and refugee crisis was a defining moment for the European Union (EU), testing its institutional capacity, normative commitments, and political cohesion. Over 1.3 million asylum applications in 2015 alone placed unprecedented strain on the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) and exposed fundamental divisions among member states. This paper examines the EU’s response through comparative analysis of five key cases — Germany, Greece, Hungary, Sweden, and Italy — situating them within broader historical legacies of European migration and applying multiple theoretical frameworks, including Realism, Liberal Institutionalism, Constructivism, Securitisation Theory, and Multi-level Governance. The findings demonstrate that geography, institutional capacity, and political culture strongly shaped divergent national responses, while public opinion and securitisation dynamics intensified policy shifts. Germany and Sweden embodied humanitarian norms before retreating under political pressure; Greece and Italy struggled with frontline burdens amid weak EU solidarity; and Hungary securitised migration to consolidate domestic power. Collectively, these cases reveal structural weaknesses in the CEAS — particularly the overreliance on the Dublin Regulation, the absence of enforceable solidarity mechanisms, and the fragmentation of asylum governance. The paper argues that future resilience requires institutional reforms, including mandatory burden-sharing, fairer responsibility allocation, and stronger local-level empowerment. Ultimately, the crisis exposed the tension between the EU’s normative self-image as a values-based community and the sovereignty-driven realities of its member states, raising critical questions about the future of European integration and migration governance.